Search

Daniel Eek,1 Meaghan Krohe,2 Iyar Mazar,2 Alison Horsfield,3 Farrah Pompilus,2 Rachel Friebe,2 Alan L Shields2 1AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden; 2Adelphi Values, Boston, MA, USA; 3AstraZeneca, Macclesfield, UK Objective: The emergence of various modes of administration for cancer treatment, including oral administration, brings into focus the importance of patient preference for administration. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the administration preferences of cancer patients, specifically between oral and intravenous (IV) treatment, as well as the factors contributing to preference. Methods: A literature search was conducted in OvidSP to identify research in which the preferences of cancer patients for oral or IV treatment have been evaluated. Data were analyzed in two stages: 1) those articles that directly compared preference between modes of administration were tallied to determine explicit preference for oral or IV treatment; and 2) all attributes associated with patient preference were documented. Results: Of the 48 abstracts identified as part of the initial OvidSP search, eight articles were selected for full-text review. One article was removed following full-text review, and seven additional articles were identified through a gray literature search, yielding a total of 14 articles for evaluation. In Stage 1, 13 of the 14 articles compared preference, of which eleven articles (84.6%) reported that patients preferred oral treatment over IV, while two (15.4%) stated that cancer patients preferred IV treatment over oral. In Stage 2, the most frequently reported attributes contributing to preference included convenience, ability to receive treatment at home, treatment schedule, and side effects. Discussion: Evidence suggests that oncology patients prefer oral treatment to IV. Rationale for preference was due to a number of factors, including convenience, perception of efficacy, and past experience. Further evaluation should be conducted, given the limited data on patient preference in oncology. Keywords: oncology, patient preference, mode of administration, literature review, mode of administration, oncology, treatment

Introduction: NUT (nuclear protein of the testis) carcinoma (NUTca) is a rare and aggressive cancer that is genetically hallmarked by a chromosomal abnormality in the NUT gene, and presents with tumors in the head, neck, and lungs. Currently there is no standard of care, but patients may undergo surgery, radiation, and/or chemotherapy. There is a lack of published research describing the patient experience of NUTca. The objective of this study was to develop a conceptual framework (CF) that describes patients' experience of NUTca to inform the selection of outcome measures and design of patient-centric endpoints for future clinical research., Methods: Individual, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with patients and caregivers of patients who have/had NUTca (caregivers interviewed due to recruitment challenges resulting from the rarity of NUTca). Participants were asked about their disease symptoms, impacts, and treatment experience. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using inductive coding. The CF was developed through inductive categorization of concepts, sub-domains, and domains., Results: Twenty-seven interviews were completed (patients n = 10; caregivers n = 17). Participants reported systemic symptoms (e.g., fatigue) and symptoms related to the location of the tumor (e.g., nose blockage for head/neck tumor). Pain emerged as an important and bothersome symptom across tumor locations. Participants reported impacts on their daily activities (e.g., showering), emotions (e.g., preoccupation), sleep, social life (e.g., isolation), roles (e.g., caring for children), and finances. The final CF was organized into four symptom domains [systemic, location-specific (head/neck, lung), pain, and digestive] and six impact domains (daily activities, emotional, sleep, social, role, and financial)., Conclusions: This study describes the patient experience of NUTca and proposes an evidence-based CF that informs both the clinical community's understanding of the disease and selection of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure to assess treatment benefit in future NUTca trials., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Physical functioning and fatigue are key patient concerns in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The objective of this research was to generate supportive quantitative evidence for modular physical functioning and fatigue measures based on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 items (QLQ-C30) and a customized selection of 10 supplemental items from the EORTC Item Library., Methods: The 40 items were completed online cross-sectionally by 51 patients (higher risk [HR] MDS: 53%; CMML: 26%; AML: 10%). Psychometric analyses based on Rasch measurement theory (RMT) were conducted on the QLQ-C30 physical functioning and fatigue domains as well as measures combining QLQ-C30 and supplemental items. A measure of anemia-related symptoms composed of QLQ-C30 and supplemental items covering fatigue, dyspnea, and dizziness was also investigated., Results: The QLQ-C30 physical functioning and fatigue domains showed good targeting to the sample and adequate reliability, with few conceptual gaps identified. Combining the QLQ-C30 and supplemental physical functioning and fatigue items improved the conceptual coverage and the reliability of the measures. The patient-reported anemia-related symptom measure showed good measurement performance, underpinned by a clinically meaningful characterization of severity of these symptoms over a spectrum, starting with fatigue, then dyspnea, and finally dizziness (most severe)., Conclusion: The modular measurement approach of combining EORTC QLQ-C30 and Item Library offers a promising pragmatic solution to the measurement of physical functioning and fatigue, as well as anemia-related symptoms in clinical trials conducted in HR MDS, CMML, and AML., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments provide robust and effective means of evaluating patients' treatment experience; however, none adequately cover experience using self-injection devices with enhanced features, such as an electromechanical autoinjector (e-Device). The aim of this study was to develop a PRO instrument that accurately assesses patient experience of using an e-Device and to evaluate its psychometric properties., Methods: A mixed-methods approach was taken; two parallel, targeted literature reviews were conducted to identify relevant concepts and existing self-injection PRO instruments that could be adapted. Patient feedback obtained from two focus groups was used to inform initial instrument development. The pilot instrument was then administered in a multicenter, open-label, phase 3 clinical study in which patients self-injected certolizumab pegol using an e-Device, to gather evidence of its psychometric qualities. Exit interviews were conducted with a sub-sample of patients enrolled in the study to confirm the appropriateness and clarity of the items included and cognitively debrief the instrument. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on all items, and each domain's internal consistency was measured using Cronbach's ɑ., Results: The literature searches identified several e-Device-specific concepts related to device features, device function, side effects/reactions/pain, confidence, and interference/convenience in daily life. Seven existing PRO instruments were identified. The Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ), containing pre- and post-injection questionnaire modules, was selected as most suitable and adapted using feedback from 19 patients in the two focus groups to form the pilot Assessment of Self-Injection (ASI) questionnaire. CFA resulted in some changes to the grouping of items in the post-injection module domains following psychometric evaluation of the ASI. Internal consistency was satisfactory for all pre- and post-injection domains (ɑ > 0.8). Cognitive debriefing results from 12 patient exit interviews confirmed the ASI's appropriateness and clarity., Conclusions: The ASI was developed iteratively with patient input and was evaluated in its intended clinical context of use. Psychometric analyses indicated promising cross-sectional results; the ASI was well understood and considered relevant by patients self-injecting using the e-Device, suggesting that it could be used in real-world settings to aid with clinical decision making., Trial Registration: NCT03357471.

