Analysis of treatment goal alignment between Japanese psoriasis patients and their paired treating physicians

Burden of Topical Treatments in Psoriasis and Preferred Criteria of Choice: A Survey-Based Evaluation of Patients in Europe

INTRODUCTION

Topical treatments (TT) are widely used in psoriasis management. While psoriasis itself has been associated with diminished quality of life and mental well-being, the impact of TT remains underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate the burden of TT on the daily lives of patients with psoriasis, the convenience of the TT, and the choice criteria.

METHODS

Patients were recruited across five countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK) by Wefight and the International Federation of Psoriasis Associations (IFPA) to complete a 29-item online survey.

RESULTS

A total of 766 patients completed the survey (54% female, mean age of 53 years). The mean body surface area covered by psoriasis was 7%, predominantly on the scalp and elbows. Participants had been living with psoriasis for a mean duration of 18 years. Of the respondents, 34% reported feeling affected by their TT in their daily routines and activities. Those feeling affected were more likely to have a more complex disease, be using more treatments, or be diagnosed more recently compared to those less affected. Among those most affected by their TT, 27% reported a strong impact on mental health, 30% on sexual life, and 25% on physical activities, compared to 7%, 6% and 4% in those least affected, respectively. Both cohorts considered tolerability factors such as "does not cause itching/burning" and "good tolerability" as most important when choosing a topical. However, only least affected participants regarded convenience factors such as "does not run off," "ease of application," "does not leave stains" among others equally as important.

CONCLUSION

Overall, one-third of patients report a significant burden of TT on their daily lives. These patients have different criteria of choice, highlighting the importance of communication between physicians and patients to tailor treatment to individual preferences, thereby enhancing adherence and treatment outcomes.

Supporting effective shared decision-making in surgical context: Why framing of choices matters for high-risk patients and clinicians

AIM

In the context of high-risk surgery, shared decision-making (SDM) is important. However, the effectiveness of SDM can be hindered by misalignment between patients and clinicians in their expectations of postoperative outcomes. This study investigated the extent and the effects of this misalignment, as well as its amenability to interventions that encourage perspective-taking.

METHOD

Lay participants with a Charlson Comorbidity Index of ≥4 (representing patients) and surgeons and anaesthetists (representing doctors) were recruited. During an online experiment, subjects in both groups forecast their expectations regarding short-term (0, 1 and 3 months after treatment) and long-term (6, 9 and 12 months after treatment) outcomes of different treatment options for one of three hypothetical clinical scenarios - ischaemic heart disease, colorectal cancer or osteoarthritis of the hip - and then chose between surgical or non-surgical treatment. Subjects in both groups were asked to consider the scenarios from their own perspective (Estimation task), and then to adopt the perspective of subjects in the other study group (Perspective task). The decisions of all participants (surgery vs. non-surgical alternative) were analysed using binomial generalized linear mixed models.

RESULTS

In total, 55 lay participants and 54 doctors completed the online experiment. Systematic misalignment in expectations between high-risk patients and doctors was observed, with patients expecting better surgical outcomes than clinicians. Patients forecast a significantly higher likelihood of engaging in normal activities in the long term (β = -1.09, standard error [SE] = 0.20, t = -5.38, p < 0.001), a lower likelihood of experiencing complications in the long term (β = 0.92, SE = 0.21, t = 4.45, p < 0.001) and a lower likelihood of experiencing depression in both the short term and the long term (β = 1.01, SE = 0.19, t = 5.38, p < 0.001), than did doctors. Compared with doctors, patients forecast higher estimates of experiencing complications in the short term when a non-surgical alternative was selected (β = -0.91, SE = 0.26, t = -3.50, p = 0.003). Despite this misalignment, in both groups surgical treatment was strongly preferred (estimation task: 88.7% of doctors and 80% of patients; perspective task: 82.2% of doctors and 90.1% of patients).

