Development and Content Validation of Novel Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Disease Severity and Change in Patients with Erythropoietic Protoporphyria: The EPP Impact Questionnaire (EPIQ).

Purpose: Erythropoietic protoporphyria (EPP), a rare inherited disorder, presents in early childhood with severe, painful phototoxicity, with significant impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Previous studies have not captured all concepts important to patients. Therefore, this study sought to develop a novel, comprehensive, and content valid patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure to assess the efficacy of new therapies. Patients and Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with EPP participants and clinical experts to obtain views on concepts relevant to patients. Results informed the development of novel PROs, which were debriefed during subsequent combined concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. Results: Twenty-three interviews were conducted with 17 adults and 6 adolescents with EPP. Concept elicitation revealed that participants experienced many symptoms with significant variability. The most common were burning, pain, swelling, and tingling. Tingling was the most common prodromal symptom, while burning was the most bothersome, and pain was the worst full reaction symptom. Participants reported being negatively impacted in their ability to do daily activities, and social and emotional functioning. Many reported impacted ability to work and be productive at their job. Participants reviewed and completed the newly developed PRO measures assessing full reactions and ability to do activities, as well as items to assess severity and change in severity of prodromal symptoms, full reactions, and EPP overall. All measures were found to be comprehensive, clear, and relevant. Conclusion: PRO measures are needed to assess important aspects of HRQoL and evaluate therapeutic response. These PRO measures are unique in assessing overall severity and change in EPP.

Patient-Centered Core Impacts Sets (PC-CIS): What They Are and What They Are Not.

Letter to the Editor We are writing regarding the Innovations in Pharmacy commentary entitled, "Evidentiary Standards for Patient-Centered Core Impact Value Claims."(1) We thank Dr. Langley for commenting on the National Health Council's work on patient-centered core impact sets (PC-CIS), an initiative spearheaded by the nonprofit organization and its membership with multi-stakeholder representation and input.(2-4) While we have tried to be clear and transparent about the intent of PC-CIS, the commentary made it apparent to us we need to (and will) do more to be explicit about what a PC-CIS is and is not, and its possible downstream uses. We believe the PC-CIS concept was misrepresented in the commentary and want to provide clarification for readers so they can consider the merits of the initiative for themselves.

Development and content validation of a sunlight exposure diary in patients with erythropoietic protoporphyria.

BACKGROUND: Erythropoietic protoporphyria is a rare, inherited disorder presenting in early childhood with severe, painful phototoxicity. EPP has significant impacts on health-related quality of life, though there is variable disease severity. Accurately capturing how much time individuals with EPP can spend outdoors before they develop symptoms is critical to understanding HRQoL and measuring therapeutic response. Therefore, the goal of this study was to develop a comprehensive and content valid sun exposure diary to assess the efficacy of new therapies in individuals with EPP. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with adult and adolescent EPP participants, as well as five clinical experts, to obtain their input on the content of an existing sun exposure diary. Revisions to the diary were made based on evidence generated in cognitive debriefing interviews analyzed in eight consecutive groups of EPP participant. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 17 adults and 6 adolescents with EPP. The average age of adults was 40 years and of adolescents was 14 years. Clinical experts thought the original diary needed clarification on the description of symptoms, how time outdoors was captured, and the distinction between direct vs. indirect sunlight. Participants with EPP also noted these items needed revision, and that the distinction between prodromal symptoms and full reaction symptoms should be clarified. In the final diary version, participants with EPP found most items to be clear and easy to complete/think about. Seventy-six percent of participants (13/17) asked thought the diary was easy to complete. The remainder thought the majority of the diary was easy to complete with the exception of select questions. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluating a new treatment for EPP requires accurately capturing time in sunlight and symptoms in this unique disorder. The newly developed sun exposure diary is content valid and can be used to assess important aspects of symptoms and daily life and therefore evaluate clinically meaningful therapeutic response.

