scholarly journals EQ-5D-3L full health state discriminates between drug and placebo in clinical trials of systemic lupus erythematosus

Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julius Lindblom ◽  
Alvaro Gomez ◽  
Alexander Borg ◽  
Sharzad Emamikia ◽  
Dimitris Ladakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Damage Index ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Health State ◽  
Full Health ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Discriminative Ability ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Objectives To investigate the discriminative ability of EQ-5D-3L full health state (FHS) in clinical trials of SLE, and identify factors associated with FHS after treatment. Methods Data from the BLISS-52 (NCT00424476) and BLISS-76 (NCT00410384) trials of belimumab (N = 1684) were utilised. FHS was defined as a response of no problems in all five EQ-5D-3L dimensions, yielding an index score of 1. The Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test was employed for comparisons, and logistic regression for adjustments and assessment of independence. Results We demonstrated higher EQ-5D-3L FHS frequencies among patients given standard therapy (ST) plus the licensed belimumab dose versus ST alone (26.1% versus 19.4%; P = 0.001; week 52), and within SRI-4 responders versus non-responders (27.0% versus 19.8%; P < 0.001; week 52) from week 36 to 52. In multivariable regression analysis, SLEDAI-2K (OR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.87 − 0.94; P < 0.001) and SLICC/ACR Damage Index (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69 − 0.91; P = 0.001) scores were independently associated with lower FHS frequencies at week 52, while adding monthly infusions of belimumab 10 mg/kg to ST favoured FHS perception (OR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.15 − 2.24; P = 0.006). Add-on belimumab 10 mg/kg yielded higher FHS frequencies in antimalarial users versus non-users (29.9% versus 20.1%; P = 0.011), and in anti-dsDNA and anti-Sm positive versus negative patients (31.4% versus 13.4%; P < 0.001 and 33.0% versus 22.6%; P = 0.010, respectively), whereas no significant differences were observed in patients given ST alone. Conclusion EQ-5D-3L FHS distinguished belimumab from placebo and responders from non-responders, and exhibited known-group validity in subgroup analysis. FHS may prove a useful patient-reported outcome in SLE studies.

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcomes for Quality of Life in SLE: Essential in Clinical Trials and Ready for Routine Care

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (16) ◽  
pp. 3754
Author(s):  
Matthew H. Nguyen ◽  
Frank F. Huang ◽  
Sean G. O’Neill
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Routine Care ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Pro Tools

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are widely used to assess quality of life in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) research, and there is growing evidence for their use in clinical care. In this review, we evaluate the current evidence for their use in assessing quality of life in SLE in both research and clinical settings and examine the different characteristics of the commonly used PRO tools. There are now several well-validated generic and SLE-specific tools that have demonstrated utility in clinical trials and several tools that complement activity and damage measures in the clinical setting. PRO tools may help overcome physician–patient discordance in SLE and are valuable in the assessment of fibromyalgia and type 2 symptoms such as widespread pain and fatigue. Future work will identify optimal PRO tools for different settings but, despite current limitations, they are ready to be incorporated into patient care.

scholarly journals Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hyperhidrosis: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michaela Gabes ◽  
Helge Knüttel ◽  
Gesina Kann ◽  
Christina Tischer ◽  
Christian J. Apfelbacher
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
High Quality ◽  
High Quality Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Quality Evidence

Abstract Purpose To critically appraise, compare and summarize the quality of all existing PROMs that have been validated in hyperhidrosis to at least some extend by applying the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology. Thereby, we aim to give a recommendation for the use of PROMs in future clinical trials in hyperhidrosis. Methods We considered studies evaluating, describing or comparing measurement properties of PROMs as eligible. A systematic literature search in three big databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science) was performed. We assessed the methodological quality of each included study using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Furthermore, we applied predefined quality criteria for good measurement properties and finally, graded the quality of the evidence. Results Twenty-four articles reporting on 13 patient-reported outcome measures were included. Three instruments can be further recommended for use. They showed evidence for sufficient content validity and moderate- to high-quality evidence for sufficient internal consistency. The methodological assessment showed existing evidence gaps for eight other PROMs, which therefore require further validation studies to make an adequate decision on their recommendation. The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary (HDSM-Ax) and the short-form health survey with 36 items (SF-36) were the only questionnaires not recommended for use in patients with hyperhidrosis due to moderate- to high-quality evidence for insufficient measurement properties. Conclusion Three PROMs, the Hyperhidrosis Quality of Life Index (HidroQoL), the Hyperhidrosis Questionnaire (HQ) and the Sweating Cognitions Inventory (SCI), can be recommended for use in future clinical trials in hyperhidrosis. Results obtained with these three instruments can be seen as trustworthy. Nevertheless, further validation of all three PROMs is desirable. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020170247

scholarly journals Enabling patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials, exemplified by cardiovascular trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Theresa M. Coles ◽  
Adrian F. Hernandez ◽  
Bryce B. Reeve ◽  
Karon Cook ◽  
Michael C. Edwards ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Think Tank ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Evidentiary Standards

