Psoriasis: assessment and management

Evidence

We found 76 studies in a search for systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials published between 1 June 2014 and 12 July 2016. We also included 3 relevant studies from a total of 12 identified by members of the guideline committee who originally worked on this guideline.

We also considered evidence identified in previous surveillance 2 years after publication of the guideline. This included 12 studies identified by search.

From all sources, we considered 91 studies to be relevant to the guideline.

We also checked for relevant ongoing research, which will be evaluated again at the next surveillance review of the guideline.

See appendix A: summary of evidence from surveillance for all evidence considered, and references.

Views of topic experts

We considered the views of topic experts, including those who helped to develop the guideline and other correspondence we have received since the publication of the guideline.

Views of stakeholders

Stakeholders commented on the decision not to update the guideline. Overall, 12 stakeholders commented. See appendix B for stakeholders' comments and our responses.

Twelve stakeholders commented on the proposal to not update the guideline: 7 agreed with the decision; 1 partially agreed with the decision (plus 1 endorsement of the partial agreement); and 3 disagreed with the decision.

Reasons for disagreements with the decision not to update included: a request to add recommendations on subcutaneous methotrexate (evidence supplied was not deemed sufficient to warrant an update); a request to note in the guideline that the foam formulation of calcipotriol/betamethasone is more effective than gel and ointment (this would need an evidence review which has been deemed unwarranted at this time as interventions are broadly covered by existing recommendations); and a request to consider an in-development technology appraisal for discussion in the guideline (an editorial amend to the guideline will be made now that the appraisal has published).

Comments received on scope exclusions included: psoriatic arthritis (diagnosis and management of psoriatic arthritis is now within the scope of the recently published NICE guideline on spondyloarthritis in over 16s); and use of biological agents (appraising evidence for first-line use of biologics is within the remit of the NICE technology appraisals for the individual drugs and therefore outside the scope of the surveillance process).

See ensuring that published guidelines are current and accurate in developing NICE guidelines: the manual for more details on our consultation processes.

Equalities

We identified no equalities issues during the surveillance process.

NICE Surveillance programme project team

Sarah Willett (until February 2017) and Kay Nolan
Associate Director

Philip Alderson
Consultant Clinical Adviser

Katrina Sparrow (until February 2017) and Judith Thornton
Technical Adviser

Patrick Langford
Technical Analyst

The NICE project team would like to thank the topic experts who participated in the surveillance process.

ISBN: 978-1-4731-2536-0