Towards a novel clinical outcome assessment for systemic lupus erythematosus: first outcomes of an international taskforce.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a disease of high unmet therapeutic need. The challenge of accurately measuring clinically meaningful responses to treatment has hindered progress towards positive outcomes in SLE trials, impeding the approval of potential new therapies. Current primary end points used in SLE trials are based on legacy disease activity measures that were neither specifically designed for the clinical trial context, nor developed according to contemporary recommendations for clinical outcome assessments (COAs), such as that substantial patient input should be incorporated into their design. The Treatment Response Measure for SLE (TRM-SLE) Taskforce is a global collaboration of SLE clinician-academics, patients and patient representatives, industry partners and regulatory experts, established to realize the goal of developing a new COA for SLE clinical trials. The aim of this project is a novel COA designed specifically to measure treatment effects that are clinically meaningful to patients and clinicians, and intended for implementation in a trial end point that supports regulatory approval of novel therapeutic agents in SLE. This Consensus Statement reports the first outcomes of the TRM-SLE project, including a structured process for TRM-SLE development.

Do clinical trials prepare to fail by failing to prepare? An examination of MS trials and recommendations for patient-reported outcome measure selection.

BACKGROUND: Many clinical trials use patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, which can influence treatment decision-making, drug approval and label claims. Given that many PRO measure options exist, and there are conceptual and contextual complexities with PRO measurement, we aimed to evaluate how and why specific PRO measures have been selected for pivotal multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials. Specifically, we aimed to identify the reasons documented for PRO measure selection in contemporary phase III MS disease-modifying treatment (DMT) clinical trials. METHODS: We searched for phase III clinical trials of MS DMTs published between 2015 and 2021 and evaluated trial protocols, or primary publications where available, for PRO measure selection information. Specifically, we examined study documents for their clarification of clinical concepts measured, definitions of concepts measured, explanations of which PRO measures were considered, why specific PRO measures were chosen, and trade-offs in PRO measure selection. RESULTS: We identified 1705 abstracts containing 61 unique phase III MS DMT clinical trials. We obtained and examined 27/61 trial protocols. Six protocols were excluded: four contained no mention of PRO measures and two contained redacted sections preventing adequate assessment, leaving 21 protocols for assessment. For the remaining 34 trials (61-27), we retrieved 31 primary publications; 15 primary publications mentioned the use of a PRO measure. None of the 36 clinical trials that mentioned the use of PRO measures (21 protocols and 15 primary publications) documented clear PRO or clinical outcome assessment (COA) measurement strategies, provided clear justifications for PRO selection, or reasons why specific PRO measures were selected when alternatives existed. CONCLUSION: PRO measure selection for clinical trials is not evidence-based or underpinned by structured systematic approaches. This represents a critical area for study design improvement as PRO measure results directly affect patient care, PRO measurement has conceptual and contextual complexities, and there is a wide range of options when selecting a PRO measure. We recommend trial designers use formal approaches for PRO measure selection to ensure PRO measurement-based decisions are optimised. We provide a simple, logical, five-stage approach for PRO measure selection in clinical trials.

Efficacy and safety of a novel mucoadhesive clobetasol patch for treatment of erosive oral lichen planus: A phase 2 randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the oral mucosa. Currently there is no approved treatment for OLP. We report on the efficacy and safety of a novel mucoadhesive clobetasol patch (Rivelin® -CLO) for the treatment of OLP. METHODS: Patients with confirmed OLP and measurable symptomatic ulcer(s) participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial testing a novel mucoadhesive clobetasol patch (Rivelin® -CLO) in OLP across Europe, Canada, and the United States. Patients were randomized to placebo (nonmedicated), 1, 5, 20 µg Clobetasol/patch, twice daily, for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in total ulcer area compared to baseline. Secondary endpoints included improvement from baseline in pain, disease activity, and quality of life. RESULTS: Data were analyzed and expressed as mean [SD]. One hundred thirty-eight patients were included in the study; 99 females and 39 males, mean age was 61.1 [11.6] years. Statistical analyses revealed that treatment with 20-µg Rivelin® -CLO patches demonstrated significant improvement with ulcer area (p = 0.047), symptom severity (p = 0.001), disease activity (p = 0.022), pain (p = 0.012), and quality of life (p = 0.003) as compared with placebo. Improvement in OLP symptoms from beginning to the end of the study was reported as very much better (best rating) in the 20-µg group (25/32) patients compared to the placebo group (11/30), (p = 0.012). Adverse events were mild/moderate. Candidiasis incidence was low (2%). CONCLUSIONS: Rivelin® -CLO patches were superior to placebo demonstrating statistically significant, clinically relevant efficacy in objective and subjective improvement and, with a favorable safety profile.

