Hubbard, Rebecca A.

Importance Office-based phototherapy is cost-effective for psoriasis but difficult to access. Home-based phototherapy is patient preferred but has limited clinical data, particularly in patients with darker skin. Objective To compare the effectiveness of home- vs office-based narrowband UV-B phototherapy for psoriasis. Design, Setting, and Participants The Light Treatment Effectiveness study was an investigator-initiated, pragmatic, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter, noninferiority randomized clinical trial embedded in routine care at 42 academic and private clinical dermatology practices in the US. Enrollment occurred from March 1, 2019, to December 4, 2023, with follow-up through June 2024. Participants were 12 years and older with plaque or guttate psoriasis who were candidates for home- and office-based phototherapy. Interventions Participants were randomized to receive a home narrowband UV-B machine with guided mode dosimetry or routine care with office-based narrowband UV-B for 12 weeks, followed by an additional 12-week observation period. Main Outcomes and Measures The coprimary effectiveness outcomes were Physician Global Assessment (PGA) dichotomized as clear/almost clear skin (score of ≤1) at the end of the intervention period and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score of 5 or lower (no to small effect on quality of life) at week 12. Results Of 783 patients enrolled (mean [SD] age, 48.0 [15.5] years; 376 [48.0%] male), 393 received home-based phototherapy and 390 received office-based phototherapy, with 350 (44.7%) having skin phototype (SPT) I/II, 350 (44.7%) having SPT III/IV, and 83 (10.6%) having SPT V/VI. A total of 93 patients (11.9%) were receiving systemic treatment. At baseline, mean (SD) PGA was 2.7 (0.8) and DLQI was 12.2 (7.2). At week 12, 129 patients (32.8%) receiving home-based phototherapy and 100 patients (25.6%) receiving office-based phototherapy achieved clear/almost clear skin, and 206 (52.4%) and 131 (33.6%) achieved DLQI of 5 or lower, respectively. Home-based phototherapy was noninferior to office-based phototherapy for PGA and DLQI in the overall population and across all SPTs. Home-based phototherapy, compared to office-based phototherapy, was associated with better treatment adherence (202 patients [51.4%] vs 62 patients [15.9%]; P < .001), lower burden of indirect costs to patients, and more episodes of persistent erythema (466 of 7957 treatments [5.9%] vs 46 of 3934 treatments [1.2%]; P < .001). Both treatments were well tolerated with no discontinuations due to adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, home-based phototherapy was as effective as office-based phototherapy for plaque or guttate psoriasis in everyday clinical practice and had less burden to patients. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03726489

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to estimate differences in rates of functional decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and vascular dementia (VaD) and whether differences vary by age or sex.MethodsData came from 32 U.S. Alzheimer's Disease Centers. The cohort of participants (n = 5848) were ≥60 years of age and had clinical dementia with a primary etiologic diagnosis of probable AD, DLB, or probable VaD; a Clinical Dementia Rating‐Sum of Boxes score <16; and a duration of symptoms ≤10 years. Dementia diagnoses were assigned using standard criteria. Annual mean rate of change of the Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) score was modeled using multiple linear regression with generalized estimating equations adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, years since onset, and cognitive status (mean follow‐up = 2.0 years).ResultsFAQ declined more slowly over time in those with VaD compared with AD (difference in mean annual rate of change: −0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −1.68, −0.14). VaD participants also declined at a slower rate than DLB participants, but this difference was not statistically significant (−0.61; 95% CI: −1.45, 0.24). There was no significant difference between DLB and AD. Within each group, rate of decline was more rapid for the youngest participants.ConclusionsIn this sample, findings suggested that VaD patients declined in their functional abilities at a slower rate compared with AD patients and that there were no significant differences in rate of functional decline between patients with DLB compared with those with either AD or VaD. These results may provide guidance to clinicians about average expected rates of functional decline in three common dementia types.