Power to the People: Why person-generated health data is important for pharmacoepidemiology

Person-generated health data (PGHD) are valuable to study outcomes relevant to everyday living, to obtain information not otherwise available, for long-term follow-up and in situations where decisions cannot wait for traditional clinical research to be completed. While there is no dispute that these data are subject to bias, insights gained may be better than an information void, provided the biases are understood and acknowledged. People will share information known uniquely to them about exposures that may affect drug tolerance, safety and effectiveness, e.g., using non-prescription and complementary medications, alcohol, tobacco, illicit drugs, exercise, etc. Patients may be the best source of safety information when long-term follow-up is needed, e.g., the 5-15-year follow-up required for some gene therapies. Validation studies must be performed to evaluate what people can accurately report and when supplementary confirmation information is needed. But PGHD has already proven valuable in quantifying and contrasting COVID-19 vaccine benefits and risks, and for evaluating disease transmission and the accuracy of COVID-19 testing. Going forward, PGHD will be used for patient-measured and patient-relevant outcomes, including regulatory purposes, and will be linked to broader health data networks using tokenization, becoming a mainstay for signals about risks and benefits for diverse populations.

COVID-19 Vaccination Reactions and Risk of Breakthrough Infections Among People With Diabetes: Cohort Study Derived From Community Reporters

BACKGROUND

This exploratory study compares self-reported COVID-19 vaccine side effects and breakthrough infections in people who described themselves as having diabetes with those who did not identify as having diabetes.

OBJECTIVE

The study uses person-reported data to evaluate differences in the perception of COVID-19 vaccine side effects between adults with diabetes and those who did not report having diabetes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study conducted using data provided online by adults aged 18 years and older residing in the United States. The participants who voluntarily self-enrolled between March 19, 2021, and July 16, 2022, in the IQVIA COVID-19 Active Research Experience project reported clinical and demographic information, COVID-19 vaccination, whether they had experienced any side effects, test-confirmed infections, and consented to linkage with prescription claims. No distinction was made for this study to differentiate prediabetes or type 1 and type 2 diabetes nor to verify reports of positive COVID-19 tests. Person-reported medication use was validated using pharmacy claims and a subset of the linked data was used for a sensitivity analysis of medication effects. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratios of vaccine side effects or breakthrough infections by diabetic status, adjusting for age, gender, education, race, ethnicity (Hispanic or Latino), BMI, smoker, receipt of an influenza vaccine, vaccine manufacturer, and all medical conditions. Evaluations of diabetes medication-specific vaccine side effects are illustrated graphically to support the examination of the magnitude of side effect differences for various medications and combinations of medications used to manage diabetes.

RESULTS

People with diabetes (n=724) reported experiencing fewer side effects within 2 weeks of vaccination for COVID-19 than those without diabetes (n=6417; mean 2.7, SD 2.0 vs mean 3.1, SD 2.0). The adjusted risk of having a specific side effect or any side effect was lower among those with diabetes, with significant reductions in fatigue and headache but no differences in breakthrough infections over participants' maximum follow-up time. Diabetes medication use did not consistently affect the risk of specific side effects, either using self-reported medication use or using only diabetes medications that were confirmed by pharmacy health insurance claims for people who also reported having diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

People with diabetes reported fewer vaccine side effects than participants not reporting having diabetes, with a similar risk of breakthrough infection.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04368065; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04368065.

Tactical Considerations for Designing Real-World Studies: Fit-for-Purpose Designs That Bridge Research and Practice

Real-world evidence (RWE) is being used to provide information on diverse groups of patients who may be highly impacted by disease but are not typically studied in traditional randomized clinical trials (RCT) and to obtain insights from everyday care settings and real-world adherence to inform clinical practice. RWE is derived from so-called real-world data (RWD), ie, information generated by clinicians in the course of everyday patient care, and is sometimes coupled with systematic input from patients in the form of patient-reported outcomes or from wearable biosensors. Studies using RWD are conducted to evaluate how well medical interventions, services, and diagnostics perform under conditions of real-world use, and may include long-term follow-up. Here, we describe the main types of studies used to generate RWE and offer pointers for clinicians interested in study design and execution. Our tactical guidance addresses (1) opportunistic study designs, (2) considerations about representativeness of study participants, (3) expectations for transparency about data provenance, handling and quality assessments, and (4) considerations for strengthening studies using record linkage and/or randomization in pragmatic clinical trials. We also discuss likely sources of bias and suggest mitigation strategies. We see a future where clinical records - patient-generated data and other RWD - are brought together and harnessed by robust study design with efficient data capture and strong data curation. Traditional RCT will remain the mainstay of drug development, but RWE will play a growing role in clinical, regulatory, and payer decision-making. The most meaningful RWE will come from collaboration with astute clinicians with deep practice experience and questioning minds working closely with patients and researchers experienced in the development of RWE.

Cognitive and other neuropsychiatric symptoms in COVID-19: analysis of person-generated longitudinal health data from a community-based registry

OBJECTIVE

To describe cognitive symptoms in people not hospitalised at study enrolment for SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated demographics, medical history, other neuropsychiatric symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

DESIGN

Longitudinal observational study.

SETTING

Direct-to-participant registry with community-based recruitment via email and social media including Google, Facebook and Reddit, targeting adult US residents. Demographics, medical history, COVID-19-like symptoms, tests and vaccinations were collected through enrolment and follow-up surveys.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants who reported positive COVID-19 test results between 15 December 2020 and 13 December 2021. Those with cognitive symptoms were compared with those not reporting such symptoms.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Self-reported cognitive symptoms (defined as 'feeling disoriented or having trouble thinking' from listed options or related written-in symptoms) RESULTS: Of 3908 participants with a positive COVID-19 test result, 1014 (25.9%) reported cognitive symptoms at any time point during enrolment or follow-up, with approximately half reporting moderate/severe symptoms. Cognitive symptoms were associated with other neuropsychiatric symptoms, including dysgeusia, anosmia, trouble waking up, insomnia, headache, anxiety and depression. In multivariate analyses, female sex (OR, 95% CI): 1.7 (1.3 to 2.2), age (40-49 years (OR: 1.5 (1.2-1.9) compared with 18-29 years), history of autoimmune disease (OR: 1.5 (1.2-2.1)), lung disease (OR: 1.7 (1.3-2.2)) and depression (OR: 1.4 (1.1-1.7)) were associated with cognitive symptoms. Conversely, black race (OR: 0.6 (0.5-0.9)) and COVID-19 vaccination before infection (OR: 0.6 (0.4-0.7)) were associated with reduced occurrence of cognitive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, cognitive symptoms among COVID-19-positive participants were associated with female gender, age, autoimmune disorders, lung disease and depression. Vaccination and black race were associated with lower occurrence of cognitive symptoms. A constellation of neuropsychiatric and psychological symptoms occurred with cognitive symptoms. Our findings suggest COVID-19's full health and economic burden may be underestimated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04368065.