CONCLUSION

When high-risk surgery is discussed, a non-surgical option may be viewed as 'doing nothing', hence reducing the sense of agency and control. This biases the decision-making process, regardless of the expectations that doctors and patients might have about the outcomes of surgery. Therefore, to improve SDM and to increase the agency and control of patients regarding decisions about their care, we advocate framing the non-surgical treatment options in a way that emphasizes action, agency and change.

Pain associated with psoriasis: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Pain is a major factor in the psychosocial impact of psoriasis. There is a paucity of qualitative reports of dermatologists' views on psoriasis-related pain.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore the views of dermatologists on the presence and importance of pain associated with psoriasis.

METHODS

This qualitative study, based on semi-structured interviews, included dermatologists from different cities working in the hospital and private sector in Croatia between May and July, 2022. We collected demographic and occupational data on participants and information about their experiences and attitudes toward psoriasis-related pain. Data were analysed by applying interpretative descriptive and thematic analysis using the 4-stage method for systematic text condensation.

RESULTS

We included 19 dermatologists, all women, aged 38 (range: 31 to 63 years). Most dermatologists acknowledged the presence of pain in patients with psoriasis. They indicated that they sometimes do not sufficiently address this pain in daily practice. Some indicated that pain was a neglected symptom in psoriasis, while for others it was not crucial. Most indicated that it is necessary to focus more on psoriasis-related pain in clinical practice, to disambiguate between skin pain and joint pain in psoriatic conditions, and to better educate family physicians about psoriasis-related pain. They emphasized the importance of considering pain during psoriatic patient assessment and management. Further research on psoriasis-related pain was suggested.

CONCLUSIONS

More emphasis is needed on psoriasis-related pain for effective management of psoriasis, informing decision-making in the context of patient-centric care and improving the quality of life in patients with psoriasis.

Bimekizumab Efficacy and Safety in Japanese Patients with Plaque Psoriasis in BE VIVID: A Phase 3, Ustekinumab and Placebo-Controlled Study

INTRODUCTION

Bimekizumab treatment resulted in improved clinical outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in BE VIVID, a 52-week, phase 3, randomized, ustekinumab and placebo-controlled study. We present data from the BE VIVID Japan patient subpopulation.

METHODS

Globally, patients were randomized to receive bimekizumab 320 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), ustekinumab (45/90 mg weight-based at baseline and week 4, then every 12 weeks), or placebo (Q4W through week 16, then bimekizumab 320 mg Q4W). Efficacy endpoints included week 16 Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 and Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1, and other outcomes [PASI 100, PASI 75, IGA 0, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1, absolute PASI, scalp IGA, Psoriasis Symptoms and Impacts Measure (P-SIM) responses]. Safety analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

There were 108 Japanese randomized patients (bimekizumab: 62; ustekinumab: 29; placebo: 17). At week 16, bimekizumab-treated patients had a higher clinical response versus ustekinumab and placebo (PASI 90: 85.5% versus 51.7% and 5.9%; IGA 0/1: 82.3% versus 48.3% and 0.0%). Over 52 weeks, improved clinical response was maintained with bimekizumab, including patients switching from placebo at week 16. Overall, the safety profile in Japanese patients was consistent with that observed in the global population.

CONCLUSION

Bimekizumab resulted in improved clinical response versus ustekinumab and placebo, and was well-tolerated in Japanese patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03370133.

