Best Practices for the Electronic Implementation and Migration of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

While the use of electronic methods to collect patient-reported outcome data in clinical trials continues to increase, it remains the case that many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have originally been developed and validated on paper. Careful consideration during the move from paper PROMs to electronic format is required to preserve the integrity of the measure and ensure a "faithful migration." Relevant literature has long called out the importance of following migration best practices during this process; nevertheless, such best practices are distributed across multiple documents. This article consolidates and builds upon existing electronic PROM implementation best practice recommendations to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date, single point of reference. It reflects the current consensus based on the significant advances in technology capabilities and knowledge gleaned from the growing evidence base on electronic migration and implementation, to balance the need for maintaining the integrity of the measure while optimizing respondent usability. It also specifies whether the practice is rooted in evidence or expert consensus, to enable those using these best practices to make informed and considered decisions when conducting migration.

Development and content validation of a patient-reported endometriosis pain daily diary.

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a common gynecological disorder that causes inflammation and pelvic pain. Endometriosis-related pain is best captured with patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, however, assessment of endometriosis-related pain in clinical trials has been difficult in the absence of a reliable and valid PRO instrument. We describe the development of the Endometriosis Pain Daily Diary (EPDD), an electronic PRO developed as a survey instrument to assess endometriosis-related pain and its impact on patients' lives. METHODS: The EPDD was initially developed on the basis of an existing Endometriosis Pain and Bleeding Diary, a targeted review of relevant literature, clinical expert interviews, and open-ended (concept elicitation) patient interviews in the United States (US) and Japan which captured patients' experience with endometriosis. Cognitive interviews of patients with endometriosis were conducted to evaluate patient comprehension of the EPDD items. A conceptual model of endometriosis was developed, and meetings with US and European regulatory authorities provided feedback for validating the EPDD in the context of clinical trials. Translatability assessments of the EPDD were conducted to confirm its appropriate interpretation and ease of completion across 17 languages. RESULTS: The iterative development progressed through three versions of the instrument. The EPDDv1 included 18 items relating to dysmenorrhea/pelvic pain, dyspareunia and sexual activity, bleeding, hot flashes, daily activities, and use of rescue medication. The EPDDv2 was a larger 43-item survey tested in cognitive interviews and subsequently revised to yield the current 11-item EPDDv3, consisting of five core items relating to dysmenorrhea, non-menstrual pelvic pain, and dyspareunia, and six extension items relating to sexual activity, daily activities, and use of rescue medication. CONCLUSIONS: The EPDD is a PRO for the evaluation of endometriosis-related pain and its associated impacts on patients' lives. The EPDD represents an important step in providing a PRO that is relevant to patients with endometriosis-related pain in the context of a clinical study setting (ie, fit-for-purpose), designed to evaluate pain associated with endometriosis, including regulatory agency support for its further exploration in clinical trials.

Flexible approaches to eCOA administration in clinical trials: The site perspective.

The Critical Path Institute convened the Support Flexible Approaches to PRO Data Collection project as part of the eCOA: Getting Better Together Initiative which was instigated to identify and address common challenges and drive positive change with eCOA implementation in clinical trials. The project aimed to identify clinical trial stakeholders' concerns related to electronic PRO (ePRO) implementation and propose areas of improvement via simplification and flexibility. One workstream focused on patient-/site-centric approaches for simplification and surveyed representatives of clinical sites and site monitors for their perspectives. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed and distributed via snowball sampling to site professionals and clinical research associates (CRAs) that had ePRO experience who had been identified via representative groups or sponsor-led site networks. Responses were received from various site roles across a range of global regions; the largest contribution was from the United States. Topics raised included helpdesk capabilities, technical concerns, device types, and user interfaces among others and are discussed further in this paper. The feedback derived from the questionnaire provided the basis for concrete ideas that sponsors should consider incorporating into protocol design for participant visits, technology use, devices, and methods of back-up data collection.

Measurement Comparability of Electronic and Paper Administration of Visual Analogue Scales: A Review of Published Studies.

BACKGROUND: Visual analogue scales (VASs) are used in a variety of patient-, observer- and clinician-reported outcome measures. While typically included in measures originally developed for pen-and-paper completion, a greater number of clinical trials currently use electronic approaches to their collection. This leads researchers to question whether the measurement properties of the scale have been conserved during the migration to an electronic format, particularly because electronic formats often use a different scale length than the 100 mm paper standard. METHODS: We performed a review of published studies investigating the measurement comparability of paper and electronic formats of the VAS. RESULTS: Our literature search yielded 26 studies published between 1997 and 2018 that reported comparison of paper and electronic formats using the VAS. After excluding 2 publications, 23 of the remaining 24 studies included in this review reported electronic formats of the VAS (eVAS) and paper formats (pVAS) to be equivalent. A further study concluded that eVAS and pVAS were both acceptable but should not be interchanged. eVAS length varied from 21 to 200 mm, indicating that 100 mm length is not a requirement. CONCLUSIONS: The literature supports the hypothesis that eVAS and pVAS provide comparable results regardless of the VAS length. When implementing a VAS on a screen-based electronic mode, we recommend following industry best practices for faithful migration to minimise the likelihood of non-comparability with pVAS.

