Comparison of the paper‐based and electronic versions of the Dermatology Life Quality Index: evidence of equivalence

How to use the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema Core Outcome Set for atopic dermatitis trials: a users' guide

BACKGROUND

The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has agreed upon the Core Outcome Set (COS) for use in atopic dermatitis (AD) clinical trials, but additional guidance is needed to maximize its uptake.

OBJECTIVES

To provide answers to some of the commonly asked questions about using the HOME COS; to provide data to help with the interpretation of trial results; and to support sample size calculations for future trials.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We provide practical guidance on the use of the HOME COS for investigators planning clinical trials in patients with AD. It answers some of the common questions about using the HOME COS, how to access the outcome measurement instruments, what training/resources are needed to use them appropriately and clarifies when the COS is applicable. We also provide exemplar data to inform sample size calculations for eczema trials and encourage standardized data collection and reporting of the COS.

CONCLUSIONS

By encouraging adoption of the COS and facilitating consistent reporting of outcome data, it is hoped that the results of eczema trials will be more comprehensive and readily combined in meta-analyses and that patient care will subsequently be improved.

Low prevalence of scabies and impetigo in Dakar/Senegal: A cluster-randomised, cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Scabies, a parasitic infection caused by Sarcoptes scabiei var. hominis, is a public health problem with significant morbidity worldwide, particularly in low-resource countries. Impetigo, a complication of scabies infection, is a risk factor for sepsis, glomerulonephritis and possibly acute rheumatic fever. Currently, the majority of epidemiological data has been collected in rural populations in the Pacific with limited applicability to urban populations in sub-Saharan Africa, where scabies is also believed to be a problem. To inform future public health programs, more reliable information about the burden of disease is required.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In July/August 2022, we conducted a cross sectional, cluster-randomised, household survey in Pikine/Dakar using the 'International Association for the Control of Scabies (IACS)' criteria to diagnose scabies and impetigo. All participants underwent a standardised clinical examination by post-graduate dermatology students. For those diagnosed with scabies, an age-adapted 'Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)' questionnaire was filled. We recruited and examined 1697 participants to detect 27 cases of scabies (prevalence: 1.6%, 95% CI 0.8-3.2), mostly in school aged children. Ten participants suffered from impetigo (prevalence: 0.6%, 95% CI 0.3-1.3), 5 of which were dually infected with scabies. Risk factors for scabies infection were young age, male gender and Koranic school attendance. Of those found to have scabies, in 7 out of 22 cases (31.8%) it had a large effect on their lives according to the DLQI questionnaires filled.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

This study adds to the mapping of the burden of scabies across Africa to support public health action. With a low prevalence of scabies that is concentrated amongst poor households and children attending Koranic schools, a focused public health approach targeting Koranic schools and poor households seems to be most appropriate in this community.

A systematic review of 454 randomized controlled trials using the Dermatology Life Quality Index: experience in 69 diseases and 43 countries

BACKGROUND

Over 29 years of clinical application, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) has remained the most used patient-reported outcome (PRO) in dermatology due to its robustness, simplicity and ease of use.

OBJECTIVES

To generate further evidence of the DLQI's utility in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to cover all diseases and interventions.

METHODS

The methodology followed PRISMA guidelines and included seven bibliographical databases, searching articles published from 1 January 1994 until 16 November 2021. Articles were reviewed independently by two assessors, and an adjudicator resolved any opinion differences.

RESULTS

Of 3220 screened publications, 454 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion, describing research on 198 190 patients, were analysed. DLQI scores were primary endpoints in 24 (5.3%) of studies. Most studies were of psoriasis (54.1%), although 69 different diseases were studied. Most study drugs were systemic (85.1%), with biologics comprising 55.9% of all pharmacological interventions. Topical treatments comprised 17.0% of total pharmacological interventions. Nonpharmacological interventions, mainly laser therapy and ultraviolet radiation treatment, comprised 12.2% of the total number of interventions. The majority of studies (63.7%) were multicentric, with trials conducted in at least 42 different countries; 40.2% were conducted in multiple countries. The minimal clinically importance difference (MCID) was reported in the analysis of 15.0% of studies, but only 1.3% considered full score meaning banding of the DLQI. Forty-seven (10.4%) of the studies investigated statistical correlation of the DLQI with clinical severity assessment or other PRO/quality of life tools; and 61-86% of studies had within-group scores differences greater than the MCID in 'active treatment arms'. The Jadad risk-of-bias scale showed that bias was generally low, as 91.8% of the studies had Jadad scores of ≥ 3; only 0.4% of studies showed a high risk of bias from randomization. Thirteen per cent had a high risk of bias from blinding and 10.1% had a high risk of bias from unknown outcomes of all participants in the studies. In 18.5% of the studies the authors declared that they followed an intention-to-treat protocol; imputation for missing DLQI data was used in 34.4% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides a wealth of evidence of the use of the DLQI in clinical trials to inform researchers' and -clinicians' decisions for its further use. Recommendations are also made for improving the reporting of data from future RCTs using the DLQI.