Patient perceptions of psoriatic disease in Japan: Results from the Japanese subgroup of the Understanding Psoriatic Disease Leveraging Insights for Treatment (UPLIFT) survey

The population‐based Understanding Psoriatic Disease Leveraging Insights for Treatment (UPLIFT) survey was designed to better understand patient and dermatologist perceptions of the disease burden of psoriasis (PsO) and their treatment expectations. UPLIFT was a cross‐sectional, quantitative, online survey conducted in Europe, North America, and Japan between 2 March and 3 June 2020. In Japan, 391 patients reporting a diagnosis of PsO and/or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) were surveyed (75% had PsO alone, 23% had PsO and PsA, and 2% had PsA alone). Self‐reported body surface area (BSA) data were available for 309 Japanese patients, with the majority (80%) reporting PsO‐involved BSA ≤3 palms. Current symptoms of PsO were rated as moderate or severe by 43% of Japanese patients with BSA ≤3 palms, and severe by 44% of patients with BSA 4–10 palms. PsO frequently occurred in ≥1 special areas, most commonly the scalp in 76% of Japanese patients with BSA ≤3 palms, and ≥90% of those with BSA ≥4 palms. Furthermore, musculoskeletal symptoms in 42% of patients with PsO alone were suggestive of PsA. Whereas Japanese patients with BSA ≤3 palms mainly reported receiving topical therapy alone (34%) or no treatment (32%), 64% patients with BSA 4–10 palms reported receiving systemic therapy. Overall, 21% of Japanese patients with self‐perceived mild symptoms of PsO and 48% of patients with special area involvement experienced at least a moderate impact of disease on quality of life (Dermatology Life Quality Index score >5). Moreover, patients and dermatologists differed in their perceptions of determinants of PsO severity and treatment, and office visit discussions. In general, these findings from the Japanese subgroup of the UPLIFT survey demonstrated that a high proportion of patients perceived their symptoms to be moderate or severe irrespective of the level of skin involvement, suggesting a persistent unmet treatment need.

Comparison of Treatment Goals between Users of Biological and Non-Biological Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in Japan

Background: Previously, our cross-sectional observational study in Japan revealed high (68%) discordance within treatment goals between psoriasis patients and their physicians. Objective: This secondary analysis aimed to determine whether patient and physician users of biologics have higher treatment goals than users of non-biologics. Methods: A survey for both patients and physicians on background characteristics, disease severity, treatment goals, treatment satisfaction, and health-related quality of life was conducted at 54 sites. Association between treatment goals and biologic/non-biologic users was assessed using ordinal logistic regression models. Results: In total, 449 patient-physician pairs agreed to participate; 425 completed the survey and were analyzed. More biologic users than non-biologic users reported complete clearance (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 100) as a treatment goal (patient-reported: 23.6% vs. 16.1%; physician-reported: 26.9% vs. 2.2%). Biologic users were significantly associated with higher treatment goals than non-biologic users (patient-reported: 1.8 (1.15–2.87) (odds ratio (9 5% CI)), p = 0.01; physician-reported: 11.0 (5.72–21.01), p < 0.01). Among biologic users, higher treatment goals were associated with higher treatment satisfaction (patient- and physician-rated); lower treatment goals were associated with back lesions and increasing patient age (patient-rated) and higher disease severity (physician-rated). Conclusion: Use of biologics among patients with psoriasis was associated with higher treatment goals. Further use of biologics contributed to treatment satisfaction. Appropriate treatment goals that are shared among patients and their physicians may improve treatment outcomes.

Evaluation of treatment satisfaction misalignment between Japanese psoriasis patients and their physicians - Japanese psoriasis patients and their physicians do not share the same treatment satisfaction levels

OBJECTIVES

High treatment satisfaction in both patients and physicians is an important factor in improving quality of life in psoriasis patients. This study aimed to evaluate treatment satisfaction alignment between psoriasis patients and physicians and to identify factors associated with satisfaction misalignment, especially "physician-predominant" misalignment.

METHODS

This is a nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study. Subjects were paired moderate to severe psoriasis outpatients and their physicians. Treatment satisfaction was evaluated on a scale from 0 to 10. Subjects were defined as "misaligned" when the difference in treatment satisfaction was over ±1 between the patient-physician pair.