Research design considerations for chronic pain prevention clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.

Although certain risk factors can identify individuals who are most likely to develop chronic pain, few interventions to prevent chronic pain have been identified. To facilitate the identification of preventive interventions, an IMMPACT meeting was convened to discuss research design considerations for clinical trials investigating the prevention of chronic pain. We present general design considerations for prevention trials in populations that are at relatively high risk for developing chronic pain. Specific design considerations included subject identification, timing and duration of treatment, outcomes, timing of assessment, and adjusting for risk factors in the analyses. We provide a detailed examination of 4 models of chronic pain prevention (ie, chronic postsurgical pain, postherpetic neuralgia, chronic low back pain, and painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy). The issues discussed can, in many instances, be extrapolated to other chronic pain conditions. These examples were selected because they are representative models of primary and secondary prevention, reflect persistent pain resulting from multiple insults (ie, surgery, viral infection, injury, and toxic or noxious element exposure), and are chronically painful conditions that are treated with a range of interventions. Improvements in the design of chronic pain prevention trials could improve assay sensitivity and thus accelerate the identification of efficacious interventions. Such interventions would have the potential to reduce the prevalence of chronic pain in the population. Additionally, standardization of outcomes in prevention clinical trials will facilitate meta-analyses and systematic reviews and improve detection of preventive strategies emerging from clinical trials.

Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary (HDSM-Ax): Evaluation of Measurement Performance.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of primary axillary hyperhidrosis (AHH) require rigorous measurement of AHH severity from the patient’s perspective. Previously, we reported conceptualization and item content development for the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary (HDSM-Ax) scale. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychometric performance and estimate clinically meaningful change scores for the HDSM-Ax in a Phase IIb clinical study of sofpironium bromide gel for AHH. METHOD: HDSM-Ax measurement performance was analyzed in trial response data using two psychometric paradigms: Classical Test and Rasch Measurement Theories (CTT; RMT). HDSM-Ax meaningful change scores were estimated from anchor-based methods using two global summary questions of hyperhidrosis severity and the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Score (HDSS). RESULTS: HDSM-Ax satisfied CTT and RMT criteria as a fit-for-purpose outcome measure in AHH clinical trials. Within-person anchor-based analyses indicated a 1-point change in HDSM-Ax severity score (range, 0–4) represents a clinically meaningful change in AHH severity. CONCLUSION: HDSM-Ax is a well-defined and reliable measure of AHH severity. A 1-point change in HDSM-Ax score is clinically meaningful. J Drugs Dermatol.20(4):410-418. doi:10.36849/JDD.5569.

The Coping Assessment for Bereavement and Loss Experiences (CABLE): Development and initial validation.

The authors present the development and validation of the Coping Assessment for Bereavement and Loss Experiences (CABLE), the first instrument designed to assess a range of potentially constructive strategies for coping with grief following the death of a loved one. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis with an international sample of bereaved adults (N = 844) yielded a six-factor, 28-item structure. Use of this validated, clinically useful, self-report tool can inform clinicians and researchers in evaluating bereavement coping, and in developing interventions designed to increase the number and broaden the types of coping strategies used to facilitate healing following loss.

Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief 2.0 (ICSG 2.0): Validation of a revised measure of spiritual distress in bereavement.