COVID-19 Vaccinations in Pregnancy: Comparative Evaluation of Acute Side Effects and Self-Reported Impact on Quality of Life between Pregnant and Nonpregnant Women in the United States

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe the acute side effects experienced by pregnant women who received a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine in the United States and to compare their experience to nonpregnant women of similar age.

STUDY DESIGN

Adults who received a COVID-19 vaccine in the United States were invited via social media to enroll in an online, longitudinal, community-based registry ( www.helpstopCOVID19.com ). Participants self-reported pregnancy status, vaccination dates, manufacturer, acute side effects, impact on work and self-care, medical consultation, and hospitalization. This analysis was restricted to women aged 20 to 39 at the time of vaccination. Side effects reported by pregnant women were compared to those reported by nonpregnant women.

RESULTS

This analysis included 946 pregnant women, with 572 (60%) receiving at least one dose of Pfizer, 321 (34%) Moderna, and 53 (6%) J&J, and 1,178 nonpregnant women. Demographic and medical history were similar across manufacturers for both cohorts.Overall, pregnant women reported similar side effects as nonpregnant women, with the most common being injection site reactions (83 vs. 87%), fatigue (72 vs.78%), and headache (45 vs. 59%). Pregnant women reported fewer side effects (median: 3 vs. 4, respectively). In both cohorts, very few reported seeking medical care (<5%) or being hospitalized (<0.3%) after vaccination. Fewer pregnant women reported working less after vaccination than nonpregnant women (32 vs. 40%) or trouble with self-care (32 vs. 46%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pregnant women reported similar COVID-19 vaccine side effects as nonpregnant women, although fewer total side effects; pregnant women judged these side effects to have less impact on work and self-care. While these results do not address pregnancy outcomes or long-term effects, findings about acute side effects and impact offer reassurance for all three vaccines in terms of tolerability.

KEY POINTS

· COVID vaccines were well tolerated by pregnant women.. · Pregnant women reported fewer total side effects.. · Pregnant women reported less impact on work and self-care..

Evaluating real-world COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness using a test-negative case-control design

Aim: It is important to assess if clinical trial efficacy translates into real-world effectiveness for COVID-19 vaccines. Materials & methods: We conducted a modified test-negative design (TND) to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of three COVID-19 vaccines. We defined cases in two ways: self-reported COVID-19-positive tests, and self-reported positive tests with ≥1 moderate/severe COVID-19 symptom. Results: Any vaccination was associated with a 95% reduction in subsequently reporting a positive COVID-19 test, and a 71% reduction in reporting a positive test and ≥1 moderate/severe symptom. Conclusion: We observed high effectiveness across all three marketed vaccines, both for self-reported positive COVID-19 tests and moderate/severe COVID-19 symptoms. This innovative TND approach can be implemented in future COVID-19 vaccine and treatment real-world effectiveness studies. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier:NCT04368065.

Evaluating real-world COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. #COVID19 #Vaccines #TND #PRO #patientreportedoutcomes

Demonstrating Benefit-Risk Profiles of Novel Therapeutic Strategies in Kidney Transplantation: Opportunities and Challenges of Real-World Evidence

While great progress has been made in transplantation medicine, long-term graft failure and serious side effects still pose a challenge in kidney transplantation. Effective and safe long-term treatments are needed. Therefore, evidence of the lasting benefit-risk of novel therapies is required. Demonstrating superiority of novel therapies is unlikely via conventional randomized controlled trials, as long-term follow-up in large sample sizes pose statistical and operational challenges. Furthermore, endpoints generally accepted in short-term clinical trials need to be translated to real-world (RW) care settings, enabling robust assessments of novel treatments. Hence, there is an evidence gap that calls for innovative clinical trial designs, with RW evidence (RWE) providing an opportunity to facilitate longitudinal transplant research with timely translation to clinical practice. Nonetheless, the current RWE landscape shows considerable heterogeneity, with few registries capturing detailed data to support the establishment of new endpoints. The main recommendations by leading scientists in the field are increased collaboration between registries for data harmonization and leveraging the development of technology innovations for data sharing under high privacy standards. This will aid the development of clinically meaningful endpoints and data models, enabling future long-term research and ultimately establish optimal long-term outcomes for transplant patients.

Uncontrolled Extensions of Clinical Trials and the Use of External Controls-Scoping Opportunities and Methods

Increased interest in real-world evidence (RWE) for clinical and regulatory decision making and the need to evaluate long-term benefits and risks of pharmaceutical products raise the importance of understanding the use of external controls (ECs) for uncontrolled extensions of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched clinicaltrials.gov from 2009 to 2019 for uncontrolled extensions and assessed the use of ECs in the trial protocol registry and PubMed. We present characteristics of identified uncontrolled extensions, their adoption of ECs, and a qualitative appraisal of published uncontrolled extensions with ECs according to good pharmacoepidemiologic practice. The number of uncontrolled extensions increased slightly across the study period, resulting in a total of 1,115 studies. Most originated from phase III RCTs (62.2%) and specified safety outcomes (61.9% among those with specified outcomes). Most uncontrolled extensions incorporated no control group with only 7 out of 1,115 (0.6%) employing ECs. For those studies with ECs, all involved treatments for rare conditions and assessment of effectiveness. Attempts to balance comparison groups varied from none mentioned to propensity score matching. We noted consistent deficiencies in outcome ascertainment methods and approaches to address attrition bias. The contrast of the large and growing number of uncontrolled extensions with the small number of studies that utilized ECs showed clear opportunities for enhancement in design, measurement, and analysis of uncontrolled extensions to allow causal inferences on long-term treatment effects. As extensions continue to expand within RWE regulatory frameworks, development of guidelines for use of EC with uncontrolled extensions is needed.

When Can We Trust Real-World Data To Evaluate New Medical Treatments?

Concerns regarding both the limited generalizability and the slow pace of traditional randomized trials have led to calls for greater use of real‐world evidence (RWE) in the evaluation of new treatments or products. RWE studies often rely on real‐world data (RWD), including data extracted from healthcare records or data captured by mobile phones or other consumer devices. Global assessments of RWD sources are not helpful in assessing whether any specific RWD element is fit for any specific purpose. Instead, evidence generators and evidence consumers should clearly identify the specific health state or clinical phenomenon of interest and then consider each step between that clinical phenomenon and its representation in a research database. We propose specific questions regarding potential error or bias affecting each of those steps: Would a person experiencing this clinical phenomenon present for care in this setting or interact with this recording device? Would this clinical phenomenon be accurately recognized or assessed? How might the recording environment or tools affect accurate and consistent recording of this clinical phenomenon? Can data elements from different sources be harmonized, both technically (same format) and semantically (same meaning)? Can the original data elements be consistently reduced to a useful clinical phenotype? Addressing these questions requires a range of clinical, organizational, and technical expertise. Transparency regarding each step in the creation of RWD is essential if evidence consumers are to rely on RWE studies.

When Can Nonrandomized Studies Support Valid Inference Regarding Effectiveness or Safety of New Medical Treatments?

The randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the gold standard for evaluating the causal effects of medications. Limitations of RCTs have led to increasing interest in using real-world evidence (RWE) to augment RCT evidence and inform decision making on medications. Although RWE can be either randomized or nonrandomized, nonrandomized RWE can capitalize on the recent proliferation of large healthcare databases and can often answer questions that cannot be answered in randomized studies due to resource constraints. However, the results of nonrandomized studies are much more likely to be impacted by confounding bias, and the existence of unmeasured confounders can never be completely ruled out. Furthermore, nonrandomized studies require more complex design considerations which can sometimes result in design-related biases. We discuss questions that can help investigators or evidence consumers evaluate the potential impact of confounding or other biases on their findings: Does the design emulate a hypothetical randomized trial design? Is the comparator or control condition appropriate? Does the primary analysis adjust for measured confounders? Do sensitivity analyses quantify the potential impact of residual confounding? Are methods open to inspection and (if possible) replication? Designing a high-quality nonrandomized study of medications remains challenging and requires broad expertise across a range of disciplines, including relevant clinical areas, epidemiology, and biostatistics. The questions posed in this paper provide a guiding framework for assessing the credibility of nonrandomized RWE and could be applied across many clinical questions.

Real-world evidence to support regulatory decision making: New or expanded medical product indications

There is increasing interest in utilizing real-world data (RWD) to produce real-world evidence (RWE) on the benefits and risks of medical products that could support regulatory approval decisions. The field of pharmacoepidemiology has a long history of focusing on data and evidence that would now be termed "real-world," including evidence from healthcare claims, registries, and electronic health records. However, several emerging trends over the past decade are converging to support the use of these and other RWD sources for approval decisions, and there are several recent examples and ongoing research that demonstrate how RWE may be used to support regulatory approval of new or expanded indications. The goal of this article is to review the current landscape and future directions of the use of RWE in this context. This manuscript is endorsed by the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE).

Self-reported symptoms from exposure to Covid-19 provide support to clinical diagnosis, triage and prognosis: An exploratory analysis

Background

Symptomatic COVID-19 is prevalent in the community. We identify factors indicating COVID-19 positivity in non-hospitalized patients and prognosticators of moderate-to-severe disease.

Methods

Appeals conducted in April–June 2020 in social media, collaborating medical societies and patient advocacy groups recruited 20,476 participants ≥18 years who believed they had COVID-19 exposure. Volunteers consented on-line and reported height, weight, concomitant illnesses, medication and supplement use, residential, occupational or community COVID-19 exposure, symptoms and symptom severity on a 4-point scale. Of the 12,117 curated analytic population 2279 reported a COVID-19 viral test result: 865 positive (COVID+) and 1414 negative (COVID-).

Results

The triad of anosmia, ageusia and fever best distinguished COVID+ from COVID-participants (OR 6.07, 95% CI: 4.39 to 8.47). COVID + subjects with BMI≥30, concomitant respiratory disorders or an organ transplant had increased risk of moderate-to- severe dyspnoea. Race and anti-autoimmunity medication did not affect moderate-to-severe dyspnea risk.

Conclusions

The triad of anosmia, ageusia and fever differentiates COVID-19. Elevated risks of severe symptoms outside the hospital were most evident among the obese and those with pulmonary comorbidity. Race and use of medication for autoimmune disease did not predict severe disease. These findings should facilitate rapid COVID-19 diagnosis and triage in settings without testing.

•

The triad of anosmia, ageusia and fever best distinguished those who tested positive from those who tested negative.

•

Race nor use of medications for autoimmune disorders showed meaningful increase in risk of moderate or severe dyspnea.

•

Moderate-to-severe dyspnea in the community was increased in those with obesity or underlying respiratory disorders.

The Certainty Framework for Assessing Real-World Data in Studies of Medical Product Safety and Effectiveness

A fundamental question in using real-world data for clinical and regulatory decision making is: How certain must we be that the algorithm used to capture an exposure, outcome, cohort-defining characteristic, or confounder is what we intend it to be? We provide a practical framework to help researchers and regulators assess and classify the fit-for-purposefulness of real-world data by study variable for a range of data sources. The three levels of certainty (optimal, sufficient, and probable) must be considered in the context of each study variable, the specific question being studied, the study design, and the decision at hand.

Replication of randomized clinical trial results using real-world data: paving the way for effectiveness decisions

The FDA is preparing guidance about using real-world evidence (RWE) to support decisions about product effectiveness. Several ongoing efforts aim to replicate randomized clinical trial (RCT) results using RWE with the intent of identifying circumstances and methods that provide valid evidence of drug effects. Lack of agreement may not be due to faulty methods but rather to the challenges with emulating RCTs, differences in healthcare settings and patient populations, differences in effect measures and data analysis, bias, and/or the efficacy-effectiveness gap. In fact, for some decisions, RWE may lead to better understanding of how treatments work in usual care settings than a more constrained view from RCTs. Efforts to reconcile the role and opportunities for generating complementary evidence from RWE and RCTs will advance regulatory science.

Bridging the Gap Between RCTs and RWE Through Endpoint Selection

This commentary is authored by several industry real-world evidence (RWE) experts, with support from IQVIA, as part of the 'RWE Leadership Forum': a group of Industry Leaders who have come together as non-competitive partners to understand and respond to RWD/E challenges and opportunities with a single expert voice. Here, the forum discusses the value in bridging the industry disconnect between RTCs and RWE, with a view to promoting the use of RWE in the RCT environment. RCT endpoints are explored along several axes including their clinical relevance and their measure of direct patient benefit, and then compared with their real-world counterparts to identify suitable paths, or gaps, for assimilating RWE endpoints into the RCT environment.

Real-world evidence to support regulatory decision-making for medicines: Considerations for external control arms

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the gold standard in producing clinical evidence of efficacy and safety of medical interventions. More recently, a new paradigm is emerging-specifically within the context of preauthorization regulatory decision-making-for some novel uses of real-world evidence (RWE) from a variety of real-world data (RWD) sources to answer certain clinical questions. Traditionally reserved for rare diseases and other special circumstances, external controls (eg, historical controls) are recognized as a possible type of control arm for single-arm trials. However, creating and analyzing an external control arm using RWD can be challenging since design and analytics may not fully control for all systematic differences (biases). Nonetheless, certain biases can be attenuated using appropriate design and analytical approaches. The main objective of this paper is to improve the scientific rigor in the generation of external control arms using RWD. Here we (a) discuss the rationale and regulatory circumstances appropriate for external control arms, (b) define different types of external control arms, and (c) describe study design elements and approaches to mitigate certain biases in external control arms. This manuscript received endorsement from the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE).

Masking in Pragmatic Trials: Who, What, and When to Blind

Masking (or blinding) of treatment assignment is routinely implemented in classical randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to isolate the effect of the intervention itself and to minimize the potential for bias that could occur with traditional trials. Such biases could be introduced with the conduct, assessment of endpoints, management of conditions, analysis, and reporting when the treatment assignments are known. However, masking of treatments is not only complex but it hinders how generalizable the findings are to the "real world" clinical setting. Pragmatic RCTs (pRCTs) are intended to evaluate the effects of interventions within routine medical care, and as such, do not typically mask treatment groups; moreover, pRCTs assess comparators that are available in routine medical practice, not masked placebos. Whether pRCTs should be masked if intended for regulatory or other purposes has recently been questioned. The literature on pRCTs, while extensive, does not address how much actual benefit is gained from masking outcomes and how masking may affect the "real world" nature of a study. Here, we propose an approach to evaluate sources of bias, describe stakeholders in the conduct of pRCTs who are most likely affected, and offer a framework for considering how masking may be implemented effectively while maintaining generalizability.

