Cited by 6Dermatology and Skin DiseasesContact Dermatitis and AllergiesStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Sensitivity of clinician‐assessed efficacy outcome measurement instruments in trials of topical therapies for atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Légaré, S., Chagnon, M., Palijan, A., Kojok, K., Bissonnette, R.·2022·Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

Abstract

The rising prevalence of atopic dermatitis (AD) in developing countries and its substantial socioeconomic impact have furthered research over the last two decades giving way to advances in its aetiopathogenesis and treatment. Topical therapies targeting newly identified AD signalling pathways are being developed. Numerous clinician‐assessed disease severity outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) are available to evaluate the efficacy of investigational treatments in proof‐of‐concept (POC) trials for AD. However, little is known about the comparative sensitivity of these efficacy OMIs. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare the sensitivity of different OMIs in controlled trials of topical therapies for AD published between January 1, 2000 and April 7, 2020. Treatment effect size of OMIs reported at Week 4 was calculated with 95% Confidence Interval (CI). The sensitivity of OMIs was compared by pooling the standardized difference between means (Cohen's d and Cohen's h) for any two OMI‐parameter combinations that were reported in ≥3 studies identified in our systematic review. Assessed parameters were difference between active and vehicle at Week 4 and change from baseline [CFB] and percentage change from baseline [%CFB] at Week 4. We identified a total of 15 studies with 3313 subjects examining 14 different OMIs were included in this quantitative meta‐analysis. Continuous OMIs had a significantly higher treatment effect size vs. dichotomous OMIs (P = 0.006). Comparisons of Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), body surface area (BSA) and SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) for available parameters were performed and generally had a similar sensitivity, with BSA showing smaller overall effect size estimates. In conclusion, continuous OMIs used in topical clinical trials for AD had significantly higher treatment effect sizes when compared to dichotomous OMIs. Continuous OMIs could provide more power for POC trials with a small sample size in atopic dermatitis with topical therapies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jdv.17743

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Légaré, S., Chagnon, M., Palijan, A., Kojok, K., & Bissonnette, R.
Affiliations
  • Innovaderm (Canada) (CA)
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
Corresponding author
Bissonnette, R.
Venue
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-11-22
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
196-212
ISSN
  • 0926-9959 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3083
OpenAlex
W3207234169
Cited by
6
References
72
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatology and Skin Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
atopic dermatitis, outcome measurement instruments, sensitivity, topical treatment, Eczema Area and Severity Index, Investigator's Global Assessment, SCORAD, body surface area, change from baseline, treatment effect size
MeSH terms
Body Surface Area, Dermatitis, Atopic, Double-Blind Method, Eczema, Humans, Severity of Illness Index, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review