Epidemiology, Characteristics of Disease, and Unmet Needs of Patients with Generalized Pustular Psoriasis: A Large Italian Delphi Consensus.

INTRODUCTION: Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a rare and chronic, debilitating skin condition characterized, in its acute flare phase, by clinically severe and potentially life-threatening systemic manifestations. Data on GPP are still scanty, particularly in Europe and at a national level. The aim of this study was to provide expert indications on several disease-related and patient-related aspects of GPP, with specific focus to the Italian context. METHODS: We conducted an iterative eDelphi study following the recommended criteria for reporting methods and results. After a thorough bibliographic review aimed to identify unknown or controversial issues in GPP, the following areas were investigated through a few specific questions/statements for each area: (1) disease epidemiology; (2) disease characteristics, with specific interest toward GPP flares; (3) diagnosis and diagnostic delay; (4) GPP treatment; (5) GPP patient journey and use of healthcare resources in Italy; (6) unmet needs and quality of life. An Executive Board of 9 principal investigators revised and approved the topics to be examined and overviewed the whole project. A total of 35 experts from different Italian areas, including 34 board-certified Italian dermatologists and 1 representative of patients' associations, took part in the study. RESULTS: A high agreement in responses from Italian experts emerged during two eDelphi iterations on - among several other aspects - GPP prevalence and incidence in Italy, use of European Rare and Severe Psoriasis Expert Network diagnostic criteria, flare frequency and duration, best diagnostic and care pathway, and main unmet needs of Italian patients. On the other hand, a broad spectrum of treatments (of different drug classes) was reported both in the acute and chronic phases of GPP, and no consensus on the issue was thus achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus findings from this Delphi study of GPP experts may be useful to fill gaps of knowledge and improve awareness of this rare disease, as well as to help clinical and public health management of GPP in Italy.

Acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD): addressing knowledge gaps in unmet needs and patient journey in Italy-a Delphi consensus.

Acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD) is an ultra-rare disease, and several gaps of knowledge on various issues remain, particularly at a regional/national level. Expert opinions collected through well-defined consensus methodologies are increasingly used to make available reliable information in the context of rare/ultra-rare diseases. With the aim to provide indications on infantile neurovisceral ASMD (also formerly known as Niemann-Pick disease type A), chronic neurovisceral ASMD (formerly known as Niemann-Pick disease type A/B) and chronic visceral ASMD (formerly known as Niemann-Pick disease type B) in Italy, we conducted a Delphi consensus of experts focused on five main areas: (i) patients and disease characteristics; (ii) unmet needs and quality of life; (iii) diagnostic issues; (iv) treatment-related aspects; and (v) patient journey. Pre-specified, objective criteria were used to outline the multidisciplinary panel, based on 19 Italian experts in ASMD in paediatric and adult patients from different Italian Regions, including both clinicians (n = 16) and ASMD patients' advocacy or payors with expertise in rare diseases (n = 3). During two Delphi rounds, a high ratio of agreement was found on several topics related to ASMD characteristics, diagnosis, management and disease burden. Our findings may provide valuable indications for management of ASMD at a public health level in Italy.

Recommendations for neonatologists and pediatricians working in first level birthing centers on the first communication of genetic disease and malformation syndrome diagnosis: consensus issued by 6 Italian scientific societies and 4 parents' associations.

BACKGROUND: Genetic diseases are chronic conditions with relevant impact on the lives of patients and their families. In USA and Europe it is estimated a prevalence of 60 million affected subjects, 75% of whom are in developmental age. A significant number of newborns are admitted in the Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICU) for reasons different from prematurity, although the prevalence of those with genetic diseases is unknown. It is, then, common for the neonatologist to start a diagnostic process on suspicion of a genetic disease or malformation syndrome, or to make and communicate these diagnoses. Many surveys showed that the degree of parental satisfaction with the methods of communication of diagnosis is low. Poor communication may have short and long-term negative effects on health and psychological and social development of the child and his family. We draw up recommendations on this issue, shared by 6 Italian Scientific Societies and 4 Parents' Associations, aimed at making the neonatologist's task easier at the difficult time of communication to parents of a genetic disease/malformation syndrome diagnosis for their child. METHODS: We used the method of the consensus paper. A multidisciplinary panel of experts was first established, based on the clinical and scientific sharing of the thematic area of present recommendations. They were suggested by the Boards of the six Scientific Societies that joined the initiative: Italian Societies of Pediatrics, Neonatology, Human Genetics, Perinatal Medicine, Obstetric and Gynecological Ultrasound and Biophysical Methodologies, and Pediatric Genetic Diseases and Congenital Disabilities. To obtain a deeper and global vision of the communication process, and to reach a better clinical management of patients and their families, representatives of four Parents' Associations were also recruited: Italian Association of Down People, Cornelia de Lange National Volunteer Association, Italian Federation of Rare Diseases, and Williams Syndrome People Association. They worked from September 2019 to November 2020 to achieve a consensus on the recommendations for the communication of a new diagnosis of genetic disease. RESULTS: The consensus of experts drafted a final document defining the recommendations, for the neonatologist and/or the pediatrician working in a fist level birthing center, on the first communication of genetic disease or malformation syndrome diagnosis. Although there is no universal communication technique to make the informative process effective, we tried to identify a few relevant strategic principles that the neonatologist/pediatrician may use in the relationship with the family. We also summarized basic principles and significant aspects relating to the modalities of interaction with families in a table, in order to create an easy tool for the neonatologist to be applied in the daily care practice. We finally obtained an intersociety document, now published on the websites of the Scientific Societies involved. CONCLUSIONS: The neonatologist/pediatrician is often the first to observe complex syndromic pictures, not always identified before birth, although today more frequently prenatally diagnosed. It is necessary for him to know the aspects of genetic diseases related to communication and bioethics, as well as the biological and clinical ones, which together outline the cornerstones of the multidisciplinary care of these patients. This consensus provide practical recommendations on how to make the first communication of a genetic disease /malformation syndrome diagnosis. The proposed goal is to make easier the informative process, and to implement the best practices in the relationship with the family. A better doctor-patient/family interaction may improve health outcomes of the child and his family, as well as reduce legal disputes with parents and the phenomenon of defensive medicine.

Price and reimbursement for orphan medicines and managed entry agreements: does Italy need a framework?

This article illustrates a consensus opinion of an expert panel on the need and usefulness of a framework for price and reimbursement (P&R) process and managed entry agreements (MEAs) for orphan medicines in Italy. This opinion was gathered in three rounds: an introductory document was sent to the panel and discussed during a recorded online meeting. A second document was sent to the panel for their review. In the third step the final document was validated. Members of the expert panel are the authors of the article. The panel agreed that Italy does not need a specific value framework for orphan medicines, driving the P&R process. Rather, a more structured value framework for all medicines tailored to the specific drugs can be useful. For orphan drugs, the panel advocated for a multidisciplinary approach and the contribution of different stakeholders to value assessment, and acknowledged the importance of addressing, more than for other drugs, unmet needs, equity issues and societal value. The panel raised the need of increasing the importance of patient-reported outcomes. Experts, acknowledging the growing criticisms in implementation of outcome-based agreements in Italy, expressed their position against their abandonment in favour of discounts only and supported orphan medicines as natural candidates for these agreements. Finally, the panel made some recommendations on the appraisal process for orphan medicines, including an early discussion on the uncertainty of the evidence generated and the adoption of a structured approach to identify the agreement, which better responds to the uncertainty.