Trial designs using real-world data: The changing landscape of the regulatory approval process

Purpose

There is a need to develop hybrid trial methodology combining the best parts of traditional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational study designs to produce real‐world evidence (RWE) that provides adequate scientific evidence for regulatory decision‐making.

Methods

This review explores how hybrid study designs that include features of RCTs and studies with real‐world data (RWD) can combine the advantages of both to generate RWE that is fit for regulatory purposes.

Results

Some hybrid designs include randomization and use pragmatic outcomes; other designs use single‐arm trial data supplemented with external comparators derived from RWD or leverage novel data collection approaches to capture long‐term outcomes in a real‐world setting. Some of these approaches have already been successfully used in regulatory decisions, raising the possibility that studies using RWD could increasingly be used to augment or replace traditional RCTs for the demonstration of drug effectiveness in certain contexts. These changes come against a background of long reliance on RCTs for regulatory decision‐making, which are labor‐intensive, costly, and produce data that can have limited applicability in real‐world clinical practice.

Conclusions

While RWE from observational studies is well accepted for satisfying postapproval safety monitoring requirements, it has not commonly been used to demonstrate drug effectiveness for regulatory purposes. However, this position is changing as regulatory opinions, guidance frameworks, and RWD methodologies are evolving, with growing recognition of the value of using RWE that is acceptable for regulatory decision‐making.

Ankle Sprains in the National Basketball Association, 2013-2014 Through 2016-2017

BACKGROUND

Ankle sprains are one of the most common injuries in basketball. Despite this, the incidence and setting of ankle sprains among elite basketball players are not well described.

PURPOSE

To describe the epidemiology of ankle sprains among National Basketball Association (NBA) players.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

All players on an NBA roster for ≥1 NBA game (preseason, regular season, or playoffs) during the 2013-14 through 2016-17 seasons were included. Data were collected with the NBA electronic medical record system. All NBA teams used the electronic medical record continuously throughout the study period to record comprehensive injury data, including onset, mechanism, setting, type, and time lost. Game incidence rates were calculated per 1000 player-games and per 10,000 player-minutes of participation, stratified by demographic and playing characteristics.

RESULTS

There were 796 ankle sprains among 389 players and 2341 unique NBA player-seasons reported in the league from 2013-14 through 2016-17. The overall single-season risk of ankle sprain was 25.8% (95% CI, 23.9%-28.0%). The majority of ankle sprains occurred in games (n = 565, 71.0%) and involved a contact mechanism of injury (n = 567, 71.2%). Most ankle sprains were lateral (n = 638, 80.2%). The incidence of ankle sprain among players with a history of prior ankle sprain in the past year was 1.41 times (95% CI, 1.13-1.74) the incidence of those without a history of ankle sprain in the past year (P = .002). Fifty-six percent of ankle sprains did not result in any NBA games missed (n = 443); among those that did, players missed a median of 2 games (interquartile range, 1-4) resulting in a cumulative total of 1467 missed player-games over the 4-season study period.

CONCLUSION

Ankle sprains affect approximately 26% of NBA players on average each season and account for a large number of missed NBA games in aggregate. Younger players and players with a history of ankle sprain have elevated rates of incident ankle sprains in games, highlighting the potential benefit for integrating injury prevention programs into the management of initial sprains. Research on basketball- and ankle-specific injury prevention strategies could provide benefits.

Lessons on Data Collection and Curation From the NFL Injury Surveillance Program

BACKGROUND

"Research-ready" evidence platforms that link sports data with anonymized electronic health records (EHRs) or other data are important tools for evaluating injury occurrence in response to changes in games, training, rules, and other factors. While there is agreement that high-quality data are essential, there is little evidence to guide data curation.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesized that an EHR used in the course of clinical care and curated for research readiness can provide a robust evidence platform. Our purpose was to describe the data curation used for active injury surveillance by the National Football League (NFL).

STUDY DESIGN

Dynamic cohort study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2.

METHODS

Players provide informed consent for research activities through the collective bargaining process. A league-wide EHR is used to record injuries that come to the attention of the teams' athletic trainers and physicians, NFL medical spotters, or unaffiliated neurotrauma consultants. Information about football activities and injuries are linkable by player, setting, and event to other sports-related data, including game statistics and game-day stadium quality measures, using a unique player identification designed to protect player privacy. Ongoing data curation is used to review data completeness and accuracy and is adjusted over time in response to findings.

RESULTS

The core data curation activities include monthly injury summaries to team staff, queries to resolve incomplete reporting, and periodic external checks. Experiences derived from producing more than 100 reports per year on diverse topics are used to update coding training and related guidance documents in response to missing data or inconsistent coding that is observed. Roughly 20% more injuries were recorded for the same "reportable" injuries after switching from targeted reporting to an EHR.

CONCLUSION

Research-ready databases need systematic curation for quality and completeness, along with related action plans. More injuries were reported through EHR than through targeted reporting.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Evidence-driven decision-making thrives on reliable data fine-tuned through systematic use, review, and ongoing adjustments to the curation process.

The Establishment and Refinement of the National Basketball Association Player Injury and Illness Database

The National Basketball Association (NBA; also referred to as "the league") has established a centralized, audited electronic medical record system that has been linked with external sources to provide a platform for robust research and to allow the NBA to conduct player health and safety reviews. The system is customized and maintained by the NBA and individual teams as part of the employment records for each player and is deployed uniformly across all 30 teams in the league, thereby allowing for standardized data on injuries, illnesses, and player participation in NBA games and practices. The electronic medical record data are enriched by linkage with other league external data sources that provide additional information about injuries, players, game and practice participation, and movement. These data linkages allow for the assessment of potential injury trends, development of injury-prevention programs, and rule changes, with the ultimate goal of improving player health and wellness. The purpose of this article is to describe this NBA injury database, including the details of data collection, data linkages with external data sources, and activities related to reporter training and data quality improvement.

