Digital measures of respiratory and upper limb function in spinal muscular atrophy: design, feasibility, reliability, and preliminary validity of a smartphone sensor-based assessment suite

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is characterized by progressive muscle weakness and paralysis. Motor function is monitored in the clinical setting using assessments including the 32-item Motor Function Measure (MFM-32), but changes in disease severity between clinical visits may be missed. Digital health technologies may assist evaluation of disease severity by bridging gaps between clinical visits. We developed a smartphone sensor-based assessment suite, comprising nine tasks, to assess motor and muscle function in people with SMA. We used data from the risdiplam phase 2 JEWELFISH trial to assess the test-retest reliability and convergent validity of each task. In the first 6 weeks, 116 eligible participants completed assessments on a median of 6.3 days per week. Eight of the nine tasks demonstrated good or excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.75 and >0.9, respectively). Seven tasks showed a significant association (P < 0.05) with related clinical measures of motor function (individual items from the MFM-32 or Revised Upper Limb Module scales) and seven showed significant association (P < 0.05) with disease severity measured using the MFM-32 total score. This cross-sectional study supports the feasibility, reliability, and validity of using smartphone-based digital assessments to measure function in people living with SMA.

Reverse Engineering of Digital Measures: Inviting Patients to the Conversation

Background

Digital measures offer an unparalleled opportunity to create a more holistic picture of how people who are patients behave in their real-world environments, thereby establishing a better connection between patients, caregivers, and the clinical evidence used to drive drug development and disease management. Reaching this vision will require achieving a new level of co-creation between the stakeholders who design, develop, use, and make decisions using evidence from digital measures.

Summary

In September 2022, the second in a series of meetings hosted by the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zürich, the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health Biomarkers Consortium, and sponsored by Wellcome Trust, entitled "Reverse Engineering of Digital Measures," was held in Zurich, Switzerland, with a broad range of stakeholders sharing their experience across four case studies to examine how patient centricity is essential in shaping development and validation of digital evidence generation tools.

Key Messages

In this paper, we discuss progress and the remaining barriers to widespread use of digital measures for evidence generation in clinical development and care delivery. We also present key discussion points and takeaways in order to continue discourse and provide a basis for dissemination and outreach to the wider community and other stakeholders. The work presented here shows us a blueprint for how and why the patient voice can be thoughtfully integrated into digital measure development and that continued multistakeholder engagement is critical for further progress.

The Case for the Patient-Centric Development of Novel Digital Sleep Assessment Tools in Major Depressive Disorder

Background

Depression imposes a major burden on public health as the leading cause of disability worldwide. Sleep disturbance is a core symptom of depression that affects the vast majority of patients. Nonetheless, it is frequently not resolved by depression treatment and may even be worsened through some pharmaceutical interventions. Disturbed sleep negatively impact patients' quality of life, and persistent sleep disturbance increases the risk of recurrence, relapse, and even suicide. However, the development of novel treatments that might improve sleep problems is hindered by the lack of reliable low-burden objective measures that can adequately assess disturbed sleep in this population.

Summary

Developing improved digital measurement tools that are fit for use in clinical trials for major depressive disorder could promote the inclusion of sleep as a focus for treatment, clinical drug development, and research. This perspective piece explores the path toward the development of novel digital measures, reviews the existing evidence on the meaningfulness of sleep in depression, and summarizes existing methods of sleep assessments, including the use of digital health technologies.

Key Messages

Our objective was to make a clear call to action and path forward for the qualification of new digital outcome measures which would enable assessment of sleep disturbance as an aspect of health that truly matters to patients, promoting sleep as an important outcome for clinical development, and ultimately ensure that disturbed sleep will not remain the forgotten symptom of depression.

Using Clinical Scales and Digital Measures to Explore Falls in Patients with Lewy Body Dementia

Introduction

PRESENCE was a phase 2 clinical trial assessing the efficacy of mevidalen, a D1 receptor positive allosteric modulator, for symptomatic treatment of Lewy body dementia (LBD). Mevidalen demonstrated improvements in motor and non-motor features of LBD, global functioning, and actigraphy-measured activity and daytime sleep. Adverse events (AEs) of fall were numerically increased in mevidalen-treated participants.

Methods

A subset of PRESENCE participants wore a wrist actigraphy device for 2-week periods pre-, during, and posttreatment. Actigraphy sleep and activity measures were derived per period and analyzed to assess for their association with participants' reports of an AE of fall. Prespecified baseline and treatment-emergent clinical characteristics were also included in the retrospective analysis of falls. Independent-samples t test and χ² test were performed to compare the means and proportions between individuals with/without falls.

Results

A trend toward more falls was observed with mevidalen treatment (31/258 mevidalen-treated vs. 4/86 in placebo-treated participants: p = 0.12). Higher body mass index (BMI) (p < 0.05), more severe disease measured by baseline Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) part II (p < 0.05), and a trend toward improved Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale 13 (ADAS-Cog₁₃) (p = 0.06) were associated with individuals with falls. No statistically significant associations with falls and treatment-emergent changes were observed.

Conclusion

The association of falls with worse baseline disease severity and higher BMI and overall trend toward improvements on cognitive and motor scales suggest that falls in PRESENCE may be related to increased activity in mevidalen-treated participants at greater risk for falling. Future studies to confirm this hypothesis using fall diaries and digital assessments are necessary.

