Reliability, validity and responsiveness of E-RS:COPD in patients with spirometric asthma-COPD overlap.

BACKGROUND: The Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (E-RS:COPD) is a patient-reported diary that assesses respiratory symptoms in stable COPD. METHODS: This post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, parallel-arm trial (GSK ID: 200699; NCT02164539) assessed the structure, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the E-RS, and a separate wheeze item, for use in patients with a primary diagnosis of asthma or COPD, but with spirometric characteristics of both (fixed airflow obstruction and reversibility to salbutamol; a subset of patients referred to as spirometric asthma-COPD overlap [ACO]; N = 338). RESULTS: Factor analysis demonstrated that E-RS included Cough and Sputum, Chest Symptoms, and Breathlessness domains, with a Total score suitable for quantifying overall respiratory symptoms (comparative fit index: 0.9), consistent with the structure shown in COPD. The wheeze item did not fit the model. Total and domain scores were internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha: 0.7-0.9) and reproducible (intra-class correlations > 0.7). Moderate correlations between RS-Total and RS-Breathlessness scores were observed with St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total and Activity domain scores at baseline (r = 0.43 and r = 0.48, respectively). E-RS scores were sensitive to change when a patient global impression of change and SGRQ change scores were used to define responders, with changes of ≥ - 1.4 in RS-Total score interpreted as clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: E-RS:COPD scores were reliable, valid and responsive in this sample, suggesting the measure may be suitable for evaluating the severity of respiratory symptoms and the effects of treatment in patients with asthma and COPD that exhibit spirometric characteristics of both fixed airflow obstruction and reversibility. Further study of this instrument and wheeze in new samples of patients with ACO is warranted.

Using the Influenza Patient-reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) diary to evaluate symptoms of influenza viral infection in a healthy human challenge model.

BACKGROUND: In clinical studies involving a healthy volunteer human challenge model, a valid and reliable measure to assess the evolution of patient-reported symptom type and severity following viral exposure is necessary. This study examines the use of the InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) diary as a standardized measure of symptom severity in a healthy volunteer human challenge model. METHODS: Healthy adults admitted to the NIH Clinical Center (Day - 1) underwent a 9-day inpatient quarantine after intranasal challenge with a wild-type influenza A/H1N1pdm virus (Day 0). Participants completed the 32-item FLU-PRO diary twice daily for 14 days to assess presence, severity, and duration of symptoms across six body systems. Secondary analyses included descriptive statistics to examine FLU-PRO scores over the course of illness and analysis of variance to compare scores on Day 3 post-challenge by presence of viral shedding, and pre-challenge hemagglutinin and neuraminidase inhibition (HAI and NAI) titers. RESULTS: All but one subject (99%), who was lost to follow-up, completed twice daily FLU-PRO diaries on all study assessment days. FLU-PRO demonstrated that 61 of 65 subjects reported symptoms (Days: Median 5, Mean 6 ± 7), of whom 37 (61%) had viral shedding. Pre-challenge, 39 (64%) and 10 (16%) subjects had low (< 1:40) HAI and NAI titers, respectively. Nose, throat, body, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms reached peak intensity at Day 3, followed by chest/respiratory and eye symptoms at Day 4. Subjects with viral shedding had higher mean FLU-PRO scores compared to those without, except for Eye and GI domains (p <0.05). Mean FLU-PRO scores were significantly higher for subjects with low NAI titer (p <0.05) across all domains. No significant differences were observed between HAI titer groups. FLU-PRO scores of the low HAI-low NAI group (n = 10) were significantly higher (more severe) than the other two groups (p < 0.05) (high HAI-high NAI (n = 22), low HAI-high NAI (n = 29)). CONCLUSIONS: The FLU-PRO had high adherence and low respondent burden. It can be used to track symptom onset, intensity, duration, and recovery from influenza infection in clinical research. In this human challenge study, scores were responsive to change and distinguished known clinical subgroups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01971255 First Registered October 2, 2013.

