Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38969921›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2024

Psychometric Properties of the EQ-5D-5L in Patients with Alopecia Areata.

Andrew Lloyd, Daniel Aggio, Caleb Dixon, Ernest H Law, Thomas Price

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03732807 (A PHASE 2B/3 RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, DOSE-RANGING STUDY TO INVESTIGATE THE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF PF-06651600 IN ADULT AND ADOLESCENT ALOPECIA AREATA), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT03732807 phase2 / phase3completednot on this map

A phase 2b/3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study to investigate the efficacy and safety of pf-06651600 in adult and adolescent alopecia areata (aa) subjects with 50% or greater scalp hair loss

TypeinterventionalSponsorPfizerRan2018 to 2021Enrolled718ConditionsAlopecia AreataArmsPF-06651600 Induction Dose, PF-06651600 Maintenance Dose #1, PF-06651600 Maintenance Dose #2, PF-06651600 Maintenance Dose #3, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Andrew LloydAcaster Lloyd Consulting Ltd, 8th Floor, Lacon House, 84 Theobalds Road, London, WC1X 8NL, UK. Andrew.lloyd@acasterlloyd.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7597-6556
Daniel AggioAcaster Lloyd Consulting Ltd, 8th Floor, Lacon House, 84 Theobalds Road, London, WC1X 8NL, UK.
Caleb DixonAcaster Lloyd Consulting Ltd, 8th Floor, Lacon House, 84 Theobalds Road, London, WC1X 8NL, UK.
Ernest H LawPfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA.
Thomas PricePfizer UK, Ltd, Tadworth, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor many decision makers in Health Technology Assessment the EQ-5D-5L is the standard measure of health-related quality of life (HRQL). However, evidence has shown the limitations of the measure in certain disease areas, including dermatology. Alopecia areata (AA) is associated with a significant HRQL impact, partly due to the emotional impact of hair loss.

objectivesThis study explores the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in people with AA in reference to the short-form 36 version 2 (SF-36v2), the Alopecia Areata Patient Priority Outcomes (AAPPO), the Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) and the Patient Global Impressions of Change (PGI-C).

methodsData from participants with AA enrolled in the ALLEGRO-2b/3 trial (NCT03732807) of ritlecitinib were analysed. Participants completed the AAPPO measure (an AA-specific measure assessing emotional symptoms and activity limitations), PGI-C, EQ-5D-5L and SF-36v2 across 48-weeks of follow up. Extent of scalp hair loss was assessed using the SALT. Ceiling effects, known groups validity, convergent validity and responsiveness were examined. Known groups were defined by SALT score and a PGI-C defined response from baseline. Exploratory factor analysis was also performed.

resultsData were available from 612 adult participants. Ceiling effects were observed for the EQ-5D-5L (55.3-61.2%) and analyses suggested that the EQ-5D did not capture important differences between patients that the SF-36v2 did. The EQ-5D-5L very weakly correlated with SALT score, whereas the AAPPO correlated more strongly with the extent of hair loss. Compared with the EQ-5D-5L, the AAPPO was better able to discriminate between known groups defined by SALT and PGI-C. An exploratory factor analysis suggested that the EQ-5D-5L had limitations in content validity compared with the AAPPO.

conclusionsThe EQ-5D-5L may not adequately measure the burden of AA on patients' HRQL. Insensitivity to the burden of AA suggests that the EQ-5D-5L may not measure treatment-related benefit with hair regrowth. Data from other measures could be considered if they are shown to be more relevant.

Identifiers

PMID38969921
PMCPMC11362414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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 OpenQuestion graph.