Complex Measures and Indices for Clinical Research Compared with Simple Patient Questionnaires to Assess Function, Pain, and Global Estimates as Rheumatology “Vital Signs” for Usual Clinical Care

Development of a multivariable improvement measure for gout

Background

Gout is a heterogeneous inflammatory disease with numerous clinical manifestations. A composite means to assess the impact of therapy on numerous aspects of gout could be useful.

Methods

Results from patients treated with pegloticase or placebo in two randomized clinical trials and their open-label extension were assessed using a novel evidence-based Gout Multivariable Improvement Measure (GMIM) derived from previously reported criteria for remission and complete response. Improvement was defined as serum urate (sU) < 6 mg/dL and absence of flares during the preceding 3 months plus 20, 50, and 70% improvement in tophus size, patient global assessment, pain, and swollen and tender joints.

Results

Patients treated with pegloticase manifested a significantly greater GMIM20, 50, and 70 response vs those treated with placebo (GMIM20 at 6 months 37.1% vs 0%, respectively). Higher response rates were significantly more frequent in subjects with persistent urate lowering (GMIM 58.1% at 6 months) in response to pegloticase versus those with only transient urate lowering (GMIM 7.1% at 6 months). However, when the requirement for a decrease in sU to < 6 mg/dL was omitted, a substantial percentage of subjects with transient urate lowering met the GMIM clinical criteria. A sensitivity analysis indicated that gout flares contributed minimally to the model. The response measured by GMIM persisted into the open-level extension for as long as 2 years. Finally, subjects who received placebo in the randomized control trials, but pegloticase in the open-label extension, manifested GMIM responses comparable to that noted with pegloticase-treated subjects in the randomized controlled trials.

Conclusions

GMIM captures changes in disease activity in response to treatment with pegloticase and may serve as an evidence-based tool for assessment of responses to other urate-lowering therapies in gout patients.

Development of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Symptom Questionnaire (RASQ): a patient reported outcome scale for measuring symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a chronic, progressive inflammatory, autoimmune disease, can substantially reduce health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and lead to severe disability and early mortality. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are used to assess the patient experience of RA symptoms and impacts, and can capture RA treatment effects. To address limitations in existing PRO instruments, this research aimed to establish the content validity of a new instrument, the Rheumatoid Arthritis Symptom Questionnaire (RASQ), to assess the signs and symptoms of RA.

METHOD

The most important and relevant sign and symptom concepts for RA patients were identified through a targeted review of the published literature, expert opinion, and concept elicitation patient interviews. Cognitive interviews were conducted with patients to test the comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of the RASQ.

RESULTS

Seven symptoms emerged consistently across the conceptual research: joint pain, joint swelling, joint stiffness, joint tenderness, joint warmth, muscle pain, and tiredness. Draft item content was developed to assess these symptoms, in addition to a single impact item, resulting in three RASQ versions: two utilizing a 7 day recall period (one assessing symptoms at their worst, the other on average) and a third using a 24 hour recall period assessing symptoms at their worst. Cognitive interview results demonstrated patient understanding and ability to use the instrument.

CONCLUSIONS

Content validity of the RASQ was established in accordance with instrument development guidelines. The RASQ fills a measurement gap by assessing the RA signs and symptoms most important to patients. Research evaluating the RASQ's psychometric properties is underway.

Quantitative Data for Care of Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Usual Clinical Settings: A Patient Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire and Physician Estimate of Noninflammatory Symptoms

Objective.

To analyze quantitative data in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), seen in usual care, from a patient Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) with routine assessment of patient index data (RAPID3) scores and from a physician global estimate of noninflammatory symptoms; and to compare results to self-report Systemic Lupus Activity Questionnaire (SLAQ) scores and 4 SLE indices: SLE Disease Activity Index-2K (SLEDAI-2K), British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG), Systemic Lupus Activity Measure (SLAM), and European Consensus Lupus Activity Measurement (ECLAM).

Methods.

Fifty consecutive patients with SLE were studied in usual care of one rheumatologist. All patients completed an MDHAQ/RAPID3 in this setting. Each patient also completed a SLAQ. The rheumatologist scored SLEDAI-2K, BILAG, SLAM, ECLAM, and 2 physician global estimates, one for overall status and one for noninflammatory symptoms. Patients were classified into 2 groups: “few” or “many” noninflammatory symptoms. Scores and indices were compared using correlations, cross-tabulations and t tests.

Results.

The patients included 45 women and 5 men. MDHAQ/RAPID3 and SLAQ scores were significantly correlated. RAPID3 scores were significantly higher in patients with SLE index scores above median levels, and in 34 patients scored by the rheumatologist as having “few” noninflammatory symptoms. MDHAQ/RAPID3 and SLAQ were significantly higher in 16 patients scored as having many noninflammatory symptoms.

Conclusion.

MDHAQ/RAPID3 and SLAQ subscale scores appear to reflect disease activity in patients with SLE, but not in patients with many noninflammatory symptoms. A physician scale for noninflammatory symptoms is useful to interpret MDHAQ/RAPID3, SLAQ, and SLE index scores.