MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381383541 · doi:10.1093/bjd/ljad162.026

403 Achievement of minimal disease activity is associated with improvements in symptoms, quality of life and treatment satisfaction in patients with atopic dermatitis

2023· article· en· W4381383541 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan I. Silverberg, Melinda Gooderham, Norito Katoh, Valéria Aoki, Andrew Pink, Yousef Binamer, Wan‐Ju Lee, Brian Calimlim, Shiyu Zhang, Amy Gamelli, Sarah Ofori, Andreas Wollenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsProbity Medical ResearchSKiN HealthQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEczema Area and Severity IndexAtopic dermatitisMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Dermatology Life Quality IndexRating scalePhysical therapyMinimal clinically important differenceSeverity of illnessAnxietyDiseasePediatricsInternal medicineDermatologyRandomized controlled trialPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There is a need for clear criteria to guide treatment decisions and disease management in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). The recently developed minimal disease activity (MDA) concept aims to optimize AD management through shared decision-making between patients and clinicians in a treat-to-target approach, and is based on consensus recommendations from 87 physicians and insights from 88 patients globally.This study aims to evaluate how achieving MDA affects outcomes in patients with AD. Observed-case data from three phase 3 clinical trials involving adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD were integrated and analysed (NCT03568318, NCT03569293 and NCT03607422). The MDA criteria were applied to clinician-reported measures [Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), SCORing of Atopic Dermatitis, validated Investigator Global Assessment, and body surface area] and patient-reported measures [Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, Atopic Dermatitis Symptom Scale (ADerm-SS) Skin Pain score, Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (ADerm-IS) Sleep disturbance score, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Dermatology Life Quality Index]. Patients were stratified into three mutually exclusive groups by achievement of treatment targets per measurement at week 16: (i) achieving the optimal target (i.e. MDA) criteria [e.g. EASI improvement ≥90% (EASI 90); WP-NRS ≤1], (ii) achieving the moderate but not optimal target criteria [e.g. EASI improvement ≥75% and <90%; WP-NRS improvement (reduction) ≥4 and WP-NRS >1] and (iii) not achieving either target criteria. Among the stratified target groups (optimal, moderate and neither), patients’ symptoms, quality of life, work productivity and treatment satisfaction were assessed based on achieving meaningful clinically important differences in ADerm-SS 7-item total symptom score (ADerm-SS TSS-7; improvement ≥28), ADerm-IS Daily Activities score (improvement ≥14), ADerm-IS Emotional State score (improvement ≥11), percentage-point improvement in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Overall Work Productivity score and proportion reporting Patient Global Impressions of Treatment of ‘Extremely/Very Satisfied’. Stratified target groups were compared with a chi-squared or t-test for categorical or continuous variables, respectively, based on observed data. This analysis included 2392 patients. Patients in the optimal target (MDA) group based on EASI (EASI 90) vs. those in the moderate or neither target group had a higher proportion reporting meaningful improvements in ADerm-SS TSS-7 (optimal = 82.6% vs. moderate = 56.8% or neither = 27.4%; P < 0.001 for both comparisons), ADerm-IS Daily Activities (87.2% vs. 66.2% or 39.9%; both P < 0.001) and ADerm-IS Emotional State (86.1% vs. 67.1% or 36.8%; both P < 0.001); a greater percentage-point improvement in WPAI Overall Work Productivity (36.8% vs. 29.2% or 16.6%; both P < 0.01); and a higher proportion reporting being very/extremely satisfied with treatment (73.5% vs. 54.0% or 23.5%; both P < 0.001). Patients in the optimal target (MDA) group based on itch (WP-NRS ≤1) vs. those in the moderate or neither target group had a higher proportion reporting meaningful improvements in ADerm-SS TSS-7 (94.3% vs. 79.7% or 19.1%; both P < 0.001), ADerm-IS Daily Activities (97.3% vs. 84.7% or 33.6%; both P < 0.001) and ADerm-IS Emotional State (94.5% vs. 84.5% or 31.7%; both P < 0.001); a greater percentage-point improvement in WPAI Overall Work Productivity [39.7% vs. 35.2% (not significant) or 14.6% (P < 0.001)]; and a higher proportion reporting being very/extremely satisfied with treatment (79.7% vs. 60.5% or 26.8%; both P < 0.001). Trends were similar in other clinician- and patient-reported measures, with patients who achieved MDA generally reporting better outcomes. Achieving MDA from both a clinician and patient perspective was generally associated with greater improvements in AD symptoms, daily activities, emotional state, work productivity and higher satisfaction. These results demonstrate the value of achieving MDA and support implementing MDA in clinical practice to help improve the current standard of AD care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of DermatologySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207