Quality of life measurement in teledermatology. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes and Teledermatology

Many events, including the COVID-19 pandemic, have accelerated the implementation of teledermatology pathways within dermatology departments and across healthcare organizations. Quality of Life (QoL) assessment in dermatology is also a rapidly developing field with a gradual shift from theory to practice. The purpose of this paper organized jointly by the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force (TF) on QoL and patient-oriented outcomes and the EADV TF on teledermatology is to present current knowledge about QoL assessment during the use of teledermatology approaches, including data on health-related (HR) QoL instruments used in teledermatology, comparison of influence of different treatment methods on HRQoL after face-to-face and teledermatology consultations and to make practical recommendations concerning the assessment of QoL in teledermatology. The EADV TFs made the following position statements: HRQoL assessment may be an important part in most of teledermatology activities; HRQoL assessment may be easily and effectively performed during teledermatology consultations. It is especially important to monitor HRQoL of patients with chronic skin diseases during lockdowns or in areas where it is difficult to reach a hospital for face-to-face consultation; regular assessment of HRQoL of patients with skin diseases during teledermatology consultations may help to monitor therapy efficacy and visualize individual patient's needs; we recommend the use of the DLQI in teledermatology, including the use of the DLQI app which is available in seven languages; it is important to develop apps for dermatology-specific HRQoL instruments for use in children (for example the CDLQI and InToDermQoL) and for disease-specific instruments.

Mānuka oil based ECMT-154 versus vehicle control for the topical treatment of eczema: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial in community pharmacies in Aotearoa New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a chronic, relapsing skin condition commonly managed by emollients and topical corticosteroids. Prevalence of use and demand for effective botanical therapies for eczema is high worldwide, however, clinical evidence of benefit is limited for many currently available botanical treatment options. Robustly-designed and adequately powered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are essential to determine evidence of clinical benefit. This protocol describes an RCT that aims to investigate whether a mānuka oil based emollient cream, containing 2% ECMT-154, is a safe and effective topical treatment for moderate to severe eczema.

METHODS

This multicentre, single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial aims to recruit 118 participants from community pharmacies in Aotearoa New Zealand. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to receive topical cream with 2% ECMT-154 or vehicle control, and will apply assigned treatment twice daily to affected areas for six weeks. The primary outcome is improvement in subjective symptoms, assessed by change in POEM score. Secondary outcomes include change in objective symptoms assessed by SCORAD (part B), PO-SCORAD, DLQI, and treatment acceptability assessed by TSQM II and NRS.

DISCUSSION

Recruitment through community pharmacies commenced in January 2022 and follow up will be completed by mid-2023. This study aims to collect acceptability and efficacy data of mānuka oil based ECMT-154 for the treatment of eczema. If efficacy is demonstrated, this topical may provide an option for a novel emollient treatment. The community-based design of the trial is anticipated to provide a generalisable result.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from Central Health and Disability Ethics Committee (reference: 2021 EXP 11490). Findings of the study will be disseminated to study participants, published in peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12621001096842. Registered on August 18, 2021 ( https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=382412&isReview=true ).

PROTOCOL VERSION

2.1 (Dated 18/05/2022).

Development and Integration of Patient-Reported Measures into E-Health System: Pilot Feasibility Study

Patient-centered care is recognized as a key element in recent healthcare management strategies. However, the integrated collection of patient feedback capturing the entire journey of patients with complex medical conditions remains understudied. Herein, we aimed to describe the development of an instrument prototype for the collection of PROMs and PREMs that would encompass a whole patient journey at a single time point. We further describe the process of its integration into a hospital's information system (HIS) and the results of a pilot feasibility study in adult patients with kidney and hematological diseases. We developed an instrument consisting of original PREM and generic EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. E-questionnaires were handled with REDCap software (version 12.5.14) and integrated into the HIS. Patients refusing to use e-questionnaires (48%) were offered paper administration and were older (64 vs. 50 years). The overall response rate for e-questionnaires was 57.1% with a median completion time of 2.0 and 3.7 min for PROM and PREM, respectively. Psychological and social services and primary care setting (diagnosis establishment and involvement in continuous care) were identified as most problematic. The majority of PREM dimensions encompassing different levels of care significantly correlated with PROM responses. Our data indicate the feasibility and potential relevance of the proposed approach, although wider-scale studies in diverse settings are needed.

