Updated Recommendations on Evidence Needed to Support Measurement Comparability Among Modes of Data Collection for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force.

The ISPOR Task Force on measurement comparability between modes of data collection for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has updated the good practice recommendations from the 2009 ISPOR electronic patient-reported outcome and 2014 patient-reported outcome mixed modes Good Research Practices Task Force reports in light of accumulated evidence of measurement comparability among different modes of PROM data collection. Furthermore, with the increasing use of electronic formats of clinical outcome assessments in clinical trials and the US Food and Drug Administration's encouragement of electronic data collection, this new task force report provides stakeholders with best practice recommendations reflecting the current body of evidence and enables them to respond to future developments in research and technology. This task force recommends an evidence-based approach to determine whether new research is needed to evaluate measurement comparability for a given questionnaire or technology. The suitability of existing evidence depends upon whether it satisfactorily demonstrates that the change in data collection mode has not affected the PROM's measurement properties. In cases where sufficient evidence of measurement comparability exists and best practices for faithful migration are followed, this task force concludes that further testing of measurement comparability among the data collection modes is unnecessary, including cases of "mixing modes" within clinical trials such as bring your own device designs.

Neurocognitive clinical outcome assessments for inborn errors of metabolism and other rare conditions.

Well-defined and reliable clinical outcome assessments are essential for determining whether a drug provides clinically meaningful treatment benefit for patients. In 2015, FDA convened a workshop, "Assessing Neurocognitive Outcomes in Inborn Errors of Metabolism." Topics covered included special challenges of clinical studies of inborn errors of metabolism (IEMs) and other rare diseases; complexities of identifying treatment effects in the context of the dynamic processes of child development and disease progression; and the importance of natural history studies. Clinicians, parents/caregivers, and participants from industry, academia, and government discussed factors to consider when developing measures to assess treatment outcomes, as well as tools and methods that may contribute to standardizing measures. Many issues examined are relevant to the broader field of rare diseases in addition to specifics of IEMs.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Glomerular Disease.

Incorporation of the patient perspective into research and clinical practice will enrich our understanding of the status and management of patients with glomerular disease and may result in therapies that better address patient needs. In recent years, the importance of the patient experience of glomerular disease has become clear, and significant efforts have been undertaken to systematically capture and describe the patient's disease experience. Patient-reported outcome instruments provide a means to assess the patient's experience in a quantitative manner, thus enabling for comparisons within and between patients. Patient-reported outcome assessments are solely on the basis of a patient report about the status of their health without amendment or interpretation by a clinician or others. Patient-reported outcome assessments provide an opportunity to incorporate the patient perspective into clinical care, research, and clinical trials. Our paper provides an overview of terminology and development methods for patient-reported outcomes and reviews (1) currently available patient-reported outcome instruments appropriate for use in glomerular disease, (2) existing patient-reported outcome data in glomerular disease, and (3) opportunities for incorporating patient-reported outcome instruments into clinical care and research.

Practical Considerations for the Use of Clinical Outcome Assessments (COAs) in Pediatric Clinical Research: Examples From Pediatric Gastroenterology.

Clinical outcome assessments (COAs), including patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, are routinely used in drug development and other clinical research initiatives to assess the impact of treatment on patient health and well-being. The FDA Guidance for Industry Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims (2009), the European Medicines Agency's Reflection Paper on the Regulatory Guidance for the Use of Health-Related Quality of Life Measures in the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (2005), and the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research PRO Good Research Practices for the Assessment of Children and Adolescence Task Force (2013) outline key considerations and good measurement principles that are relevant to the selection and use of COAs in a pediatric population. However, challenges remain in the appropriate selection and use of COAs to assess treatment benefit in pediatric clinical research. The purpose of this paper is to summarize proceedings from a panel presentation at the Critical Path Institute's 2015 Annual PRO Consortium Workshop. This paper underscores the importance of considering children's specific needs and the numerous challenges faced when developing and implementing well-defined and reliable COAs in pediatric clinical trials evaluating medical products, and describes some approaches to addressing these unique needs and challenges.