Clinical trials in dermatology.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Torre K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5555277 | biostudies-other | 2017 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:The UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network (UK DCTN) was formed in 2002 with the aim of developing and supporting high-quality independent national clinical trials that address prioritized research questions for people with skin disease. Its philosophy is to democratize UK dermatological clinical research and to tackle important clinical questions that industry has no incentive to answer. The network also plays a key role in training and capacity development. Its membership of over 1000 individuals includes dermatology consultants, trainees, dermatology nurses, general practitioners, methodologists and patients. Its organizational structures are lean and include a co-ordinating team based at the Centre of Evidence-Based Dermatology in Nottingham, and an executive with independent members to ensure probity and business progression. A prioritization panel and steering group enable a pipeline of projects to be prioritized and refined for external funding from independent sources. The UK DCTN has supported and completed 12 national clinical trials, attracting investment of over £15 million into UK clinical dermatology research. Trials have covered a range of interventions from drugs such as doxycycline (BLISTER), silk clothing for eczema (CLOTHES) and surgical interventions for hidradenitis suppurativa (THESEUS). Trial results are published in prestigious journals and have global impact. Genuine partnership with patients and carers has been a strong feature of the network since its inception. The UK DCTN is proud of its first 20 years of collaborative work, and aims to remain at the forefront of independent dermatological health technology assessment, as well as expanding into areas including diagnostics, artificial intelligence, efficient studies and innovative designs.
| S-EPMC9322597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Baricitinib is an oral, selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 that transiently and reversibly inhibits many proinflammatory cytokines. This mechanism is a key mediator in a number of chronic inflammatory diseases; accordingly, baricitinib has been studied and approved for the treatment of several rheumatological and dermatological disorders, as well as COVID-19. This narrative review summarises and discusses the safety profile of baricitinib across these diseases, with special focus on adverse events of special interest (AESI) for JAK inhibitors, using integrated safety data sets of clinical trial data, and puts findings into context with the underlying risk in the respective disease populations, using supporting literature. We show that rates of infection with baricitinib generally reflected the inherent risk of the disease populations being treated, with serious infections and herpes zoster being more frequent in rheumatic diseases than in dermatological disorders, and herpes simplex being reported particularly in atopic dermatitis. Similarly, rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), venous thromboembolism (VTE) and malignancies were generally within or below the ranges reported for the respective disease populations, thereby reflecting the underlying risk; these events were therefore more frequent in patients with rheumatic diseases than in those with dermatological disorders, the latter of whom generally had low absolute risk. AESI were usually more common in patients with risk factors specific for each event. When a population similar to that of ORAL Surveillance was considered, the incidence rate of MACE with baricitinib was numerically lower than that reported with tofacitinib and similar to that of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. No safety concerns were observed in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who received baricitinib for up to 14 days. Identifying the patterns and likelihoods of AEs that occur during treatment in large groups of patients with different diseases can help the physician and patient better contextualise the benefit-to-risk ratio for the individual patient.
| S-EPMC9443639 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8027931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsThe advent of biologic drugs revolutionised the treatment of many chronic inflammatory diseases in rheumatology, dermatology, and gastroenterology. The introduction of different targeted agents closely followed the increase in knowledge of pathogenic mechanisms. The identification of IL-23 as a master regulator of 'pathogenic' inflammation and the consequent efficacy of IL-23 blocking agents were first proofed in psoriasis and then in other inflammatory diseases such as psoriatic arthritis and Crohn's disease.MethodsWe reviewed all available results from anti-Il-23 clinical trials for psoriasis, focusing on data of IBDologists' interest. Regarding guselkumab, we analysed data from phase III clinical trials VOYAGE1, VOYAGE2, and NAVIGATE. For risankizumab, we reported efficacy and safety results from UltIMMa-1, UltIMMa-2, and IMMvent clinical trials, and tildrakizumab was evaluated by analysing data from reSURFACE1 and reSURFACE2 studies.ResultsData from all the clinical trials that we reported showed both the efficacy of all three anti-IL-23 drugs in psoriasis and the safety of this class; in particular, no gastrointestinal side effects were observed in those studies. IL-23 blockers have shown promising short- and long-term results in psoriasis, with a major safety profile and no negative interactions with gastrointestinal system.ConclusionsAnti-IL-23 indication for psoriatic arthritis is very recent and for IBD is still to come. Therefore, dermatologists are accumulating long-term experience with these drugs, both in clinical trials and in real-world evidence, which can help gastroenterologists in the management of IBD patients.
