Abstract
Introduction
In the USA, psoriasis affects approximately 3% of the population and costs more than $110 billion annually. The development of targeted biologics has revolutionized psoriasis management, but at an increasing cost. According to Joint AAD/NPF guidelines, an important need exists to identify biomarkers that can predict the appropriate biologic agent for patients.
Methods
A survey of community dermatologists was developed to address (1) significant factors influencing biologic therapy utilization in psoriasis; (2) the clinical utility of a test stratifying biologic response.
Results
Respondents confirmed that trial and error leads to frequent biologic switching. The survey indicated that 82% of dermatologists switch 10–30% of their patients in the first year and 98% switch intra-class for at least 50% of non-responding patients. The trial and error is due, in part, to formularies influencing the physician 77% of the time, with only 14% reporting that their first choice and the formulary alignment is greater than 75%. Compounding trial and error, 93% of the physicians report that they wait at least 12 weeks before determining non-response, in alignment with AAD/NPF guidelines. The lack of precision medicine and this trial-and-error approach result in unnecessary wasted spending and suboptimal patient outcomes. After being given an overview of Mind.Px, a dermal biomarker patch used to predict therapeutic response to a biologic class, survey participants expressed that:
93% would utilize Mind.Px results to determine first-line therapy even if this differed from initial clinical choice
100% would utilize Mind.Px if part of the prior authorization process
98% say Mind.Px would improve patient outcomes
81% reported Mind.Px would help with prior authorization process
Conclusions
Surveyed dermatologists believe a test that predicts psoriasis treatment response to a class of biologic drugs would lessen trial and error, provide a tool for physicians to make more informed decisions about drug selection, improve patient outcomes, and significantly reduce wasted spending.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, USA (GRID:grid.47100.32) (ISNI:0000000419368710); Central Connecticut Dermatology, Cromwell, USA (GRID:grid.47100.32)
2 Eastern Virginia Medical School and Virginia Clinical Research, Inc., Norfolk, USA (GRID:grid.478129.1)
3 Mindera Corporation, San Diego, USA (GRID:grid.478129.1)
4 Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, New York, USA (GRID:grid.59734.3c) (ISNI:0000 0001 0670 2351)
5 Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, USA (GRID:grid.411588.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2167 9807)