Spirituality has long served as a source of solace for many grievers following a loss. For other mourners, whose bereavement experience has been significantly challenged by struggles in their relationship with God and/or their faith community, the opposite is true. Complicated spiritual grief (CSG) is a spiritual crisis following the loss of a loved one. To assess CSG in samples of bereaved adults, a simple-to-use, multidimensional measure of spiritual crisis following loss called the Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief (ICSG) was previously developed and validated. However, subsequent research providing greater clarity about the construct of CSG supported the need to revise and update the ICSG. The goal of the present study was to establish the psychometric validity of a revised measure of CSG, called the Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief 2.0 (ICSG 2.0), with a large, diverse cohort of bereaved Christian adults (N = 440). Analyses of the bifurcated sample supported a three-factor model measuring insecurity with God, estrangement from the spiritual community, and disruption in religious practices. Further analyses supported the convergent and incremental validity of a 28-item scale relative to other theoretically similar instruments and measures of poor bereavement outcome, indicating the instrument's research and clinical usefulness.

FDA Oncology Center of Excellence Project Renewal: Engaging the Oncology Community to Update Product Labeling for Older Oncology Drugs.

The FDA conducts independent reviews of scientific data obtained with investigational drug products to ensure that they are safe and effective. As a result of this process, FDA-approved product labeling is generated that is considered one of the most trusted sources of information for use of an approved drug. But FDA approval is only the beginning of the life cycle of a new drug; the first oncology drugs now have more than 7 decades of clinical experience in the postmarketing setting. Due, in part, to lack of incentives, some companies may not seek inclusion of new data, other than new safety information, in FDA-approved product labeling. Ensuring that product labeling provides adequate directions for use is important for all drugs, including older therapies that may form the backbone of many standard combination regimens for pediatric and adult cancers. Project Renewal is an FDA Oncology Center of Excellence pilot program that leverages expertise from the clinical and scientific oncology communities to review published literature and generate a drug-specific product report summarizing data that may support updates to FDA-approved product labeling. This article provides a broad overview of Project Renewal's collaborative pilot process for identifying and assessing literature supporting potential labeling updates, while engaging the oncology community to increase awareness of FDA's evidentiary standards and deliberative processes used when considering the addition of new indications and dosing regimens to product labeling.

Interpretation of chronic pain clinical trial outcomes: IMMPACT recommended considerations.

Interpreting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is crucial to making decisions regarding the use of analgesic treatments in clinical practice. In this article, we report on an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) consensus meeting organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks, the purpose of which was to recommend approaches that facilitate interpretation of analgesic RCTs. We review issues to consider when drawing conclusions from RCTs, as well as common methods for reporting RCT results and the limitations of each method. These issues include the type of trial, study design, statistical analysis methods, magnitude of the estimated beneficial and harmful effects and associated precision, availability of alternative treatments and their benefit-risk profile, clinical importance of the change from baseline both within and between groups, presentation of the outcome data, and the limitations of the approaches used.

Measuring upper limb function in MS: Which existing patient reported outcomes are fit for purpose?

BACKGROUND: Multiple Sclerosis (MS) clinical trials increasingly focus on progressive and advanced MS, with upper limb function (ULF) as a key outcome. Within clinical trials, Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) quantify clinical variables and establish meaningfulness of changes. Scientific standards and regulatory criteria (from Food and Drug Administration [FDA]) require PROs be "fit-for-purpose": well-defined and reliable measures of specific concepts in defined contexts. OBJECTIVE: To identify, from literature, existing PROs measuring ULF and determine which satisfy scientific and regulatory clinical trials requirements. METHOD: We screened PubMed/Web of Science using multiple relevant terms. Abstracts and full texts were screened using suitability criteria. PRO development papers were evaluated using recently expanded Consensus Standards for Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) criteria for content development. RESULTS: We identified 3619 articles; 485 used 24 different ULF PROs. No PRO satisfied scientific and regulatory requirements as a well-defined measure of a clearly defined construct in a specific clinical context. CONCLUSIONS: Existing ULF PROs don't meet fit-for-purpose criteria. MS clinical trials require new measures with greater emphasis on patient engagement to derive theoretical frameworks, concepts of interest, and contexts of use followed by systematic literature searches, expert input, and qualitative research to support item generation. Until then, trials will miss aspects of meaningful within-patient change and thereby misrepresent (likely underestimating) treatment effects.

Improving Study Conduct and Data Quality in Clinical Trials of Chronic Pain Treatments: IMMPACT Recommendations.

