Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 Score and Psoriasis Quality of Life Assess Complementary Yet Different Aspects of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Psoriasis: A Systematic Review

Importance

Multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for health-related quality of life (HRQL) exist for patients with psoriasis. Evidence for the content validity and other measurement properties of these PROMs is critical to determine which HRQL PROMs could be recommended for use.

Objective

To systematically review the validity of HRQL-focused PROMs used in patients with psoriasis.

Evidence Review

Using PubMed and Embase, full-text articles published in English or Spanish on development or validation studies for psoriasis-specific, dermatology-specific, or generic HRQL PROMs were included. Development studies included original development studies, even if not studied in psoriasis patients per Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) recommendations. If a study included multiple diagnoses, more than 50% of patients had to have psoriasis or psoriasis-specific subgroup analyses available. Data extraction and analysis followed the COSMIN guidelines. Two independent reviewers extracted and analyzed the data, including PROM characteristics, quality of measurement properties (structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, construct validity, and responsiveness), and level of evidence. PROMs were classified into 3 levels of recommendations: (1) PROM recommended for use; (2) PROM requires further validation; and (3) PROM not recommended for use.

Findings

Overall, 97 articles were identified for extraction. This included 19 psoriasis-specific, 8 skin-specific, and 6 generic PROMs. According to COSMIN standards, most measures identified received a B recommendation for use, indicating their potential but requiring further validation. Only the Rasch reduced version of the Impact of Psoriasis Questionnaire (IPSO-11 Rasch) received an A recommendation for use given that it had sufficient content validity, structural validity, and internal consistency.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study identified a significant lack of information concerning the quality of HRQL measures in psoriasis. This gap in knowledge can be attributed to the fact that traditional measures were developed using validation criteria that differ from the current standards in use. Consequently, additional validation studies in accordance with contemporary standards will be useful in aiding researchers and clinicians in determining the most suitable measure for assessing HRQL in patients with psoriasis.

Secukinumab in US Biologic-Naive Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: Results From the Randomized, Placebo-Controlled CHOICE Study

Objective

To evaluate secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg vs placebo in a US-only population of biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Methods

CHOICE was a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial conducted in the United States. Biologic-naive patients with PsA and psoriasis were randomized 2:2:1 to secukinumab 300 mg (n = 103), secukinumab 150 mg (n = 103), or placebo (n = 52). The primary objective was to show superiority of secukinumab 300 mg vs placebo in ACR20 response at week 16. Additional objectives included the effect of secukinumab on dactylitis, enthesitis, psoriasis, and safety.

Results

ACR20 response rates at week 16 were higher with secukinumab 300 mg than with placebo (51.5% vs 23.1%; odds ratio, 3.51 [95% CI: 1.65, 7.45]; P = .0011). Secukinumab 300 mg also led to greater ACR50/70 responses and improvements in other variables vs placebo. Responses were generally sustained over time. Patients with inadequate response to secukinumab 150 mg at weeks 16, 28, or 40 who received dose escalation to 300 mg experienced improved clinical response after uptitration. The most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infections and diarrhea. No inflammatory bowel disease was reported or new safety signals observed.

Conclusion

Secukinumab 300 mg led to rapid and significant improvements over placebo in symptoms of PsA in this heavier population of US-only biologic-naive patients. Findings were consistent with previous studies and suggest that secukinumab 300 mg is a safe and efficacious first-line biologic treatment for patients with PsA.

A comparison of physical function instruments in psoriatic arthritis: HAQ-DI vs MDHAQ vs PROMIS10 global physical health

OBJECTIVES

Physical function is a core outcome in PsA. We examined the construct validity and responsiveness of three commonly used instruments to assess physical function in PsA: HAQ disability index (HAQ-DI), MultiDimensional HAQ (MDHAQ) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Global-10.

METHODS

Between 2016 and 2019, patients with PsA were enrolled in the Psoriatic Arthritis Research Consortium longitudinal cohort study in the USA. Correlations were calculated at baseline and among change scores using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Standardized response means were calculated. Agreement with the 20% improvement cut-off was used to determine the potential effect of using MDHAQ or the PROMIS Global-10 physical health (GPH) subscore in place of HAQ-DI when assessing the ACR20.