Advancing a Framework for Regulatory Use of Real-World Evidence: When Real Is Reliable

There is growing interest in regulatory use of randomized pragmatic trials and noninterventional real-world (RW) studies of effectiveness and safety, but there is no agreed-on framework for assessing when this type of evidence is sufficiently reliable. Rather than impose a clinical trial-like paradigm on RW evidence, like blinded treatments or complete, source-verified data, the framework for assessing the utility of RW evidence should be grounded in the context of specific study objectives, clinical events that are likely to be detected in routine care, and the extent to which systematic error (bias) is likely to impact effect estimation. Whether treatment is blinded should depend on how well the outcome can be measured objectively. Qualification of a data source should be based on (1) numbers of patients of interest available for study; (2) if "must-have" data are likely to be recorded, and if so, how and where; (3) the accessibility of systematic follow-up data for the time period of interest; and (4) the potential for systematic errors (bias) in data collection and the likely magnitude of any such bias. Accessible data may not be representative of an entire population, but still may provide reliable evidence about the experience of typical patients treated under conditions of conventional care. Similarly, RW data that falls short of optimal length of follow-up or study size may still be useful in terms of its ability to provide evidence for regulators for subgroups of special interest. Developing a framework to qualify RW evidence in the context of a particular study purpose and data asset will enable broader regulatory use of RW data for approval of new molecular entities and label changes. Reliable information about diverse populations and settings should also help us move closer to more affordable, effective health care.

The GRACE Checklist: A Validated Assessment Tool for High Quality Observational Studies of Comparative Effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Recognizing the growing need for robust evidence about treatment effectiveness in real-world populations, the Good Research for Comparative Effectiveness (GRACE) guidelines have been developed for noninterventional studies of comparative effectiveness to determine which studies are sufficiently rigorous to be reliable enough for use in health technology assessments.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate which aspects of the GRACE Checklist contribute most strongly to recognition of quality.

METHODS

We assembled 28 observational comparative effectiveness articles published from 2001 to 2010 that compared treatment effectiveness and/or safety of drugs, medical devices, and medical procedures. Twenty-two volunteers from academia, pharmaceutical companies, and government agencies applied the GRACE Checklist to those articles, providing 56 assessments. Ten senior academic and industry experts provided assessments of overall article quality for the purpose of decision support. We also rated each article based on the number of annual citations and impact factor of the journal in which the article was published. To identify checklist items that were most predictive of quality, classification and regression tree (CART) analysis, a binary, recursive, partitioning methodology, was used to create 3 decision trees, which compared the 56 article assessments with 3 external quality outcomes: (1) expert assessment of overall quality, (2) citation frequency, and (3) impact factor. A fourth tree looked at the composite outcome of all 3 quality indicators.

RESULTS

The best predictors of quality included the following: use of concurrent comparators, limiting the study to new initiators of the study drug, equivalent measurement of outcomes in study groups, collecting data on most if not all known confounders or effect modifiers, accounting for immortal time bias in the analysis, and use of sensitivity analyses to test how much effect estimates depended on various assumptions. Only sensitivity analyses appeared consistently as a predictor of quality in all 4 trees. When a composite outcome of the 3 quality measures was used, the GRACE Checklist showed high sensitivity and specificity (71.43% and 80.95%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The GRACE Checklist stands out from other consensus-driven and expert guidance documents because of its extensive validation efforts. This most recent work shows that the checklist has strong sensitivity and specificity, increasing its utility as a screening tool to identify high-quality observational comparative effectiveness research worthy of in-depth review and applicability for decision support.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this research. All authors are full-time employees of Quintiles, which provides research and consulting services to the biopharmaceutical industry. The authors have no other disclosures to report. Two of the 3 CART trees were presented at the International Society of Pharmacepidemiology in 2015 ("Article Citations per Year" and "Journal Impact Factor"). The original validation study was published in the March 2014 issue of the Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy. The checklist questions and scoring were included using a table that was originally published by this journal in 2014. Study concept and design were primarily contributed by Dreyer and Velentgas, along with Bryant. Bryant took the lead in data collection and analysis, along with Dreyer and Velentgas, and data interpretation was performed by Dreyer, Velentgas, and Bryant. The manuscript was written and revised primarily by Dreyer, along with Bryant and Velentgas.

The fast route to evidence development for value in healthcare

Over the past 30 years, our greatest accomplishments in advancing understanding about the safety, effectiveness and value of healthcare interventions have been achieved through the availability and accessibility of health insurance claims for large populations and, more recently, access to pockets of electronic health records that can be linked to information on expenditures, outcomes and patient experience. Although useful, this data lacks clinical detail and patient relevance. Going forward, we need qualified data networks that understand their data, have a research administration in place to evaluate requests, obtain institutional review and transfer data - all on a timely basis. The mecca of health information will be networks with comprehensive electronic health records that are able to collect and link supplementary data collected from clinicians, tissue banks, etc., and/or directly from patients, including information on quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes. A combination of data collected from clinicians, patients and health systems will provide details about treatment use, patient characteristics and health outcomes that are not consistently available in a patient's medical record, including whether prescriptions were actually filled, and if patients were hospitalized or had other costly healthcare that may not have been reported to their network doctors. We need a simple process to serve as a gateway to identify qualified research partners, the types of data each has access to, and how to work with them. The best partners will have established processes for contracting, prompt and informed institutional review, and data integration including supplementation from patients, clinicians and others, as needed, to support evidence generation that is more nuanced than simply choosing treatments based on how the average patient would respond.

An International Study of the Ability and Cost-Effectiveness of Advertising Methods to Facilitate Study Participant Self-Enrolment Into a Pilot Pharmacovigilance Study During Early Pregnancy

Background

Knowledge of the fetal effects of maternal medication use in pregnancy is often inadequate and current pregnancy pharmacovigilance (PV) surveillance methods have important limitations. Patient self-reporting may be able to mitigate some of these limitations, providing an adequately sized study sample can be recruited.

Objective

To compare the ability and cost-effectiveness of several direct-to-participant advertising methods for the recruitment of pregnant participants into a study of self-reported gestational exposures and pregnancy outcomes.

Methods

The Pharmacoepidemiological Research on Outcomes of Therapeutics by a European Consortium (PROTECT) pregnancy study is a non-interventional, prospective pilot study of self-reported medication use and obstetric outcomes provided by a cohort of pregnant women that was conducted in Denmark, the Netherlands, Poland, and the United Kingdom. Direct-to-participant advertisements were provided via websites, emails, leaflets, television, and social media platforms.

Results

Over a 70-week recruitment period direct-to-participant advertisements engaged 43,234 individuals with the study website or telephone system; 4.78% (2065/43,234) of which were successfully enrolled and provided study data. Of these 90.4% (1867/2065) were recruited via paid advertising methods, 23.0% (475/2065) of whom were in the first trimester of pregnancy. The overall costs per active recruited participant were lowest for email (€23.24) and website (€24.41) advertisements and highest for leaflet (€83.14) and television (€100.89). Website adverts were substantially superior in their ability to recruit participants during their first trimester of pregnancy (317/668, 47.5%) in comparison with other advertising methods (P<.001). However, we identified international variations in both the cost-effectiveness of the various advertisement methods used and in their ability to recruit participants in early pregnancy.

Conclusions

Recruitment of a pregnant cohort using direct-to-participant advertisement methods is feasible, but the total costs incurred are not insubstantial. Future research is needed to identify advertising strategies capable of recruiting large numbers of demographically representative pregnant women, preferentially in early pregnancy.