The effect of aclidinium bromide on daily respiratory symptoms of COPD, measured using the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS: COPD) diary: pooled analysis of two 6-month Phase III studies.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the severity of respiratory symptoms is a key goal in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated the effect of aclidinium bromide 400 µg twice daily (BID) on respiratory symptoms, assessed using the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS(™): COPD) scale (formerly EXACT-RS). METHODS: Data were pooled from the aclidinium 400 µg BID and placebo arms of two 24-week, double-blind, randomized Phase III studies evaluating aclidinium monotherapy (ATTAIN) or combination therapy (AUGMENT COPD I) in patients with moderate to severe airflow obstruction. Patients were stratified by Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Groups A-D. Change from baseline in E-RS scores, proportion of responders (patients achieving pre-defined improvements in E-RS scores), and net benefit (patients who improved minus patients who worsened) were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 1210 patients, 1167 had data available for GOLD classification. Mean (standard deviation) age was 63.2 (8.6) years, 60.7 % were male, and mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s was 54.4 % predicted. Compared with placebo, aclidinium 400 µg BID significantly improved RS-Total (2.38 units vs 0.79 units, p < 0.001) and domain scores (all p < 0.001) at Week 24, and doubled the likelihood of being an RS-Total score responder (p < 0.05), irrespective of GOLD group. The net benefit for RS-Total (Overall: 56.9 % vs 19.4 %; A + C: 65.7 % vs 6.3 %; B + D: 56.0 % vs 20.8 %, for aclidinium 400 µg BID and placebo respectively; all p < 0.05) and domain scores (all p < 0.05) was significantly greater with aclidinium compared with placebo, in both GOLD Groups A + C and B + D. CONCLUSIONS: Aclidinium 400 µg BID significantly improved respiratory symptoms regardless of the patients' level of symptoms at baseline. Net treatment benefit was similar in patients with low or high levels of symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ATTAIN (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001494 ) and AUGMENT COPD I (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01437397 ).

Measuring respiratory symptoms of COPD: performance of the EXACT- Respiratory Symptoms Tool (E-RS) in three clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic relief is an important treatment goal for patients with COPD. To date, no diary for evaluating respiratory symptoms in clinical trials has been developed and scientifically-validated according to FDA and EMA guidelines. The EXACT - Respiratory Symptoms (E-RS) scale is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure designed to address this need. The E-RS utilizes 11 respiratory symptom items from the existing and validated 14-item EXACT, which measures symptoms of exacerbation. The E-RS total score quantifies respiratory symptom severity, and 3 domains assess breathlessness, cough and sputum, and chest symptoms. METHODS: This study examined the performance of the E-RS in each of 3 controlled trials with common and unique validation variables: one 6-month (N = 235, US) and two 3-month (N = 749; N = 597; international). Subjects completed the E-RS as part of a daily eDiary. Tests of reliability, validity, and responsiveness were conducted in each dataset. RESULTS: In each study, RS-Total score was internally consistent (Cronbach α) (0.88, 0.92, 0.92) and reproducible (intra-class correlation) in stable patients (2 days apart: 0.91; 7 days apart: 0.71, 0.74). RS-Total scores correlated significantly with the following criterion variables (Spearman's rho; p < 0.01, all comparisons listed here): FEV1% predicted (-0.19, -0.14, -0.15); St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) (0.65, 0.52, 0.51); Breathlessness, Cough, and Sputum Scale (BCSS) (0.89, 0.89); modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale (mMRC) (0.40); rescue medication use (0.43, 0.42); Functional Performance Inventory Short-Form (FPI-SF) (0.43); 6-minute walk distance (6-MWT) (-0.30, -0.14) and incremental shuttle walk (ISWT) (-0.18) tests. Correlations between these variables and RS-Breathlessness, RS-Cough and Sputum, RS-Chest Symptoms scores supported subscale validity. RS-Total, RS-Breathlessness, and RS-Chest Symptoms differentiated mMRC levels of breathlessness severity (p < 0.0001). RS-Total and domain scores differentiated subjects with no rescue medication use and 3 or more puffs (p < 0.0001). Sensitivity to changes in health status (SGRQ), symptoms (BCSS), and exercise capacity (6MWT, ISWT) were also shown and responder definitions using criterion- and distribution-based methods are proposed. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the E-RS is a reliable, valid, and responsive measure of respiratory symptoms of COPD suitable for use in natural history studies and clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: MPEX: NCT00739648 ; AZ1: NCT00949975 ; AZ 2: NCT01023516.

