Patients with moderate to severe psoriasis are undertreated. To solve this persistent problem, the consensus programme was performed to define goals for treatment of plaque psoriasis with systemic therapy and to improve patient care. An expert consensus meeting and a collaborative Delphi procedure were carried out. Nineteen dermatologists from different European countries met for a face-to-face discussion and defined items through a four-round Delphi process. Severity of plaque psoriasis was graded into mild and moderate to severe disease. Mild disease was defined as body surface area (BSA) ≤10 and psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) ≤10 and dermatology life quality index (DLQI) ≤10 and moderate to severe psoriasis as (BSA > 10 or PASI > 10) and DLQI > 10. Special clinical situations may change mild psoriasis to moderate to severe including involvement of visible areas or severe nail involvement. For systemic therapy of plaque psoriasis two treatment phases were defined: (1) induction phase as the treatment period until week 16; however, depending on the type of drug and dose regimen used, this phase may be extended until week 24 and (2) maintenance phase for all drugs was defined as the treatment period after the induction phase. For the definition of treatment goals in plaque psoriasis, the change of PASI from baseline until the time of evaluation (ΔPASI) and the absolute DLQI were used. After induction and during maintenance therapy, treatment can be continued if reduction in PASI is ≥75%. The treatment regimen should be modified if improvement of PASI is <50%. In a situation where the therapeutic response improved ≥50% but <75%, as assessed by PASI, therapy should be modified if the DLQI is >5 but can be continued if the DLQI is ≤5. This programme defines the severity of plaque psoriasis for the first time using a formal consensus of 19 European experts. In addition, treatment goals for moderate to severe disease were established. Implementation of treatment goals in the daily management of psoriasis will improve patient care and mitigate the problem of undertreatment. It is planned to evaluate the implementation of these treatment goals in a subsequent programme involving patients and physicians.

The most commonly used tool for self-report of pruritus intensity is the visual analogue scale (VAS). Similar tools are the numerical rating scale (NRS) and verbal rating scale (VRS). In the present study, initiated by the International Forum for the Study of Itch assessing reliability of these tools, 471 randomly selected patients with chronic itch (200 males, 271 females, mean age 58.44 years) recorded their pruritus intensity on VAS (100-mm line), NRS (0-10) and VRS (four-point) scales. Re-test reliability was analysed in a subgroup of 250 patients after one hour. Statistical analysis showed a high reliability and concurrent validity (r>0.8; p<0.01) for all tools. Mean values of all scales showed a high correlation. In conclusion, high reliability and concurrent validity was found for VAS, NRS and VRS. On re-test, higher correlation and less missing values were observed. A training session before starting a clinical trial is recommended.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual analogue scale (VAS) as a method of pruritus assessment. A total of 310 subjects with pruritic dermatoses (148 Caucasian subjects and 162 Asian subjects) were recruited. The patients assessed pruritus intensity using the horizontal and vertical VAS, numeric rating scale (NRS) and verbal rating scale (VRS). All scales showed very good reproducibility (intraclass coefficient (ICC) > 0.8). No significant differences were found between the horizontal and vertical VAS (5.3 ± 2.9 vs. 5.3 ± 3.0 points, p = 0.34). Using NRS, patients rated their pruritus significantly higher than with VAS (5.7 ± 2.6 points, p < 0.01). VRS showed the highest correlation with NRS (R = 0.82, p < 0.001), followed by horizontal (R = 0.75, p < 0.001) and vertical VAS (R=0.74, p < 0.001). Based on detailed analysis following VAS categories were proposed: 0 = no pruritus, > 0-< 4 points = mild pruritus, ≥ 4-< 7 points = moderate pruritus, ≥ 7-< 9 points = severe pruritus, and ≥ 9 points = very severe pruritus. In conclusion, the VAS is a valuable method of pruritus measurement.

This new definition and terminology of CPG should be implemented in dermatology to harmonize communication in the clinical routine, clinical trials and scientific literature. Acute/subacute forms of prurigo are separated entities, which need to be differentiated from CPG and will be discussed in a next step. In the near future, the cross-sectional EPP will provide relevant clinical data on various aspects of CPG leading to new directions in the scientific investigation of CGP.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between itch and the well-being of patients with psoriasis. In a study of 102 patients with plaque-type psoriasis, pruritus was found in 91 (89.2%) patients during exacerbation of psoriasis. No significant correlation was found between disease severity and the presence and intensity of pruritus. However, pruritus intensity correlated significantly with patients' quality of life, feelings of stigmatization, stress experienced within a period of one month before psoriasis outbreak, and depressive symptoms. In conclusion, pruritus may have a significant negative influence on the psychosocial status of patients with psoriasis. There is a need for the development of effective anti-pruritic treatments in order to improve the well-being of patients with psoriasis.