Characterization of Missing Data in Clinical Registry Studies

Patterns of missing data are seldom well-characterized in observational research. This study examined the magnitude of, and factors associated with, missing data across multiple observational studies. Missingness was evaluated for demographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from a procedure registry (TOPS), a rare disease (cystic fibrosis) registry (Port-CF), and a comparative effectiveness registry (glaucoma, RiGOR). Generalized linear mixed effects models were fit to assess whether patient characteristics or follow-up methods predicted missingness. Data from 156,707 surgical procedures, 32,118 cystic fibrosis patients, and 2373 glaucoma patients were analyzed. Data were rarely missing for demographics, treatments, and outcomes. Missingness for clinical variables varied by registry and measure and depended on whether a variable was required. Within RiGOR, PRO forms were missing more often when collected by e-mail compared with office-based paper data collection. In Port-CF, missingness varied based on insurance status and sex. Strategic consideration of operational approaches affecting missing data should be performed prior to data collection and assessed periodically during study conduct.

Direct-to-Patient Research: Piloting a New Approach to Understanding Drug Safety During Pregnancy

Background

Little is known about the effects of human fetal exposure when a new drug is authorized unless it was specifically developed for use in pregnancy. Since many factors may contribute to adverse fetal effects, having comprehensive information about in utero exposures will enhance our ability to make correct determinations about causality.

Objective

The objective of the study was to assess the extent to which women, recruited without the intervention of health care professionals (HCPs), will provide information, suitable for research purposes, via the Internet or by phone on some potential risk factors in pregnancy.

Methods

To pilot direct-to-patient research for pharmacovigilance, we conducted a prospective, noninterventional study of medication use and lifestyle factors as part of the Pharmacoepidemiological Research on Outcomes of Therapeutics by a European ConsorTium (PROTECT) Consortium. Consenting women who self-identified as pregnant and residing in the United Kingdom (UK), Denmark (DK), The Netherlands, or Poland were recruited and could then choose to provide data every 2 or 4 weeks via the Internet or a telephonic interactive voice response system (IVRS). Self-reported drug use was compared with pharmacy register data in DK and with electronic health records in the UK.

Results

Recruited women were on average older and more highly educated than the general population. Most respondents chose a frequency of every 4 weeks (56.99%, 1177/2065). Only 29.83% (464/1555) of women with due dates occurring during the study provided information on pregnancy outcome. For those responding by Internet, over 90.00% (1915/2065) reported using >1 pregnancy-related medication, 83.34% (1721/2065) reported using >1 other medicine, and 23.53% (486/2065) reported only over-the-counter medications, not counting herbals and dietary supplements. Some respondents (7.16%, 148/2065) reported that they chose not to take a prescribed medication (mostly medicines for pain or inflammation, and for depression) and 1.30% (27/2065) reported using medicines that had been prescribed to a friend or family member (oxycodone, paracetamol, and medications for acid-related problems). Relatively few respondents reported using fish oil (4.60%, 95/2065), other dietary supplements (1.88%, 39/2065), herbal products (7.07%, 146/2065), or homeopathic products (1.16%, 24/2065). Most medications for chronic conditions that were listed in the Danish prescription registry were also self-reported (83.3%, 145/174 agreement), with larger discrepancies for medications indicated for short-term use (54.0%, 153/283 agreement) and pregnancy-related medications (66.1%, 78/118).

Conclusions

Self-reported information on medication use as well as other potential teratogenic factors can be collected via the Internet, although recruitment costs are not insubstantial and maintaining follow-up is challenging. Direct data collection from consumers adds detail, but clinical input may be needed to fully understand patients’ medical histories and capture birth outcomes.

Balancing the interests of patient data protection and medication safety monitoring in a public-private partnership

Obtaining data without the intervention of a health care provider represents an opportunity to expand understanding of the safety of medications used in difficult-to-study situations, like the first trimester of pregnancy when women may not present for medical care. While it is widely agreed that personal data, and in particular medical data, needs to be protected from unauthorized use, data protection requirements for population-based studies vary substantially by country. For public-private partnerships, the complexities are enhanced. The objective of this viewpoint paper is to illustrate the challenges related to data protection based on our experiences when performing relatively straightforward direct-to-patient noninterventional research via the Internet or telephone in four European countries. Pregnant women were invited to participate via the Internet or using an automated telephone response system in Denmark, the Netherlands, Poland, and the United Kingdom. Information was sought on medications, other factors that may cause birth defects, and pregnancy outcome. Issues relating to legal controllership of data were most problematic; assuring compliance with data protection requirements took about two years. There were also inconsistencies in the willingness to accept nonwritten informed consent. Nonetheless, enrollment and data collection have been completed, and analysis is in progress. Using direct reporting from consumers to study the safety of medicinal products allows researchers to address a myriad of research questions relating to everyday clinical practice, including treatment heterogeneity in population subgroups not traditionally included in clinical trials, like pregnant women, children, and the elderly. Nonetheless, there are a variety of administrative barriers relating to data protection and informed consent, particularly within the structure of a public-private partnership.

Impact of symptom burden on work-related abilities in patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: Results from a substudy of the VIRGO observational cohort study

Limited data exist on the association of symptom burden, daily activity impairment, and work productivity (WP) in patients with advanced breast cancer. This cross-sectional analysis evaluated baseline patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving first-line hormonal therapy or chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy in the VIRGO observational study. The primary PRO study endpoint, symptom severity and interference score, was measured using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI). Secondary endpoints included Activity Level Scale (ALS), health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI:SHP) scores. Overall, 152 patients (chemotherapy cohort, 104; hormonal therapy cohort, 48) answered questionnaires. Fatigue, decreased sexual interest, disturbed sleep, emotional distress, and drowsiness were the most common severe symptoms, and were of moderate-to-severe intensity in 38.8%-52.0% of patients. Mean percent daily activity impairment was 30% for study patients, and WP impairment ranged from 20% to 40% across indices in employed patients (n, 58). Significant positive correlations existed for MDASI severity and interference scores with activity impairment and WP indices (Pearson correlation coefficients [R] = 0.47-0.82; p < 0.0001). ALS and overall HRQOL correlated negatively with these indices (R = -0.41 to -0.60; p ≤ 0.001). After adjustment for potential confounders, MDASI symptom interference and ALS were significant predictors of activity and WP impairment. Our results indicate patients receiving treatment for MBC are symptomatic with significant daily activity and/or WP impairment. Symptom severity and interference, functional status, and overall HRQOL were moderately correlated with perceived work-related ability.

The GRACE checklist for rating the quality of observational studies of comparative effectiveness: a tale of hope and caution

BACKGROUND

While there is growing demand for information about comparative effectiveness (CE), there is substantial debate about whether and when observational studies have sufficient quality to support decision making.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and test an item checklist that can be used to qualify those observational CE studies sufficiently rigorous in design and execution to contribute meaningfully to the evidence base for decision support.

