A Core set of patient-reported outcome measures to measure quality of life in obesity treatment research.

The lack of standardization in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has made measurement and comparison of quality of life (QoL) outcomes in research focused on obesity treatment challenging. This study reports on the results of the second and third global multidisciplinary Standardizing Quality of life measures in Obesity Treatment (S.Q.O.T.) consensus meetings, where a core set of PROMs to measure nine previously selected patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in obesity treatment research was established. The S.Q.O.T. II online and S.Q.O.T. III face-to-face hybrid consensus meetings were held in October 2021 and May 2022. The meetings were led by an independent moderator specializing in PRO measurement. Nominal group techniques, Delphi exercises, and anonymous voting were used to select the most suitable PROMs by consensus. The meetings were attended by 28 and 27 participants, respectively, including a geographically diverse selection of people living with obesity (PLWO) and experts from various disciplines. Out of 24 PROs and 16 PROMs identified in the first S.Q.O.T. consensus meeting, the following nine PROs and three PROMs were selected via consensus: BODY-Q (physical function, physical symptoms, psychological function, social function, eating behavior, and body image), IWQOL-Lite (self-esteem), and QOLOS (excess skin). No PROM was selected to measure stigma as existing PROMs deemed to be inadequate. A core set of PROMs to measure QoL in research focused on obesity treatment has been selected incorporating patients' and experts' opinions. This core set should serve as a minimum to use in obesity research studies and can be combined with clinical parameters.

Considerations for the design and conduct of pediatric obesity pharmacotherapy clinical trials: Proceedings of expert roundtable meetings.

Anti-obesity medications (AOMs) have emerged as one element of comprehensive obesity clinical care intended to improve long-term health outcomes for children and adolescents. The number of pediatric AOM clinical trials has burgeoned in recent years as new pharmacotherapeutics have been developed. Factors related to growth and development in children and adolescents can present unique challenges in terms of designing and conducting clinical trials investigating the safety and efficacy of AOMs. These barriers can delay the AOM development and evaluation process, increase the cost of performing trials, create challenges in the interpretation of results, influence the generalizability of the findings and present ethical dilemmas. In an effort to address these issues and provide guidance to streamline the process of designing and conducting pediatric AOM clinical trials, relevant key stakeholders convened a series of roundtable meetings to discuss, debate and achieve harmonization on design features. Stakeholder participants included a multidisciplinary group of international pediatric obesity experts, patient (parent) representatives and representatives from academic medicine, key regulatory agencies and industry. Topics of discussion included primary efficacy end-points, secondary end-points, eligibility criteria, trial run-in and follow-up phases, use of active comparators and guidelines for down-titration and/or stopping rules for excessive weight reduction. Consensus recommendations were agreed upon. Regarding end-points, emphasis was placed on moving away from BMI z-score as a primary outcome, incorporating multiple alternative BMI-related outcomes and measuring adiposity/body fat as a prominent secondary end-point. Trial eligibility criteria were carefully considered to maximize generalizability while maintaining safety. The limited value of trial run-in phases was discussed. It was also underscored that designing trials with extended follow-up periods after AOM withdrawal should be avoided owing to ethical issues (including possible psychological harm) related to weight regain without providing the opportunity to access other treatments. The panel emphasized the value of the randomized, placebo-controlled trial but recommended the thoughtful consideration of the use of active comparators in addition to, or instead of, placebo to achieve clinical equipoise when appropriate. Finally, the panel recommended that clinical trial protocols should include clear guidance regarding AOM down-titration to avoid excessive weight reduction when applicable.

Core Set of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Measuring Quality of Life in Clinical Obesity Care.

PURPOSE: The focus of measuring success in obesity treatment is shifting from weight loss to patients' health and quality of life. The objective of this study was to select a core set of patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures to be used in clinical obesity care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Standardizing Quality of Life in Obesity Treatment III, face-to-face hybrid consensus meeting, including people living with obesity as well as healthcare providers, was held in Maastricht, the Netherlands, in 2022. It was preceded by two prior multinational consensus meetings and a systematic review. RESULTS: The meeting was attended by 27 participants, representing twelve countries from five continents. The participants included healthcare providers, such as surgeons, endocrinologists, dietitians, psychologists, researchers, and people living with obesity, most of whom were involved in patient representative networks. Three patient-reported outcome measures (patient-reported outcomes) were selected: the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite (self-esteem) measure, the BODY-Q (physical function, physical symptoms, psychological function, social function, eating behavior, and body image), and the Quality of Life for Obesity Surgery questionnaire (excess skin). No patient-reported outcome measure was selected for stigma. CONCLUSION: A core set of patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures for measuring quality of life in clinical obesity care is established incorporating patients' and experts' opinions. This set should be used as a minimum for measuring quality of life in routine clinical practice. It is essential that individual patient-reported outcome measure scores are shared with people living with obesity in order to enhance patient engagement and shared decision-making.