Differences in Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 and Kessler Screening Scale for Psychological Distress Scores between Smartphone Version versus Paper Version Administration: Evidence of Equivalence

The use of electronic patient-reported outcomes has increased recently, and smartphones offer distinct advantages over other devices. However, previous systematic reviews have not investigated the reliability of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Kessler Screening Scale for Psychological Distress (K6) when used with smartphones, and this has not been fully explored. This study aimed to evaluate the equivalence of the paper and smartphone versions of the CES-D, GAD-7, and K6, which were compared following a randomized crossover design method in 100 adults in Gunma, Japan. Participants responded to the paper and smartphone versions at 1-week intervals. The equivalence of paper and smartphone versions was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC_agreement). The mean participant age was 19.86 years (SD = 1.08, 23% male). The ICC_agreements for the paper and smartphone versions of the CES-D, GAD-7, and K6 were 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.83), 0.68 (95% CI 0.59-0.77), and 0.83 (95% CI 0.75-0.88), respectively. Thus, the CES-D and K6 scales are appropriate for use in a smartphone version, which could be applied to clinical and research settings in which the paper or smartphone versions could be used as needed.

Outcomes of Biologic Use in Asian Compared with Non-Hispanic White Adult Psoriasis Patients from the CorEvitas Psoriasis Registry

INTRODUCTION

Real-world data are limited comparing Asian and White patients with psoriasis using biologic therapy. This study compared the 6-month effectiveness of biologic therapy between Asian and White plaque patients with psoriasis in the CorEvitas Psoriasis Registry.

METHODS

Analyses included biologic initiations and 6-month follow-up visits from self-identified Asian (n = 293) and White (n = 2314) patients in the USA/Canada (4/2015-4/2020). Outcomes included: Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 75, disease activity measures [body surface area (BSA) ≤ 1, BSA ≤ 3, PASI90, PASI100, Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1], and patient-reported outcomes [Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1, itch, fatigue, skin pain, EuroQoL visual analog scale (EQ-VAS), patient global assessment, Work Productivity Activity and Impairment (WPAI) domains]. Unadjusted regression models were used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for achievement of binary outcomes and difference in mean change in continuous outcomes (β, 95% CI) at 6 months, followed by adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, alcohol, smoking, health insurance, education, comorbidities, scalp psoriasis morphology, psoriatic arthritis, biologic class, previous biologics, and baseline outcome value.

RESULTS

Asians had lower proportions of women (32.8% versus 49.1%) and obesity (27.3% versus 54.5%), and higher proportions on Medicaid (19.9% versus 8.8%), graduated college (50.9% versus 40.1%) and never smoked (67.1% versus 44.1%). In unadjusted analyses, Asians had 52% higher odds of achieving PASI75 versus White patients (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.15, 2.02). After adjustment, the association was attenuated (OR 1.11; 0.81, 1.52). Secondary outcomes experienced similar patterns except for DLQI: Asians had 33% lower odds of achieving DLQI 0/1 in both the unadjusted (OR 0.67; 0.50, 0.90) and adjusted (OR 0.67; 0.49, 0.92) models.

CONCLUSION

Unadjusted differences in biologic therapy effectiveness between Asians compared with White patients were likely explained by differences in demographic, lifestyle, and psoriatic disease characteristics between groups. However, Asians still experienced lesser improvements in skin-related quality of life, even after adjustment.

Efficacy of a 3% Kānuka oil cream for the treatment of moderate-to-severe eczema: A single blind randomised vehicle-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Māori, the indigenous people of New Zealand, have traditionally used the kānuka tree as part of their healing system, Rongoā Māori, and the oil from the kānuka tree has demonstratable anti-inflammatory and anti-bacterial properties. This trial investigated the efficacy and safety of a 3% kānuka oil (KO) cream compared to vehicle control (VC) for the topical treatment of eczema. The trial was conducted through a nationwide community pharmacy research network.

METHODS

This single-blind, parallel-group, randomised, vehicle-controlled trial was undertaken in 11 research trained community pharmacies across New Zealand. Eighty adult participants with self-reported moderate-to-severe eczema, assessed by Patient Orientated Eczema Measure (POEM) were randomised by blinded investigators to apply 3% KO cream or VC topically, twice daily, for six weeks. Randomisation was stratified by site and eczema severity, moderate versus severe. Primary outcome was difference in POEM scores at week six between groups by intention to treat. The study is registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ANZCTR) reference number, ACTRN12618001754235.