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures for clinical trials of COPD: the EXACT and E-RS.

The precise assessment of treatment efficacy in clinical trials requires scientific instruments that are not only relevant to the target population and treatment, but have been shown to be reliable, valid, and sensitive to change within the intended context of use. This paper describes the background, procedures, and current status of 2 patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments developed for use in clinical trials of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The first measure, the EXAcerbations of Chronic pulmonary disease Tool (EXACT), was developed under the EXACT-PRO Initiative, a multi-year, multi-sponsor project involving experts in pulmonary medicine, instrument development, and drug development regulatory issues, dedicated to the development of a single, standardized instrument for evaluating the effects of treatment on acute exacerbations of COPD. The second measure, the EXACT-Respiratory Symptoms (E-RS) scale, is a derivative instrument comprising a subset of EXACT items to test the effect of treatment on the severity of respiratory symptoms in stable COPD. The EXACT-PRO Initiative was the first PRO instrument development consortia, and the EXACT and E-RS are the first PRO measures to undergo qualification review by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Standardizing measurement of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations. Reliability and validity of a patient-reported diary.

RATIONALE: Although exacerbations are an important problem in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a target of intervention, there is no valid, standardized tool for assessing their frequency, severity, and duration. OBJECTIVES: This study tested the properties of the Exacerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool (EXACT), a new patient-reported outcome diary. METHODS: A prospective, two-group, observational study was conducted in patients with COPD. The acute group (n = 222) was enrolled during a clinic visit for exacerbation with follow-up visits on Days 10, 29, and 60. The stable group (n = 188), recruited by telephone or during routine visits, was exacerbation free for at least 60 days. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Acute patients completed the diary on Days 1-29 and 60-67; stable patients for 7 days. All patients provided stable-state spirometry and completed the St. George Respiratory Questionnaire-COPD (SGRQ-C). Acute patient assessments included clinician and patient global ratings of exacerbation severity and recovery. Mean age of the sample (n = 410) was 65 (± 10) years; 48% were male; stable FEV1 was 51% predicted (± 20). Internal consistency (Pearson separation index) for the EXACT was 0.92, 1-week reproducibility (stable patients; intraclass correlation) was 0.77. EXACT scores correlated with SGRQ-C (r = 0.64; P < 0.0001) and differentiated acute and stable patients (P < 0.0001). In acute patients, scores improved over time (P < 0.0001) and differentiated between degrees of clinician-rated exacerbation severity (P < 0.05). EXACT change scores differentiated responders and nonresponders on Day 10, as judged by clinicians or patients (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the EXACT is reliable, valid, and sensitive to change with exacerbation recovery.

Interpreting Evaluating Respiratory SymptomsTM in COPD Diary Scores in Clinical Trials: Terminology, Methods, and Recommendations.

Accurately interpreting scores on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures is essential to understanding and communicating treatment benefit. Over the years, terminology and methods for developing recommendations for PRO score interpretation in clinical trials have evolved, leading to some confusion in the field. The phrase "minimal clinically important difference (MCID)" has been simplified to "minimal important difference (MID)" and use of responder thresholds to interpret statistically significant treatment effects has increased. Anchor-based derivation methods continue to be the standard, with specific variations preferred by regulatory authorities for drug development programs. In the midst of these changes, the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms™ in COPD (E-RS:COPD) was developed and qualified for use as an endpoint in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) drug development programs. This paper summarizes the evolution of terminology and method preferences for the development of recommendations for interpreting scores from PRO measures used in clinical trials, and how these changes are reflected in the E-RS:COPD recommendations. The intent is to add clarity to discussions around PRO endpoints and facilitate use of the E-RS:COPD as a key efficacy endpoint in clinical trials of COPD.

A Conceptual Framework for Use of Increased Endurance Time During Constant Work Rate Cycle Ergometry as a Patient-Focused Meaningful Outcome in COPD Clinical Trials.

