Expert consensus on systemic therapy for plaque psoriasis with limited skin involvement in JAPAN: Results from a DELPHI study.

Akimichi Morita, Yukari Okubo, Shinichi Imafuku, Yayoi Tada, Masatoshi Abe, A E J Gibson, Frauke Becker, Nataliya Bogoeva, Mamitaro Ohtsuki
{"title":"Expert consensus on systemic therapy for plaque psoriasis with limited skin involvement in JAPAN: Results from a DELPHI study.","authors":"Akimichi Morita, Yukari Okubo, Shinichi Imafuku, Yayoi Tada, Masatoshi Abe, A E J Gibson, Frauke Becker, Nataliya Bogoeva, Mamitaro Ohtsuki","doi":"10.1111/1346-8138.17444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our objective was to establish consensus on (1) which patients with plaque psoriasis and limited skin involvement (body surface area [BSA] <10%) are suitable for systemic treatment, and (2) a definition of 'topical therapy failure'. A steering committee refined 13 statements drawn from literature related to the study objectives. An independent panel of 45 clinical experts from Japan indicated their agreement to each statement using a 10-point Likert scale (Round 1; strong consensus, ≥70% of responses = 7-10 and median value ≥8). The steering committee reviewed Round 1 results and refined the statements for Round 2, as necessary. In Round 2, the panel indicated their agreement to each statement using a 3-point scale (strong consensus, ≥70% of responses and median value of 3) and were shown Round 1 responses before voting. Forty-five clinicians participated in Round 1 and 41 of those (91%) participated in Round 2. Consensus was achieved on the criteria of eligibility for systemic treatment among patients with limited skin involvement as disease involvement at special or difficult to treat areas, psoriasis-induced psychological distress, uncontrolled symptoms (e.g., scaling, bleeding, pruritus, insomnia) affecting their social life, psoriatic arthritis, or failure of topical therapy. Consensus on criteria for topical failure were persistent symptoms (e.g., itchiness, pain) and plaques, poor patient satisfaction with treatment, a need to increase medication quantity or application time after treatment with two topicals for 4 weeks; or if the Psoriasis Area Severity Index score of >3 or Physician Global Assessment Score of ≥2 after 8 weeks treatment. Our Delphi panel proposes criteria to help physicians identify patients with psoriasis and limited skin involvement who would benefit from systemic therapy and suggests a definition for topical therapy 'failure' which could indicate a move to systemic treatment is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":94236,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of dermatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1346-8138.17444","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our objective was to establish consensus on (1) which patients with plaque psoriasis and limited skin involvement (body surface area [BSA] <10%) are suitable for systemic treatment, and (2) a definition of 'topical therapy failure'. A steering committee refined 13 statements drawn from literature related to the study objectives. An independent panel of 45 clinical experts from Japan indicated their agreement to each statement using a 10-point Likert scale (Round 1; strong consensus, ≥70% of responses = 7-10 and median value ≥8). The steering committee reviewed Round 1 results and refined the statements for Round 2, as necessary. In Round 2, the panel indicated their agreement to each statement using a 3-point scale (strong consensus, ≥70% of responses and median value of 3) and were shown Round 1 responses before voting. Forty-five clinicians participated in Round 1 and 41 of those (91%) participated in Round 2. Consensus was achieved on the criteria of eligibility for systemic treatment among patients with limited skin involvement as disease involvement at special or difficult to treat areas, psoriasis-induced psychological distress, uncontrolled symptoms (e.g., scaling, bleeding, pruritus, insomnia) affecting their social life, psoriatic arthritis, or failure of topical therapy. Consensus on criteria for topical failure were persistent symptoms (e.g., itchiness, pain) and plaques, poor patient satisfaction with treatment, a need to increase medication quantity or application time after treatment with two topicals for 4 weeks; or if the Psoriasis Area Severity Index score of >3 or Physician Global Assessment Score of ≥2 after 8 weeks treatment. Our Delphi panel proposes criteria to help physicians identify patients with psoriasis and limited skin involvement who would benefit from systemic therapy and suggests a definition for topical therapy 'failure' which could indicate a move to systemic treatment is warranted.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
日本局限性皮肤受累斑块状银屑病系统疗法专家共识:DELPHI 研究结果。
我们的目标是就以下问题达成共识:(1) 哪些斑块状银屑病患者皮肤受累程度有限(体表面积 [BSA] 3 或治疗 8 周后医生总体评估评分≥2)。我们的德尔菲小组提出了一些标准,以帮助医生确定哪些银屑病患者和皮肤受累范围有限的患者可从系统治疗中获益,并提出了局部治疗 "失败 "的定义,这可能表明需要转为系统治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Clinical and laboratory features between anti‐TIF1γ dermatomyositis with and without malignancy: 37 case series and a review Analysis of disease burden in patients with hereditary angioedema from Japan by patient‐reported outcomes Coexistence of Basan syndrome and cutaneous basal cell carcinoma: Genetic and clinical perspectives Perspectives of Japanese patients on psoriatic disease burden: Results from “Psoriasis and Beyond,” the Global Psoriatic Disease Survey HPV 51‐associated inguinal SCC on an atopic dermatitis patient treated with cyclosporine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1