| S-EPMC9097670 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAssessment of treatment effects in clinical trials requires valid information on treatment adherence, adverse events and symptoms. Paper-based diaries are often inconvenient and have limited reliability, particularly for outpatient trials.ObjectivesTo investigate the utility of an electronic diary (e-diary) application for patients with skin diseases in outpatient clinical trials.MethodsAn e-diary application was developed and technically validated. Treatment adherence was defined as topical administration by the patient, and patient-reported outcomes, i.e. pain and itch, were evaluated by the e-diary in six clinical trials on newly tested topical drugs. Additionally, the proportion of patients capturing the applied topical drug by camera and filling in the pain and itch scores was defined as e-diary adherence, and patients' perception of usefulness and acceptability of the e-diary were evaluated.ResultsTreatment adherence rates of the included 256 patients were high (median 98%, range 97-99%). E-diary adherence was also high with a median of 93% (range 87-97%) for capturing the applied drug by camera, and 89% (range 87-96%) and 94% (range 87-96%) for entering respectively the itch and pain score. Daily symptom scores provided good insights into the disease burden, and patients rated the e-diary as good to excellent with respect to user acceptability.ConclusionsThe results suggest that the e-diary is an excellent way to ensure proper treatment administration, indicated by both the high user acceptability scores and high treatment adherence. Moreover, the e-diary may also be valuable for frequent and reliable monitoring of patient-reported outcomes in daily clinical practice.
| S-EPMC7064941 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:It is well documented that financial conflicts of interest influence medical research and clinical practice. Prior to the Open Payments provisions of the Affordable Care Act, financial ties became apparent only through self-disclosure. The nature of financial interests has not been studied among physicians who develop dermatology clinical practice guidelines. Objective:To evaluate payments received by physicians who author dermatology clinical practice guidelines, compare disclosure statements for accuracy, determine whether pharmaceutical companies from which the authors received payments manufactured products related to the guidelines, and examine the extent to which the American Academy of Dermatology enforced their Administrative Regulations for guideline development. Design, Setting, and Participants:Three American Academy of Dermatology guidelines published from 2013 to 2016 were retrieved. Double data extraction was used to record financial payments received by 49 guideline authors using the Open Payments database. Payments received by the authors from the date of the initial literature search to the date of publication were used to evaluate disclosure statement accuracy, detail the companies providing payments, and evaluate Administrative Regulations enforcement. This study is applicable to clinical practice guideline panels drafting recommendations, physicians using clinical practice guidelines to inform patient care, and those establishing policies for guideline development. Main Outcomes and Measures:Our main outcomes are the monetary values and types of payments received by physicians who author dermatology guidelines and the accuracy of disclosure statements. Data were collected from the Open Payments database and analyzed descriptively. Results:Of the 49 authors evaluated, 40 received at least 1 reported industry payment, 31 accepted more than $1000, 25 accepted more than $10?000, and 18 accepted more than $50?000. Financial payments amounted to a mean of $157?177 per author. The total reimbursement among the 49 authors from 2013 to 2015 was $7?701?681. Of the 40 authors receiving payments, 22 did not accurately disclose industry relationships. Authors received payments from companies with products directly related to the guideline topic. Violations to the Administrative Regulations were found. Conclusions and Relevance:Dermatology clinical practice guideline authors received sizable industry payments and did not completely disclose these payments. The American Academy of Dermatology policies may benefit from stricter enforcement or the adoption of new standards.
| S-EPMC5817443 | biostudies-other
Project description:The American Academy of Dermatology is modernizing its clinical practice guidelines to be more timely and easily interpretable, while decreasing the influence of conflicts of interest in guideline generation. The main changes include the transition from SORT to GRADE methodology and the requirement that nonconflicted members of the guideline work groups remain nonconflicted throughout the entire guidelines process.