Background: Novel, pragmatic, patient-centered strategies are needed to ensure fit-for-purpose patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments in clinical trial research for rare diseases such as myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). The objective of the current study was to select supplemental items to add to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) to ensure content coverage of all important clinical concepts in patients with higher-risk (HR) MDS, low-blast count (LB) AML, and CMML, thus, improving the instrument's ability to detect clinically meaningful treatment benefit for this context of use., Methods: Our mixed methods approach comprised literature review, clinician consultation (n = 3), and qualitative and quantitative analysis of two stages of patient interview data (n = 14, n = 18) to select library bank items to supplement a generic cancer PRO, the EORTC QLQ-C30., Results: Unique symptom (n = 54) and impact (n = 72) concepts were organized into conceptual frameworks of treatment benefit, compared with EORTC QLQ-C30 items and conceptual gaps identified. Supplemental items (n = 13) addressing those gaps were selected from the EORTC Item Library and tested with patients. Supplemental item endorsement frequencies met World Health Organization Quality of Life criteria, suggesting good targeting and relevance for this sample. However, three supplemental items were confirmed as problematic based upon cognitive debriefing results, and expert clinical consultations. Ultimately, 10 supplemental items (n = 7 symptom; n = 3 impact) were selected for the MDS/AML/CMML context., Conclusion: Supplemental items were selected to enhance the conceptual coverage of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in the areas of fatigue, shortness of breath, and functioning.

Background: The goal of the research reported here was to understand the patient experience of living with myelofibrosis (MF) and establish content validity of the Modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Diary (MPN-SD)., Methods: Qualitative interviews were performed in patients with MF, including both concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing. Patients with MF were asked to spontaneously report on their signs, symptoms, and impacts of MF, as well as their understanding of the MPN-SD content, and use of the tool on an electronic platform. A supplementary literature review and meetings with MF experts were also performed., Results: Twenty-three patients with MF participated in qualitative interviews. Signs and symptoms most commonly reported by ruxolitinib-experienced patients (n = 16) were: fatigue and/or tiredness (n = 16, 100%), shortness of breath (n = 11, 69%), pain below the ribs on the left side and/or stomach pain and/or abdominal pain (n = 9, 56%), and enlarged spleen (n = 9, 56%) and for ruxolitinib-naïve patients (n = 7) were: fatigue and/or tiredness (n = 6, 86%), pain below the ribs on the left side (n = 6, 86%), enlarged spleen (n = 4, 57%), full quickly/filling up quickly (n = 4, 57%), night sweats and/or general sweats (n = 4, 57%), and itching (n = 4, 57%). Patients demonstrated that they were able to read, understand, and provide meaningful responses to the MPN-SD. The final version of the MPN-SD includes the 10 most commonly reported concepts from the MF patient interviews., Conclusions: The findings demonstrate the comprehensiveness of the MPN-SD in assessing MF symptoms in both ruxolitinib-experienced and ruxolitinib-naïve patients, while remaining easy for patients to understand and complete.

