Capturing patients' perspectives of treatment in clinical trials/drug development

A study of implementation factors for a novel approach to clinical trials: constructs for consideration in the coordination of direct-to-patient online-based medical research

BACKGROUND

Traditional medical research infrastructures relying on the Centers of Excellence (CoE) model (an infrastructure or shared facility providing high standards of research excellence and resources to advance scientific knowledge) are often limited by geographic reach regarding patient accessibility, presenting challenges for study recruitment and accrual. Thus, the development of novel, patient-centered (PC) strategies (e.g., the use of online technologies) to support recruitment and streamline study procedures are necessary. This research focused on an implementation evaluation of a design innovation with implementation outcomes as communicated by study staff and patients for CoE and PC approaches for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) for patients with vasculitis.

METHODS

In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 32 individuals (17 study team members, 15 patients). Transcripts were coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

The following CFIR elements emerged: characteristics of the intervention, inner setting, characteristics of individuals, and process. From the staff perspective, the communication of the PC approach was a major challenge, but should have been used as an opportunity to identify one "point person" in charge of all communicative elements among the study team. Study staff from both arms were highly supportive of the PC approach and saw its promise, particularly regarding online consent procedures. Patients reported high self-efficacy in reference to the PC approach and utilization of online technologies. Local physicians were integral for making patients feel comfortable about participation in research studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The complexity of replicating the interpersonal nature of the CoE model in the virtual setting is substantial, meaning the PC approach should be viewed as a hybrid strategy that integrates online and face-to-face practices.

TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

1) Name: The Assessment of Prednisone In Remission Trial - Centers of Excellence Approach (TAPIR).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01940094 . Date of registration: September 10, 2013. 2) Name: The Assessment of Prednisone In Remission Trial - Patient Centric Approach (TAPIR).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinical Trials.gov NCT01933724 . Date of registration: September 2, 2013.

Prospective observational study to evaluate treatment satisfaction and effectiveness in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis starting cladribine tablets (CLADREAL) in Italy

Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) reduce relapse frequency, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity, and slow disability progression. Numerous DMTs are approved for relapsing forms of MS although real-world data on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and quality of life (QoL) are needed to inform treatment choice. Immune reconstitution therapy with cladribine tablets is a highly effective treatment for relapsing MS (RMS). We present the protocol for an observational study to prospectively assess the effectiveness of cladribine tablets on clinical and MRI parameters as well as on PROs, including treatment satisfaction, QoL, sleep quality, self-perceived health, fatigue, and physical function. Enrolled patients at study sites in Italy will be adults with RMS (including relapsing-remitting and active secondary progressive MS) who are either treatment naïve or have received at least one first-line disease modifying DMT or no more than one second-line DMT. The primary objective will be change in global treatment satisfaction measured with the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication Version 1.4 approximately 24 months after initiating cladribine tablets in patients switching from previous DMTs. Secondary objectives will include global treatment satisfaction at earlier timepoints, will comprise treatment naïve patients, and will quantify treatment effectiveness and tolerability. We will also assess relapses, disability progression, MRI activity, and other PROs at approximately 12 and 24 months. The findings will provide insight from daily clinical practice into the patient's experience to complement data from controlled trials and inform treatment choice. EU PAS Registration Number EUPAS49334 filed 17/10/2022.

Impact of Dupilumab on Sinonasal Symptoms and Outcomes in Severe Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps

OBJECTIVES

To assess the severity of the top 5 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) items ranked most important by patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), the effect of dupilumab on these items, and their association with objective disease measures.

STUDY DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of the SINUS-24 (NCT02912468) and SINUS-52 (NCT02898454) clinical trials.

SETTING

Multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies.

METHODS

Patients ranked the SNOT-22 items most affecting their health at baseline. Item symptom severity (0-5 scale) was assessed at baseline, Week 24 (W24), and Week 52 (W52). Changes in nasal polyps score (NPS) and Lund-Mackay (LMK) scores were assessed in patients with/without SNOT-22 items improvements of at least 1 severity group point at W24 and W52.

RESULTS

The SNOT-22 items ranked most important at baseline were "decreased sense of smell/taste" (87% of patients), followed by "nasal blockage" (82%), "postnasal discharge" (40%), "thick nasal discharge" (37%), and "wake up at night" (26%); 82%, 61%, 32%, 40%, and 26% of patients reported severe symptoms (score 4 or 5) for these items, respectively. Dupilumab improved score severity for all top 5 items versus placebo at W24 and W52. Improvements in NPS and LMK scores were numerically greater in patients with improvements in the SNOT-22 top 5 items.

