Search

INTRODUCTION: The 2021 US approval of ruxolitinib cream for treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) in patients aged ≥ 12 years was based on the results of two pivotal phase 3 studies. Currently, real-world data to describe effectiveness of ruxolitinib cream and physician satisfaction with treatment remain limited. Our objective is to describe disease control among adults with mild to moderate AD prescribed ruxolitinib cream and physician satisfaction with treatment. METHODS: Data were from the Adelphi AD Disease Specific Programme™, a US real-world, cross-sectional survey of physician-reported data, undertaken between August 2022 and March 2023. For patients aged ≥ 18 years, physicians reported patient demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and physician satisfaction with disease control. Descriptive analysis of data for patients with mild to moderate AD prior to the initiation of ruxolitinib cream and treated with ruxolitinib cream for ≥ 1 month was undertaken. RESULTS: Among physician-reported data from 1360 patients with AD, 149 patients had received ruxolitinib cream (in combination or as monotherapy) for ≥ 1 month, including 59 patients receiving monotherapy. Prior to treatment with ruxolitinib cream, 84.6% of patients had moderate AD (Investigators Global Assessment, IGA of 3), whereas after treatment (median duration, 26 weeks), only 21.5% had an IGA of 3, with 48.3% of patients having clear or almost clear skin (IGA of 0/1). For these patients, 81.2% were not currently experiencing a flare, and physicians were satisfied with disease control for 87.3%. Results were similar in patients receiving monotherapy. The most frequent physician-reported reasons for prescribing ruxolitinib cream included relieving itch, improving lesion redness/thickness, achieving disease control, and reducing/controlling flares. CONCLUSIONS: These real-world findings demonstrate effective disease control and physician satisfaction with ruxolitinib cream for the treatment of AD in adults in a clinical practice setting. Outcomes were similar whether ruxolitinib cream was prescribed as monotherapy or in combination regimens, suggesting a role for ruxolitinib cream across the spectrum of disease.

Background: This study evaluated the level of burden in pediatric and adolescent atopic dermatitis (AD) patients in Japan, the associated burden on caregivers/families, and whether this burden varied with age. Methods: Data were drawn from the Adelphi Pediatric AD Disease Specific Programme (DSP)™, a cross‐sectional survey of physicians and their patients conducted in Japan between July and December 2022. Physicians reported patient demographics, clinical characteristics, disease burden, and current/previous therapies. Patients and/or caregivers reported perceived disease severity and impact of AD, including the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) and Dermatitis Family Impact questionnaire (DFI). Results: Overall, 55 physicians provided data for 537 AD patients aged ≤17. Mean (SD) overall scores for CDLQI, POEM, and DFI were 9.3 (6.3), 8.3 (6.8), and 11.7 (7.2), respectively. Age was associated with higher patient and/or caregiver‐reported CDLQI scores, which increased by 0.543 points per year of age (P = 0.01). Patients with severe disease reported a more significant impact on quality of life factors compared with mild patients (P < 0.001). Age was associated with higher caregiver‐reported burden, with DFI scores increasing by 0.325 per year (P = 0.01). Physician‐reported impact on caregivers showed that age was significantly associated with increased burden on sleep, daily activities, work, and mood (P < 0.05), with disease severity associated with impact across all factors (P < 0.01). Conclusions: Both increasing age and disease severity were associated with the increased impact of AD on patients and their caregivers. Disease control/modification through appropriate therapeutic intervention at a younger age may relieve the burden of pediatric AD on patients and their families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstracts. Forty-two medication adherence concepts were reported and grouped into 10 domains. Eight forms of medication adherence were reported during interviews, along with 27 drivers of non-adherence, all of which were incorporated into a conceptual model. Participants reported skipping medication doses (n=36/57; 63.2%) or taking medication later in the day than prescribed (n=29/57; 50.9%). Common drivers of non-adherence included forgetfulness (n=35/57; 61.4%), being out of the usual routine (n=31/57; 54.4%) and being busy (n=22/57; 38.6%). US participants were more likely to report non-adherence due to low perceived efficacy (n=6/21, 28.6%) and cost (n=5/21, 23.8%) than German (n=1/18, 5.6%; n=0/18, 0.0%) or Spanish (n=2/18, 11.1%; n=1/18, 5.6%) participants. Conclusion: Findings highlight the diverse forms and drivers of medication non-adherence, informing the development of a comprehensive conceptual model of medication adherence. The conceptual model builds on and advances previous models of medication adherence and can be used by healthcare professionals to understand and interpret barriers to medication adherence and how best to support patients in taking their medication as intended. Plain Language Summary: Medication adherence is the extent to which a patient takes their medication as prescribed. This paper describes a literature review and concept elicitation interviews to identify forms and drivers of medication adherence across a diverse sample of participants. Forms of non-adherence identified included: deviating from the prescription, skipping a dose, taking a different amount, and taking medication at a different time. Behaviours and drivers can vary by condition, treatment modality, and dosing schedule.This research highlights the variation in the prevalence of medication non-adherence, and the different forms and drivers of non-adherence, based on individuals' demographic and clinical characteristics. The conceptual model developed advances previous models of medication adherence and may support healthcare professionals in the management of patients and how they can be supported to take medication as intended. The research ultimately informed the development of the Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ©), a novel generic patient-reported outcome measure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objectivesThe US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) End Stage Renal Disease Prospective Payment System and Quality Incentive Program requires that dialysis centers meet predefined criteria for quality of patient care to ensure future funding. The CMS selected the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems In-Center Hemodialysis (CAHPS-ICH) survey for the assessment of patient experience of care. This analysis evaluated the psychometric properties of the CAHPS-ICH survey in a sample of hemodialysis patients.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsData were drawn from the Adelphi CKD Disease Specific Program (a retrospective, cross-sectional survey of nephrologists and patients). Selected United States-based nephrologists treating patients receiving hemodialysis completed patient record forms and provided information on their dialysis center. Patients (n=404) completed the CAHPS-ICH survey (comprising 58 questions) providing six scores for the assessment of patient experience of care. CAHPS-ICH item-scale convergence, discrimination, and reliability were evaluated for multi-item scales. Floor and ceiling effects were estimated for all six scores. Patient (demographics, dialysis history, vascular access method) and facility characteristics (size, ratio of patients-to-physicians, nurses, and technicians) associated with the CAHPS-ICH scores were also evaluated.ResultsItem-scale correlations and internal consistency reliability estimates provided support for the nephrologists' communication (range, 0.16-0.71; α=0.81) and quality of care (range, 0.16-0.76; α=0.90) composites. However, the patient information composite had low internal consistency reliability (α=0.55). Provider-to-patient ratios (range, 2.37 for facilities with >36 patients per physician to 2.8 for those with 15 minutes of waiting time to 3.75 for 5 to