RESULTS

A total of 425 pairs were collected from 54 facilities in Japan. The mean patient age and disease duration were 56.5 years and 18.7 years, respectively. The mean physician age was 50.6 years and 69.6% of physicians specialized in psoriasis. Treatment satisfaction misalignment was found in 49.9% of the patient-physician pairs. Among misaligned pairs, 43.6% were "physician-predominant" pairs. In the multivariate logistic regression analyses, "treatment is effective" was the most important reason for treatment satisfaction (odds ratio [OR]: 35.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.43, 231.78). Symptoms in the genital area (OR: 10.2; 95% CI: 2.55, 40.93) and lack of understanding of treatment options by patients (OR: 7.5; 95% CI: 2.19, 25.94) were key factors leading to "physician-predominant" status.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that genital psoriasis plays an important role in treatment satisfaction from the patient perspective, and illustrate the importance of communication between patients and physicians which potentially resolves these factors and improves misalignment.

Clinicians' perspectives of shared care of psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis between rheumatology and dermatology: an interview study

OBJECTIVE

Shared care between rheumatologists and dermatologists is advocated for patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, but care provided by rheumatologists and dermatologists is often siloed, leading to inconsistencies in patient care and outcomes. This study aimed to describe rheumatologists' and dermatologists' perspectives on shared care.

METHODS

Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 rheumatologists and 12 dermatologists across 27 centers in Australia. Transcripts were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: uncertainties in disciplinary tensions (lacking expertise to make diagnosis, hesitation managing outside of scope, doubting screening tools, defaulting to own disciplinary priorities, hampered by lack of evidence), working in fragmented care (frustration with working in silos, striving to coordinate with primary care, persevering despite inequities in access to care, overwhelmed by managing comorbidities, under-resourced for complexity), building trusting relationships (establishing a culture of collaboration, seeking reliable cross-specialty help, depending on unique skills), prioritizing efficiency (minimizing burden for patients, avoiding resource overuse, deferring to pragmatic decisions), and strengthened by integrated care models (improving the timeliness and accuracy of care, centering on patient goals and understanding, enhancing cross-specialty partnerships, providing opportunities for education and training).

CONCLUSIONS

Rheumatologists and dermatologists endeavor to provide comprehensive care to their patients in disjointed healthcare settings but are hampered by a lack of training and a sense of feeling overburdened in the management of comorbidities. Interdisciplinary models are perceived to improve the care of patients but are limited by financial barriers to implementation and concerns about wasting health resources and improperly burdening patients. Key Points • Rheumatologists and dermatologists perceive that shared care models improve the care for their patients with psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis by improving the timeliness and accuracy of management, making the patient the center of care, and enhancing shared care relationships between specialties. • Screening tools to detect psoriatic arthritis may be under-utilized by dermatologists due to doubt about the accuracy of instruments and competing priorities in time-limited consultations. • Management of comorbid disease is challenging for rheumatologists and dermatologists due to a need to prioritize their specialty area and a sense of feeling overburdened while working in fragmented healthcare systems.

Treatment Goals in Psoriasis: Which Outcomes Matter Most?

Psoriasis is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory disease that predominantly affects the skin and joints. Its detrimental effects on the physical, psychosocial, and emotional well-being of patients leads to a significant reduction in quality of life (QoL). The goals of treatment focus on decreasing disease severity and improving QoL for patients; accomplishing these goals requires physicians to understand both the full impact of the disease on a patient's life and the outcomes that matter most to patients. The use of outcome measures, both physician- and patient-reported, can assist clinicians in evaluating the disease burden and its effect on QoL and in identifying patient preferences for treatment, ultimately enhancing quality of care. However, current outcome measures have many limitations and do not adequately capture patients' needs and priorities. Nevertheless, physicians treating patients with psoriasis are encouraged to utilize these instruments while remaining cognizant of each of their limitations. As there is no consensus on an outcome measure that fully encompasses the complexities of psoriasis and its impact on patients, instruments that are appropriate and applicable to dermatologists and their patients should be developed.