Abstract Objectives There has been limited success in achieving integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials. We describe how stakeholders envision a solution to this challenge. Methods Stakeholders from academia, industry, non-profits, insurers, clinicians, and the Food and Drug Administration convened at a Think Tank meeting funded by the Duke Clinical Research Institute to discuss the challenges of incorporating PROs into clinical trials and how to address those challenges. Using examples from cardiovascular trials, this article describes a potential path forward with a focus on applications in the United States. Results Think Tank members identified one key challenge: a common understanding of the level of evidence that is necessary to support patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in trials. Think Tank participants discussed the possibility of creating general evidentiary standards depending upon contextual factors, but such guidelines could not be feasibly developed because many contextual factors are at play. The attendees posited that a more informative approach to PROM evidentiary standards would be to develop validity arguments akin to courtroom briefs, which would emphasize a compelling rationale (interpretation/use argument) to support a PROM within a specific context. Participants envisioned a future in which validity arguments would be publicly available via a repository, which would be indexed by contextual factors, clinical populations, and types of claims. Conclusions A publicly available repository would help stakeholders better understand what a community believes constitutes compelling support for a specific PROM in a trial. Our proposed strategy is expected to facilitate the incorporation of PROMs into cardiovascular clinical trials and trials in general.

scholarly journals AB0300 LUPUS DISEASE ACTIVITY CORRELATES WITH QUALITY OF LIFE BUT NOT WITH HEALTH LITERACY STATUS

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1176.2-1176
Author(s):  
E. Eraslan ◽  
R. Bilici Salman ◽  
H. Satiş ◽  
A. Avanoglu Guler ◽  
H. Karadeniz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
The Body ◽  
Limited Health Literacy ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Limited Health

Background:Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease of unknown etiology that can affect any organ of the body. SLE is associated with adverse effects on both health and non-health-related quality of life (HRQOL and non-HRQOL). Lupus PRO is a patient reported outcome measure that has been validated in many languages. It has 44 items that cover both HRQOL and non-HRQOL (1). Health literacy is defined as the degree to which individuals have the capacity to obtain, process and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions. Multiple studies indicate that people with limited health literacy have worse health status and higher rates of hospitalization (2).Objectives:We aimed to evaluate the relationship between the LLDAS (Lupus Low Disease Activity State) criteria and the Lupus PRO test, as well as the health literacy status of lupus patients.Methods:83 SLE patients (94% women) were included in the study. We performed Lupus PRO and the European Health Literacy Survey tests during the routine follow-up visits of lupus patients to our rheumatology outpatient clinic and admissions to rheumatology inpatient clinic. Available clinical data on medical records were obtained, physician global assessments (PGA) were recorded by the attending physician.Results:LLDAS criteria strongly and inversely correlated with the total score, as well as the mood subunit of the Lupus PRO. Similarly, it also significantly inversely correlated with the body appearence and goals subunits. Health literacy status of the patients did not correlate with their LLDAS scores, ie their disease activities.Conclusion:Our results suggest that lupus disease activity, assessed by LLDAS criteria, significantly correlates with measures of quality of life, spesicifically Lupus PRO test, but not with health literacy status. Further studies are needed to evaluate if health literacy is related with damage, hospitalization or mortality associated with lupus.References:[1]Jolly M, Pickard AS, Block JA, Kumar RB, Mikolaitis RA, Wilke CT, et al., editors. Disease-specific patient reported outcome tools for systemic lupus erythematosus. Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism; 2012: Elsevier.[2]Paasche-Orlow MK, Parker RM, Gazmararian JA, Nielsen-Bohlman LT, Rudd RR. The prevalence of limited health literacy. Journal of general internal medicine. 2005;20(2):175-84.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals Errors in answering migraine patient-reported outcome measure questions: patients consider training necessary in clinical trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Jenny J. Ly ◽  
Rinah T. Yamamoto ◽  
Susan M. Dallabrida
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Quality ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Pain Severity ◽  
Improve Data Quality ◽  
Training Materials ◽  
Hypothetical Scenario ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Study Participants

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> In migraine clinical trials, patients’ understanding of the terminology used in patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures is important as variability in completing PRO measures can reduce the power to detect treatment efficacy. This study examines patients’ understanding of how to complete PRO measures in the absence of training, if minimal training can improve the accuracy of answering PRO items, and patients’ opinion on the necessity of training and their preference for the method of training.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Participants reporting a diagnosis of migraine completed online surveys. Participants were given scenarios of how to report headache days and pain severity. Respondents were asked about their opinions on the necessity of training, and their preference for the method of training. In a second study, participants were given a hypothetical scenario on how to report pain severity before and after a short training.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> The majority of participants had different criteria to interpret PRO questions and provided incorrect answers to our scenarios. In the second study, with minimal training, errors were reduced by 7.5%. Over 90% of participants viewed educational materials and training as necessary and preferred electronic modes of training with the ability to review training materials as needed for the duration of the trial.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patient training may improve data quality and inter-rater reliability in clinical trials. Electronic interactive training could be used as an approach to reduce inconsistencies in PRO measures and improve data quality.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document