Moderate Psoriasis in Clinical Practice: French Expert Consensus Using a Modified Delphi Method

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

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.

The screening and management of sleep disturbances in people living with HIV: Delphi consensus

Sleep disturbances in people living with HIV (PLHIV) are frequent but their management remains insufficient. In the absence of specific recommendations, a DELPHI consensus research project was conducted in France to establish best practice. A multidisciplinary Steering Committee (STC) undertook a literature review and used it with clinical expertise to create statements that were voted on. Two profiles of healthcare professionals with significant experience in monitoring PLHIV were selected for the voting: physicians and nurses/psychologists. Votes were collected electronically, independently, and anonymously. The STC created 27 statements covering six areas: Screening of sleep disturbances, Investigation, First-line management, Referral to a specialist, Antiretroviral treatment (ARV), and Prevention. Two rounds of votes included 42 physicians and 32 nurses/psychologists. Consensus was reached for 24 out of 27 statements (89%) including: to assess quantity and quality of sleep among PLHIV at least annually, ideally using a common methodology within the medical department; to consider the temporary addition of a hypnotic treatment in cases of acute insomnia not improved by the rules of sleep hygiene, with full awareness of potential drug-drug interactions and risk of dependence; to correct ferritinaemia if <100 ng/mL before referral to a specialist when restless legs syndrome is suspected; to consider changing the time of ARV administration or an ARV switch within the same class when sleep disturbances are caused by an ARV. This DELPHI Consensus provides best practice for screening and managing sleep disturbances in PLHIV and optimising their quality of life.

Use of genotypic HIV DNA testing: a DELPHI-type consensus

OBJECTIVES

As many disparities in the clinical use of HIV DNA sequencing are observed, a DELPHI-type consensus was initiated in France to homogenize use, techniques and interpretation of results.

METHODS

Based on a literature review and clinical experience, a steering committee (SC) of eight virologists and one infectious disease specialist formulated statements. Statements were submitted to an independent and anonymous electronic vote of virologists and HIV clinicians in France, between October 2022 and December 2022.

RESULTS

The SC developed 20 statements grouped into six categories: clinical situations for the use of HIV DNA genotyping; techniques for performing HIV DNA genotyping; consideration of apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme (APOBEC) mutations; genotyping results reporting; recycling of antiretrovirals; and availability of HIV DNA genotyping tests and delays. Twenty-one virologists and 47 clinicians participated in two voting rounds and 18/20 (90%) assertions reached a 'strong' consensus. For example, that prior genotyping on HIV DNA is useful for clinical decision-making when considering switching to some long-acting regimens or to reduce the number of antiretroviral agents in virologically suppressed patients for whom RNA data are unavailable/not exploitable/not sufficiently informative. Two statements achieved no consensus: reporting any detected viral minority population for discussion in multidisciplinary meetings (virologists), and possible risk of virological failure when using a second-generation InSTI plus lamivudine or emtricitabine regimen in patients with undetectable viral load within ≥1 year and in the presence of a documented M184V mutation within the last 5 years (clinicians).

CONCLUSIONS

This DELPHI-type consensus will facilitate the strengthening and harmonization of good practice when performing HIV DNA sequencing.