Search

Sensor-based digital health technology (DHT) has emerged as a promising means to assess patient functioning within and outside clinical trials. Sensor-based functional outcomes (SBFOs) provide valuable insights that complement other measures of how a patient feels or functions to enhance understanding of the patient experience to inform medical product development. This perspective paper provides recommendations for defining SBFOs, discusses the core evidence required to support SBFOs to inform decision-making, and considers future directions for the field. The clinical outcome assessment (COA) development process provides an important starting point for developing patient-centered SBFOs; however, given the infancy of the field, SBFO development may benefit from a hybrid approach to evidence generation by merging exploratory data analysis with patient engagement in measure development. Effective SBFO development requires combining unique expertise in patient engagement, measurement and regulatory science, and digital health and analytics. Challenges specific to SBFO development include identifying concepts of interest, ensuring measurement of meaningful aspects of health, and identifying thresholds for meaningful change. SBFOs are complementary to other COAs and, as part of an integrated evidence strategy, offer great promise in fostering a holistic understanding of patient experience and treatment benefits, particularly in real-world settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Overall survival, progression-free survival, and to a lesser extent objective response rate, have long been the most widely accepted endpoints used to evaluate clinical benefit in oncology trials. More recently, clinical outcome assessments (COAs) that measure the impact of disease and treatment on patients' symptoms and function have been recognized as having potential to be an integral component of the risk/benefit analysis of new therapies. Although COAs have been used to evaluate cognitive and physical functioning in neurological diseases, assessing patient-centered outcomes in individuals with malignant brain tumors presents unique challenges. The approach to developing appropriate instruments to measure COAs in neuro-oncology should include identifying areas requiring new tools, reviewing existing tools that may be suitable or adapted for use in clinical trials, and engaging early with regulatory agencies to standardize a set of well-defined and reliable instruments to quantify important patient-centered outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Incorporation of the patient perspective into research and clinical practice will enrich our understanding of the status and management of patients with glomerular disease and may result in therapies that better address patient needs. In recent years, the importance of the patient experience of glomerular disease has become clear, and significant efforts have been undertaken to systematically capture and describe the patient's disease experience. Patient-reported outcome instruments provide a means to assess the patient's experience in a quantitative manner, thus enabling for comparisons within and between patients. Patient-reported outcome assessments are solely on the basis of a patient report about the status of their health without amendment or interpretation by a clinician or others. Patient-reported outcome assessments provide an opportunity to incorporate the patient perspective into clinical care, research, and clinical trials. Our paper provides an overview of terminology and development methods for patient-reported outcomes and reviews (1) currently available patient-reported outcome instruments appropriate for use in glomerular disease, (2) existing patient-reported outcome data in glomerular disease, and (3) opportunities for incorporating patient-reported outcome instruments into clinical care and research., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Objective: Diverse neurologic syndromes have been described in association with tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) antagonist therapy for inflammatory arthritides and Crohn's disease. The objective of this study was to review the occurrence and clinical features of Guillain-Barré syndrome and its variant, the Miller Fisher syndrome, during TNFalpha antagonist therapy., Methods: The postmarketing database of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was searched, following our experience with a patient with rheumatoid arthritis in whom the Miller Fisher syndrome variant of the Guillain-Barré syndrome developed while he was receiving infliximab therapy., Results: Our index patient had a neurologic illness defined initially by ataxia and dysarthria, which fluctuated in relation to each subsequent infliximab infusion and, after 6 months, culminated in areflexic flaccid quadriplegia. In addition, 15 patients in whom Guillain-Barré syndrome developed following TNFalpha antagonist therapy were identified from the FDA database. Guillain-Barré syndrome developed following infliximab therapy in 9 patients, following etanercept therapy in 5 patients, and following adalimumab therapy in 1 patient. Among the 13 patients for whom followup data were available, 1 patient experienced no resolution, 9 patients had partial resolution, and 3 patients had complete resolution of Guillain-Barré syndrome following therapy., Conclusion: An association of Guillain-Barré syndrome with TNFalpha antagonist therapy is supported by the worsening of neurologic symptoms that occurred in our index patient following each infusion of infliximab, and by the temporal association of this syndrome with TNFalpha antagonist therapy in 15 other patients. An acute or subacute demyelinating polyneuropathy should be considered a potential adverse effect of TNFalpha antagonist therapy.