Content Validity and Psychometric Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) in Patients with Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) frequently experience fatigue, although it is often overlooked in medical research and practice. AIMS: To explore patients' experience of fatigue and evaluate content validity, psychometric properties, and score interpretability of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) in patients with CD or UC. METHODS: Concept elicitation and cognitive interviews were conducted with participants aged ≥ 15 years with moderately-to-severely active CD (N = 30) or UC (N = 33). To evaluate psychometric properties (reliability and construct validity) and interpretation of FACIT-Fatigue scores, data from two clinical trials were analyzed [ADVANCE (CD): N = 850; U-ACHIEVE (UC): 248]. Meaningful within-person change was estimated using anchor-based methods. RESULTS: Almost all interview participants reported experiencing fatigue. Over 30 unique fatigue-related impacts were reported per condition. The FACIT-Fatigue was interpretable for most patients. FACIT-Fatigue items had good internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.86-0.88 for CD and 0.94-0.96 for UC); the total score displayed acceptable test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.60 for CD and > 0.90 for UC). FACIT-Fatigue scores had acceptable convergent validity with similar measures. A 7-10 point improvement for CD and 4-9 point improvement for UC on the FACIT-Fatigue total score may represent meaningful improvements. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the importance of fatigue among adolescents and adults with CD or UC and provide evidence that the FACIT-Fatigue is content valid and produces reliable, valid, and interpretable scores in these populations. Care should be taken if using the questionnaire with adolescents who may be less familiar with the word "fatigue." Clinical trial registration numbers NCT03105128 (date of registration: 4 April 2017) and NCT02819635 (date of registration: 28 June 2016).

Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints in Cancer Clinical Trials-Innovative Medicines Initiative (SISAQOL-IMI): stakeholder views, objectives, and procedures.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, functioning, and other health-related quality-of-life concepts are gaining a more prominent role in the benefit-risk assessment of cancer therapies. However, varying ways of analysing, presenting, and interpreting PRO data could lead to erroneous and inconsistent decisions on the part of stakeholders, adversely affecting patient care and outcomes. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints in Cancer Clinical Trials-Innovative Medicines Initiative (SISAQOL-IMI) Consortium builds on the existing SISAQOL work to establish recommendations on design, analysis, presentation, and interpretation for PRO data in cancer clinical trials, with an expanded set of topics, including more in-depth recommendations for randomised controlled trials and single-arm studies, and for defining clinically meaningful change. This Policy Review presents international stakeholder views on the need for SISAQOL-IMI, the agreed on and prioritised set of PRO objectives, and a roadmap to ensure that international consensus recommendations are achieved.

Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Industry-Sponsored Phase I Oncology Studies: Considerations for Translating Theory Into Practice.

An increasing interest in the identification of optimal dosage for oncology therapies has prompted key opinion leaders and regulators to encourage the integration of patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessments in phase I oncology clinical trials. Although the potential benefits of assessing PROs in early-phase studies have been acknowledged, the difficulties that arise from such a radical shift have been largely overlooked in the public discussion. In this commentary, the authors provide insight into the challenges that industry sponsors face in integrating PRO assessments into phase I oncology trials, with the ultimate goal of facilitating conversations that may help to resolve some of these issues.

