Abstract
Introduction
Lichen planus (LP) is an inflammatory skin disorder that can present in various forms across the body, including lesions on the skin (cutaneous LP [CLP]), scalp (lichen planopilaris [LPP]), and mucosal regions (mucosal LP [MLP]). Qualitative exploration of the patient experience of LP, notably symptoms and impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), is limited. A scarcity of research was also identified relating to emotional wellbeing impacts of CLP patients. Two qualitative studies were conducted with LP patients to address these gaps.
Methods
Study 1 consisted of exit interviews conducted with a subset of adult patients with MLP (n = 5), CLP (n = 4), and LPP (n = 4) enrolled in an LP clinical study in the United States (US) to explore the patient experience. Study 2 consisted of independent qualitative interviews conducted with adult CLP patients (n = 13) from the US and Germany to further explore impacts on emotional wellbeing.
Results
Exit interviews found that itch , pain, and skin lesions were most frequently reported as signs/symptoms of LP. Itch and skin lesions were experienced across all LP subtypes, while pain was only reported by CLP and MLP patients. These signs/symptoms impacted HRQoL including emotional wellbeing (frustration, embarrassment), daily activities (oral hygiene, clothing options), social functioning (intimacy, social activities), and physical functioning (chewing/swallowing, opening/moving mouth). Impacts on activities of daily living (ADL) and physical functioning were mostly experienced by MLP patients. Independent qualitative interviews, which further explored impacts of CLP on patients’ emotional wellbeing, identified frustration, worry, sadness, embarrassment, and depression as the most frequently experienced.
Conclusion
The findings contribute to the literature by providing qualitative insights into signs/symptoms and HRQoL impacts of LP, from the adult patient perspective. The findings also highlight the importance of considering assessment of HRQoL impacts in future clinical LP research, particularly impacts on emotional wellbeing when selecting instruments for assessment of HRQoL in the CLP population.
Trial Registration
NCT04300296.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Why Carry Out This Study? |
Limited qualitative research is available regarding the patient experience of lichen planus (LP), particularly for cutaneous lichen planus (CLP) and lichen planopilaris (LPP) subtypes. |
This study aimed to conduct qualitative research with LP patients via two qualitative interview studies to: (1) gain insight into the patient experience of LP and (2) provide further insight into the impact of LP on patients’ emotional wellbeing, with a particular focus on CLP patients. |
What Was Learned from the Study? |
This study provides valuable insights into the patient perspective of the signs, symptoms, and HRQoL impacts associated with LP. |
This study also confirms the importance of assessing the psychological effects of CLP as part of any HRQoL assessment in future research. |
Introduction
Lichen planus (LP) is an inflammatory immune-mediated skin disease that mostly affects middle-aged adults aged 30–60 years [1, 2]. Global prevalence is estimated to be 0.5–1% of the population [3, 4] and may affect more female adults than males [5]. Diagnosis is based on clinical presentation and is typically confirmed by biopsy [6, 7]. LP can present in various forms on the body including lesions on the skin (cutaneous LP [CLP]), the scalp (lichen planopilaris [LPP]), and mucosal regions (mucosal LP [MLP]). CLP is the most common form of LP and is characterized by a subacute or chronically progressive appearance of polygonal purple papules [6]. LPP is the follicular variant of CLP and presents as active patches at the center of the scalp, along the frontal hairline and/or in the eyebrows [6]. LPP has a sexual predilection for females [4] and can also be induced by hair transplantation or cosmetic surgery [6]. If left untreated, LPP can lead to irreversible scarring and alopecia [6]. MLP presents as asymptomatic white lesions (reticular, papular, plaque-like) or painful erosive/ulcerative and erythematous lesions that most commonly affect the oral mucosa but can also involve the genitalia or conjunctiva [4, 6, 8]. An estimated 30–50% of patients with oral MLP have concomitant CLP [9]. While most instances of CLP resolve spontaneously within 1–2 years, LPP and MLP tend to be more resistant to treatment [7].
Symptoms of LP include itch, pain, and a burning sensation at the affected area [3, 10,11,12,13]. Hair loss, scaling, and scalp tenderness are also experienced in LPP patients [4] and stinging, soreness, and tenderness in MLP patients [11, 12]. In online forums (such as PatientInfo), patients with various LP subtypes describe how these symptoms can have a significant impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Qualitative studies in MLP indicate that painful oral lesions affect patients’ physical functioning and daily life by impairing their ability to eat, perform oral hygiene care, and speak [11, 13, 14]. Patients’ emotional wellbeing is also affected due to the chronicity, unpredictable clinical behavior, and potentially malignant nature of MLP [14, 15]. While no qualitative studies appear to exist that explore HRQoL impacts for CLP or LPP patients, there are some quantitative studies that suggest a significant impact on aspects of emotional wellbeing, social functioning, and activities of daily living (ADL) in these patients, as indicated by patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures designed to assess HRQoL [16, 17]. The limited qualitative research exploring the patient experience of LP, particularly for the different subtypes, highlights the need for more in-depth qualitative studies in this patient population. Patient insights through qualitative research can help identify important and relevant concepts and can inform the selection of suitable PRO measures for use in clinical trials, observational studies, and clinical practice.