Multimodal biometric monitoring technologies drive the development of clinical assessments in the home environment

Biometric monitoring technologies (BioMeTs) have attracted the attention of the health care community because of their user-friendly form factor and multi-sensor data-collection capabilities. The potential benefits of remote monitoring for collecting comprehensive, longitudinal, and contextual datasets span therapeutic areas, and both chronic and acute disease settings. Importantly, multimodal BioMeTs unlock the ability to generate rich contextual data to augment digital measures. Currently, the availability of devices is no longer the main factor limiting adoption but rather the ability to integrate fit-for-purpose BioMeTs reliably and safely into clinical care. We provide a critical review of the state of art for multimodal BioMeTs in clinical care and identify three unmet clinical needs: 1) expand the abilities of existing ambulatory unimodal BioMeTs; 2) adapt standardized clinical test protocols ("spot checks'') for use under free living conditions; and 3) develop novel applications to manage rehabilitation and chronic diseases. As the field is still in an early and quickly evolving state, we make practical recommendations: 1) to select appropriate BioMeTs; 2) to develop composite digital measures; and 3) to design interoperable software to ingest, process, delegate, and visualize the data when deploying novel clinical applications. Multimodal BioMeTs will drive the evolution from in-clinic assessments to at-home data collection with a focus on prevention, personalization, and long-term outcomes by empowering health care providers with knowledge, delivering convenience, and an improved standard of care to patients.

EVIDENCE Publication Checklist for Studies Evaluating Connected Sensor Technologies: Explanation and Elaboration

The EVIDENCE (EValuatIng connecteD sENsor teChnologiEs) checklist was developed by a multidisciplinary group of content experts convened by the Digital Medicine Society, representing the clinical sciences, data management, technology development, and biostatistics. The aim of EVIDENCE is to promote high quality reporting in studies where the primary objective is an evaluation of a digital measurement product or its constituent parts. Here we use the terms digital measurement product and connected sensor technology interchangeably to refer to tools that process data captured by mobile sensors using algorithms to generate measures of behavioral and/or physiological function. EVIDENCE is applicable to 5 types of evaluations: (1) proof of concept; (2) verification, (3) analytical validation, and (4) clinical validation as defined by the V3 framework; and (5) utility and usability assessments. Using EVIDENCE, those preparing, reading, or reviewing studies evaluating digital measurement products will be better equipped to distinguish necessary reporting requirements to drive high-quality research. With broad adoption, the EVIDENCE checklist will serve as a much-needed guide to raise the bar for quality reporting in published literature evaluating digital measurements products.

The Future of Digital Health: Meeting Report

At the end of 2020, Karger's Digital Biomarkers, together with Evidation Health, produced a special issue entitled "The Future of Digital Health." This brief meeting report provides an overview of the expert panel and workshop that were held in early 2021 to explore key topics raised in the special issue.

Evaluation, Acceptance, and Qualification of Digital Measures: From Proof of Concept to Endpoint

To support the successful adoption of digital measures into internal decision making and evidence generation for medical product development, we present a unified lexicon to aid communication throughout this process, and highlight key concepts including the critical role of participant engagement in development of digital measures. We detail the steps of bringing a successful proof of concept to scale, focusing on key decisions in the development of a new digital measure: asking the right question, optimized approaches to evaluating new measures, and whether and how to pursue qualification or acceptance. Building on the V3 framework for establishing verification and analytical and clinical validation, we discuss strategic and practical considerations for collecting this evidence, illustrated with concrete examples of trailblazing digital measures in the field.

The Path Forward for Digital Measures: Suppressing the Desire to Compare Apples and Pineapples

Digital measures are becoming more prevalent in clinical development. Methods for robust evaluation are increasingly well defined, yet the primary barrier for digital measures to transition beyond exploratory usage often relies on a comparison to the existing standards. This article focuses on how researchers should approach the complex issue of comparing across assessment modalities. We discuss comparisons of subjective versus objective assessments, or performance-based versus behavioral measures, and we pay particular attention to the situation where the expected association may be poor or nonlinear. We propose that, rather than seeking to replace the standard, research should focus on a structured understanding of how the new measure augments established assessments, with the ultimate goal of developing a more complete understanding of what is meaningful to patients.

Digital Measures That Matter to Patients: A Framework to Guide the Selection and Development of Digital Measures of Health

Background

With the rise of connected sensor technologies, there are seemingly endless possibilities for new ways to measure health. These technologies offer researchers and clinicians opportunities to go beyond brief snapshots of data captured by traditional in-clinic assessments, to redefine health and disease. Given the myriad opportunities for measurement, how do research or clinical teams know what they should be measuring? Patient engagement, early and often, is paramount to thoughtfully selecting what is most important. Regulators encourage stakeholders to have a patient focus but actionable steps for continuous engagement are not well defined. Without patient-focused measurement, stakeholders risk entrenching digital versions of poor traditional assessments and proliferating low-value tools that are ineffective, burdensome, and reduce both quality and efficiency in clinical care and research.

Summary

This article synthesizes and defines a sequential framework of core principles for selecting and developing measurements in research and clinical care that are meaningful for patients. We propose next steps to drive forward the science of high-quality patient engagement in support of measures of health that matter in the era of digital medicine.

Key Messages

All measures of health should be meaningful, regardless of the product's regulatory classification, type of measure, or context of use. To evaluate meaningfulness of signals derived from digital sensors, the following four-level framework is useful: Meaningful Aspect of Health, Concept of Interest, Outcome to be measured, and Endpoint (exclusive to research). Incorporating patient input is a dynamic process that requires more than a single, transactional touch point but rather should be conducted continuously throughout the measurement selection process. We recommend that developers, clinicians, and researchers reevaluate processes for more continuous patient engagement in the development, deployment, and interpretation of digital measures of health.