Ulcerative Colitis-Symptom Questionnaire: Valid for Use in Adults with Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Due to wide-ranging impacts of Ulcerative Colitis (UC), regulatory authorities emphasize the importance of including validated patient-reported symptom severity measures in clinical trials. AIM: To describe the development and validation of the Ulcerative Colitis-Symptom Questionnaire (UC-SQ). METHODS: The UC-SQ was developed in a qualitative study involving a targeted literature review, semi-structured concept elicitation interviews, and combined concept elicitation/cognitive interviews. Measurement properties, including item-level analyses, factor structure, reliability, validity, responsiveness, and clinically meaningful change were evaluated using data from a phase 2b, randomized trial in adults with UC (N = 113). RESULTS: Fourteen symptom concepts were elicited across 22 interviews, with saturation at the fifth interview. Twenty-two items were unmodified as cognitive interview participants interpreted underlying concepts correctly. Instructions were clear and items were relevant, with appropriate response options and recall periods. Reduction to 17 items was completed prior to psychometric testing. Two items (joint pain/constipation) did not contribute to reliability in initial testing and were included as non-scored items. The 15-item UC-SQ showed evidence of internal consistency (α = 0.86) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.88). The UC-SQ discriminated by disease severity as defined by Mayo and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire scores (p < 0.0001). Convergent validity was supported by strong correlations with criterion measures. The UC-SQ was responsive in patients indicating change in other measures. A 10-point decrease from baseline indicated within-patient meaningful improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The UC-SQ is reliable, valid and responsive, with a 10-point improvement estimating within-patient clinically meaningful improvement. The tool is fit-for-purpose as a key endpoint in pivotal UC trials.

A Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Considerations in Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee Meetings (2016-2021).

PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to gain insight into the role of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) reviews and recommendations by documenting PRO-related considerations that appear in transcripts of ODAC meetings over a 6-year period (2016-2021). METHODS: ODAC meeting transcripts were reviewed for any mention of PRO-related concepts. Meetings that reviewed biosimilars and meetings that discussed conceptual matters were excluded. For each identified transcript, the meeting date, brand and generic names of the drug, and indication were collected from the meeting minutes. Comments by ODAC members, FDA reviewers, and study sponsors on PRO data were captured during the review. Qualitative review of transcripts included both reading and searching for key terms, including PROs, quality of life, and health-related quality of life. Discussion of PRO-related topics was captured verbatim, organized thematically, and analyzed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Twenty-seven transcripts of reviews were identified for 2016-2021. Topics related to PROs were included in 12 of those 27 reviews. The ODAC was satisfied with PROs included in 2 of those 12 reviews. Reasons for dissatisfaction in 10 of the 12 reviews included key concepts not assessed (5/12), missing data (5/12), and disagreement with sponsors' interpretation (3/12). The ODAC also expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of PRO data in 6 of 15 reviews that did not include PROs. CONCLUSION: Less than half of ODAC reviews in 2016-2021 included PROs, and reviewers expressed frustration at the lack of PRO data. Even when included, evidence on the basis of PROs was rarely deemed adequate for benefit-risk assessments.

Validation of the Physician's Global Assessment of Fingernail Psoriasis by Rheumatologists Treating Psoriatic Arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the content validity and reliability of the Physician's Global Assessment of Fingernail Psoriasis (PGA-F) by rheumatologists treating patients with psoriatic arthritis. METHODS: There were 3 stages of analyses with 3 clinician cohort groups. Stage 1 (concept confirmation) included rheumatologist qualitative data (cohort 1) to establish content validity, acceptability, utility, and feasibility of the PGA-F in assessing nail severity. Quantitative information regarding the response category utilization in nail abnormalities was assessed by photographs. Stage 2 (inter-rater reliability) involved quantitative analysis of PGA-F data from study investigators, including rheumatologists, involved in a phase III clinical study (cohort 2) and a cohort of newly recruited rheumatologists (cohort 3). Stage 3 included known-groups validity. RESULTS: Qualitative analyses identified consensus that the PGA-F severity levels are comprehensive of real-world patient symptoms and the instrument is simple to use and understand. Psychometric analyses support the PGA-F as a clinical outcome assessment tool. Inter-rater reliability showed rheumatologist agreement across the fingernail psoriasis severity spectrum. They were monotonically ordered by the hypothesized severity structure with excellent fit to the clinicians who evaluated them. Agreement on the rank order of the severity of the photographs in this target rheumatologist population was consistent with previous reports by dermatologists. CONCLUSIONS: The PGA-F was shown to be usable by rheumatologists to measure patients along the full range of the fingernail psoriasis severity spectrum, have a strong relationship with a conceptually similar reference measure, differentiate among patients based on fingernail psoriasis severity, and detect category severity change over a 24-week period.