Several HRQoL PRO measures are available for use in specific subtypes of LP, most notably the Chronic Oral Mucosal Disease Questionnaire (COMDQ) [18] for use in MLP and the Scalpdex [19] for use in LPP. The COMDQ-26 comprises 26 items grouped into four domains: pain and functional limitation, social and emotional, medication and treatment, and patient support. A shorter 15-item version (COMDQ-15) is also available [20]. The Scalpdex comprises 23 items grouped into three domains: symptoms, functioning, and emotions. Both instruments demonstrate relatively strong coverage of key impact concepts identified in the qualitative literature and described in online forums. However, there appear to be no disease-specific PRO measures assessing HRQoL impacts in CLP. While the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) is a widely used questionnaire to assess quality of life (QoL) in patients with dermatological disorders [21], including LP [17, 22, 23], it may have its limitations in this population. Despite the instrument covering six domains of impact (symptoms and feelings, daily activities, leisure activities, interpersonal relationships, work/study, and treatment), it does not have sufficient coverage of impacts on emotional wellbeing, which have been highlighted as important to LP patients. Evidence suggests a bidirectional relationship between mental health status (i.e., stress, anxiety, and depression) and the development or course of skin diseases, further highlighting the need to understand the extent of psychological effects on patients’ HRQoL [24, 25]. Thus, further qualitative research is needed to understand the impact of LP on patients’ emotional wellbeing, with a particular focus on CLP patients. This will help inform what instrument(s) may be suitable for use in CLP.
The overall objective of this qualitative research was to explore the signs and symptoms of LP and their impact on HRQoL from the patient perspective. A further objective was to better understand emotional wellbeing impacts in CLP patients.
Methods
This research consisted of two qualitative interview studies involving concept elicitation (CE) methods to explore the patient experience of LP: (1) exit interviews with a subset of adult CLP, LPP, and MLP patients from the United States (US) enrolled in an LP clinical study and (2) independent qualitative interviews with adult CLP patients from the US and Germany to further explore the impact of CLP on patients’ emotional wellbeing. The interview studies were conducted in parallel. Figure 1 provides an overview of the research design (Fig. 1).
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
Ethical approval and oversight for the exit interviews was obtained as part of the clinical study (clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT04300296, EUDRACT: 2019-003588-24) from the following independent institutional review boards (IRB) and ethics committees: Advarra IRB, Columbia, Maryland, United States; Mayo Clinic IRB, Rochester, Minnesota, United States; University of Miami Human Subjects Research Office, Miami, Florida, United States; and Western Institutional Review Board, Puyllap, Washington, United States. Ethical approval and oversight for the independent qualitative interviews was obtained from Western Copernicus Group Independent Review Board (WCG IRB; reference: 20216826). The studies were performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and its later amendments, and all participants provided informed consent indicating that their data would be used for medical research purposes and that the study results may be published.
Study 1: Qualitative Exit Interviews
Sample and Recruitment
A purposive sampling method was used which included recruiting patients enrolled in an LP clinical study in the US. Patients were invited to take part in an exit interview once they had completed all treatment periods at Week 32 of the study. Participation was voluntary and patients could opt out from taking part in the interview. Patients in the clinical study had to be at least 18 years of age; have biopsy confirmed CLP, MLP, or active LPP eligible for systemic therapy based on an investigator global assessment (IGA) rating of ≥ 3 (moderate or severe); and inadequate response to topical corticosteroids of high–ultrahigh potency in the opinion of the investigator. Patients were excluded if they had LP pigmentosus, paraneoplastic MLP, LP that was predominantly a bullous variant, MLP of the oral cavity or gastrointestinal involvement requiring the patient to use parenteral nutrition or a feeding tube, burnt-out cicatricial alopecia (alopecia of Brocque), frontal fibrosing alopecia without active patches of LPP, scarring alopecia without active inflammation, or a clinical history suspicious for lichenoid drug eruption. Socio-demographic and clinical information was also collected to characterize the interview sample.
