Validation of SIMPLE Index for Lupus Disease Activity:

The contribution of medical burden to 22q11.2 deletion syndrome quality of life and functioning

PURPOSE

To date, there is no systematic method to quantify the medical burden of individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS). This study aimed to design a Medical Burden Scale for 22q11.2DS to evaluate the effect of medical symptoms severity on quality of life (QoL) and functioning in individuals with this syndrome.

METHODS

Individuals with 22q11.2DS (n = 76) were included in the study. A multidisciplinary group of physicians determined the severity of symptoms (on a scale of 0 to 4) of 8 major medical systems affected in 22q11.2DS, as well as the level of cognitive deficits and psychiatric morbidity. Regression models were used to evaluate the impact of medical, cognitive, and psychiatric symptoms' severity on global assessment of functioning (GAF) and QoL.

RESULTS

The total Medical Burden Scale score was significantly associated with both QoL and GAF scores, beyond the effect of the psychiatric and cognitive deficits. We also found that QoL and GAF scores were associated with the severity scores of specific medical systems, particularly neurological symptoms, but also cardiovascular, ear-nose-throat, endocrinology, and orthopedics.

CONCLUSION

Quantifying the medical burden of 22q11.2DS individuals is feasible and indicates the overall and specific contribution of medical symptoms to QoL and functioning of 22q11.2DS individuals.

Physician Global Assessment International Standardisation COnsensus in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: the PISCOS study

The Physician Global Assessment International Standardisation COnsensus in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (PISCOS) study aimed to obtain an evidence-based and expert-based consensus standardisation of the Physician Global Assessment (PGA) scoring of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). An international panel of 79 SLE experts participated in a three-round Delphi consensus process, in which 41 statements related to the PGA in SLE were rated, using a 0 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree) numerical rating scale. Statements with agreement of 75% or greater were selected and further validated by the expert panel. Consensus was reached on 27 statements, grouped in 14 recommendations, for the use of the PGA in SLE, design of the PGA scale, practical considerations for PGA scoring, and the relationship between PGA values and levels of disease activity. Among these recommendations, the expert panel agreed that the PGA should consist of a 0-3 visual analogue scale for measuring disease activity in patients with SLE in the preceding month. The PGA is intended to rate the overall disease activity, taking into account the severity of active manifestations and clinical laboratory results, but excluding organ damage, serology, and subjective findings unrelated to disease activity. The PGA scale ranges from "no disease activity" (0) to the "most severe disease activity" (3) and incorporates the values 1 and 2 as inner markers to categorise disease activity as mild (≥0·5 to 1), moderate (>1 and ≤2) and severe (>2 to 3). Only experienced physicians can rate the PGA, and it should be preferably scored by the same rater at each visit. The PISCOS results will allow for increased homogeneity and reliability of PGA ratings in routine clinical practice, definitions of remission and low disease activity, and future SLE trials.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Lupus

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) was identified as a core systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) outcome in 1999. More than 20 years later, however, generic PRO measures evaluating impact in SLE are used mainly for research. Generic and disease-targeted PRO tools have unique advantages. Significant progress in identification of patient disease-relevant PRO concepts and development of new PRO tools for SLE has occurred over the past 20 years. Further research needs to focus on responsiveness and minimally important differences of existing, promising PRO tools to facilitate their use in SLE patient care and research.

Use of Physician Global Assessment in systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review of its psychometric properties

OBJECTIVE

The Physician Global Assessment (PGA) is a visual analogue score that reflects the clinician's judgement of overall SLE disease activity. The aim of this systematic literature review is to describe and analyse the psychometric properties of the PGA.

METHODS

This systematic literature review was conducted by two independent reviewers in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. All articles published through 1 July 2019 in PubMed were screened, with no limitation on year of publication, language or patients' age. Psychometric properties data were analysed according to the OMERACT Filter methodology version 2.1.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 91 studies. Face validity was reported in all the articles retrieved in which the PGA was used alone or as part of composite indices (Systemic Responder Index, Safety of Estrogen in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment Flare Index, Lupus Low Disease Activity State, Definitions of Remission in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus criteria). Content validity was reported in 89 studies. Construct validity was demonstrated by a good correlation (r ≥ 0.50) between the PGA with the SLEDAI (12 studies), SLAM (4 studies), LAI, BILAG and ECLAM (2 studies each). Criterion validity was assessed exploring the PGA correlation with quality of life measurements, biomarker levels and treatment changes in 28 studies, while no study has evaluated correlation with damage. A good responsiveness for PGA was shown in eight studies. A high variability in scales was found, causing a wide range of reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.67-0.98).

CONCLUSION

PGA is a valid, responsive and feasible instrument, though its reliability was impacted by the scale adopted, suggesting the major need for standardization of its scoring.

Development and content validity of the Lupus Foundation of America rapid evaluation of activity in lupus (LFA-REAL™): a patient-reported outcome measure for lupus disease activity

Background/purpose

The LFA REAL™ is a measurement system for evaluating lupus disease activity from both clinician and patient perspectives. Patients’ viewpoints are captured using a patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire. A series of visual analog scales are designed to rate disease severity and progress over the past 4 weeks. Brief instructions guide the patient to distinguish between active, potentially reversible symptoms and chronic pain or discomfort that are more likely due to damage. Beyond its simplicity and efficiency, the PRO can provide versatile assessments from a global, organ-based, and symptom-specific level. This paper describes the patient-centered approach used to evaluate the content validity of the LFA-REAL PRO.

Methods

The PRO was developed in accordance with FDA guidance. A two-phase qualitative study was performed with 25 lupus patients, 10 who participated in concept elicitation (Phase 1) and 15 in cognitive debriefing interviews (Phase 2). Qualitative data were analyzed using ATLAS.ti software v7.5. Upon completion of the interviews, participants completed the draft PRO and additional measures to characterize the sample.

Results

The mean age of participants was 45.6 and 88% were female, as expected in a lupus population. The mean SF-36 physical component score was 29.8 and the mean mental component score was 46.4. Phase 1 elicited symptom saturation and mapping of the draft PRO. Fatigue was reported by 100% of patients, highlighting its importance as a measurable domain. Additionally, 100% of patients spontaneously mentioned arthritis, which may be more important to this group than previously estimated, substantiating the approach of this PRO to break down components of arthritis into joint pain, stiffness, and swelling. Shortness of breath and fever were reported more frequently than expected. Phase 2 data demonstrated that participants found the instrument easy to use and offered recommendations to improve clarity, leading to adjustments in wording and formatting.

Conclusions

Results suggest that the LFA-REAL PRO has content validity and, with some modifications suggested by participants, is ready for quantitative validation, including tests of reliability, validity, responsiveness to change, and performance relative to other PROs used in lupus trials. After validation, the LFA-REAL system is intended for use in clinical practice and research.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-019-1151-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.