Patients' demographic and socioeconomic characteristics influence the therapeutic decision-making process in psoriasis.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
10
04
2020
accepted:
22
07
2020
entrez:
14
8
2020
pubmed:
14
8
2020
medline:
9
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Knowledge regarding differences in care for psoriatic patients is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing prescription of systemic treatments for patients with psoriasis with a special focus on socioeconomic factors. This was a non-interventional, cross-sectional study, conducted in 18 Italian University and/or hospital centers with psoriasis-specialized units. Questionnaires evaluating demographic and socioeconomic characteristics were administered to participants. Overall, 1880 consecutive patients affected by mild-to-severe psoriasis were recruited. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses of systemic therapy prescription, with a special focus on biologics, accounting for the above mentioned characteristics were performed. Our analysis showed that all analyzed patients' characteristics were significantly associated with biological therapy compared to non-biological systemic one. Particularly, women were less likely to receive biologics than men (OR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77). Elderly patients (≥65 years) and subjects with a BMI ≥30 had lower odds to receive biologics respect to adults (≥35-64 years) (OR = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.25-0.40), and subjects with BMI≥25<30 (OR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.77), respectively. Northern and Southern patients were both less likely to receive biologics than Central patients (OR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.89, and OR = 0.56; 95% CI,0.47-0.68, respectively). Lower economic profile and never reading books were both associated with decreased odds of receiving biological therapy. This study shows that sex, age, comorbidities, and socioeconomic characteristics influence the prescription of systemic treatments in psoriasis, highlighting that there are still unmet needs influencing the therapeutic decision-making process that have to be addressed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Knowledge regarding differences in care for psoriatic patients is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing prescription of systemic treatments for patients with psoriasis with a special focus on socioeconomic factors.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
This was a non-interventional, cross-sectional study, conducted in 18 Italian University and/or hospital centers with psoriasis-specialized units. Questionnaires evaluating demographic and socioeconomic characteristics were administered to participants. Overall, 1880 consecutive patients affected by mild-to-severe psoriasis were recruited. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses of systemic therapy prescription, with a special focus on biologics, accounting for the above mentioned characteristics were performed. Our analysis showed that all analyzed patients' characteristics were significantly associated with biological therapy compared to non-biological systemic one. Particularly, women were less likely to receive biologics than men (OR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77). Elderly patients (≥65 years) and subjects with a BMI ≥30 had lower odds to receive biologics respect to adults (≥35-64 years) (OR = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.25-0.40), and subjects with BMI≥25<30 (OR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.77), respectively. Northern and Southern patients were both less likely to receive biologics than Central patients (OR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.89, and OR = 0.56; 95% CI,0.47-0.68, respectively). Lower economic profile and never reading books were both associated with decreased odds of receiving biological therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
This study shows that sex, age, comorbidities, and socioeconomic characteristics influence the prescription of systemic treatments in psoriasis, highlighting that there are still unmet needs influencing the therapeutic decision-making process that have to be addressed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32785291
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237267
pii: PONE-D-20-10345
pmc: PMC7423114
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0237267Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