Interview Procedure
Interviews were 60 min and conducted via telephone by trained qualitative interviewers. A semi-structured interview guide, informed by a targeted qualitative literature review in LP, was used to guide the discussions. The CE section of the interview, which aimed to explore the patient experience of LP, lasted approximately 30 min and consisted of broad, open-ended questions designed to facilitate spontaneous elicitation of concepts. Participants were asked to think about their entire LP experience, from when they were first diagnosed to their present day-to-day experience, including good days and bad days with LP. Focused questions were then used if pre-identified concepts of relevance (i.e., itch and pain) had not emerged or been fully explored.
Qualitative Analysis
All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, with identity information redacted. Interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis methods in Atlas.Ti software (version 8) [27]. Participant quotes pertaining to signs, symptoms, and impacts of LP were assigned corresponding concept codes in accordance with an agreed coding scheme. Codes were applied both deductively (based on prior knowledge) and inductively (as emerging from the data). Differences between LP subtypes were also captured.
Study 2: Independent Qualitative Interviews
Sample and Recruitment
Patients for the independent qualitative interviews were recruited by third-party recruitment agencies via referring clinicians in the US and Germany. Eligible patients had to be at least 18 years of age, have a clinician-confirmed diagnosis of CLP based on medical history, clinical signs, and results of any diagnostic technique deemed necessary (e.g., biopsy, dermoscopy, allergy test), and have mild, moderate, or severe disease based on an IGA rating of ≥ 2. Exclusion criteria were reflective of Study 1.
The target sample size was driven by principles of concept saturation (i.e., the point at which no new relevant concepts are likely to emerge with further interviews) [28]. Based on previous research, a minimum of 10 patients was deemed sufficient [29]. A quota sampling approach was employed to ensure a range of key demographic and clinical characteristics. All participants were compensated for their participation.
Interview Procedure
All interviews were 60 min and conducted via telephone by trained qualitative interviewers in the patients’ native language using a semi-structured interview guide. The CE section of the interview, which aimed to explore the impact of CLP on patients’ emotional wellbeing, lasted approximately 10–15 min. All participant-facing study documents and the interview guide were translated into German by certified translators to ensure they were appropriately adapted for the German interviews.
Qualitative Analysis
All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, with identity information redacted; German interviews were further translated into English. Interview transcripts were analyzed in Atlas.ti (version 8) [27], using the same thematic analysis approach as described for Study 1.
Results
Study 1: Qualitative Exit Interviews
Demographics and Clinical Characteristics
Thirteen US adults (female n = 12 [92.3%]; mean age [range] 56.5 [30–75] years) with MLP (n = 5), CLP (n = 4), and LPP (n = 4) participated in an exit interview (Table 1). Most participants had moderate LP (n = 10/13, 76.9%; MLP [n = 4], LPP [n = 4], CLP [n = 2]), based o n baseline IGA score (Table 1).
Signs/Symptoms
Participants reported ten key signs and symptoms of LP during the exit interviews: itch, pain, skin lesions, burning sensation (MLP and CLP only), hair loss (LPP only), mouth ulcers (MLP only), red gums (MLP only), tingling sensation (LPP only), dry skin (CLP only), and scarring (CLP only) (Fig. 2). Relevant quotes for each concept are shown in Table 2.
The most frequently reported signs and symptoms were itch (n = 10/13, 76.9%), followed by pain (n = 7/13, 53.8%), and skin lesions (n = 7/13, 53.8%). Itch and skin lesions were experienced across all LP subtypes (MLP, CLP, LPP), while pain was only reported by CLP and MLP participants. Eight participants described areas of the body where they experienced itch, the most common being the arms, legs, and head (all n = 2). Itch was most frequently reported to be triggered by stress (n = 3/5). Pain was described as most commonly occurring in the mouth (n = 5/7) and was reported to be most frequently aggravated by eating in general (n = 4/6) or eating spicy foods (n = 3/6). Five participants described the location of their skin lesions, with the hands, feet, and legs most commonly mentioned (all n = 2). A burning sensation was reported (n = 6/13, 46.2%) by MLP and LPP participants. For MLP participants, this was experienced in their mouth (n = 4) and for LPP participants, this was experienced on their scalp when scratched (n = 2). Hair loss (n = 4/13, 30.8%), mouth ulcers (n = 4/13, 30.8%), tingling sensation (n = 3/13, 23.1%), red gums (n = 3/13, 23.1%), dry skin (n = 2/13, 15.4%), and scarring (n = 1/13, 7.7%) were also reported.