The Chronic Lung Disease Biomarker and Clinical Outcome Assessment Qualification Consortium (CBQC) evaluates the potential of biomarkers and outcome measures as drug development tools. Exercise endurance is an objective indicator of treatment benefit, closely related to daily physical function. Therefore, it is an ideal candidate for an outcome for drug development trials. Unfortunately, no exercise endurance measure is qualified by regulatory authorities for use in trials of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and no approved COPD therapies have claims of improving exercise endurance. Consequently, it has been challenging for developers to consider this outcome when designing clinical trials for new therapies. Endurance time during constant work rate cycle ergometry (CWRCE), performed on an electronically braked stationary cycle ergometer, provides an exercise endurance measure under standardized conditions. Baseline individualized work rate for each participant is set using an incremental test. During CWRCE the patient is encouraged to continue exercising for as long as possible. Although not required, physiological and sensory responses (e.g., pulmonary ventilation, heart rate, dyspnea ratings) are frequently collected to support interpretation of endurance time changes. Exercise tolerance limit is reached when the individual is limited by symptoms, unable to maintain pedaling cadence or unable to continue safely. At exercise cessation, exercise duration is recorded. An CWRCE endurance time increase from the pre-treatment baseline is proposed as a key efficacy endpoint in clinical trials. In COPD, improved exercise endurance has a direct relationship to the experience of physical functioning in daily life, which is a patient-centered, meaningful benefit.

Characterizing COPD Symptom Variability in the Stable State Utilizing the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD Instrument.

Rationale: It has been suggested that patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) experience considerable daily respiratory symptom fluctuation. A standardized measure is needed to quantify and understand the implications of day-to-day symptom variability. Objectives: To compare standard deviation with other statistical measures of symptom variability and identify characteristics of individuals with higher symptom variability. Methods: Individuals in the SubPopulations and InteRmediate Outcome Measures In COPD Study (SPIROMICS) Exacerbations sub-study completed an Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS) daily questionnaire. We calculated within-subject standard deviation (WS-SD) for each patient at week 0 and correlated this with measurements obtained 4 weeks later using Pearson's r and Bland Altman plots. Median WS-SD value dichotomized participants into higher versus lower variability groups. Association between WS-SD and exacerbation risk during 4 follow-up weeks was explored. Measurements and Main Results: Diary completion rates were sufficient in 140 (68%) of 205 sub-study participants. Reproducibility (r) of the WS-SD metric from baseline to week 4 was 0.32. Higher variability participants had higher St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores (47.3 ± 20.3 versus 39.6 ± 21.5, p=.04) than lower variability participants. Exploratory analyses found no relationship between symptom variability and health care resource utilization-defined exacerbations. Conclusions: WS-SD of the E-RS can be used as a measure of symptom variability in studies of patients with COPD. Patients with higher variability have worse health-related quality of life. WS-SD should be further validated as a measure to understand the implications of symptom variability.

Content validation of two SF-36 subscales for use in type 2 diabetes and non-dialysis chronic kidney disease-related anemia.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the relevance and importance of two SF-36 subscales, Vitality (VT) and Physical Function (PF), to assess concepts of energy and physical function in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and non-dialysis CKD-related anemia. METHODS: Patients with clinical history of DM and non-dialysis CKD-related anemia (n = 68) were identified as follows: 40 participated in concept elicitation (CE) interviews; 20 in cognitive interviews (CI), and 8 in pilot interviews. Relevance and importance ratings for SF-36 VT and PF items were obtained. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and patient expressions of concepts coded. Inter-rater agreement was used to evaluate coding consistency. Concepts elicited were mapped to SF-36 VT and PF items. RESULTS: Patients (n = 64) were 65.6% women, 42.2% Caucasian, with mean age of 66.1 ± 11.6 years. Of 830 coded concepts, 388 (47%) were "Energy" expressions and 287 (35%) were "PF limitations" expressions. Low energy was reported by 85% patients and rated as an important limitation by 88%. Limitations in PF were reported by 56-82% patients and rated important by 44-96%. CE and CI quotes correspond well to SF-36 VT and PF items. CONCLUSION: SF-36 VT and PF contents were suitable for assessing energy and physical function limitations, respectively, in this patient population.

Use of the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms™ in COPD as an Outcome Measure in Clinical Trials: A Rapid Systematic Review.

