Assessment of physical function and participation in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT/OMERACT recommendations.

Although pain reduction is commonly the primary outcome in chronic pain clinical trials, physical functioning is also important. A challenge in designing chronic pain trials to determine efficacy and effectiveness of therapies is obtaining appropriate information about the impact of an intervention on physical function. The Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) convened a meeting to consider assessment of physical functioning and participation in research on chronic pain. The primary purpose of this article is to synthesize evidence on the scope of physical functioning to inform work on refining physical function outcome measurement. We address issues in assessing this broad construct and provide examples of frequently used measures of relevant concepts. Investigators can assess physical functioning using patient-reported outcome (PRO), performance-based, and objective measures of activity. This article aims to provide support for the use of these measures, covering broad aspects of functioning, including work participation, social participation, and caregiver burden, which researchers should consider when designing chronic pain clinical trials. Investigators should consider the inclusion of both PROs and performance-based measures as they provide different but also important complementary information. The development and use of reliable and valid PROs and performance-based measures of physical functioning may expedite development of treatments, and standardization of these measures has the potential to facilitate comparison across studies. We provide recommendations regarding important domains to stimulate research to develop tools that are more robust, address consistency and standardization, and engage patients early in tool development.

ING-1, a monoclonal antibody targeting Ep-CAM in patients with advanced adenocarcinomas.

PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility of administration, safety, toxicity, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, maximum tolerated dose, and biodistribution of ING-1, a high-affinity, Human-Engineered monoclonal antibody (heMAb) to the Mr 40,000 epithelial cell adhesion molecule Ep-CAM, in patients with advanced adenocarcinomas. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: ING-1 was initially administered to patients as a 1-hour intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. Toxicity and pharmacokinetic data led to the evaluation of a weekly schedule. The distribution of iodine-131 (131I)-labeled ING-1 was studied. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients received 82 courses of ING-1. Minimal toxicity was initially observed at the 0.03-, 0.10-, and 0.30-mg/kg dose levels. A patient dosed at 1.0 mg/kg developed acute pancreatitis with severe abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. A patient dosed at 0.3 mg/kg had an asymptomatic amylase and lipase elevation to 502 units/L and 1,627 units/L, respectively. Both patients made uncomplicated recoveries. No other dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Regardless of dose, the volume of distribution (mean +/- SEM) was 46.6 +/- 1.6 mL/kg. ING-1 clearance decreased with increasing dose. To minimize toxicity and increase dose intensity, we then administered ING-1 weekly. No significant toxicity was observed in 7 patients dosed at 0.1 mg/kg. Studies of 131I-labeled ING-1 biodistribution showed radiolocalization to colorectal and prostate cancers. A patient with colorectal cancer had an 80% decrement in the levels of carcinoembryonic antigen. CONCLUSION: The recommended dose for ING-1 is 0.10 mg/kg by intravenous infusion weekly. The absence of severe toxicity at this dose, low immunogenicity, and preliminary evidence of ING-1 tumor localization and antitumor efficacy support the further clinical development of this antibody to treat Ep-CAM-positive malignant diseases.