CONCLUSION

Loss of smell/taste was ranked as the most important symptom by patients with CRSwNP. Dupilumab reduced the severity of the top 5 most important SNOT-22 items versus placebo, in parallel with improvements in objective disease measures.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

SINUS-24 and SINUS-52 clinical trials were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, identifiers NCT02912468 and NCT02898454, respectively.

Further Refinement is Required for Patient-Reported Outcome Scales for Respiratory Diseases Based on Traditional Chinese Medicine Theory for Applicability

Objective

To summarize the contents and assess the methodological quality and measurement properties of the patient-reported outcome (PRO) scales featured with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) for respiratory diseases based on the guideline of COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN).

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, VIP, and China Biology Medicine (CBM) were searched for studies on PRO scales featured with TCM for respiratory diseases from their inception until December 2022. The characteristics of the PRO scales were qualitatively summarized. Following the COSMIN guideline, the risk of bias was assessed according to the checklist, and different measurement properties (content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, criterion validity, and responsiveness) were evaluated. Finally, the evidence's overall quality was assessed, and the recommendation was formulated using the modified GRADE approach.

Results

A total of 13 scales were included, with 6 for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 3 for lung cancer, 2 for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), 1 for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), and 1 for bronchiectasis. All 13 scales are disease-specific scales and were developed based on Chinese cultural background to measure the efficacy of TCM. The study did not provide information on measurement error, cross-cultural validity, and hypothesis testing for the construct validity of these measures. No scale was rated as sufficient in content validity and responsiveness. Two scales showed sufficient structural validity, while 11 scales exhibited sufficient internal consistency. Three scales demonstrated sufficient reliability, and 7 scales showed sufficient criterion validity. All 13 scales have a recommendation level of B.

Conclusion

The 13 scales could reflect the clinical efficacy of TCM and are suitable for the Chinese population. Nevertheless, the validation of these scales was not comprehensive enough, and the methodological quality of their studies needs to be further strengthened.

Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Measure to Assess Emotional Impact of Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Patients receiving treatment for type 2 diabetes (T2D) may experience an emotional impact associated with treatment-related changes. A patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure assessing both positive and negative emotional impact of medication treatment for T2D is needed to better understand the patient experience of treatment. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the emotional impact of treatment for T2D and support the development of a questionnaire to assess the emotional impact of treatment for T2D.

METHODS

Exit interviews were conducted with patients with T2D participating in the SURPASS-2 and SURPASS-3 trials for tirzepatide. The exit interviews included a concept elicitation section focusing on the emotional impact of their study treatment. Results were used to develop two questionnaires that were evaluated in cognitive interviews with patients with T2D.

RESULTS

The concept elicitation interviews included 28 patients (mean age 57.6 years; 64.3% female). Most patients reported positive changes in emotions associated with tirzepatide, including increased confidence (n = 23; 82.1%), hope (n = 23; 82.1%), self-esteem (n = 23; 82.1%), relief (n = 22; 78.6%), optimism (n = 21; 75.0%), sense of control (n = 21; 75.0%), happiness (n = 15; 53.6%), and motivation (n = 15; 53.6%), as well as reduced worry/anxiety (n = 19; 67.9%). Negative emotional impact was less commonly reported but included frustration (n = 2; 7.1%), worry/anxiety (n = 1; 3.6%), fear (n = 1; 3.6%), and feeling depressed (n = 1; 3.6%). Two new PROs, the Emotional Impact of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaires (EIDTQ, status and comparison versions), were developed based on these finding. The status version assesses the emotional impact of current treatment, while the comparison version allows for comparison of the current treatment to a previous treatment. The questionnaires were refined on the basis of cognitive interviews with 20 additional patients (mean age 58.3 years; 60.0% female), and results suggest that the final instruments were clear, comprehensible, and relevant to patients.

CONCLUSION

The EIDTQ-Status and Comparison measures can be used as a supplement to clinical outcomes, such as hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and body weight, to provide a broader picture of the patient's emotional experience with medication treatment for T2D.

Data Mining of Free-Text Responses: An Innovative Approach to Analyzing Patient Perspectives on Treatment for Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps in a Phase IIa Proof-of-Concept Study for Dupilumab

PURPOSE

Patient perspective is an important and increasingly sought-after complement to clinical assessment. The aim of this study was to transcribe individual patients' experience of treatment in a dupilumab clinical trial through free-text responses with analysis using natural language processing (NLP) to obtain the unique perspective of patients on disease impact and unmet needs with existing treatment to inform future trial design.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) who were enrolled in a Phase IIa randomized controlled trial comparing dupilumab with placebo (NCT01920893) were invited to complete a self-assessment of treatment (SAT) tool at the end of treatment, asking, "What is your opinion on the treatment you had during the trial? What did you like or dislike about the treatment?" Free-text responses were analyzed for the overall cohort and according to treatment assignment using natural language processing including sentiment scoring. In a mixed-methods approach, quantitative patient-reported outcome (PRO) results were utilized to complement the qualitative analysis of free-text responses.

