Determining patient value profiles in psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) should strive to create the maximum value for their patients in which value is defined as the patient-relevant health outcomes achieved per costs made. However, currently it remains difficult to determine which outcomes matter to an individual psoriasis patient. OBJECTIVE: To define outcome profiles, or so called 'patient value profiles', within a cohort of psoriasis patients that can be translated to daily practice to increase value for the individual patient. METHODS: Hierarchical clustering on principal components (HCPC) was used to identify groups of patients sharing the same profile within an outcome ranking exercise. Once the clusters were defined, their characterization was provided based on a V-test. In a final step, a multi-class decision tree (MDT) based on relevant socio-demographic and clinical variables was built to allocate patients to a cluster. RESULTS: In the ranking exercise 120 patients participated. The median age was 50.0 (IQR 25.0) years and 36.7% were female. Median PASI score was 2.4 (IQR 5.2) and median duration of psoriasis was 17.0 (IQR 20.0) years. Primary treatment varied from topicals to biologicals. We found three distinct patient value profiles in this cohort (QoL, cost and treatment). A MDT was built which had an accuracy of 64%. CONCLUSION: We found three distinct patient value profiles in a cohort of psoriasis patients and patients can be easily assigned to one of these profiles based on a MDT. HCPs can use these profiles to steer psoriasis management accordingly allowing for a more goal-orientated approach.

Practical recommendations for systemic treatment in psoriasis in case of coexisting inflammatory, neurologic, infectious or malignant disorders (BETA-PSO: Belgian Evidence-based Treatment Advice in Psoriasis; part 2).

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis patients carry an increased risk for associated comorbidities. Dermatologists have to be aware of the effects of systemic treatments not only on psoriasis but also on co-occurring diseases. In case of other coexisting inflammatory diseases, the right psoriasis treatment may improve both disorders. For infectious and malignant disorders, some treatments have to be avoided as they may be harmful. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this project was to collect evidence for the creation of practice guidelines for systemic treatment of psoriasis (BETA-PSO: Belgian Evidence-based Treatment Advice in Psoriasis). METHODS: Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using a quasi-Delphi methodology after a systematic search of the literature and a consensus procedure involving eight psoriasis experts. RESULTS: Recommendations are given on the use of systemic treatment in psoriatic arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, demyelinating disorders, hepatitis B and C, HIV and cancer. CONCLUSION: This expert opinion is a practical guide for dermatologists when handling psoriasis patients with these specific conditions.

Practical recommendations for systemic treatment in psoriasis according to age, pregnancy, metabolic syndrome, mental health, psoriasis subtype and treatment history (BETA-PSO: Belgian Evidence-based Treatment Advice in Psoriasis; part 1).

BACKGROUND: Impressive progress in new therapeutic options has been made for psoriasis. Treatments include topical steroids, phototherapy, conventional, synthetic disease-modifying drugs and an expanding list of biologics. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this work was to collect evidence for the creation of practice guidelines for systemic treatment of psoriasis (BETA-PSO: Belgian Evidence-based Treatment Advice in Psoriasis). METHODS: Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using a quasi-Delphi methodology after a systematic search of the literature and a consensus procedure involving 8 psoriasis experts. RESULTS: In this part, the use of systemic treatment in different age groups, during pregnancy, in metabolic syndrome, in patients with mental health problems, in different psoriasis subtypes and in previously systemically treated patients treatment is discussed. CONCLUSION: Guidance on therapeutic choice in specific clinical situations in psoriasis is provided in order to facilitate the decision-making in clinical practice.

Role of the HLA-C*06 allele in clinical response to ustekinumab: evidence from real life in a large cohort of European patients.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the role of the HLA-C*06 allele in the response to psoriasis treatments. OBJECTIVES: To confirm the role of HLA-C*06 as a pharmacogenetic marker of response to ustekinumab in a new, large cohort of patients involving four European centres. METHODS: In this retrospective multicentre study we reviewed data of 255 patients with psoriasis genotyped for HLA-C*06 who started ustekinumab treatment between January 2014 and March 2015. The severity of psoriasis and response to treatment were evaluated using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score at baseline and then at follow-up visits on weeks 4, 12, 28, 40 and 52. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 50% reduction in PASI score (PASI 50) at week 4. A ≥ 75% reduction in PASI score (PASI 75) and a ≥ 90% reduction in the PASI score (PASI 90) after 12 weeks were secondary end points. RESULTS: At week 4, PASI 50 was seen in 71·7% of HLA-C*06-positive (C*06POS) and 35·2% of HLA-C*06-negative (C*06NEG) patients. At week 12, PASI 75 was reached by 69.1% of C*06POS patients and 40·5% of C*06NEG patients. After 52 weeks, PASI 75 was reached by 83.7% of C*06POS patients and 58.8% of C*06NEG patients. CONCLUSIONS: The results from our new, large cohort of European patients treated with ustekinumab in daily clinical practice confirm the role of HLA-C*06 as a potential predictor of response to ustekinumab.