The signs and symptoms considered most bothersome to participants differed between LP subtypes, with most MLP participants reporting pain as most bothersome (n = 2/3, 66.7%), most CLP participants reporting itch as most bothersome (n = 2/3, 66.7%), and most LPP participants reporting hair loss as most bothersome (n = 3/4, 75.0%) (Fig. 2; Table 2).
Impacts on Patient Functioning and HRQoL
The impacts of LP on participants’ functioning and HRQoL are grouped into six domains: emotional wellbeing, ADL, social activities/relationships, physical functioning, work/school, and sleep. As shown in Fig. 3, participants were generally impacted by their LP, regardless of the LP subtype. Example quotes for each impact domain are shown in Table 3. Impact on emotional wellbeing was reported by all but one participant (n = 12/13, 92.3%; CLP [n = 4], LPP [n = 4], MLP [n = 4]), with feelings of embarrassment/self-consciousness (n = 7/12, 58.3%) being the most frequently mentioned, followed by frustration/annoyance (n = 6/12, 50.0%). Embarrassment/self-consciousness was most commonly attributed to the participants’ physical appearance (e.g., due to skin lesions, hair loss, mouth ulcers) (n = 7), while frustration/annoyance was most frequently attributed to itch (n = 3). Other emotional impacts included concern/nervousness/anxiousness (n = 4), bad mood (n = 3), and depression (n = 3). The impact on ADL was mostly experienced by MLP participants (n = 9/13, 69.2%; MLP [n = 5], LPP [n = 2], CLP [n = 2]) and included difficulties with oral hygiene (n = 4), food and drink intake (e.g., avoidance of spicy, hot, or hard foods) (n = 3), and changes in clothing options to cover lesions/hair loss (n = 3). The signs/symptoms most frequently reported to impact ADL were pain (n = 6) and skin lesions (n = 5). Impact on social activities/relationships (n = 8/13, 61.5%; MLP [n = 4], LPP [n = 2], CLP [n = 2]) was reported to mainly affect participants’ intimacy with their partner (n = 5) and participation in social events/activities (n = 5). Reduced intimacy was attributed to oral and genital pain (n = 3), appearance of skin lesions (n = 1), itching (n = 1), and hair loss (n = 1). Impact on physical functioning was primarily reported by MLP participants (n = 6/13, 46.2%; MLP [n = 5], LPP [n = 1]) and included difficulties chewing/swallowing when eating (n = 5) and opening/moving the mouth when speaking, smiling, or laughing (n = 4) due to pain, burning sensation, and/or mouth ulcers. Other domains less frequently mentioned were impacts on work/school (n = 3/13, 23.1%; CLP [n = 1], LPP [n = 1], MLP [n = 1]) and sleep (n = 1/13, 7.7%; CLP) (Fig. 3; Table 3).
Study 2: Independent Qualitative Interviews
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics
Thirteen adults (female n = 8 [61.5%]; mean age [range] 53.5 [22–76] years) with CLP from the US (n = 11) and Germany (n = 2) participated in an independent qualitative interview (Table 4). All participants had either moderate (n = 7/13, 53.8%) or severe (n = 6/13, 46.2%) CLP based on their IGA score (Table 4).
Impact on Emotional Wellbeing in CLP Patients
Fifteen impacts on emotional wellbeing were discussed by participants during the interviews. Example quotes for each emotional wellbeing concept are provided in Table 5. The most frequently mentioned impacts of CLP were frustration/annoyance (n = 11/13, 84.6%) and worry/nervousness/anxiousness (n = 11/13, 84.6%), followed by feeling sad/upset (n = 8/13, 61.5%), embarrassed (n = 7/13, 53.8%), or depressed (n = 7/13, 53.8%). Most participants who felt frustrated/annoyed (n = 9/11, 81.8%) described aspects of their condition that caused this, including pain (n = 3), itch (n = 2), and flare-ups/when the disease is most severe (n = 2). Of the participants who discussed factors that caused them to feel worried/nervous/anxious (n = 8/11, 72.7%), the most frequently reported causes were visibility of skin lesions (e.g., when wearing t-shirts or shorts in public) (n = 4) and lack of improvement/the possibility of symptoms worsening (n = 4). Over half the participants who reported embarrassment also mentioned visibility of skin lesions as the cause of their embarrassment (n = 4). Reasons provided by five of the participants who experienced feeling sad/upset included acute flare-ups (n = 2), the need to dress differently to minimize the visibility of skin lesions (n = 1), having to explain persistent itching (n = 1), and lack of resolution in symptoms (n = 1). Of the four participants who provided a reason for feeling depressed, most mentioned lack of resolution/no improvement in symptoms as the cause of their depression (n = 3). Several other emotional impacts were mentioned less frequently, namely stress (n = 2/13, 15.4%), helplessness (n = 2/13, 15.4%), feeling uneasy/unsettled (n = 2/13, 15.4%), confusion (n = 1/13, 7.7%), fear (n = 1/13, 7.7%), burden (n = 1/13, 7.7%), defeat (n = 1/13, 7.7%), hypervigilance (n = 1/13, 7.7%), and guilt (n = 1/13, 7.7%) (Table 5).
