Evidence mapPaperPMID 30822358Full record

ArticleThe British journal of dermatology2019

A standardization approach to compare treatment safety and effectiveness outcomes between clinical trials and real-world populations in psoriasis.

Z Z N Yiu, K J Mason, J N W N Barker, P J Hampton, K McElhone, C H Smith, R B Warren, C E M Griffiths, M Lunt, A D Burden and 1 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of dermatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Z Z N YiuDermatology Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, U.K.ORCID 0000-0002-1831-074X
K J MasonDermatology Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, U.K.ORCID 0000-0002-5419-0669
J N W N BarkerSt John's Institute of Dermatology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, SE1 9RT, U.K.
P J HamptonDermatological Sciences, Institute of Cellular Medicine, Medical School, Newcastle University, and Department of Dermatology, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, U.K.
K McElhoneArthritis Research U.K. Epidemiology Unit, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PT, U.K.
C H SmithSt John's Institute of Dermatology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, SE1 9RT, U.K.ORCID 0000-0001-9918-1144
R B WarrenDermatology Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, U.K.
C E M GriffithsDermatology Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, U.K.
M LuntArthritis Research U.K. Epidemiology Unit, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PT, U.K.
A D BurdenInstitute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8TA, U.K.
BADBIR Study Group

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2015-08-089Medical Research Council MR/L011808/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients recruited in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for biologic therapies in psoriasis are not fully representative of the real-world psoriasis population.

objectivesFirstly, to investigate whether patient characteristics are associated with being included in a psoriasis RCT. Secondly, to estimate the differences in the incidence of severe adverse events (SAEs) and the response rate between RCT and real-world populations of patients on biologic therapies for psoriasis using a standardization method.

methodsData from the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR) were appended to individual participant-level data from two RCTs assessing ustekinumab in patients with psoriasis. Baseline variables were assessed for association of being in an RCT using a multivariable logistic regression model. Propensity score weights were derived to reweigh the registry population so that variables had the distribution of the trial population. We measured the C-statistic of the model with trial status as the dependent variable, and the risk differences in the incidence rate of SAEs in the first year and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) after 6 months in the BADBIR cohort before and after weighting.

resultsIn total 6790 registry and 2021 RCT participants were included. The multivariable logistic regression model had a C-statistic of 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-0.83]. The risk differences for the incidence rate of SAEs and the proportion of patients with PASI < 1.5 were 9.27 (95% CI -3.91-22.5) per 1000 person-years and 0.95 (95% CI -1.98-4.15), respectively.

conclusionsOur results suggest that RCTs of biologic therapies in patients with psoriasis are not fully representative of the real-world population, but this lack of external validity does not account for the efficacy-effectiveness gap. What's already known about this topic? Patients with psoriasis who would not be eligible for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating biologic therapies have a greater risk of serious adverse events and lower treatment effectiveness than patients who would have been eligible. What does this study add? Baseline patient characteristics were shown to be predictive of whether a patient would have been eligible for enrolment in an RCT for psoriasis biologic therapy. We did not find any efficacy-effectiveness gap between the sample representative of the real-world population of patients with psoriasis and the sample representative of the RCT population. Factors outside of baseline patient characteristics, such as observer effect and higher adherence in RCTs, may be more influential in any efficacy-effectiveness gap between trial and real-world populations of patients with psoriasis.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionAdalimumabAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiological ProductsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsEtanerceptFemaleHumansIncidenceLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPsoriasisAdalimumabBiological ProductsEtanerceptUstekinumab

Identifiers

PMID30822358
PMCPMC6916305

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.