121
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Multiarm study comparing patient-reported and clinical outcome measures in patients undergoing antipsoriatic therapy with non-biological systemic agents in a real-world setting

, , , , &
Pages 2997-3004 | Received 10 May 2022, Accepted 04 Jun 2022, Published online: 04 Jul 2022
 

Abstract

Background

Although the inclusion of patients’ preferences and needs is essential for therapy adherence, the assessment of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials is often neglected. Therefore, the aim of this study was to quantify several patient-reported outcome measures in psoriasis patients undergoing systemic therapy in a real-life clinical setting.

Methods

This clinical trial has been designed as a prospective, multiarm study to investigate the treatment satisfaction, adherence to therapy, quality of life (QoL), and clinical response in a real-life clinical setting during the initial 6 months of treatment with apremilast, methotrexate, and fumaric acids in 80 patients suffering from plaque psoriasis.

Results

The treatment satisfaction for the three systemic therapies was rated ‘sufficient’ with a mean (±SD) Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) score of 275.0 (±62.7). Most potential for improvement was seen in the ‘effectiveness’ domain (54.3 ± 21.5). The highest treatment satisfaction level in all four domains (convenience, effectiveness, global satisfaction, and side-effects) was seen in the methotrexate group with a mean TSQM score of 306.3 ± 50.9, followed by apremilast (267.1 ± 61.6) and fumaric acids (254.9 ± 65.0; p = 0.005). Analysis of the TSQM revealed a considerable discrepancy between patient-reported clinical response and the actual Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) reduction. This applies equally to the patient- vs. physician-reported side-effects.

Conclusions

This real-life study demonstrates that an adequate assessment of antipsoriatic drugs by PASI-reduction alone is not sufficient and underlines the importance of patient-reported outcome measures not only in clinical trials, but also for improved patient care.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the local ethics committee (University of Heidelberg, Faculty of Medicine; S-298/2015).

Study registration

This study is registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS): DRKS00008721.

Disclosure statement

  • C. Fink has been an investigator for Novartis, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Abbvie, Leo, Galderma, Pfizer, Almirall, Merck, Celgene; speaker for Janssen, Novartis and advisory board member for Novartis.

  • C. Alt has been an investigator for Novartis, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Abbvie, Leo, Galderma, Pfizer, Almirall, Merck, Celgene.

  • K. Schäkel has been an investigator, speaker and/or advisory board member for Novartis, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Abbvie, Leo, Galderma, Pfizer, Almirall, Merck, Celgene.

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access
  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart
* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.