Discussion
While there is extensive clinical literature reporting the presentation and symptomology of LP [4, 6, 7, 12], qualitative exploration of patients’ signs, symptoms, and impact on HRQoL is limited, particularly for the different clinical subtypes. Specifically, no qualitative studies appear to exist for CLP or LPP. As such, this research sought to address this gap by exploring the experience of LP for the different LP subtypes in adult patients, including gaining a better understanding of the impact on emotional wellbeing in CLP patients.
Participants reported several signs and symptoms associated with LP, the most frequent of which were itch, pain, skin lesions, and a burning sensation. While itch was reported by participants with all subtypes of LP, fewer MLP participants reported experiencing itch compared with CLP and LPP participants. This finding aligns with previous qualitative literature that indicates that itch is not a prominent symptom of MLP [11]. By contrast, pain was only reported by CLP and MLP participants, despite the clinical literature indicating that pain is also a key symptom of LPP [30]. The lack of LPP participants reporting pain in this study could be due to the small sample size; as such, this finding should be interpreted with caution. No CLP participants spontaneously reported experiencing a burning sensation in the exit interviews, which aligns with the literature that burning sensation is a more prominent symptom of LPP and MLP [4, 11, 31]. However, this finding should not be taken to indicate that CLP patients do not experience a burning sensation, as pre-study recruitment discussions with participants indicate that some CLP patients may experience this symptom and, where this concept was assessed, conceptual saturation may not have been met due to the small sample size of CLP patients in the exit interview sample. Other signs and symptoms that were reported by only one subtype of LP included hair loss and a tingling sensation on the scalp, both of which are recognized in the clinical literature as symptoms associated with primary cicatricial alopecias like LPP [4, 32, 33]. Further, two thirds of MLP participants described the appearance of red gums, which has been previously documented as a clinical sign of oral LP [34].
These signs and symptoms were also reported to have a significant impact on participants’ HRQoL. Consistent with previous literature [11, 13, 14], MLP participants reported that painful oral lesions affect physical functioning and ADL by impairing their ability to eat, perform oral hygiene care, and move or open their mouth to speak, laugh, or smile. Oral discomfort was reported to be triggered or intensified by spicy, hot, or hard foods/liquids, leading to dietary alteration and avoiding activities in most MLP participants [11, 35, 36]. Further, some CLP and LPP participants described how concerns about the visibility of skin lesions/hair loss had led to changes in their clothing habits to hide affected areas of the body. While this finding was identified in a previous study that implemented the DLQI in patients with CLP [16], the current studies provide direct qualitative evidence from the patient perspective. Notably, across the LP subtypes, participants reported substantial impact on their emotional wellbeing, which they attributed to various aspects of their condition. These included (but were not limited to) feelings of frustration/annoyance primarily due to itch, and embarrassment associated with their physical appearance. This is reflective of previous literature that LP has a significant impact on patients’ psychological wellbeing [15,16,17]. LP was also reported to impact social functioning across the LP subtypes, with participants mentioning reduced intimacy and avoidance of social activities due to their symptoms. While impaired sexual function has been previously documented in relation to vulvovaginal MLP [37, 38], in the current study, participants across LP subtypes described aspects of their condition that affected intimacy with their partner, including oral or genital pain (MLP), appearance of skin lesions and itching (CLP), and hair loss (LPP). The present study supports findings from previous literature that work/school activities are less frequently impacted in LP patients [11, 16]. Impaired sleep, which was only mentioned spontaneously by one CLP participant, has been documented to be a significant impact in patients with dermatological disorders, including oral MLP [39], due to itch, pain, and reduced psychological wellbeing [40]. While these findings largely align with the literature, they add an important contribution in that, previously, there were no qualitative insights in the literature describing the patient experience of CLP and LPP from the patient perspective, and limited qualitative insights from the MLP patient perspective.