FINDINGS

Eighty participants were recruited between 17 May 2019 and 10 May 2021 (41 KO group, 39 VC group). Mean POEM score (standard deviation) improved between baseline and week six for KO group, 18·4 (4·4) to 6·8 (5·5), and VC group, 18·7 (4·5) to 9·8 (6·5); mean difference between groups (95% confidence interval) was -3·1 (-6·0 to -0·2), p = 0·036. There were three adverse events reported in the KO group related to the intervention and two in the control group.

INTERPRETATION

The KO group had a significant improvement in POEM score compared to VC. Rates of adverse events and withdrawals were similar between groups with no serious adverse events reported. Treatment acceptability was high for both groups across all domains. Our results suggest that in adults with moderate-to-severe eczema, the addition of KO to a daily emollient regimen led to a reduction in POEM score compared to VC. KO may represent an effective, safe, and well tolerated treatment for moderate-to-severe eczema in adults.

FUNDING

Hikurangi Bioactives (Ruatoria, New Zealand) and HoneyLab (Tauranga, New Zealand), supported by a grant from Callaghan Innovation.

Clinical experience and psychometric properties of the Cardiff Acne Disability Index (CADI)

The Cardiff Acne Disability Index (CADI) is a questionnaire designed to measure the quality of life of teenagers and young adults with acne. It has been used clinically and within therapeutic research globally. This review aims to appraise all published data regarding the clinical and research experience of the CADI, its psychometric properties and validation, from its publication in 1992 until September 2020, in a single reference source. A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE via Ovid, PubMed, EBSCOhost, Web of Science and Scopus. All full articles in the English language were included. A total of 96 clinical studies were identified and analysed. The CADI has been used in 44 different countries, including four multinational studies, and has validated translations in 25 languages. Overall, 29 therapeutic interventions have used the CADI, demonstrating its responsiveness to change. The reliability of the CADI has been assessed in 14 studies through test-retest and internal consistency studies. In total, 57 studies have demonstrated aspects of its validity through correlation to other measures, and five studies have investigated the dimensionality of the CADI. There is evidence of high internal consistency, test-retest reliability, responsiveness to change and significant correlation with other objective measures. The minimal clinically important difference and validated score meaning bands have not yet been reported. This information is needed to improve the interpretability of CADI scores for clinical use and in research. The authors of the CADI have also rephrased Question 2 of the measure to ensure inclusivity.

Utility of the Dermatology Life Quality Index at initiation or switching of biologics in real-life Japanese patients with plaque psoriasis: Results from the ProLOGUE study

BACKGROUND

Plaque psoriasis significantly affects patients' health-related quality of life. To aid treatment decisions, not only objective assessment by physicians but also subjective assessment by patients is important.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the significance of Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) evaluation at the time of biologics introduction in clinical practice in Japanese patients with plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

This was a single-arm, open-label, multicenter study. At baseline, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and DLQI scores were measured and stratified based on DLQI scores ≥6/≤5 and PASI scores ≤10/>10. Other patient-reported outcomes assessed included EQ-5D-5L, itch numerical rating scale (NRS), skin pain NRS, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8), Sleep Problem Index-II (SPI-II), and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication-9 (TSQM-9).

RESULTS

Of the 73 enrolled patients, 23 had PASI scores ≤10. Those with PASI/DLQI scores >10/≥6 had a significantly higher median PASI score than those with PASI/DLQI scores >10/≤5 (p = 0.0125). Regardless of PASI scores (>10/≤10), median itch NRS and GAD-7 scores were significantly higher in patients with DLQI scores ≥6 than in those with DLQI scores ≤5 (itch NRS, p = 0.0361 and p = 0.0086, respectively; GAD-7, p = 0.0167 and p = 0.0273, respectively). Patients with PASI/DLQI scores ≤10/≥6 had significantly higher skin pain NRS (p = 0.0292) and PHQ-8 (p = 0.0255) scores and significantly lower median SPI-II scores (p = 0.0137) and TSQM-9 Effectiveness domain scores (p = 0.0178) than those with PASI/DLQI scores ≤10/≤5.

CONCLUSION

DLQI may be useful for assessing patients' concerns that cannot be identified by PASI alone while initiating biologics or switching from other biologics in clinical practice.