RATIONALE: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) struggle with respiratory symptoms that impair their daily activities and quality of life. Understanding a treatment's ability to relieve symptoms requires precise assessment. The Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RSTM:COPD) was developed to quantify respiratory symptoms in clinical trials. This study aimed to better understand how trials use this patient-reported outcome measure as an endpoint, as well as its responsiveness and performance relative to other outcome measures. OBJECTIVES: To summarize the use of the E-RS:COPD in pharmacological trials since its qualification by regulatory authorities. METHODS: A rapid systematic literature review, using key biomedical databases to identify English language full-text publications of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) that included the E-RS:COPD as an endpoint (2010-2020). Two investigators independently screened the publications and extracted data. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 219 screened records, 28 full-text publications were included, and data from 17 reporting 20 unique double-blind RCTs were synthesized. The E-RS:COPD was positioned as a primary or secondary endpoint in six publications (35%), and served as an exploratory or additional endpoint in 11 (65%). Statistically significant E-RS:COPD treatment effects versus placebo/comparator were found in 13 of the 14 publications reporting symptom results. E-RS:COPD effects corresponded well with other outcome measures (e.g., St George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ] and forced expiratory volume 1 second [FEV1]). Two publications reported the number of responders. CONCLUSIONS: E-RS:COPD is sensitive to treatment effects in clinical trials testing drug therapies. Presentation of trial results should include responder analyses to facilitate interpretation and application of results.

Does epoetin alfa improve health-related quality of life in chronically ill patients with anemia? Summary of trials of cancer, HIV/AIDS, and chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVES: Anemia, defined as having low levels of hemoglobin (HGB), is caused by disease-related (e.g., bone marrow suppression, nutritional deficiency) or treatment-related (e.g., chemotherapy, antiretroviral therapy) factors. Although epoetin alfa has been shown to improve HGB outcomes in cancer, HIV/AIDS, and chronic kidney disease (CKD), these results have been viewed in isolation, rather than across populations. The purpose of this article is to review findings from trials that evaluated the impact of epoetin alfa on HGB and health-related quality of life (HRQL) across various populations with different underlying causes of anemia. METHODS: A review of clinical trials published in English between January 1993 and September 2005. Searches were conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE. Between- and within-group changes in HGB and HRQL were examined. RESULTS: One hundred ten articles were retrieved and 18 were reviewed. Statistically significant improvements in HGB were generally seen (1) between groups for cancer patients receiving epoetin alfa compared with those receiving placebo or standard of care (SOC) (between-group differences in changes from baseline to end point ranging from 1.2 to 1.9 g/dl); and (2) within groups for HIV/AIDS and CKD patients receiving epoetin alfa (changes from baseline to end point of 2.5 and 2.9 g/dl and 2.7 g/dl, respectively). Statistically and clinically significant improvements in HRQL, particularly with regard to fatigue, were seen across chronic conditions based on the Linear Analog Scale Assessment energy scale; where improvements of at least 8 mm-considered clinically relevant-were generally seen (1) between groups for cancer patients receiving epoetin alfa compared with those receiving placebo or SOC (differences in changes from baseline to end point from 0.8 to 19.8 mm); and (2) within groups for HIV/AIDS and CKD patients receiving epoetin alfa (changes from baseline to end point of 23 and 25 mm and 28 mm, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Results of published clinical trials suggest that treatment of anemia associated with cancer, HIV/AIDS and CKD can have a significant impact on HRQL, particularly fatigue, and that this impact is both statistically and clinically significant.

The Short-term Impact of Symptom-defined COPD Exacerbation Recovery on Health Status and Lung Function.

Background: This study examined the short-term effects of symptom-defined exacerbation recovery on health status and pulmonary function in moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Methods: Secondary analyses of pooled data from two 12-week Phase II international, randomized controlled trials using the EXAcerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool (EXACT) to identify symptom-defined exacerbations were conducted. Recovery was categorized as recovered, unrecovered (persistent worsening), or censored. Multiple regression analyses were used to test the effect of recovery status on change in the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from baseline to Week 12. Evaluating Respiratory Symptom scale (E-RS) scores were used to evaluate change in stable-state respiratory symptoms from baseline to Week 12. Results: Of 1346 eligible patients, 414 (31%) experienced ≥1 symptom-defined exacerbation; 260 patients recovered from their events, 80 experienced an unrecovered event (persistent worsening), 74 patients had only censored events (excluded). Groups were similar at baseline, with the recovered group reporting significantly worse symptoms (p<0.01). Recovery group and baseline SGRQ were significant predictors of change in health status over 12 weeks (p=0.04; p<0.01); no effects were observed for lung function. Significant between-group differences in change in respiratory symptom severity from baseline to Week 12 were observed (p<0.01), with the persistent worsening group experiencing clinically meaningful deterioration in breathlessness and chest symptoms. Conclusions: Results suggest some patients have difficulty recovering from symptom-defined exacerbations, leading to a deterioration in health status, dyspnea, and chest symptoms without short-term effects on lung function. Further study of symptom-defined exacerbation recovery and health outcomes is warranted.