METHODS

An 11-item checklist about data and methods (the GRACE checklist) was developed through literature review and consultation with experts from professional societies, payer groups, the private sector, and academia. Since no single gold standard exists for validation, checklist item responses were compared with 3 different types of external quality ratings (N=88 articles). The articles compared treatment effectiveness and/or safety of drugs, medical devices, and medical procedures. We validated checklist item responses 3 ways against external quality ratings, using published articles of observational CE or safety studies: (a) Systematic Review-quality assessment from a published systematic review; (b) Single Expert Review-quality assessment made according to the solicited "expert opinion" of a senior researcher; and (c) Concordant Expert Review-quality assessments from 2 experts for which there was concordance. Volunteers (N=113) from 5 continents completed 280 article assessments using the checklist. Positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV, respectively) of individual items were estimated to compare testers' assessments with those of experts.

RESULTS

Taken as a whole, the scale had better NPV than PPV, for both data and methods. The most consistent predictor of quality relates to the validity of the primary outcomes measurement for the study purpose. Other consistent markers of quality relate to using concurrent comparators, minimizing the effects of bias by prudent choice of covariates, and using sensitivity analysis to test robustness of results. Concordance of expert opinion on the quality of the rated articles was 52%; most checklist items performed better.

CONCLUSIONS

The 11-item GRACE checklist provides guidance to help determine which observational studies of CE have used strong scientific methods and good data that are fit for purpose and merit consideration for decision making. The checklist contains a parsimonious set of elements that can be objectively assessed in published studies, and user testing shows that it can be successfully applied to studies of drugs, medical devices, and clinical and surgical interventions. Although no scoring is provided, study reports that rate relatively well across checklist items merit in-depth examination to understand applicability, effect size, and likelihood of residual bias. The current testing and validation efforts did not achieve clear discrimination between studies fit for purpose and those not, but we have identified a critical, though remediable, limitation in our approach. Not specifying a specific granular decision for evaluation, or not identifying a single study objective in reports that included more than one, left reviewers with too broad an assessment challenge. We believe that future efforts will be more successful if reviewers are asked to focus on a specific objective or question. Despite the challenges encountered in this testing, an agreed upon set of assessment elements, checklists, or score cards is critical for the maturation of this field. Substantial resources will be expended on studies of real-world effectiveness, and if the rigor of these observational assessments cannot be assessed, then the impact of the studies will be suboptimal. Similarly, agreement on key elements of quality will ensure that budgets are appropriately directed toward those elements. Given the importance of this task and the lessons learned from these extensive efforts at validation and user testing, we are optimistic about the potential for improved assessments that can be used for diverse situations by people with a wide range of experience and training. Future testing would benefit by directing reviewers to address a single, granular research question, which would avoid problems that arose by using the checklist to evaluate multiple objectives, by using other types of validation test sets, and by employing further multivariate analysis to see if any combination or sequence of item responses has particularly high predictive validity.

Human influenza A H5N1 in Indonesia: health care service-associated delays in treatment initiation

Background

Indonesia has had more recorded human cases of influenza A H5N1 than any other country, with one of the world’s highest case fatality rates. Understanding barriers to treatment may help ensure life-saving influenza-specific treatment is provided early enough to meaningfully improve clinical outcomes.

Methods

Data for this observational study of humans infected with influenza A H5N1 were obtained primarily from Ministry of Health, Provincial and District Health Office clinical records. Data included time from symptom onset to presentation for medical care, source of medical care provided, influenza virology, time to initiation of influenza-specific treatment with antiviral drugs, and survival.

Results

Data on 124 human cases of virologically confirmed avian influenza were collected between September 2005 and December 2010, representing 73% of all reported Indonesia cases. The median time from health service presentation to antiviral drug initiation was 7.0 days. Time to viral testing was highly correlated with starting antiviral treatment (p < 0.0001). We found substantial variability in the time to viral testing (p = 0.04) by type of medical care provider. Antivirals were started promptly after diagnosis (median 0 days).

Conclusions

Delays in the delivery of appropriate care to human cases of avian influenza H5N1 in Indonesia appear related to delays in diagnosis rather than presentation to health care settings. Either cases are not suspected of being H5N1 cases until nearly one week after presenting for medical care, or viral testing and/or antiviral treatment is not available where patients are presenting for care. Health system delays have increased since 2007.

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) from the VIRGO observational cohort study (OCS)

111

Background: Limited data exist on patient (pt) experience and work productivity (WP) in MBC. VIRGO is a prospective OCS following >1,200 pts with locally advanced or MBC receiving 1st-line hormonal therapy (HT) or chemotherapy (CT) in a real-world setting. We report baseline characteristics of 277 pts from the VIRGO PRO substudy and correlations between health-related quality of life (HRQoL), symptoms, activities of daily living, and WP. Methods: Symptom severity and interference (M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory [MDASI]), functional status (Activity Level Scale [ALS] from the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist) and WP (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire) were assessed. Pts rated their HRQoL during the past week on a scale of 0–10. Results: See table. The five most severe symptoms at baseline were fatigue, decreased sexual interest, disturbed sleep, drowsiness, and emotional distress; these were reported with less severity in the HT cohort (24%-37% vs 42%-59%). Overall MDASI severity and interference correlated with WP measures in the CT (R=0.46 to 0.78) and HT cohorts (0.36 to 0.94). Mean of the 5 most severe symptoms also significantly correlated with WP indices (R=0.47 to 0.66). HRQoL correlated (p<0.05) with all WP measures (R=-0.46 to -0.56) in the CT cohort and with % impairment while working (R=-0.65) and % overall work impairment (R=-0.71) in the HT cohort. In univariate regression analysis, MDASI symptom interference score was the best predictor of reduced WP (R2=0.52 while working; R2=0.48 for non-work activities). Conclusions: MBC pts receiving CT and HT report significant work impairment. Results indicate moderate correlations between WP indices, HRQoL and symptom burden. [Table: see text]

Determinants of antiviral effectiveness in influenza virus A subtype H5N1

BACKGROUND

Oseltamivir is widely used as treatment for influenza virus A subtype H5N1 (hereafter, "H5N1") infection but, like any intervention, is not always effective.

METHODS

We used Avian Influenza Registry data from 10 countries to examine the risk of death in 215 patients with confirmed H5N1 infection who were treated with oseltamivir, according to viral clade, age, respiratory failure, and adjunctive treatment with corticosteroids or antibiotics.

RESULTS

The median age of infected individuals was 18 years, and 50% were male. The highest fatality rate occurred in a country with clade 2.1 virus circulation, and the lowest occurred in countries with clade 2.2 virus circulation (P < .001). In univariate analyses, age of ≤5 years and treatment ≤2 days after symptom onset were protective against fatality. When accounting for all risk factors, early initiation of oseltamivir was found to be particularly effective in individuals without respiratory failure (odds ratio, 0.17; P = .04). Patients who had advanced respiratory failure requiring ventilatory support at the time of oseltamivir initiation were more likely to die from the episode of H5N1 infection than patients who did not (P < .001). Adjunctive therapy did not improve the likelihood of surviving the episode.

CONCLUSIONS

Oseltamivir is especially effective for treating H5N1 infection when given early and before onset of respiratory failure. The effect of viral clade on fatality and treatment response deserves further investigation.