This research also specifically focused on aspects of emotional wellbeing in CLP patients, given the importance of emotional impacts in LP and the absence of disease-specific instruments available in CLP. CLP participants in both studies reported several impacts on their emotional wellbeing, including (but not limited to) frustration/annoyance, worry/nervousness/anxiousness, embarrassment, and depression. Such findings are consistent with previous quantitative literature that CLP has a significant impact on emotional wellbeing [16]. However, the current study provides a more in-depth understanding of the ways that CLP patients’ emotional wellbeing is impacted from the perspective of patients themselves. In particular, participants described that the cosmetic appearance of skin lesions caused them to feel embarrassed about their appearance and anxious or nervous about the visibility of skin lesions, particularly when wearing t-shirts and shorts in public. Participants described feeling depressed about the lack of resolution in symptoms and expressed worry that their symptoms may not improve or could worsen. Persistent or severe symptoms were reported to cause participants to feel frustrated or annoyed with their condition. While several participants reported sadness, the reasons were variable (e.g., severity of symptoms, lack of symptom resolution, and having to change clothing habits to cover lesions). These findings confirm that CLP significantly impacts patients’ psychological wellbeing, in addition to other domains of HRQoL (as previously described). As such, when considering how best to assess HRQoL in CLP populations, capturing the emotional impacts of CLP should also be considered. For example, the DLQI would not be considered appropriate as a standalone measure for assessing HRQoL in CLP patients as it lacks coverage of important impacts on emotional wellbeing.
CE methods used in qualitative interviews remain the gold standard for providing in-depth understanding of the patient experience. Such findings are paramount for identifying concepts that are relevant and important to patients and can help inform selection of appropriate outcome instruments in clinical research [41]. For the exit interviews, one benefit is that the evidence generated was obtained during a time when participants were actively monitoring their condition as part of an LP clinical study and therefore it is assumed that participants would have been more acutely aware of their disease experience.
Some limitations of this study should also be noted. An important limitation is the inclusion of relatively few participants who may not be representative of a wider population. Although the exit interview sample included participants with a range of LP diagnoses, the sample size within each subtype was relatively small and there was a greater proportion of participants with moderate LP, presenting a limitation in the analysis and interpretation of these data. Further, participants were selected based on a clinician-confirmed primary diagnosis of CLP, MLP, or LPP and no pre-defined quotas were used to target patients with specific regions of the body where quality of life may be more greatly affected (e.g., nail involvement, genital regions). However, considering the rarity of specific presentations like nail involvement, the inclusion of these participants may not generalize to the wider LP patient population. To our knowledge, this is the first qualitative study exploring patients’ perceptions of the signs, symptoms, and impact on HRQoL associated with CLP and LPP subtypes. Therefore, despite the small sample size, this research not only adds to the qualitative literature available in MLP [11, 13,14,15], but also provides preliminary insights into the experience of CLP and LPP from the patient perspective. A further limitation is that participants for the exit interviews were predominantly female; however, this is reflective of the literature, which suggests that LP may affect more females than males [5]. Additionally, itch and pain were specifically probed for during the exit interviews, which may over-represent the prevalence of these concepts compared with others identified in this research.
Conclusion
The results of this qualitative research contribute to the literature by providing insights into the adult patient experience of LP (namely the signs, symptoms, and impact on HRQoL) across three LP subtypes. This research also highlights that in addition to assessing key symptoms of LP, consideration should be given to the assessment of impact on HRQoL in future LP research; in particular, highlighting the importance of considering impacts on emotional wellbeing when selecting instruments for the assessment of HRQoL in CLP patient populations.
References
Thandar Y, Maharajh R, Haffejee F, Mosam A. Treatment of cutaneous lichen planus (Part 1): a review of topical therapies and phototherapy. Cogent Med. 2019;6(1):1582467.
Ioannides D, Vakirlis E, Kemeny L, Marinovic B, Massone C, Murphy R, et al. European S1 guidelines on the management of lichen planus: a cooperation of the European Dermatology Forum with the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(7):1403–14.
Le Cleach L, Chosidow O. Lichen planus. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(8):723–32.
Weston G, Payette M. Update on lichen planus and its clinical variants. Int J Women’s Dermatol. 2015;1(3):140–9.
Kyriakis K, Terzoudi S, Palamaras I, Michailides C, Emmanuelides S, Pagana G. Sex and age distribution of patients with lichen planus. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2006;20(5):625–6.
Gorouhi F, Davari P, Fazel N. Cutaneous and mucosal lichen planus: a comprehensive review of clinical subtypes, risk factors, diagnosis, and prognosis. ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014: 742826.
Usatine RP, Tinitigan M. Diagnosis and treatment of lichen planus. Am Fam Physician. 2011;84(1):53–60.
Ingafou M, Leao JC, Porter SR, Scully C. Oral lichen planus: a retrospective study of 690 British patients. Oral Dis. 2006;12(5):463–8.