Objective: Acute intermittent porphyria is a rare metabolic disorder that affects heme synthesis. Patients with acute intermittent porphyria may experience acute debilitating neurovisceral attacks that require frequent hospitalizations and negatively impact quality of life. Although clinical aspects of acute intermittent porphyria attacks have been documented, the experience of patients is not well known, particularly for those more severely affected patients who experience frequent attacks. The aim of the present study was to qualitatively characterize the experience of patients with acute intermittent porphyria who have frequent attacks, as well as the impact of the disease on daily living., Methods: Patients with acute intermittent porphyria who experience frequent attacks were recruited and took part in 2-h qualitative one-on-one interviews with a semi-structured guide. Interviews were anonymized, transcribed, and coded. The inductive coding approach targeted textual data related to acute intermittent porphyria attack symptoms, chronic symptoms, and the impact of the disease. Saturation analysis was conducted to assess whether the research elicited an adequate account of patients' experiences., Results: In total, 19 patients with acute intermittent porphyria were interviewed (mean age 40 years; 79% female). Eighteen patients (95%) experienced both attack and chronic symptoms. Patients described attacks as the onset of unmanageable symptoms that generally lasted 3-5 days requiring hospitalization and/or treatment. Pain, nausea, and vomiting were considered key attack symptoms; pain, nausea, fatigue, and aspects of neuropathy (e.g., tingling and numbness) were considered key chronic symptoms., Conclusions: In this study population of acute intermittent porphyria with frequent attacks, most patients had symptoms during and between attacks. In these patients, acute intermittent porphyria appears to have acute exacerbations as well as chronic day-to-day manifestations, and is not just intermittent as its name implies. As a result, patients reported limitations in their ability to function across multiple domains of their lives on a regular basis and not just during acute attacks.

Background and Objective: The 12-item Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale (MSWS-12) is a patient-reported outcome instrument that quantifies the progressive loss of walking ability from the patient perspective. However, previous psychometric analyses indicated floor and ceiling effects across the multiple sclerosis severity spectrum. This study aimed to address floor effects by creating a gait module that can be used in conjunction with the MSWS-12 for better measurement of treatment benefit in the higher functioning multiple sclerosis population., Methods: We used a step-wise mixed methods study design, with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients (wave 1, n =88; wave 2, n =30), combining qualitative (concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews) and quantitative (Rasch Measurement Theory) data collection and analytical techniques and consultation interviews with three neurologists specializing in multiple sclerosis., Results: Thirty-seven walking ability concepts were identified, and a five-domain conceptual framework was created. Draft items were generated and refined with patient and neurologist input. Draft items covered gait-related concepts such as dragging, shuffling, limping, tripping and falling. Rasch measurement theory psychometric analysis indicated administering MSWS-12 plus gait items improved measurement precision in targeted populations with better walking ability., Conclusion: Study findings indicate that new gait items could improve sensitivity to detect clinical change in walking ability for higher functioning multiple sclerosis patients.

Background: ABILHAND, a manual ability patient-reported outcome instrument originally developed for stroke patients, has been used in multiple sclerosis clinical trials; however, psychometric analyses indicated the measure's limited measurement range and precision in higher-functioning multiple sclerosis patients., Objective: The purpose of this study was to identify candidate items to expand the measurement range of the ABILHAND-56, thus improving its ability to detect differences in manual ability in higher-functioning multiple sclerosis patients., Methods: A step-wise mixed methods design strategy was used, comprising two waves of patient interviews, a combination of qualitative (concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing) and quantitative (Rasch measurement theory) analytic techniques, and consultation interviews with three clinical neurologists specializing in multiple sclerosis., Results: Original ABILHAND was well understood in this context of use. Eighty-two new manual ability concepts were identified. Draft supplementary items were generated and refined with patient and neurologist input. Rasch measurement theory psychometric analysis indicated supplementary items improved targeting to higher-functioning multiple sclerosis patients and measurement precision. The final pool of Early Multiple Sclerosis Manual Ability items comprises 20 items., Conclusion: The synthesis of qualitative and quantitative methods used in this study improves the ABILHAND content validity to more effectively identify manual ability changes in early multiple sclerosis and potentially help determine treatment effect in higher-functioning patients in clinical trials.