Aim: To assess maintenance preference and trade-offs for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Methods: Patients completed a time trade-off exercise ranking five maintenance approaches. Patients' preferred approach was compared with alternatives to determine the progression-free time they would trade off to remain on their preferred approach. Results: Of 152 patients (median age 53 years, 68% White), 56% chose one of four maintenance medications, mostly to feel proactive and 44% chose active surveillance. Compared with their preferred approach, patients were willing to trade a mean progression-free time before switching of 2.3 months for once-daily oral medications, 3.2 months for twice-daily oral medications, 5.5 months for intravenous infusions every 3 weeks (iv. q3), 6.1 months for active surveillance and 7.5 months for iv. q3 and twice-daily oral. Conclusion: Findings highlight the importance of patients' awareness of all maintenance approaches and involving them in the decision-making process. The VOCAL study looked at maintenance approach preferences of patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Maintenance approach refers to the methods used after a patient has completed their initial chemotherapy to prevent disease progression for as long as possible. US patients completed an online survey, ranking five different maintenance approaches: No medication (active surveillance); Once-daily oral medication (e.g. pills); Twice-daily oral medication; Medication by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks; Medication by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks and oral twice-daily. Patients were asked to assume the same time to disease progression for all five approaches and the same side effects for the four approaches involving medications (2–5). Each patient then indicated how much time to disease progression they were willing to trade off to remain on their preferred approach before switching to an alternative. Overall, 152 patients completed the survey (median age: 53 years, 68% White). Most patients preferred a medication approach (56%, n = 85) to active surveillance (44%, n = 67). Of the 85 patients who preferred medication, 66% (n = 56) reported this was to feel proactive in preventing their cancer returning. Once-daily oral medication was the most acceptable alternative to the patients' preferred maintenance approach, given they were willing to trade the least 'disease-free' time (2.3 months) before accepting a switch. Individual patient preferences vary, and healthcare professionals should work with patients to determine which approach is most appropriate for them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]