Abstract Number: 62

The autoimmune bullous disease quality of life and treatment of autoimmune bullous disease quality of life

R.Y. Ang, C.Y. Zhao, M.C. Doria, Q.C. Wang,B.S. Daniel, M. Ramirez, D.C. Boettiger, M.G. Law,N. Ishii, T. Hashimoto, D.F. Murrell

Meeting: 2015 Dermcoll

Session Information

Date: -

Session Title: Poster Presentations

Session Time: -

Introduction: The Autoimmune Bullous Disease Quality of
Life (ABQOL) and the Treatment of Autoimmune Bullous
Disease Quality of Life (TABQOL) questionnaires are valid
and reliable autoimmune blistering disease (AIBD)-specific
quality of life (QOL) instruments. Their responsiveness to
change remains undetermined.

Objectives: To identify trends in ABQOL and TABQOL
scores; To determine the responsiveness of ABQOL and
TABQOL to change; To determine the relationships between
disease extent, treatment intensity and treatment adversity
with ABQOL and TABQOL scores.

Methods: Methodologies included patient recruitment,
QOL (Short Form 36, ABQOL, TABQOL), disease extent (Autoimmune Bullous Skin Disease Intensity Score, Pemphigus
Disease Area Index, Bullous Pemphigoid Disease
Area Index, anti-desmoglein 1 and 3 and anti-BP180), treatment
intensity (Treatment Intensity Scoring System) and
adversity (Treatment Adversity Scoring System) assessments,
and statistical analysis.

Results: Fifty-seven AIBD patients were studied. Mean
ABQOL and TABQOL scores decreased over initial 48
months. ABQOL and TABQOL were insignificantly correlated
against disease extent, treatment intensity or treatment
adversity. Correlations between ABQOL and erosions
and blisters (face) scores were low but statistically significant
(r = 0.356, p ≤ 0.001). A 1-point change in physical component
scores or mental component scores resulted in a
0.468 to 0.864-point change in ABQOL and TABQOL scores.

Conclusions: AIBD has greater impact on QOL during
early disease. The ABQOL and TABQOL are responsive to
small changes in QOL. QOL is largely independent of
disease extent, treatment intensity and treatment adversity.
However, active erosions or blisters on exposed skin surfaces
resulted in poorer QOL.(r = 0.249, p < 0.001). sTASS had statistically significant correlations with ABQOL (r = 0.112, p = 0.004) and TABQOL (r = 0.085, p = 0.038). cTASS had statistically significant correlations with ABSIS (r = 0.270, p < 0.001), BPDAI activity (r = −0.169, p = 0.007) and TABQOL (r = 0.199, p < 0.001). Conclusions: TISS and TASS are valid and reliable scoring systems for assessing treatment intensity and treatmentassociated adverse events. Further studies focusing on developing a dependent relationship between the TISS and TASS by attributing adverse effects from the TASS to a specific TISS therapy will be beneficial.