P. Amerio has been a scientific consultant for Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Jannsen, Celgene, Galderma, LEO-Pharma, Sanofi Genzyme and Alfa Wasserman. F. Bardazzi has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, LEOPharma, Eli-Lilly, MSD, Novartis and Pfizer. L. Bianchi has been a scientific consultant/speaker for Abbvie, Janssen, Celgene, Pfizer, UCB, Novartis, Sanofi Genzyme and LEO-Pharma. A. Campanati has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, LEO-Pharma, Eli-Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Sanofi. S.P. Cannavò has been a scientific consultant/speaker for AbbVie, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, LEO-Pharma, Novartis and Sanofi. A. Chiricozzi has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for Abbvie, Biogen, Fresenius Kabi, LEO-Pharma, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, UCB, Sanofi and Janssen. A. Conti has been a scientific consultant for Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Janssen Cilag, LEO-Pharma, UCB and Sandoz. P. Dapavo has been a scientific consultant/speaker for Novartis, Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Celgene, LEOpharma and Janssen. C. De Simone has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, LEO-Pharma, Eli-Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Sun Pharma. M. Esposito has been a scientific consultant/speaker for Abbvie, Novartis, Eli-Lilly, Biogen, LEO-Pharma. M.C. Fargnoli has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, LEO-Pharma, Eli- Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Galderma, Almirall, Mylan, UCB and Regeneron. C. Guarneri has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for Wyeth-Pfizer, Abbott Immunology-Abbvie, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, LEO-Pharma, Eli-Lilly, Celgene and Merck-Serono. K. Hansel has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Eli- Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi and Admiral. P. Malagoli has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, LEO-Pharma, Eli-Lilly, Novartis. G. Micali has been a scientific consultant/clinical study investigator for Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Janssen- Cilag, LEO-Pharma and Novartis. C. Mugheddu has been a speaker/clinical study investigator for Abbvie, Celgene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janseen, Novartis and LEO-Pharma. A. Offidani has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, LEOPharma, Eli-Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Alfasigma and Almirall. F. Prignano has been a scientific consultant/adviser/clinical study investigator for Eli-Lilly, Abbvie, Novartis, LEOPharma, Abiogen-Pharma, Celgene and Janssen-Cilag. F. Rongioletti has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Boehringer, Celgene, Janssen, LEOPharma, Eli-Lilly, Novartis and Sanofi. L. Stingeni has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Almirall and Sanofi. A. Balato has been a scientific consultant/speaker/clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Références
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Oct;77(4):758-763
pubmed: 28917457
Qual Health Res. 2018 Jan;28(1):73-86
pubmed: 29192872
Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2017 Nov;17(11):1363-1374
pubmed: 28791896
J Invest Dermatol. 2018 Apr;138(4):785-794
pubmed: 29183731
J Invest Dermatol. 2013 Feb;133(2):377-85
pubmed: 23014338
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020 Mar;34(3):e152-e153
pubmed: 31715054
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2019 Jan;33(1):e22-e23
pubmed: 29888405
PLoS One. 2013 May 15;8(5):e63619
pubmed: 23691076
Circulation. 2003 Jul 1;107(25):3133-40
pubmed: 12796126
Clin Exp Dermatol. 2016 Jul;41(5):564-6
pubmed: 27028505
Front Immunol. 2018 Aug 13;9:1668
pubmed: 30150978
Dermatol Ther. 2019 May;32(3):e12895
pubmed: 30958637
G Ital Dermatol Venereol. 2016 Dec;151(6):587-595
pubmed: 26199090
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010 Sep;63(3):448-56
pubmed: 20605254
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Jan 03;12:1
pubmed: 22214259
Australas J Dermatol. 2018 Nov;59(4):e247-e252
pubmed: 29315464
J Comp Eff Res. 2019 Sep;8(12):947-949
pubmed: 31512930
Am J Clin Dermatol. 2020 Jun;21(3):441-447
pubmed: 31786732
BioDrugs. 2017 Feb;31(1):75-82
pubmed: 28097638
Lancet. 2015 Sep 5;386(9997):983-94
pubmed: 26025581
Indian J Dermatol. 2017 Mar-Apr;62(2):113-122
pubmed: 28400628
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017 May;31(5):774-790
pubmed: 28244153
N Engl J Med. 2016 Jul 28;375(4):345-56
pubmed: 27299809
Lancet. 2008 May 17;371(9625):1675-84
pubmed: 18486740
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2015 Mar;29(3):515-20
pubmed: 25132013
Br J Dermatol. 2017 May;176(5):1331-1338
pubmed: 27973689
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2013 Jun;27(6):763-70
pubmed: 22631875
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2019 Jan;33(1):143-146
pubmed: 29906311
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017 Apr;31(4):e212-e214
pubmed: 27632580
Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2014 Apr 17;7:119-32
pubmed: 24790463
Int J Womens Dermatol. 2017 Feb 04;3(1):21-25
pubmed: 28492050
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2014 Apr;28(4):438-53
pubmed: 23437792
Health Econ. 2005 Sep;14(Suppl 1):S187-202
pubmed: 16161196
J Invest Dermatol. 2014 Jan;134(1):18-23
pubmed: 23921949
Dermatol Ther. 2014 Nov-Dec;27(6):323-30
pubmed: 25053228
Int J Dermatol. 2008 Feb;47(2):144-9
pubmed: 18211484