| S-EPMC8815007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a rare inflammatory skin disorder characterised by painful and rapidly progressing skin ulceration. PG can be extremely difficult to treat and patients often require systemic immunosuppression. Recurrent lesions of PG are common, but the relative rarity of this condition means that there is a lack of published evidence regarding its treatment. A systematic review published in 2005 found no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) relating to the treatment of PG. Since this time, one small RCT has been published comparing infliximab to placebo, but none of the commonly used systemic treatments for PG have been formally assessed. The UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network's STOP GAP Trial has been designed to address this lack of trial evidence.MethodsThe objective is to assess whether oral ciclosporin is more effective than oral prednisolone for the treatment of PG. The trial design is a two-arm, observer-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial comparing ciclosporin (4 mg/kg/day) to prednisolone (0.75 mg/kg/day). A total of 140 participants are to be recruited over a period of 4 years, from up to 50 hospitals in the UK and Eire. Primary outcome of velocity of healing at 6 weeks is assessed blinded to treatment allocation (using digital images of the ulcers). Secondary outcomes include: (i) time to healing; (ii) global assessment of improvement; (iii) PG inflammation assessment scale score; (iv) self-reported pain; (v) health-related quality of life; (vi) time to recurrence; (vii) treatment failures; (viii) adverse reactions to study medications; and (ix) cost effectiveness/utility. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of PG (excluding granulomatous PG); measurable ulceration (that is, not pustular PG); and patients aged over 18 years old who are able to give informed consent are included in the trial. Randomisation is by computer generated code using permuted blocks of randomly varying size, stratified by lesion size, and presence or absence of underlying systemic disease (for example, rheumatoid arthritis).Patients who require topical therapy are asked to enter a parallel observational study (case series). If topical therapy fails and systemic therapy is required, participants are then considered for inclusion in the randomised trial.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trials: ISRCTN35898459. Eudract No.2008-008291-14.
| S-EPMC3423010 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) play significant roles in most medical fields. However, little is known about the extent of financial Conflicts of Interest (FCOIs) related to pharmaceutical companies (Pharma) selling dermatology prescription products and dermatology CPG authors in Japan. The aims of this study were to elucidate the characteristics and distribution of payments from Pharma to dermatology CPG authors in Japan, and to evaluate the extent of transparency and accuracy in their FCOI disclosures. We analyzed the records of 296 authors from 32 dermatology CPGs published by the Japanese Dermatological Association from the beginning of 2015 to the end of 2018. Using the payment data reported by 79 Pharma between 2016-2017 in Japan, we investigated the characteristics of the CPG authors and the payments from the Pharma to them. Furthermore, we evaluated the transparency and accuracy of the FCOI disclosures of the individual CPG authors. Of the 296 CPGs authors, 269 authors (90.6%) received at least one payment from the Pharma. The total monetary value of payments for the 2-year period was $7,128,762. The median and mean monetary value of payments from the Pharma reporting were $10,281 (interquartile range $2,796 -$34,962) and $26,600 (standard deviation $40,950) for the two years combined. Of the 26 CPG authors who disclosed FCOIs due to the monies received from Pharma, only the atopic dermatitis CPG authors and the acne vulgaris CPG authors published their potential FCOIs. In Japan, most dermatology CPG authors received financial payments from Pharma. The transparency of the CPGs, as reported by the CPG authors, was inadequate, and a more rigorous framework of reporting and monitoring FCOI disclosure is required to improve the accuracy and transparency with relation to possible Conflicts of Interest.
| S-EPMC7553305 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many dermatology residency programs adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic by transitioning to online teaching methods. This may impact the quality of education and the satisfaction of residents. Dermatology faculty and residents nationwide were surveyed regarding their experiences with the novel online curricula. A total of 65 individuals representing at least 20 ACGME-accredited dermatology programs responded. Many programs implemented a predominantly online curriculum (78%). Most participants reported that both clinical dermatology and dermatopathology were online during the pandemic's peak (90%). Among those who had experienced a live curriculum prior to the pandemic, 49% reported that a virtual curriculum had similar effectiveness, whereas 36% deemed it less effective. Open-ended questions suggested that disadvantages of a virtual curricula included too many distractions, lack of human features, and less spontaneous feedback. They also suggested advantages to an online curriculum included flexibility and more opportunities to hear from guest speakers. Dissatisfaction before the curriculum change was the same as after (7%), suggesting that the educational experience was not worsened. Failing to adjust the curriculum to residents' needs can contribute to lower satisfaction and inadequate education. The variation of responses signifies the importance of seeking sufficient feedback from residents to meet their educational needs.
| S-EPMC9357933 | biostudies-literature