RESULTS

Of 60 patients enrolled in the study, 43 (71.6%) completed the SAT and responses from 37 patients were analyzed (placebo, n = 16; dupilumab, n = 21). Word analyses showed that the most common words were "smell," "improve," "staff," "great," "time," and "good." Across the whole cohort, "smell" was the most common symptom-related word. The words "smell" and "experience" were more likely to occur in patients treated with dupilumab. Patients treated with dupilumab also had more positive sentiment in their SAT responses than those who received placebo. The results from this qualitative analysis were reflected in quantitative PRO results.

CONCLUSION

"Smell" was important to patients with CRSwNP, highlighting its importance as a patient-centric efficacy outcome measure in the context of clinical trials in CRSwNP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01920893. Registered 12 August 2013, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01920893.

The Patient Experience with Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are a heterogenous group of rare tumors that involve the connective tissue in the body (e.g. muscle, tendons). As with many rare tumors, little is known about the impact of STS on patient well-being.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to better understand current knowledge related to patient experience and quality of life (QOL) following diagnosis of STS.

METHODS

A systematic review of English-language articles published from 2005 to 2015 was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, and Evidence-Based Medicine databases. The review included recent conference proceedings and advocacy websites. Articles were eligible if they included adult STS patient-reported outcomes (PROs) or details on patient experience.

RESULTS

Overall, 3430 articles were identified and 20 were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 14 were clinical studies that included PRO measures, 1 summarized PRO measures used in STS studies, and 5 described the STS patient experience. Patients with STS report a range of impacts on QOL, including emotional well-being, body image, functional deficit following surgery, and practical considerations such as child care and work.

CONCLUSIONS

Few studies have published either qualitative or quantitative data on the patient experience with STS. While STS has a measurable impact on QOL, there is a lack of detailed information in the published literature. Although PROs are used in clinical studies of STS, they are not STS-specific and may not capture the unique needs of this population. There is a need for qualitative research to better understand both patient and caregiver experiences in STS.

Evolution of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Their Role in Multiple Sclerosis Clinical Trials

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are playing an increasing role in multiple sclerosis (MS) research and practice, and are essential for understanding the effects that MS and MS treatments have on patients' lives. PROs are captured directly from patients and include symptoms, function, health status, and health-related quality of life. In this article, we review different categories (e.g., generic, targeted, preference-based) of PRO measures and considerations in selecting a measure. The PROs included in MS clinical research have evolved over time, as have the measures used to assess them. We describe findings from recent MS clinical trials that included PROs when evaluating Food and Drug Administration-approved disease-modifying therapies (e.g., daclizumab, teriflunomide). Variation in the measures used in these trials makes it difficult to draw any conclusions from the data. We therefore suggest a standardized approach to PRO assessment in MS research and describe 2 generic, National Institutes of Health-supported measurement systems [Neuro-QoL and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)] that would facilitate such an approach. The use of PROs in MS care and research is expanding beyond clinical trials, as is demonstrated by examples from comparative effectiveness and other patient-centered research. The importance of PRO assessment is expected to continue to grow in the future.

Role of patient-reported outcomes and other efficacy endpoints in the drug approval process in Europe (2008-2012)

The present study aimed at systematically reviewing the role and extent of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) usage within the package of scientific evidence considered for marketing authorization (MA). All regulatory information published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for products authorized between January 2008 and December 2012 and appearing in the European Public Assessment Report (EPAR) database was examined for efficacy endpoints. The endpoints here considered included: PROs, clinician reported outcomes (CROs), and laboratory reported outcomes (LROs). LROs were the most frequently reported endpoints. Out of the 180 products here selected, 99 (55%), 67 (37%), and 30 (17%), respectively, used LROs, CROs and PROs as primary endpoints (PEs). PROs as any endpoints were used in 82 (46%) products. Out of these, PROs were documented as PE in 30 (37%), with 27 (33%) products having used PROs both as primary and non-PEs. PRO usage was most frequently identified with nervous system and antineoplastic agents. During the study period, the use of all the three types of endpoints appeared to be static. Both the regulatory bodies and the industry should ensure complete and clear reporting of all endpoints used, including PROs, to improve transparency.