The estimated probability of progressing from phase 3 analgesic clinical trials to regulatory approval is approximately 57%, suggesting that a considerable number of treatments with phase 2 trial results deemed sufficiently successful to progress to phase 3 do not yield positive phase 3 results. Deficiencies in the quality of clinical trial conduct could account for some of this failure. An Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials meeting was convened to identify potential areas for improvement in trial conduct in order to improve assay sensitivity (ie, ability of trials to detect a true treatment effect). We present recommendations based on presentations and discussions at the meeting, literature reviews, and iterative revisions of this article. The recommendations relate to the following areas: 1) study design (ie, to promote feasibility), 2) site selection and staff training, 3) participant selection and training, 4) treatment adherence, 5) data collection, and 6) data and study monitoring. Implementation of these recommendations may improve the quality of clinical trial data and thus the validity and assay sensitivity of clinical trials. Future research regarding the effects of these strategies will help identify the most efficient use of resources for conducting high quality clinical trials. PERSPECTIVE: Every effort should be made to optimize the quality of clinical trial data. This manuscript discusses considerations to improve conduct of pain clinical trials based on research in multiple medical fields and the expert consensus of pain researchers and stakeholders from academia, regulatory agencies, and industry.

Clinician-rated measures for distal symmetrical axonal polyneuropathy: ACTTION systematic review.

Distal symmetrical axonal polyneuropathy (DSP) is due to injury to peripheral sensory, motor, and autonomic nerve fibers, resulting in distal predominant sensory loss, pain, and gait instability. DSP occurs as a complication of multiple medical conditions including diabetes or HIV, or following exposure to various toxins such as chemotherapy. It affects at least 10% of the United States population. Few treatments for DSP are approved by regulatory agencies. Reliable and responsive outcome measures are integral to developing new DSP treatments. Multiple clinician-rated measures that incorporate neuropathy signs exist, however, it is not clear which of these measures performs best for various DSP phenotypes. This systematic review summarizes the content of 18 published measures of DSP identified using PubMed and from personal archives of the authors. The relative percentage of scoring dedicated to motor, reflex, large and small fiber sensory, and autonomic domains varied considerably among measures. The most common neurologic examination items included in the scales were (1) vibration perception (n = 18, 100%), (2) reflexes (n = 16, 89%), (3) pinprick perception (n = 14, 78%), (4) muscle strength (n = 11, 61%), (5) touch-pressure perception (n = 9, 50%), and (6) joint position perception (n = 8, 44%). This review can be used to inform decisions regarding which of the available clinician-rated sign outcome measures would be most appropriate for use in a particular DSP population, based on the domains most affected by that neuropathy or on the domains most likely to be affected by a particular experimental therapy.

Novel Oral Lichen Planus Symptom Severity Measure for assessing patients' daily symptom experience.

OBJECTIVE: A novel Oral Lichen Planus Symptom Severity Measure was developed as a clinical outcome assessment of the daily symptom experience of patients with oral lichen planus. METHODS: A literature review and expert input were followed by open-ended concept elicitation interviews with 17 adults with oral lichen planus in the United States and Ireland. Item content was generated, and the interviews continued until input saturation was reached. The final electronic version of the measure was cognitively debriefed in 6 US patients and subsequently translated and linguistically validated in Germany and Denmark. RESULTS: Concept elicitation interviews demonstrated content validity and saturation in identifying symptoms and daily activities that generate symptoms in patients with oral lichen planus. The content and electronic daily diary format demonstrated content validity during cognitive debriefing interviews. Linguistic validation of the 7-item Oral Lichen Planus Symptom Severity Measure in Germany and Denmark confirmed the content validity of the German and Danish versions. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative research methods generated evidence that the 7-item Oral Lichen Planus Symptom Severity Measure version 1.0 is a well-defined assessment tool to characterize the severity, specificity and variations of symptoms in patients with oral lichen planus.