RESULTS

A total of 274 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age of patients was 49 years and 51% were male. At baseline, the mean HAQ-DI was 0.6 (s.d. 0.6; range 0-3), the mean MDHAQ was 1.8 (s.d. 1.6; range 0-10) and the mean GPH T-score was 43.4 (s.d. 9.3; range 0-100). All three instruments were strongly correlated at baseline (rho 0.75-0.85). Change scores were moderately correlated (rho 0.42-0.71). Among therapy initiators, the mean change between two visits in HAQ-DI, MDHAQ and GPH was -0.1 (s.d. 0.4), -0.2 (s.d. 1.2) and 2.5 (s.d. 6.1), respectively. The standardized response means were 0.18, 0.16 and 0.41, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The three instruments tested are not directly interchangeable but have overall similar levels of responsiveness.

Measuring Outcomes in Psoriatic Arthritis: Comparing Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data and Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease

OBJECTIVE

To examine the construct validity of Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) and Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In examining construct validity, we also addressed scores among subgroups with severe psoriasis, poly articular disease, enthesitis, and dactylitis, and evaluated influences of sociodemographic factors and comorbidities (contextual factors) on these patient-reported outcomes (PRO).

METHODS

Patients with PsA were enrolled in the Psoriatic Arthritis Research Consortium (PARC) between 2014 and 2016. PARC is a longitudinal observational cohort study conducted at 4 US institutions. In this cross-sectional study, construct validity was assessed by examining Spearman correlation coefficients for RAPID3 and PsAID with physician-reported disease activity measures and other PRO [e.g., Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-12 physical component summary/mental component summary (SF-12 PCS/MCS), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scale (FACIT-F)]. Contextual factors and disease subgroups were assessed in multivariable linear regression models with RAPID3 or PsAID12 as outcomes of interest and the hypothesized contextual factors as covariates.

RESULTS

Among 401 patients enrolled in PARC, 347 completed RAPID3 or PsAID12. Of these, most were white females with a mean age of 51.7 years (SD 14.02). RAPID3 and PsAID were highly correlated (r = 0.90). These measures were also correlated with the SF-12 PCS (r = -0.67) and FACIT-F (r = -0.77). Important contextual factors and disease subgroups included enthesitis, joint counts, education, insurance type, and depression.

CONCLUSION

RAPID3 and PsAID12 have excellent construct validity in PsA and are strongly correlated despite differing items. Contextual factors (i.e., the presence of depression and obesity) should be considered when interpreting raw scores of the RAPID3 and PsAID12.

Measurement properties of instruments assessing psoriatic arthritis symptoms for psoriasis clinical trials: a systematic literature review

Introduction: The International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) identified 'Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Symptoms' as a core domain to be measured in psoriasis clinical trials. This domain includes the measurement of pain, patient global and physical function. Herein, we evaluated the quality (i.e. measurement properties) of five candidate 'PsA Symptoms' measures: Patient Global Assessment (PGA) for Joints, PGA for PsA, the Routine Assessment Patient Index 3 (RAPID3), the PsA Impact of Disease 9 (PsAID9) and PsAID12.Areas covered: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (inception-to-March 2018) for studies assessing the measurement properties of candidate instruments. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias of 12 eligible articles using the COSMIN checklist. For each measurement property, we rated the quality of the evidence as 'high,' 'moderate,' 'low,' or 'very low' (GRADE approach) and classified the results as 'sufficient,' 'insufficient,' or 'inconsistent.' Finally, we provided recommendations.Expert opinion: In PsA, RAPID3 had 'very low' quality evidence for 'sufficient' content validity and no evidence of internal structure. Global assessment instruments had 'very low' quality evidence for 'inconsistent' content validity. PsAID9 and PsAID12 had 'low' evidence for 'sufficient' content validity and were recommended to measure 'PsA Symptoms.' Further validation studies will improve the level of evidence of this recommendation.

The promise and perils of 'Big Data': focus on spondyloarthritis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will describe the available large-scale data sources to study spondyloarthritis (SpA), enumerate approaches to identify SpA and its disease-related manifestations and outcomes, and will outline existing and future methods to collect novel data types [e.g. patient-reported outcomes (PRO), passive data from wearables and biosensors].

RECENT FINDINGS

In addition to traditional clinic visit-based SpA registries, newer data sources, such as health plan claims data, single and multispecialty electronic health record (EHR) based registries, patient registries and linkages between data sources, have catalyzed the breadth and depth of SpA research. Health activity tracker devices and PRO collected via PROMIS instruments have been shown to have good validity when assessed in SpA patients as compared to legacy disease-specific instruments. In certain cases, machine learning outperforms traditional methods to identify SpA and its associated manifestations in EHR and claims data, and may predict disease flare.

SUMMARY

Although caution remains in the application of newer data sources and methods including the important need for replication, the availability of new data sources, health tracker devices and analytic methods holds great promise to catalyze SpA research.