A Simple Goal Elicitation Tool Improves Shared Decision Making in Outpatient Orthopedic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction. Shared decision making involves educating the patient, eliciting their goals, and collaborating on a decision for treatment. Goal elicitation is challenging for physicians as previous research has shown that patients do not bring up their goals on their own. Failure to properly elicit patient goals leads to increased patient misconceptions and decisional conflict. We performed a randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of a simple goal elicitation tool in improving patient involvement in decision making. Methods. We conducted a randomized, single-blind study of new patients presenting to a single, outpatient surgical center. Prior to their consultation, the intervention group received a demographics questionnaire and a goal elicitation worksheet. The control group received a demographics questionnaire only. After the consultation, both groups were asked to complete the Perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICS) survey. We compared the mean PICS scores for the intervention and control groups using a nonparametric Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon test. Secondary analysis included a qualitative content analysis of the patient goals. Results. Our final cohort consisted of 96 patients (46 intervention, 50 control). Both groups were similar in terms of demographic composition. The intervention group had a significantly higher mean (SD) PICS score compared to the control group (9.04 [2.15] v. 7.54 [2.27], P < 0.01). Thirty-nine percent of patient goals were focused on receiving a diagnosis or treatment, while 21% of patients wanted to receive education regarding their illness or their treatment options. Discussion. A single-step goal elicitation tool was effective in improving patient-perceived involvement in their care. This tool can be efficiently implemented in both academic and nonacademic settings.

Cost per responder analysis of guselkumab versus targeted therapies in the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in Germany

BACKGROUND

The fully human monoclonal antibody guselkumab is an effective treatment option for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine the cost per responder of guselkumab compared with other targeted therapies for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in Germany.

METHODS

A one-year cost per responder model was developed based on efficacy and safety data from a published network meta-analysis. Drug, treatment administration, resource use, and adverse event costs were included in the analysis. The primary analysis assessed the cost per Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 responder at week 16. Additional analyses were conducted at year 1. In the year 1 analyses, treatment response was assessed at the end of the induction period (week 16) to determine which patients continued onto maintenance therapy (responders) and which patients moved onto a subsequent adalimumab or secukinumab therapy (non-responders).

RESULTS

At week 16, the cost per PASI 90 responder was lower for guselkumab than all comparators except adalimumab and brodalumab. Similarly, in the year 1 analyses, guselkumab had a lower cost per PASI 90 responder than all comparators except brodalumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Guselkumab is a cost-effective therapy option in Germany.

Patient-physician discrepancy in the perception of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis. A qualitative systematic review of the literature

Introduction

Recommendations on chronic diseases management emphasise the need to consider patient perspectives and shared decision-making. Discrepancies between patients and physicians’ perspectives on treatment objectives, disease activity, preferences and treatment have been described for immune-mediate inflammatory diseases. These differences could result on patient dissatisfaction and negatively affect outcomes.

Objective

To describe the degree of patient-physician discrepancy in three chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (rheumatoid arthritis [RA], psoriatic arthritis [PsA] and psoriasis [Ps]), identifying the main areas of discrepancy and possible predictor factors.

Methods

Qualitative systematic review of the available literature on patient and physician discrepancies in the management of RA, PsA and Ps. The search was performed in international (Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, ISI-WOK) and Spanish electronic databases (MEDES, IBECS), including papers published from April 1, 2008 to April 1, 2018, in English or Spanish, and conducted in European or North American populations. Study quality was assessed by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria.

Results

A total of 21 studies were included (13 RA; 3 PsA; 4 Ps; 1 RA, Ps, and Axial Spondyloarthritis). A significant and heterogeneous degree of discrepancy between patients and physicians was found, regarding disease activity, treatment, clinical expectations, remission concept, and patient-physician relationship. In RA and PsA, studies were mainly focused on the evaluation of disease activity, which is perceived as higher from the patient’s than the physician’s perspective, with the discrepancy determined by factors such as patient’s perception of pain and fatigue. In Ps, studies were focused on treatment satisfaction and patient-physician relationship, showing a lower degree of discrepancy in the satisfaction regarding these aspects.