Benefits and Disadvantages of Electronic Patient-reported Outcome Measures: Systematic Review

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important in clinical practice and research. The growth of electronic health technologies provides unprecedented opportunities to systematically collect information via PROMs.

Objective

The aim of this study was to provide an objective and comprehensive overview of the benefits, barriers, and disadvantages of the digital collection of qualitative electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs).

Methods

We performed a systematic review of articles retrieved from PubMED and Web of Science. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed during all stages. The search strategy yielded a total of 2333 records, from which 32 met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The relevant ePROM-related information was extracted from each study.

Results

Results were clustered as benefits and disadvantages. Reported benefits of ePROMs were greater patient preference and acceptability, lower costs, similar or faster completion time, higher data quality and response rates, and facilitated symptom management and patient-clinician communication. Tablets were the most used ePROM modality (14/32, 44%), and, as a platform, Web-based systems were used the most (26/32, 81%). Potential disadvantages of ePROMs include privacy protection, a possible large initial financial investment, and exclusion of certain populations or the “digital divide.”

Conclusions

In conclusion, ePROMs offer many advantages over paper-based collection of patient-reported outcomes. Overall, ePROMs are preferred over paper-based methods, improve data quality, result in similar or faster completion time, decrease costs, and facilitate clinical decision making and symptom management. Disadvantages regarding ePROMs have been outlined, and suggestions are provided to overcome the barriers. We provide a path forward for researchers and clinicians interested in implementing ePROMs.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO CRD42018094795; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=94795

Evaluation of the Paper and Smartphone Versions of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) in Depressed Patients in China

PURPOSE

Smartphone-based questionnaires have advantages compared with their paper versions, but there is a lack of consistent research on depressive disorder questionnaires. This study aimed to assess the equivalence between the paper and smartphone versions of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for patients with depressive disorders in psychiatric hospitals in China.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a randomized crossover study of 110 depressed patients recruited from the outpatient department of Beijing Anding Hospital from March 2016 to September 2018. Group 1 completed both the QIDS-SR16 and PHQ-9 in paper format and then completed the smartphone version 1-2 h later. Group 2 completed the scales in the reverse order. Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The expected ICC was 0.9 (α=0.05).

RESULTS

The overall ICC score of the QIDS-SR16 paper and smartphone versions was 0.904 (95% CI: 0.861-0.934), and the ICCs of each item ranged from 0.769 to 0.923. The overall ICC score of the PHQ-9 paper and smartphone versions was 0.951 (95% CI: 0.929-0.967), and the ICCs of each item ranged from 0.779 to 0.914.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the equivalence of the paper and smartphone versions of the PHQ-9 and QIDS-SR16 in depressed patients in China.

Impact of red and processed meat and fibre intake on treatment outcomes among patients with chronic inflammatory diseases: protocol for a prospective cohort study of prognostic factors and personalised medicine

INTRODUCTION

Chronic inflammatory diseases (CIDs) are frequently treated with biological medications, specifically tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi)). These medications inhibit the pro-inflammatory molecule TNF alpha, which has been strongly implicated in the aetiology of these diseases. Up to one-third of patients do not, however, respond to biologics, and lifestyle factors are assumed to affect treatment outcomes. Little is known about the effects of dietary lifestyle as a prognostic factor that may enable personalised medicine. The primary outcome of this multidisciplinary collaborative study will be to identify dietary lifestyle factors that support optimal treatment outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This prospective cohort study will enrol 320 patients with CID who are prescribed a TNFi between June 2017 and March 2019. Included among the patients with CID will be patients with inflammatory bowel disease (Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis), rheumatic disorders (rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis), inflammatory skin diseases (psoriasis, hidradenitis suppurativa) and non-infectious uveitis. At baseline (pretreatment), patient characteristics will be assessed using patient-reported outcome measures, clinical assessments of disease activity, quality of life and lifestyle, in addition to registry data on comorbidity and concomitant medication(s). In accordance with current Danish standards, follow-up will be conducted 14-16 weeks after treatment initiation. For each disease, evaluation of successful treatment response will be based on established primary and secondary endpoints, including disease-specific core outcome sets. The major outcome of the analyses will be to detect variability in treatment effectiveness between patients with different lifestyle characteristics.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The principle goal of this project is to improve the quality of life of patients suffering from CID by providing evidence to support dietary and other lifestyle recommendations that may improve clinical outcomes. The study is approved by the Ethics Committee (S-20160124) and the Danish Data Protecting Agency (2008-58-035). Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, patient associations and presentations at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03173144; Pre-results.