Exacerbation recovery patterns in newly diagnosed or maintenance treatment-naïve patients with COPD: secondary analyses of TICARI 1 trial data.

Background: Little is known about the recovery patterns from acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in newly diagnosed or maintenance treatment-naïve patients with COPD. This study describes the course of AECOPD in these patients at the time of treatment for the symptoms of acute respiratory tract infection (RTI). Methods: This study was a secondary analysis of data from a 12-week, randomized clinical trial (TICARI 1) testing the efficacy and safety of once-daily tiotropium 18 µg maintenance therapy versus placebo in newly diagnosed or maintenance treatment-naïve COPD patients with acute RTI symptoms for ≤7 days. Patients received standard care for AECOPD and RTI. Due to under-recruitment, the trial ended early and hence was underpowered to detect treatment differences. Data were pooled and exacerbation recovery patterns examined by using the EXAcerbation of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool (EXACT), forced expiratory volume in 1 second, rescue medication use, COPD Assessment Test™, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Short Form, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Respiratory Symptoms. Results: Of 140 patients, 73.6% had a prior COPD diagnosis without maintenance therapy; 80.0% had moderate-to-severe airflow obstruction. In addition to study drug, 40.0% were prescribed pharmacologic therapy (corticosteroids [34.3%], antibiotics [16.4%], and short-acting ß2-adrenergic agonists [5.0%]) within ±7 days of randomization. Over 12 weeks, 78.6% exhibited symptomatic recovery (EXACT score) in a median of 5.0 days. Across all patients, 49.3% recovered without relapse, 29.3% recovered and then relapsed, and 21.4% had persistent symptoms (recovery criteria unmet). Conclusion: A substantial portion of newly diagnosed or maintenance treatment-naïve patients with COPD experience relapse or persistent symptoms following a clinic visit for AECOPD with symptoms of RTI. Whether initiating maintenance therapy could improve outcomes and reduce exacerbation risk requires further study.

Can CAPTURE be used to identify undiagnosed patients with mild-to-moderate COPD likely to benefit from treatment?

Background: COPD Assessment in Primary Care To Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE™) uses five questions and peak expiratory flow (PEF) thresholds (males ≤350 L/min; females ≤250 L/min) to identify patients with a forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) <0.70 and FEV1 <60% predicted or exacerbation risk requiring further evaluation for COPD. This study tested CAPTURE's ability to identify symptomatic patients with mild-to-moderate COPD (FEV1 60%-80% predicted) who may also benefit from diagnosis and treatment. Methods: Data from the CAPTURE development study were used to test its sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) differentiating mild-to-moderate COPD (n=73) from no COPD (n=87). SN and SP for differentiating all COPD cases (mild to severe; n=259) from those without COPD (n=87) were also estimated. The modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale and COPD Assessment Test (CAT™) were used to evaluate symptoms and health status. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01880177, https://ClinicalTrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01880177?term=NCT01880177&rank=1. Results: Mean age (+SD): 61 (+10.5) years; 41% male. COPD: FEV1/FVC=0.60 (+0.1), FEV1% predicted=74% (+12.4). SN and SP for differentiating mild-to-moderate and non-COPD patients (n=160): Questionnaire: 83.6%, 67.8%; PEF (≤450 L/min; ≤350 L/min): 83.6%, 66.7%; CAPTURE (Questionnaire+PEF): 71.2%, 83.9%. COPD patients whose CAPTURE results suggested that diagnostic evaluation was warranted (n=52) were more likely to be symptomatic than patients whose results did not (n=21) (mMRC >2: 37% vs 5%, p<0.01; CAT>10: 86% vs 57%, p<0.01). CAPTURE differentiated COPD from no COPD (n=346): SN: 88.0%, SP: 83.9%. Conclusion: CAPTURE (450/350) may be useful for identifying symptomatic patients with mild-to-moderate airflow obstruction in need of diagnostic evaluation for COPD.