Conclusions

There is a significant degree of patient-physician discrepancy regarding the management of RA, PA, and Ps, what can have a major impact on shared decision-making. Future research may help to show whether interventions considering discrepancy improve shared decision-making.

Priorities of patients with multimorbidity and of clinicians regarding treatment and health outcomes: a systematic mixed studies review

OBJECTIVES

To identify studies that have investigated the health outcome and treatment priorities of patients with multimorbidity, clinicians or both, in order to assess whether the priorities of the two groups are in alignment, or whether a disparity exists between the priorities of patients with multimorbidity and clinicians.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL and Cochrane databases from inception to May 2019 using a predefined search strategy, as well as reference lists containing any relevant articles, as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane guidelines.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies reporting health outcome and treatment priorities of adult patients with multimorbidity, defined as suffering from two or more chronic conditions, or of clinicians in the context of multimorbidity or both. There was no restriction by study design, and studies using quantitative and/or qualitative methodologies were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We used a narrative synthesis approach to synthesise the quantitative findings, and a meta-ethnography approach to synthesise the qualitative findings.

RESULTS

Our search identified 24 studies for inclusion, which comprised 12 quantitative studies, 10 qualitative studies and 2 mixed-methods studies. Twelve studies reported the priorities of both patients and clinicians, 10 studies reported the priorities of patients and 2 studies reported the priorities of clinicians alone. Our findings have shown a mostly low level of agreement between the priorities of patients with multimorbidity and clinicians. We found that prioritisation by patients was mainly driven by their illness experiences, while clinicians focused on longer-term risks. Preserving functional ability emerged as a key priority for patients from across our quantitative and qualitative analyses.

CONCLUSION

Recognising that there may be a disparity in prioritisation and understanding the reasons for why this might occur, can facilitate clinicians in accurately eliciting the priorities that are most important to their patients and delivering patient-centred care.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018076076.

Understanding Treatment Preferences in Patients with Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis in the USA: Results from a Cross-Sectional Patient Survey

Introduction

The goal of psoriasis (PsO) treatment is to improve quality of life by lessening the extent and severity of the disease. Traditional systemic drugs and biologic agents are used for the treatment of moderate to severe PsO and recent research emphasizes understanding patient goals and preferences for treatment, to improve overall outcomes.

Methods

An online survey was administered to collect data from 500 adult patients with moderate to severe PsO in the USA. Patients were required to have current or previous systemic therapy use and were excluded if aged 75 or older. Data on demographics, disease burden, treatment use, and patients’ treatment goals and expectations were collected. Descriptive and multivariate analyses examined the factors that predict treatment goals. Subgroup analyses were performed for age, gender, severity, comorbid psoriatic arthritis (PsA), location of PsO, and biologic experience. All analyses were conducted using SAS v9.4 and R v3.4.

Results

Of the 500 adult patients included, 71.6% reported moderate PsO. Patients had a mean (SD) score of 62.4 (23.0) for skin pain, 60.0 (26.3) for fatigue, and 6.6 (2.1) for itch on a scale of 0–100, 0–100, and 0–10 respectively. Mean (SD) score for quality of life (QoL), assessed using Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), was 18.3 (7.3), with more than 90% having moderate/very large/extremely large effect on life. The majority of patients considered “keeping skin clear for 2–3 years” (94%), “overall relief of symptoms” (93.8%), and effective in clearing certain areas” (92.2%) as important attributes of a systemic treatment. Overall, patients expected 50% clear skin in about 2 weeks and completely clear skin in about 4 weeks.

Conclusions

Overall, in this study with more than 70% of patients with moderate disease, patients reported high burden of disease and impact on QoL. This study demonstrates the importance of considering patient perspectives in treatment decisions that are critical for optimizing patient outcomes.