Development and validation of the Ulcerative Colitis patient-reported outcomes signs and symptoms (UC-pro/SS) diary.

BACKGROUND: The clinical course of ulcerative colitis (UC) and the effects of treatment are assessed through patient-reported signs and symptoms (S&S), and endoscopic evidence of inflammation. The Ulcerative Colitis Patient-Reported Outcomes Signs and Symptoms (UC-PRO/SS) measure was developed to standardize the quantification of gastrointestinal S&S of UC in clinical trials through direct report from patient ratings. DESIGN: The UC-PRO/SS was developed by collecting data from concept elicitation (focus groups, and individual interviews), then refined through a process of cognitive interviews of 57 UC patients. Measurement properties, including item-level statistics, scaling structure, reliability, and validity, were evaluated in an observational, four-week study of adults with mild to severe UC (N = 200). RESULTS: Findings from qualitative focus groups and interviews identified nine symptom items covering bowel and abdominal symptoms. The final UC-PRO/SS daily diary includes two scales: Bowel S&S (six items) and Abdominal Symptoms (three items), each scored separately. Each scale showed evidence of adequate reliability (α = 80 and 0.66, respectively); reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.81, 0.71) and validity, including moderate-to-high correlations with the Partial Mayo Score (0.79; 0.45) and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) total score (- 0.70; - 0.61). Scores discriminated by level of disease severity, as defined by the Partial Mayo Score, Patient Global Rating, and Clinician Global Rating (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the UC-PRO/SS is a reliable and valid measure of gastrointestinal symptom severity in UC patients. Additional longitudinal data are needed to evaluate the ability of the UC-PRO/SS scores to detect responsiveness and inform the selection of responder definitions.

Development and validation of the Crohn's disease patient-reported outcomes signs and symptoms (CD-PRO/SS) diary.

BACKGROUND: The clinical course of Crohn's disease (CD) and the effect of its treatment are monitored through patient-reported signs and symptoms (S&S), and endoscopic evidence of inflammation. The Crohn's Disease Patient-reported Outcomes Signs and Symptoms (CD-PRO/SS) measure was developed to standardize the quantification of gastrointestinal S&S of CD through direct report from patient ratings. METHODS: The CD-PRO/SS was developed based on data from concept elicitation (focus groups, interviews; n = 29), then refined through cognitive interviews of CD patients (n = 20). Measurement properties, including item-level statistics, scaling structure, reliability, and validity, were examined using secondary analyses of baseline and two-week clinical trial data of adults with moderate-to-severe CD (n = 238). RESULTS: Findings from qualitative interviews identified nine S&S items covering bowel and abdominal symptoms. The final CD-PRO/SS daily diary includes two scales: Bowel S&S (three items) and Abdominal Symptoms (three items), each scored separately. Each scale showed evidence of adequate reliability (α = 0.74 and 0.67, respectively); reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.80), and validity, with the last including moderate correlations with the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire bowel symptom score and select items (ranging from r = 0.43-0.54). Scores distinguished patients categorized by patient global ratings of disease severity (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the CD-PRO/SS is a reliable and valid measure of gastrointestinal symptom severity in CD patients. Additional longitudinal data are needed to evaluate the ability of the CD-PRO/SS scores to detect responsiveness and inform the selection of responder definitions.

The impact of upper facial lines and psychological impact of crow's feet lines: content validation of the Facial Line Outcomes (FLO-11) Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Treatments for upper facial lines (UFL), the most visible sign of aging, are of interest to patients and clinicians alike. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable in evaluating the impact of such treatments; however, regulatory recommendations have stipulated that the patient perspective be central in developing these assessments. OBJECTIVES: (1) To evaluate the content validity of the Facial Lines Outcomes Questionnaire, a PRO instrument developed to assess upper facial line impacts, according to the regulatory guidance of the United States Food and Drug Administration and (2) assess whether it adequately measures the psychological impacts associated with crow's feet lines (CFL) (lateral canthal lines) from the patient perspective. METHODS: Two patient groups participated in face-to-face qualitative interviews. One group included patients with UFL (Group 1, n = 25 interviews), and the other included patients specifically with CFL (Group 2, n = 41 interviews). Each interview consisted of a concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing phase. RESULTS: Interviews with both groups elicited all key concepts of the instrument, including "bothered by facial lines"; "looking older"; "looking less attractive"; and looking "tired," "stressed," or "angry." Most Group 2 patients (n = 35, 85%) agreed that the instrument adequately assessed the psychological impacts associated with CFL. During cognitive debriefing, the majority of patients in both groups agreed the instrument was understandable, comprehensive, and easy to complete. CONCLUSIONS: The Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire is an appropriate and valid tool to assess the impact of UFL and the psychological impacts associated with CFL.

Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure in sarcopenia.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop a patient-reported outcome (PRO) to assess reduced muscle strength in sarcopenia. DESIGN: Qualitative research study. SETTING: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects with sarcopenia. MEASUREMENTS: Adults aged 55 years and older with sarcopenia (n = 12) attended open-ended, concept elicitation interviews to characterize the functional effects of reduced muscle strength on their lives. The resulting qualitative data were analyzed using a qualitative analysis software program (Atlas.ti [Atlas.ti GmbH, Berlin, Germany]) and a common set of codes was developed to summarize the data. Subsequently, the initial PRO measure was drafted. Cognitive interviews were then conducted with additional sarcopenia subjects (n = 12) to refine the measure. RESULTS: Qualitative interviews identified key concepts (eg, impacts) in the areas of activities of daily living, emotions, social activities, energy, balance, coordination, sleep, and strength. Based on data from the cognitive debriefing interviews (eg, understandability, relevance, suggestions to reword items), the PRO measure development team came to consensus on which items or parts of the instructions to retain, revise, or delete. The final measure included 14 items. CONCLUSION: The final PRO measure, the Age-Related Muscle Loss Questionnaire, can be used in both clinical practice and clinical trial settings to assess functional impacts of reduced muscle strength in sarcopenia.

Key concepts of migraine postdrome: a qualitative study to develop a post-migraine questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: To understand migraine postdrome by directly interviewing migraine patients with postdrome symptoms. To document these symptoms, as well as impacts, as a prelude to developing a postdrome migraine questionnaire. BACKGROUND: Migraine attacks are traditionally divided into 4 phases. Of these, the postdrome is the least studied, and no patient-reported outcomes to assess symptoms and impacts of this migraine phase have been published. METHODS: Qualitative concept elicitation focus groups were conducted with 34 patients in 3 geographically diverse US cities to elicit the symptoms and burden of migraine postdrome. Data elicited from focus groups were coded using Atlas.ti software to facilitate identification of concepts and terminologies of migraine postdrome. A draft questionnaire was developed based on the symptoms and impacts of migraine postdrome described by patients. Cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with 15 patients in Connecticut and Chicago to confirm content validity, relevance, and comprehension. RESULTS: Patients defined the onset of postdrome as when they no longer experienced the migraine pain. Postdrome was often described as "[being] or [feeling] wiped out" and "headache hangover." The symptoms most frequently reported by the patients who participated in the focus groups and included in the draft post-migraine questionnaire were: tiredness, difficulty concentrating, weakness, dizziness, lightheadedness, and decreased energy. Patients also reported decreased activity level as a result of experiencing postdrome symptoms. Postdrome symptoms were reported to impact the ability to work, to affect family interactions and social life, and to cause cognitive impairment. A preliminary questionnaire measuring severity and duration of symptoms and severity of impacts of the post-migraine experience, with an 11-point (0 to 10) response scale, was developed. This preliminary questionnaire was tested for content validity, relevance, and comprehension using cognitive debriefing interviews. All patients reported that the questionnaire was relevant to their condition. Irrelevant and redundant items such as body tension and annoyance were eliminated. CONCLUSIONS: Migraine postdrome is debilitating for those who experience it. Concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing research support the relevance of the items in the post-migraine questionnaire. Future research will provide evidence of the post-migraine questionnaire's psychometric properties and interpretation guidelines.