Edwards PC, Kelsch R. Oral lichen planus: clinical presentation and management. J Can Dent Assoc. 2002;68(8):494–9.
Lepe K, Nassereddin A, Salazar FJ. Lichen Planopilaris. StatPearls [Internet]. 2021. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470325/.
Burke LB, Brennan MT, Ni Riordain R, Madsen LS. Novel oral lichen planus symptom severity measure for assessing patients’ daily symptom experience. Oral Dis. 2019;25(6):1564–72.
Cassol-Spanemberg J, Blanco-Carrión A, Rodríguez-de Rivera-Campillo ME, Estrugo-Devesa A, Jané-Salas E, López-López J. Cutaneous, genital and oral lichen planus: a descriptive study of 274 patients. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2019;24(1):e1–7.
Tadakamadla J, Kumar S, Lalloo R, Johnson NW. Qualitative analysis of the impact of oral potentially malignant disorders on daily life activities. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(4): e0175531.
Ni Riordain R, Meaney S, McCreary C. Impact of chronic oral mucosal disease on daily life: preliminary observations from a qualitative study. Oral Dis. 2011;17(3):265–9.
Nassab A, Navabi N, Pour M, Charrosta N, Hashemipour M. Quality of life in patients with chronic oral mucosal conditions: a qualitative research. Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada. 2021;21: e0092.
Sawant NS, Vanjari NA, Khopkar U, Adulkar S. A study of depression and quality of life in patients of lichen planus. Sci World J. 2015;2015: 817481.
Nasimi M, Ahangari N, Lajevardi V, Mahmoudi H, Ghodsi SZ, Etesami I. Quality of life and mental health status in patients with lichen planopilaris based on Dermatology Life Quality Index and General Health Questionnaire-28 questionnaires. Int J Women’s Dermatol. 2020;6(5):399–403.
Ni Riordain R, Meaney S, McCreary C. A patient-centered approach to developing a quality-of-life questionnaire for chronic oral mucosal diseases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;111(5):578–86, 86.e1–2.
Chen SC, Yeung J, Chren MM. Scalpdex: a quality-of-life instrument for scalp dermatitis. Arch Dermatol. 2002;138(6):803–7.
Wiriyakijja P, Porter S, Fedele S, Hodgson T, McMillan R, Shephard M, et al. Development and validation of a short version of Chronic Oral Mucosal Disease Questionnaire (COMDQ-15). J Oral Pathol Med. 2020;49(1):55–62.
Finlay AY, Khan GK. Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)–a simple practical measure for routine clinical use. Clin Exp Dermatol. 1994;19(3):210–6.
Balcı DD, İnandı T. Dermatology Life Quality Index scores in lichen planus: comparison of psoriasis and healthy controls. Turkderm-Turk Arch Dermatol Venereol. 2008;42(4):127–30.
Fiocco Z, Kupf S, Patzak L, Kämmerer T, Pumnea T, French LE, et al. Quality of life and psychopathology in lichen planus: a neglected disease burden. Acta Derm Venereol. 2021;101(12):adv00619.
Schultz HY. Society for investigative dermatology skin disease co-morbidities project launch conference proceedings. J Investig Dermatol. 2009;129(3):525–8.
Gupta MA. Psychiatric comorbidity in dermatological disorders. In: Walker C, Papadoulos L, editors. Psychodermatology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.
Mahon-Smith A, Skingley G, Ayala-Nunes L, Batish A, Sharp R, Naujoks C, et al. Evaluating the appropriateness of existing health-related quality of life measure in lichen planus. In development.
Atlas.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH [Atlas.ti 22 Windows]. 2022. Retrived from https://atlasti.com.
Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006;18:59–82.
Turner-Bowker DM, Lamoureux RE, Stokes J, Litcher-Kelly L, Galipeau N, Yaworsky A, et al. Informing a priori sample size estimation in qualitative concept elicitation interview studies for clinical outcome assessment instrument development. Value Health. 2018;21(7):839–42.
Assouly P, Reygagne P. Lichen planopilaris: update on diagnosis and treatment. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2009;28(1):3–10.
Boch K, Langan EA, Kridin K, Zillikens D, Ludwig RJ, Bieber K. Lichen planus. Front Med. 2021;8:737813.
Harries MJ, Sinclair RD, MacDonald-Hull S, Whiting DA, Griffiths CEM, Paus R. Management of primary cicatricial alopecias: options for treatment. Br J Dermatol. 2008;159(1):1–22.
Heath CR, Usatine RP. Central centrifugal cicatrical alopecia. J Fam Pract. 2022;71(3):E13–4.