Best Practices for Avoiding Paper Backup When Implementing Electronic Approaches to Patient-Reported Outcome Data Collection in Clinical Trials.

Electronic data capture is fast becoming the preferred method of collecting patient-reported outcome (PRO) data in clinical trials. Data collection can be site-based (clinical study site), and typically collected on a tablet, or field-based (subject's typical environment such as home, school, or workplace), and most often accomplished with handheld devices, such as a smartphone. While site and study subject compliance with protocol-specific data collection procedures using these devices is critical to trial success, so is the robustness of the device hardware and the software these devices use to capture the trial data. Technology failures and/or site or subject resistance to the electronic data capture protocol may lead a subject to record data on paper, which can result in undesirable data challenges. As such, both site and subject compliance issues and technology-related factors must be anticipated to adhere to the ePRO data collection plan. The objective of this paper is to provide the technology industry's best practice recommendations for optimizing ePRO data collection in clinical trials by proposing the inclusion of a planned approach to data collection that includes viable electronic backup strategies so that defaulting to a paper-based backup becomes unnecessary.

Content Validity for the VVSymQ® Instrument: A New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for the Assessment of Varicose Veins Symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Varicose veins are common and can impact patients' quality of life, but consensus regarding the evaluation of varicose vein symptoms is lacking and existing measures have limitations. OBJECTIVE: This research aimed to develop and establish the content validity of a new electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure, the VVSymQ® instrument, to assess symptoms of superficial venous insufficiency (varicose veins) in clinical trials. METHODS: The development of the VVSymQ® instrument began with qualitative interviews with patients based on the symptom domain of the VEINES-QOL/Sym, an existing PRO instrument for chronic venous disorders of the leg. Three phases of qualitative research were conducted to examine the relevance and importance of the symptoms to patients with varicose veins, and the patients' ability to understand and use the VVSymQ® instrument. The development included evaluating questions that had 1-week and 24-h recall periods, and paper and electronic versions of the new instrument. RESULTS: Five symptoms (heaviness, achiness, swelling, throbbing, and itching [HASTI™]) were consistently reported by patients across all sources of qualitative data. The final version of the VVSymQ® instrument queries patients on the HASTI™ symptoms using a 24-h recall period and a 6-point duration-based response scale ranging from "None of the time" to "All of the time," and is administered daily via an electronic diary. Cognitive interviews demonstrated varicose vein patients' understanding of and their ability to use the final version of the VVSymQ® instrument. CONCLUSION: Content validity was established for the VVSymQ® instrument, which assesses the five HASTI™ symptoms of varicose veins daily via an electronic diary and has promise for use in research and practice.

Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) used in recent Phase 3 trials for Type 2 Diabetes: A review of concepts assessed by these PROs and factors to consider when choosing a PRO for future trials.

AIMS: Many treatment options are available for people with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D). While the goal of treatment is to reach target HbA1c levels, the psychological experience may be more tangible and meaningful for the patient. Together with biomarkers, Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) data provide a holistic understanding of the clinical and psychosocial impact of T2D and its treatment. METHODS: A literature review was conducted in multiple databases to identify PRO endpoints used in Phase 3 trials of newer classes of drugs for the treatment of T2D. RESULTS: This review identified five PRO concepts which were evaluated as endpoints in Phase 3 trials of GLP-1 receptor agonists, novel insulins, SGLT-2 inhibitors, and DPP-4 inhibitors; symptoms, health-related quality of life, psychological well-being, satisfaction with treatment/health and impact of weight. Twenty PRO questionnaires were used to measure these concepts/endpoints directly from patients. The relevance of, and scientific basis for, these concepts as endpoints are discussed, the similarities and differences between questionnaires targeting the same concepts/endpoints are explored, and the sensitivity of the questionnaires to the experimental intervention is summarized. In addition, factors that should be considered when choosing PROs for future T2D trials are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The information gained from PROs in clinical trial research is important in defining treatment benefit within the context of the trial, and the potential benefit (i.e. better adherence) in clinical practice. However, variable results have been observed in recent trials and careful and systematic consideration should be given to PRO selection for future studies of T2D.

The VVSymQ® instrument: Use of a new patient-reported outcome measure for assessment of varicose vein symptoms.

INTRODUCTION: No existing patient-reported outcome instrument focuses solely on assessment of varicose veins symptoms that are bothersome to patients. METHODS: The VVSymQ® instrument is a five-item patient-reported outcome that assesses symptoms most important to patients with varicose veins (heaviness, achiness, swelling, throbbing and itching). This paper describes how the VVSymQ® instrument was incorporated into an electronic daily diary to monitor key outcomes over time and capture treatment benefit in two randomized, controlled, phase 3 clinical trials. RESULTS: Patients were highly compliant in completing the electronic daily diary, and the VVSymQ® instrument demonstrated ability to detect overall change and ability to detect change that is meaningful to patients. CONCLUSION: The VVSymQ® instrument is a reliable, valid instrument responsive to measuring change in the patient experience of varicose vein symptoms pre- and post-intervention, and is uniquely focused on patient-reported symptoms compared with other widely used questionnaires completed by clinicians.