Performance of the inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) diary in patients with influenza-like illness (ILI).

BACKGROUND: The inFLUenza Patient Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) measure is a daily diary assessing signs/symptoms of influenza across six body systems: Nose, Throat, Eyes, Chest/Respiratory, Gastrointestinal, Body/Systemic, developed and tested in adults with influenza. OBJECTIVES: This study tested the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of FLU-PRO scores in adults with influenza-like illness (ILI). METHODS: Data from the prospective, observational study used to develop and test the FLU-PRO in influenza virus positive patients were analyzed. Adults (≥18 years) presenting with influenza symptoms in outpatient settings in the US, UK, Mexico, and South America were enrolled, tested for influenza virus, and asked to complete the 37-item draft FLU-PRO daily for up to 14-days. Analyses were performed on data from patients testing negative. Reliability of the final, 32-item FLU-PRO was estimated using Cronbach's alpha (α; Day 1) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC; 2-day reproducibility). Convergent and known-groups validity were assessed using patient global assessments of influenza severity (PGA). Patient report of return to usual health was used to assess responsiveness (Day 1-7). RESULTS: The analytical sample included 220 ILI patients (mean age = 39.3, 64.1% female, 88.6% white). Sixty-one (28%) were hospitalized at some point in their illness. Internal consistency reliability (α) of FLU-PRO Total score was 0.90 and ranged from 0.72-0.86 for domain scores. Reproducibility (Day 1-2) was 0.64 for Total, ranging from 0.46-0.78 for domain scores. Day 1 FLU-PRO scores correlated (≥0.30) with the PGA (except Gastrointestinal) and were significantly different across PGA severity groups (Total: F = 81.7, p<0.001; subscales: F = 6.9-62.2; p<0.01). Mean score improvements Day 1-7 were significantly greater in patients reporting return to usual health compared with those who did not (p<0.05, Total and subscales, except Gastrointestinal and Eyes). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest FLU-PRO scores are reliable, valid, and responsive in adults with influenza-like illness.

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.

How Well Does CAPTURE Translate?: An Exploratory Analysis of a COPD Case-Finding Method for Spanish-Speaking Patients.

BACKGROUND: This study tested the properties of a Spanish translation of CAPTURE (COPD Assessment in Primary Care To Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk) with selective use of peak expiratory flow (PEF). METHODS: This study comprised analyses of data from the Spanish-speaking cohort of the cross-sectional, case-control study used to develop CAPTURE. Translation procedures included forward and backward translation, reconciliation, and cognitive interviewing to assure linguistic and cultural equivalence, yielding CAPTURE-S. Spanish-speaking participants were recruited through one center and designated as case subjects (clinically significant COPD: FEV1 ≤ 60% predicted and/or at risk of COPD exacerbation) or control subjects (no or mild COPD). Subjects completed a questionnaire booklet that included 44 candidate items, the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea question. PEF and spirometry were also performed. RESULTS: The study included 30 participants (17 case subjects and 13 control subjects). Their mean (± SD) age was 62.6 (11.49) years, and 33% were male. CAPTURE-S scores were significantly correlated with PEF (r = -0.78), the FEV1/FVC ratio (r = -0.74), FEV1 (r = -0.69), FEV1 % predicted (r = -0.69), the CAT score (r = 0.70), and the mMRC dyspnea question (r = 0.59) (P < .0001), with significantly higher scores in case subjects than in control subjects (t = 6.16; P < .0001). PEF significantly correlated with FEV1 (r = 0.89), FEV1 % predicted (r = 0.79), and the FEV1/FVC ratio (r = 0.75) (P < .0001), with significantly lower PEF in case subjects than in control subjects (t = 5.08; P < .0001). CAPTURE-S score + PEF differentiated case subjects and control subjects with a sensitivity of 88.2% and a specificity of 92.3%. CONCLUSIONS: CAPTURE-S with selective use of PEF seems to be useful for identifying Spanish-speaking patients in need of diagnostic evaluation for clinically significant COPD who may benefit from initiation of COPD treatment. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01880177; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.