Camacho-Alonso F, López-Jornet P, Bermejo-Fenoll A. Gingival involvement of oral lichen planus. J Periodontol. 2007;78(4):640–4.
Wiriyakijja P, Porter S, Fedele S, Hodgson T, McMillan R, Shephard M, et al. Health-related quality of life and its associated predictors in patients with oral lichen planus: a cross-sectional study. Int Dent J. 2021;71(2):140–52.
Radwan-Oczko M, Zwyrtek E, Owczarek JE, Szcześniak D. Psychopathological profile and quality of life of patients with oral lichen planus. J Appl Oral Sci. 2018;26: e20170146.
Helgesen AL, Gjersvik P, Jebsen P, Kirschner R, Tanbo T. Vaginal involvement in genital erosive lichen planus. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89(7):966–70.
Cheng H, Oakley A, Rowan D, Lamont D. Diagnostic criteria in 72 women with erosive vulvovaginal lichen planus. Australas J Dermatol. 2016;57(4):284–7.
Adamo D, Ruoppo E, Leuci S, Aria M, Amato M, Mignogna MD. Sleep disturbances, anxiety and depression in patients with oral lichen planus: a case–control study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2015;29(2):291–7.
Tamschick R, Navarini A, Strobel W, Müller S. Insomnia and other sleep disorders in dermatology patients: A questionnaire-based study with 634 patients. Clin Dermatol. 2021;39(6):996–1004.
Food and Drug Administration. Patient-Focused Drug Development: Methods to Identify What Is Important to Patients Guidance for Industry, Food and Drug Administration Staff, and Other Stakeholders. Silver Spring, MD: US Food and Drug Administration; Feb 2022.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the participants of this study.
Funding
Adelphi Values was commissioned by Novartis Pharma AG to conduct this research and the sponsor contributed to the study design, data collection, and preparation of the manuscript for publication. Novartis Pharma AG funded the journal’s Rapid Service Fee.
Medical Writing, Editorial, and Other Assistance
Carl Cooper and Sophi Tatlock contributed to the study design, study conduct and qualitative analysis. Alyson Young assisted with manuscript preparation. All contributors, except Carl Cooper, are employees of Adelphi Values Ltd. Carl Cooper was an employee of Adelphi Values at the time the work was performed.
Author Contributions
Aoife Mahon-Smith, Molly Clifford, Anjali Batish, Rosie Sharp, Charlotte Panter, Christel Naujoks, Eva Schruf, Nicolò Compagno, and Santiago G. Moreno contributed to defining the scope of the research, including study design and interpretation of study results in the manuscript. Aoife Mahon-Smith, Anjali Batish, Molly Clifford, Rosie Sharp, and Charlotte Panter also contributed to conducting qualitative interviews and qualitative analysis.
Disclosures
Christel Naujoks and G. Santiago Moreno are employees of Novartis Pharma AG at the time of performing the research and preparing the manuscript. Eva Schruf is an employee of Novartis Pharma GmbH at the time of performing the research and preparing the manuscript. Nicolò Compagno was an employee of Novartis Pharma AG at the time of performing the research and preparing the manuscript and is now an employee of F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. Aoife Mahon-Smith, Molly Clifford, Rosie Sharp, and Charlotte Panter are employees of Adelphi Values, a health outcomes agency commissioned by Novartis Pharma AG to conduct this research. Anjali Batish was an employee of Adelphi Values at the time of performing the research and is now an employee of the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR). The authors declare that there are no competing interests.
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
All participants provided informed consent indicating that their data would be used for medical research purposes and that the study results may be published. The studies were performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and its later amendments. Ethical approval and oversight for the exit interviews was obtained as part of the clinical study (clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT04300296, EUDRACT: 2019-003588-24). Independent institutional review board (IRB) and ethics committee approvals were obtained from the following: Advarra IRB, Columbia, Maryland, United States; Mayo Clinic IRB, Rochester, Minnesota, United States; University of Miami Human Subjects Research Office, Miami, Florida, United States; and Western Institutional Review Board, Puyllap, Washington, United States. Ethical approval and oversight for the independent qualitative interviews was obtained from Western Copernicus Group Independent Review Board (WCG IRB; reference: 20216826).
Data Availability
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available in order to protect participant confidentiality.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Mahon-Smith, A., Clifford, M., Batish, A. et al. Patient Experience of Lichen Planus: A Qualitative Exploration of Signs, Symptoms, and Health-Related Quality of Life Impacts. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) 13, 2001–2017 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13555-023-00968-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13555-023-00968-2