The patient perspective of diabetes care: a systematic review of stated preference research

BACKGROUND

The importance of understanding the perspective of patients towards their own care is increasingly recognized, both in clinical practice and in pharmaceutical drug development. Stated preference methods to assess the preference of patients towards different aspects of diabetes treatment have now been applied for over a decade.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to examine how stated preference methods are applied in diabetes care, and to evaluate the value of this information in developing the patient perspective in clinical and policy decisions.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. The information sources were MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biosis, Current Contents, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and EconLit.

RESULTS

Three contingent valuation studies and 11 discrete choice experiments were retrieved. The majority of studies were conducted from 2009 onwards, but some date back to 1998. The reasons provided for applying the stated preference methods were to help differentiate between products, or to enable inclusion of the patient's perspective in treatment decisions. The main aspects of treatment examined were related to glucose control, adverse events, and drug administration. The majority of patients preferred glucose control over avoiding minor hypoglycemic events. Patient willingness to pay was above $US100/month for glucose control, avoiding immediate health hazards such as nausea, and oral or inhaled drug administration. Preference towards drug administration was highly associated with previous experience with injectable diabetes medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of a drug to lower glucose levels plays a decisive role in the choice between alternative treatments. Future research should strive to develop questionnaire designs relevant for the decision context of the study. That is, if the aim is to foster shared decision making, in clinical practice or drug development, this should guide the study design. Furthermore, concise reporting of all study dimensions-from the qualitative prework to the analysis stage-is warranted.

Promotion of Patient-Reported Outcome Label Claims Based on Nonprimary Endpoints

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) play an increasingly pivotal role in confirmatory clinical trials with pressures to develop drug differentiation strategies. Claims based on primary endpoints that are included in the product label are likely to be fully promoted by the manufacturers; however, the extent to which manufacturers promote claims based on secondary PRO endpoints is unknown. The purpose of this review is to assess the extent of promotion of PRO label claims for 6 pharmaceutical products with nonprimary PRO endpoints.

METHODS

Six products were reviewed that received PRO label claims based on nonprimary PRO endpoints between 2006 and 2008. Promotional documents distributed in the United States by the drug manufacturers between the year of launch and 2011 were identified from a PharmaVoxx database. Circulation of these documents was calculated according to quarterly distributions. Two researchers reviewed the documents using standard criteria. Promotional activities based on nonprimary PRO endpoint claims were compared with total number of messages.

RESULTS

Manufacturers of the 6 products distributed 973 unique promotional documents 2998 times. Messages based on primary endpoints were distributed 1798 times, whereas messages relating to nonprimary PRO endpoints were distributed 1200 times (40% of distributions) and varied among products (4%-70%). Messages relating to PROs were targeted mostly at patients and consumers (65%) versus physicians and health care professionals (34%).

CONCLUSIONS

Promotion of PRO messages based on nonprimary endpoints is much lower than those based on primary endpoints, suggesting that manufacturers do not always optimize the potential of PRO messages.

Application of Bother in patient reported outcomes instruments across cultures

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to determine the applicability of the term bother, as used in Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) instruments that will be translated into foreign languages from English for the United States. Bother is versatile in English for the U.S., in that it can describe negative mental states and physical sensations, as well as social disturbances. Bother has many different meanings across cultures, due to this versatility. Alternatives for bother were explored for future PRO instrument development.

METHODS

A PRO instrument used to evaluate the degree of bother resulting from psoriasis was analyzed. This disease can negatively impact patients physically, emotionally and socially. Translations of bother were analyzed to determine its meaning when translated into other languages. Cognitive debriefing was conducted on psoriasis patients with the instrument containing bother. Following cognitive debriefing, a questionnaire was distributed to linguists and cognitive debriefing subjects to collect definitions of bother in each target language, and detail any difficulty with translation.To establish alternatives to bother and demonstrate the breakdown of concepts within bother, translations of the Dermatology Quality of Life Index (DLQI) were analyzed. This instrument was selected for its focus on psoriasis and use of terminology that lacks the ambiguity of bother.

RESULTS

An analysis of back-translations revealed that bother yielded a back-translation that was conceptually different from the source 20% of the time (5/26). Analysis of alternative terminology found in the DLQI revealed much greater conceptual equivalence when translated into other languages.

CONCLUSION

When developing the wording of PRO instruments, the terminology chosen should be applicable across languages to allow for international pooling and comparison of data. While all linguists and subjects of cognitive debriefing understood bother to have a negative connotation, a large variety of definitions and synonyms provided across languages showed a lack of conceptual equivalence. Ambiguity of the term across cultures may result in variation in translation, impacting subsequent international data pooling. Analysis of alternatives revealed that measurement of unambiguous terminology produces the greatest conceptual equivalency across languages and cultures.