Objectives: The aim was to document, from the perspective of the empirical literature, the primary symptoms of functional dyspepsia (FD), evaluate the extent to which existing questionnaires target those symptoms, and, finally, identify any missing evidence that would impact the questionnaires' use in regulated clinical trials to assess treatment efficacy claims intended for product labeling., Methods: A literature review was conducted to identify the primary symptoms of FD and existing symptom-based FD patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments. Following a database search, abstracts were screened and articles were retrieved for review. The primary symptoms of FD were organized into a conceptual model and the PRO instruments were evaluated for conceptual coverage as well as compared against evidentiary requirements presented in the FDA's PRO Guidance for Industry., Results: Fifty-six articles and 16 instruments assessing FD symptoms were reviewed. Concepts listed in the Rome III criteria for FD (n = 7), those assessed by existing FD instruments (n = 34), and symptoms reported by patients in published qualitative research (n = 6) were summarized in the FD conceptual model. Except for vomiting, all of the identified symptoms from the published qualitative research reports were also specified in the Rome III criteria. Only three of the 16 instruments, the Dyspepsia Symptom Severity Index (DSSI), Nepean Dyspepsia Index (NDI), and Short-Form Nepean Dyspepsia Index (SF-NDI), measure all seven FD symptoms defined by the Rome III criteria. Among these three, each utilizes a 2-week recall period and 5-point Likert-type scale, and had evidence of patient involvement in development. Despite their coverage, when these instruments were evaluated in light of regulatory expectations, several issues jeopardized their potential qualification for substantiation of a labeling claim., Conclusions: No existing PRO instruments that measured all seven symptoms adhered to the regulatory principles necessary to support product labeling. As such, the development of a new FD symptom PRO instrument is supported., Competing Interests: Compliance with Ethical Standards The authors meet criteria for authorship as recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and were fully responsible for all aspects of manuscript development. Fiona Taylor participated in planning and executing the study, analyzing and interpreting the data, and drafting the manuscript; Catherine Foley and Farrah Pompilus participated in planning and executing the study, collecting, analyzing and interpreting the data, and drafting the manuscript; Ramon Iovin participated in collecting, analyzing, and interpreting the data and drafting the manuscript; Alan L. Shields participated in planning and executing the study, interpreting the data, and drafting the manuscript; David S. Reasner provided input on the study design and drafting of the manuscript; Robyn T. Carson, Linda S. Deal, Debra G. Silberg, and Jason Lundy provided input on the study design and manuscript. FT, CF, and ALS are employees of Adelphi Values, which received payment from the sponsors to conduct the research; RI and FP were employees of Adelphi Values at the time this research was conducted. DSR is a member of Albemarle Scientific Consulting and an employee of Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, and owns stock and stock options in Ironwood. RTC is an employee of Allergan and owns stock and stock options in Allergan. At the time of the research, LSD and DGS were employees of Shire, and have shareholdings in Shire and other pharmaceutical companies through stocks and mutual funds. JJL was an employee of the Critical Path Institute at the time this research was conducted. Any views expressed in this publication represent the personal opinions of the authors, not those of their respective employer. The authors’ respective organizations were given the opportunity to review the manuscript for medical and scientific accuracy as well as intellectual property considerations.

Background: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is the most common chronic pain condition and is associated with clinical, economic, social, and public health impacts. The effect of CLBP on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is significant. The symptoms and impacts most often associated with CLBP include pain and disability; patients most affected are often crippled by the condition. CLBP also affects patients' mental, physical, and psychosocial well-being. A variety of self-report measures have been developed for the assessment of CLBP, such as the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ); however, existing measures may not meet current regulatory expectation for the development, documentation, and use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaires (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, 2009)., Objectives: This report describes the qualitative development of the Chronic Low Back Pain Impact Questionnaire (CLBP-IQ), created for use in clinical trials., Methods: A total of 22 CLBP patients recruited by clinicians participated in concept elicitation interviews to identify target measurement concepts. An instrument development team generated the instructions, items, and response options guided by patient input. Cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with 21 patients recruited by the same clinicians who recruited for concept elicitation interviews. During cognitive interviews, a draft instrument composed of 28 items was presented to individuals with CLBP to evaluate its readability and comprehensiveness. All research activities were conducted in the US., Results: During concept elicitation interviews, participants reported a variety of physical, emotional, and social impacts associated with CLBP. Participants also reported CLBP impacts on sleep, energy, daily activities, work, household activities, leisure activities, cognition, self-care, and sex life. Impacts deemed simple, important, and relevant to CLBP patients became targets of measurement for the CLBP-IQ. During cognitive debriefing, seventeen items were interpreted as intended by at least 90 % of participants, and no items were interpreted incorrectly by more than five patients (24 %). Additionally, seventeen items were experienced by at least 90 % of participants, and no single item was experienced by less than 67 % of participants (n = 14)., Conclusions: The CLBP-IQ was developed in accordance with current US Food and Drug Administration guidance on instrument development. Results from both concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews support the content validity of the CLBP-IQ in patients with CLBP. Future development should proceed with psychometric evaluation.