↓ Skip to main content

Systemic therapy for vulval Erosive Lichen Planus (the ‘hELP’ trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Systemic therapy for vulval Erosive Lichen Planus (the ‘hELP’ trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-1133-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosalind C. Simpson, Ruth Murphy, Daniel J. Bratton, Matthew R. Sydes, Sally Wilkes, Helen Nankervis, Shelley Dowey, Kim S. Thomas

Abstract

Erosive lichen planus affecting the vulva (ELPV) is a relatively rare, chronic condition causing painful raw areas in the vulvovaginal region. Symptoms are pain and burning, which impact upon daily living. There is paucity of evidence regarding therapy. A 2012 Cochrane systematic review found no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this field. Topically administered corticosteroids are the accepted first-line therapy: however, there is uncertainty as to which second-line treatments to use. Several systemic agents have been clinically noted to show promise for ELPV refractory to topically administered corticosteroids but there is no RCT evidence to support these. The 'hELP' study is a RCT with an internal pilot phase designed to provide high-quality evidence. The objective is to test whether systemic therapy in addition to standard topical therapy is a beneficial second-line treatment for ELPV. Adjunctive systemic therapies used are hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil and prednisolone. Topical therapy plus a short course of prednisolone given orally is considered the comparator intervention. The trial is a four-armed, open-label, pragmatic RCT which uses a blinded independent clinical assessor. To provide 80 % power for each comparison, 96 participants are required in total. The pilot phase aims to recruit 40 participants. The primary clinical outcome is the proportion of patients achieving treatment success at 6 months. 'Success' is defined by a composite measure of Patient Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 on a 4-point scale plus improvement from baseline on clinical photographs scored by a clinician blinded to treatment allocation. Secondary clinical outcomes include 6-month assessment of: (1) Reduction in pain/soreness; (2) Global assessment of disease; (3) Response at other affected mucosal sites; (4) Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale scores; (5) Sexual function; (6) Health-related quality of life using 'Short Form 36' and 'Skindex-29' questionnaires; (7) Days of topical steroid use; (8) Treatment satisfaction; (9) Discontinuation of medications due to treatment failure; (10) Per participant cost of intervention in each treatment group. Adverse events will also be reported. 'hELP' is the first RCT to address second-line treatment of ELPV. The trial has encountered unique methodological challenges and has required collaborative efforts of the UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network alongside expert clinicians. ISRCTN 81883379 . Date of registration 12 June 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 14%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 25 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 36%
Psychology 9 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 27 35%