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) from the VIRGO observational cohort study (OCS)

e11051

Background: Limited data exist on patient (pt) experience and work productivity (WP) in MBC. VIRGO is a prospective OCS following >1200 pts with locally advanced or MBC receiving 1st-line hormonal therapy (HT) or chemotherapy (CT) in a real-world setting. We report baseline characteristics of 277 pts from the VIRGO PRO substudy and correlations between health-related quality of life (HRQoL), symptoms, activities of daily living, and WP. Methods: Symptom severity and interference (MD Anderson Symptom Inventory [MDASI]), functional status (Activity Level Scale [ALS] from the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist) and WP (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire) were assessed. Pts rated their HRQoL during the past week on a scale of 0–10. Results: See table. The five most severe symptoms at baseline were fatigue, decreased sexual interest, disturbed sleep, drowsiness, and emotional distress; these were reported with less severity in the HT cohort (24%-37% vs 42%-59%). Overall MDASI severity and interference correlated with WP measures in the CT (R = 0.46 to 0.78) and HT cohorts (0.36 to 0.94). Mean of the five most severe symptoms also significantly correlated with WP indices (R = 0.47 to 0.66). HRQoL correlated (p < 0.05) with all WP measures (R = -0.46 to -0.56) in the CT cohort and with % impairment while working (R = -0.65) and % overall work impairment (R = -0.71) in the HT cohort. In univariate regression analysis, MDASI symptom interference score was the best predictor of reduced WP (R2 = 0.52 while working; R2 = 0.48 for nonwork activities). Conclusions: MBC pts receiving CT and HT report significant work impairment. Results indicate moderate correlations between WP indices, HRQoL and symptom burden. [Table: see text]

Incorporating stakeholder perspectives in developing a translation table framework for comparative effectiveness research

This project used a stakeholder-driven process to understand the factors that drive the selection of study designs for comparative effectiveness research (CER). The project assembled a diverse stakeholder committee to explore the basis of a translation framework and gathered input through surveys, interviews and an in-person meeting. Stakeholders recommended different study designs for the CER topic areas and identified different outcomes as the most important outcomes to study in each area. During the discussions, stakeholders described a variety of factors that influenced their study design recommendations. The stakeholder activities resulted in the identification of several key themes, including the need to have a highly specific detailed research question before discussing appropriate designs and the need to use multiple studies, potentially of different designs, to address the CER topic areas. The insights and themes from this project may inform efforts to develop a translation table.

H5N1 avian influenza in children

BACKGROUND

Avian influenza continues to pose a threat to humans and maintains the potential for greater transmissibility. Understanding the clinical presentation and prognosis in children will help guide effective diagnosis and treatment.

METHODS

A global patient registry was created to enable systematic collection of clinical, exposure, treatment, and outcomes data on confirmed cases of H5N1. Bivariate and multivariate statistical tools were used to describe clinical presentation and evaluate factors prognostic of survival.

RESULTS

Data were available from 13 countries on 193 children <18 years who were confirmed as having been infected with H5N1; 35.2% of cases were from Egypt. The case fatality rate (CFR) for children was 48.7%, with Egypt having a very low pediatric CFR. Overall, children aged ≤5 years had the lowest CFR and were brought to hospitals more quickly and treated sooner than older children. Children who presented for medical care with a complaint of rhinorrhea had a 76% reduction in the likelihood of death compared with those who presented without rhinorrhea, even after statistical adjustment for age, having been infected in Egypt, and oseltamivir treatment (P = .02). Delayed initiation of treatment with oseltamivir increases the likelihood of death, with an overall 75% increase in the adjusted odds ratio for death for each day of delay.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of rhinorrhea appears to indicate a better prognosis for children with H5N1, with most patients surviving regardless of age, country, or treatment. For individuals treated with oseltamivir, early initiation of treatment substantially enhances the chance of survival.

Human infection with avian influenza virus, Pakistan, 2007

Human infection with avian influenza (H5N1) virus raises concern for the possibility of a pandemic. We report 20 cases, which ranged from asymptomatic to fatal, in Pakistan in 2007. These cases indicate human-to-human-to-human transmission of this virus, and the number of cases may be higher than realized.

Human infection with avian influenza virus, Pakistan, 2007

Human infection with avian influenza (H5N1) virus raises concern for the possibility of a pandemic. We report 20 cases, which ranged from asymptomatic to fatal, in Pakistan in 2007. These cases indicate human-to-human-to-human transmission of this virus, and the number of cases may be higher than realized.

Validity of claims-based definitions of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in Medicare patients

PURPOSE

Ejection fraction (EF) is crucial information when studying the use and effectiveness of therapies in patients with heart failure (HF) and myocardial infarction (MI). We aimed to assess the validity of claims data-based definitions of systolic dysfunction (SD).

METHODS

We identified 1072 patients with EF recorded for an HF/MI hospitalization in Medicare linked with pharmacy data and national HF/MI registries in 1999-2006. Thirteen claims-based definitions for SD were developed using a single or combination of ICD-9 diagnosis codes and cardiovascular medications use. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values (PPVs) using recorded EFs as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Using an EF cutoff of 45%, the definitions based on digoxin use and no atrial fibrillation or flutter had the highest PPVs (76% to 84%) and specificity (>97%) but low sensitivity (6%-14%). As we varied the EF cutoff between 50% and 25%, the specificity decreased by 3%, but the PPVs decreased by 52%. We observed potential differences in the PPVs by patients' characteristics. In a hypothetical study assessing implantable defibrillator effectiveness, using our definition to identify patients with SD would underestimate the effectiveness by 3% to 24%. In another hypothetical study comparing two classes of angiotensin system blockers where SD was considered confounding, our definition introduced ~43% misclassification bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Claims-based definitions for SD had excellent specificity and good PPV but low sensitivity. The definitions with good PPV could be used for cohort identification or confounding adjustment by restriction and would result in relatively small misclassification bias albeit limited generalizability.

Effectiveness of antiviral treatment in human influenza A(H5N1) infections: analysis of a Global Patient Registry

BACKGROUND

Influenza A(H5N1) continues to cause infections and possesses pandemic potential.

METHODS

Data sources were primarily clinical records, published case series, and governmental agency reports. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the effect of treatment on survival, with adjustment using propensity scores (a composite measure of baseline variables predicting use of treatment).

RESULTS

In total, 308 cases were identified from 12 countries: 41 from Azerbaijan, Hong Kong SAR, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Turkey (from clinical records); 175 from Egypt and Indonesia (from various sources); and 92 from Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, Thailand, and Vietnam (from various publications). Overall crude survival was 43.5%; 60% of patients who received ≥1 dose of oseltamivir alone (OS(+)) survived versus 24% of patients who had no evidence of anti-influenza antiviral treatment (OS(-)) (P <.001). Survival rates of OS(+) groups were significantly higher than those of OS(-) groups; benefit persisted with oseltamivir treatment initiation <or=6-8 days after symptom onset. Multivariate modeling showed 49% mortality reduction from oseltamivir treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

H5N1 causes high mortality, especially when untreated. Oseltamivir significantly reduces mortality when started up to 6-8 days after symptom onset and appears to benefit all age groups. Prompt diagnosis and early therapeutic intervention should be considered for H5N1 disease.