The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary: Conceptualization and Development of Item Content.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with primary axillary hyperhidrosis (AHH) suffer from a variety of symptoms. Improved patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are needed to better assess and categorize the severity of AHH symptoms experienced by patients because the widely used Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale (HDSS) is a single-item measure that cannot capture the broad scope of disease impact. METHODS: The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary (HDSM-Ax) was developed for determining the severity of excessive sweating in patients with primary focal AHH based on face-to-face concept elicitation interviews with 58 AHH patients, a literature review, and expert clinical input. Two waves of face-to-face cognitive interviews (n=26 and n=27) were conducted to evaluate HDSM-Ax clarity and relevance. Additional interviews (n=5) were conducted to confirm content. Adding Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analyses allowed for an iterative streamlined approach to documenting content validity and other cross-sectional measurement properties of the new HDSM-Ax measurement. RESULTS: The 11-item HDSM-Ax PRO scale (0-4 scale per item; 0-44 total scale) represents an AHH symptom range of 0 (no sweating) to 44 (worst possible sweating). Content validity of the HDSM-Ax was documented by showing that chronologically-grouped interviews demonstrated saturation in AHH symptom severity concepts. Cognitive debriefing interviews provided evidence that item content is complete, comprehensible, meaningful, and relevant. RMT-based exploration indicated that targeting of the HDSM-Ax was adequate, suggesting good matching between items and persons; item fit was adequate, suggesting a clinically cohesive scale; and items appeared to be stable between subgroups, thereby supporting a summary score. CONCLUSIONS: The HDSM-Ax is a well-developed measure of AHH severity based on patient-reported signs and symptoms. It is a superior measure to the HDSS and can be used in clinical research and clinical practice to quantify changes in symptom severity in response to treatment. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(7):707-714.

Impact of voxelotor (GBT440) on unconjugated bilirubin and jaundice in sickle cell disease.

For many patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), jaundice is a significant clinical disease manifestation that impacts on patient well-being. We report a case of a patient with SCD and chronic jaundice treated with voxelotor (GBT440), a novel small molecule hemoglobin oxygen affinity modulator and potential disease-modifying therapy for SCD. The case patient is a 27-year-old Black male with a long history of SCD with clinical jaundice and scleral icterus. After starting voxelotor, the patient reported that his jaundice cleared within one week, and that he felt much better with more energy, and was relieved after his eyes cleared. Voxelotor reduced bilirubin and unconjugated bilirubin (by up to 76%), and hemoglobin improved from 9.9 g/dL at baseline to 11.1 g/dL at 90 days. Jaundice impacts many adults with SCD, significantly impacting self-image. Voxelotor treatment reduced bilirubin levels and improved jaundice, resulting in an improved sense of well-being in our case patient.

Evaluation of composite responder outcomes of pain intensity and physical function in neuropathic pain clinical trials: an ACTTION individual patient data analysis.

Integrating information on physical function and pain intensity into a composite measure may provide a useful method for assessing treatment efficacy in clinical trials of chronic pain. Accordingly, we evaluated composite outcomes in trials of duloxetine, gabapentin, and pregabalin. Data on 2287 patients in 9 trials for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and 1513 patients in 6 trials for postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) were analyzed. All trials assessed pain intensity on a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale and physical function with the 10-item subscale of the Short Form-36, ranging 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better function. Correlation between change in pain intensity from baseline to posttreatment and change in physical function was small in DPN (ρ = -0.22; P < 0.001) and nonsignificant in PHN (ρ = -0.05; P = 0.08). Assay sensitivities of 10 composite outcomes were examined in a random subsample of patients enrolled in pregabalin trials for DPN and PHN. Of these, a responder outcome of ≥50% improvement in pain intensity, or a ≥20% improvement in pain intensity and ≥30% improvement in physical function was not only significantly associated with pregabalin vs placebo in the development cohorts for both pain conditions but also in the validation cohorts. Furthermore, this composite outcome was cross-validated in trials of gabapentin for PHN and duloxetine for DPN, and had slightly lower number needed to treat than a standard responder outcome of ≥50% reduction in pain intensity. In summary, this study identified a composite outcome of pain intensity and physical function that may improve the assay sensitivity of future neuropathic pain trials.