Search

IntroductionAlopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disease characterized by hair loss. Patients with AA experience a range of social and emotional impacts, and the lack of effective treatments and multiple affected locations can deepen the burden of illness. The objective of the current study was to assess health-related quality of life (HRQL) among patients with AA, and to evaluate the relationship between patient-reported AA severity, HRQL and treatment patterns.MethodsA web survey was completed by participants recruited through the National Alopecia Areata Foundation. The survey included questions on disease characteristics, burden and impact (evaluated by the Skindex-16 for AA and items on work/school and sexual relationships), healthcare utilization and treatment experience. Analyses were conducted for the overall sample and by key subgroups, including AA severity and disease duration.ResultsA total of 1327 participants with AA completed the survey. The mean age was 39.7 [standard deviation (SD) 12.3] years and 58.4% were female. On average, participants had experienced signs and symptoms of AA for 11.5 years (SD 12.5) and were diagnosed by a healthcare provider (HCP) 10.5 (SD 12.2) years ago. Participants reported a range of severity of current scalp hair loss, including 0% (2.6%), 1-20% (39.8%), 21-49% (26.2%), 50-94% (10.2%) and 95-100% (21.3%). Participants reporting 95-100% of scalp hair missing were less likely to be currently seeing an HCP and to currently be on treatments for AA. There was a non-linear relationship between HRQL and current AA severity. Participants with 1-20% to 50-94% of current scalp hair missing reported higher symptom, functioning and emotional impacts due to AA than participants with 0% missing scalp hair and/or 95-100% missing scalp hair. Similar findings were observed for current eyebrow and eyelash severity, except for emotional impacts.ConclusionSeverity of AA plays an important role in understanding the burden of illness and healthcare patterns of people living with AA.

PurposeTo assess the response to pexidartinib treatment in six cohorts of adult patients with advanced, incurable solid tumors associated with colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) and/or KIT proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase activity.Patients and methodsFrom this two-part phase I, multicenter study, pexidartinib, a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets CSF1R, KIT, and FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3), was evaluated in six adult patient cohorts (part 2, extension) with advanced solid tumors associated with dysregulated CSF1R. Adverse events, pharmacokinetics, and tumor responses were assessed for all patients; patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) were also evaluated for tumor volume score (TVS) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO). CSF1 transcripts and gene expression were explored in TGCT biopsies.ResultsNinety-one patients were treated: TGCT patients (n = 39) had a median treatment duration of 511 days, while other solid tumor patients (n = 52) had a median treatment duration of 56 days. TGCT patients had response rates of 62% (RECIST 1.1) and 56% (TVS) for the full analysis set. PRO assessments for pain showed improvement in patient symptoms, and 76% (19/25) of TGCT tissue biopsy specimens showed evidence of abnormal CSF1 transcripts. Pexidartinib treatment of TGCT resulted in tumor regression and symptomatic benefit in most patients. Pexidartinib toxicity was manageable over the entire study.ConclusionsThese results offer insight into outcome patterns in cancers whose biology suggests use of a CSF1R inhibitor. Pexidartinib results in tumor regression in TGCT patients, providing prolonged control with an acceptable safety profile.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the PROMIS-Physical Function (PF) and Worst Stiffness Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) among patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCT).MethodsMeasurement properties of the customized lower extremity (LE) and upper extremity (UE) PROMIS-PF scales and Worst Stiffness NRS were assessed using data from the Phase 3 ENLIVEN trial (n = 120). Anchor- and distribution-based analyses were utilized to derive a responder threshold for meaningful change over time. The Patient Global Rating of Concept (PGRC)-Physical Functioning and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)-Stiffness served as anchors. Responsiveness and responder threshold analyses were from baseline to week 25.ResultsCronbach's alpha values for internal consistency reliability were 0.93 and 0.91 for the PROMIS-PF LE and UE, respectively. Test-retest reliability intra-class correlation coefficients were > 0.75 for both instruments. Convergent validity for both instruments was supported by moderate to strong correlations (≥0.30) with the Brief Pain Inventory and EQ-5D. Known-groups validity was established between subgroups stratified by pain level (p