Funding

Eli Lilly and Company.

Patient and Physician Preferences for Therapy Characteristics for Psoriasis: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Japan

BACKGROUND

With progress being made in the treatment of psoriasis, a variety of clinical research and treatment options are being pursued. This study used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to estimate treatment characteristic preferences for both patients and physicians in Japan. Subgroup analysis was also applied in order to examine differences within the range of patients and within the range of physicians.

METHODS

The DCE was developed with the input of clinical experts in the treatment of psoriasis to ensure inclusion of the most relevant attributes at appropriate levels in a way that is understandable to both physicians and patients. The study was conducted on parallel samples of Japanese physicians (n = 161) and Japanese psoriasis patients (n = 306) through an online panel. For each sample, a conditional logit statistical model and subgroup analysis were then performed to estimate respondent preferences for treatment attributes.

RESULTS

The overall findings are that better treatment efficacy as measured by proportion of patients achieving 90% reduction in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI 90), lower risk of adverse events and the availability of a bio-holiday are important decision factors for both patients and physicians. Low injection frequency is less of a priority for both samples. Also, while both groups demonstrate a preference to receive the treatment injections at a clinic by a healthcare professional rather than self-injection at home, this is more pronounced for the patient sample. The physician sample shows considerably more emphasis on the type of injection, though both samples prefer subcutaneous injections to intravenous injections.

IMPLICATIONS

This study reveals the importance of addressing both clinical effectiveness and process factors in systemic, non-topical psoriasis treatments to gain acceptance by both physicians and patients. As well as efficacy (as measured by PASI 90), which remains a consistent priority in treatment, administration and development of new treatments should also consider process factors such as the mode of administration and possibility for a bio-holiday.

Patient preference for biologic treatments of psoriasis in Japan

Psoriasis is a chronic autoimmune disease affecting skin which may also manifest in nails and joints. Several biologic treatments have been approved in Japan for psoriasis. Each biologic has a different profile for efficacy and safety, including different dosing regimens and co‐payment considerations which may complicate treatment decisions made by patients and physicians during short consultations. Elucidating patient preference is expected to contribute to shared decision‐making between patients and physicians to optimize treatment satisfaction and outcomes. However, the number of studies investigating this in Japan is very limited. The study used a discrete choice experiment methodology to elicit patient preferences for hypothetical options in an experimental framework. Participants were asked to choose their preferred treatment option from two hypothetical choices, defined by different levels of six attributes (i.e. early onset of efficacy, long‐term efficacy, sustained efficacy after drug withdrawal, dosing convenience, co‐payment and risk of serious infection). The survey included 16 treatment choice scenarios and was completed by 395 participants. Across all participants, the attribute regarded as most important was sustained efficacy after drug withdrawal, followed by dosing convenience, co‐payment, long‐term efficacy, early onset of efficacy and risk of serious infection. The study found that patients prefer treatments which have durable efficacy and lower treatment burden characterized as fewer injection frequency and lower co‐payment. These results may be helpful to understand patient preference for biologic treatments used for psoriasis in Japan and contribute to shared decision‐making between patients and physicians to improve patient satisfaction and treatment outcomes.

Clinical Goals and Barriers to Effective Psoriasis Care

Engaging global key opinion leaders, the International Psoriasis Council (IPC) held a day-long roundtable discussion with the primary purpose to discuss the treatment goals of psoriasis patients and worldwide barriers to optimal care. Setting clear expectations might ultimately encourage undertreated psoriasis patients to seek care in an era in which great gains in therapeutic efficacy have been achieved. Here, we discuss the option for early treatment of all categories of psoriasis to alleviate disease impact while emphasizing the need for more focused attention for psoriasis patients with mild and moderate forms of this autoimmune disease. In addition, we encourage policy changes to keep pace with the innovative therapies and clinical science and highlight the demand for greater understanding of treatment barriers in resource-poor countries.