Purpose: A well-defined and reliable patient-reported outcome instrument for COVID-19 is important for assessing symptom severity and supporting research studies. The InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) instrument has been expanded to include loss of taste and smell in the FLU-PRO Plus, to comprehensively cover COVID-19 symptoms. Our studies were designed to evaluate and validate the FLU-PRO Plus among patients with COVID-19. Methods: Two studies were conducted: (1) a qualitative, non-interventional, cross-sectional study of patients with COVID-19 involving hybrid concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews; (2) a psychometric evaluation of the measurement properties of FLU-PRO Plus, using data from COMET-ICE (COVID-19 Monoclonal antibody Efficacy Trial—Intent to Care Early). Results: In the qualitative interviews (n = 30), all 34 items of the FLU-PRO Plus were considered relevant to COVID-19, and participants determined the questionnaire was easily understood, well written, and comprehensive. In the psychometric evaluation (n = 845), the internal consistency reliability of FLU-PRO Plus total score was 0.94, ranging from 0.71 to 0.90 for domain scores. Reproducibility (Day 20–21) was 0.83 for total score, with domain scores of 0.67–0.89. Confirmatory factor analysis with the novel smell/taste domain demonstrated an acceptable fit to the data. Conclusion: The content, reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the FLU-PRO Plus in the COVID-19 population were supported. Our results suggest that FLU-PRO Plus is a content- and psychometrically-valid, fit-for-purpose measure which is easily understood by patients. FLU-PRO Plus is a suitable PRO measure for evaluating symptoms of COVID-19 and treatment benefit directly from the patient perspective. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT04545060, September 10, 2020; retrospectively registered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several studies suggest that a two-factor model positing internalizing and externalizing factors explains the interrelationships among psychiatric disorders. However, it is unclear whether the covariation between internalizing and externalizing disorders is due to common genetic or environmental influences. We examined whether a model positing two latent factors, internalizing and externalizing, explained the interrelationships among six psychiatric disorders (major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, separation anxiety disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder) in adolescents, and whether there are common genetic and environmental influences on internalizing and externalizing latent factors. Multivariate behavior genetic analyses of data from 1162 twin pairs and 426 siblings ascertained from the general population via the Colorado Center for Antisocial Drug Dependence (CADD) were conducted. We found support for a model positing two latent factors (internalizing and externalizing). These factors were moderately heritable and influenced by significant common genetic and nonshared environmental influences. These findings suggest that co-occurrence of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology in adolescents results from both genetic and environmental influences.

Interviews with over 3,000 adolescents were made to evaluate the extent to which DSM-IV criteria characterizes the range of severity of adolescent antisocial behavior within and across sex. The DSM-IV conduct disorder (CD) criteria are a useful indicator of severe adolescent antisocial behavior but some CD criteria display sex bias.

Clinical interviews of approximately 5,587 adolescents revealed that DSM-IV diagnostic categories were found to be different in terms of the severity of alcohol use disorders (AUDs). However, a substantial inconsistency and overlap was found in severity of AUDs across categories. The need for an alternative diagnostic algorithm which considers all of the alcohol dependence and abuse symptoms is discussed.

A study to examine the DSM-IV criteria for cannabis abuse and dependence among adolescents is conducted. Results conclude that abuse and dependence criteria were not found to affect the different levels of severity in cannabis use.

Objective: To explore the genetic and environmental influences on DSM-IV conduct disorder (CD) aggressive and nonaggressive subscales, taking into account age and sex differences. Method: A community sample of 1,100 twin pairs (ages 11-18) was interviewed using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children. Bivariate analyses, using variable threshold models accounting for age and sex differences, were used to determine the extent to which the genetic and environmental influences on aggressive and nonaggressive CD domains are shared or unique. Results: The phenotypic correlation between aggressive and nonaggressive CD domains was 0.32. The most parsimonious bivariate model included additive genetic effects and nonshared environmental effects only (AE model). Conclusions: The results of behavior genetic model fitting suggest that the DSM-IV CD domains are influenced by unique genetic and environmental factors, but also share some common genetic and environmental influences. A large percentage of the covariation (61%) is caused by genetic factors. These results are consistent with a previous report on the bivariate heritability of aggressive and nonaggressive antisocial behavior, but extend the findings to DSM-IV domains. (Contains 1 figure and 2 tables.)

Background: We used variable threshold models which accounted for age and gender differences to investigate the genetic and environmental influences on DSM-IV conduct disorder (CD) at the level of symptoms, aggressive versus non-aggressive domains, and full-scale. Method: A community sample of 1100 twin pairs (age 11-18) was interviewed using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children. Results: Behavior genetic model fitting suggested that genetic and environmental influences on individual symptoms varied by symptom. The best-fitting models for aggressive and non-aggressive domains, and full-scale CD included additive genetic effects and unique environmental effects only (AE models). These effects could be constrained across age cohorts and sex. The results suggest that using models that incorporate age- and gender-appropriate thresholds specific to each subject we can account for prevalence differences between cohorts. Heritability estimates were 0.49, 0.55 and 0.53 for the aggressive domain, non-aggressive domain, and full-scales, respectively. These results are in contrast to previous research on antisocial behavior measured with the CBCL reporting higher heritability for aggressive versus non-aggressive domains. Conclusions: Results suggest that individual symptoms of CD may be differentially heritable. Additionally, CD assessed using DSM-IV criteria may show differing patterns of heritability compared with estimates obtained for other measures of antisocial behavior such as the CBCL.