Efficacy and safety of a novel mucoadhesive clobetasol patch for treatment of erosive oral lichen planus: A phase 2 randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the oral mucosa. Currently there is no approved treatment for OLP. We report on the efficacy and safety of a novel mucoadhesive clobetasol patch (Rivelin® -CLO) for the treatment of OLP. METHODS: Patients with confirmed OLP and measurable symptomatic ulcer(s) participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial testing a novel mucoadhesive clobetasol patch (Rivelin® -CLO) in OLP across Europe, Canada, and the United States. Patients were randomized to placebo (nonmedicated), 1, 5, 20 µg Clobetasol/patch, twice daily, for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in total ulcer area compared to baseline. Secondary endpoints included improvement from baseline in pain, disease activity, and quality of life. RESULTS: Data were analyzed and expressed as mean [SD]. One hundred thirty-eight patients were included in the study; 99 females and 39 males, mean age was 61.1 [11.6] years. Statistical analyses revealed that treatment with 20-µg Rivelin® -CLO patches demonstrated significant improvement with ulcer area (p = 0.047), symptom severity (p = 0.001), disease activity (p = 0.022), pain (p = 0.012), and quality of life (p = 0.003) as compared with placebo. Improvement in OLP symptoms from beginning to the end of the study was reported as very much better (best rating) in the 20-µg group (25/32) patients compared to the placebo group (11/30), (p = 0.012). Adverse events were mild/moderate. Candidiasis incidence was low (2%). CONCLUSIONS: Rivelin® -CLO patches were superior to placebo demonstrating statistically significant, clinically relevant efficacy in objective and subjective improvement and, with a favorable safety profile.

Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary (HDSM-Ax): Evaluation of Measurement Performance.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of primary axillary hyperhidrosis (AHH) require rigorous measurement of AHH severity from the patient’s perspective. Previously, we reported conceptualization and item content development for the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary (HDSM-Ax) scale. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychometric performance and estimate clinically meaningful change scores for the HDSM-Ax in a Phase IIb clinical study of sofpironium bromide gel for AHH. METHOD: HDSM-Ax measurement performance was analyzed in trial response data using two psychometric paradigms: Classical Test and Rasch Measurement Theories (CTT; RMT). HDSM-Ax meaningful change scores were estimated from anchor-based methods using two global summary questions of hyperhidrosis severity and the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Score (HDSS). RESULTS: HDSM-Ax satisfied CTT and RMT criteria as a fit-for-purpose outcome measure in AHH clinical trials. Within-person anchor-based analyses indicated a 1-point change in HDSM-Ax severity score (range, 0–4) represents a clinically meaningful change in AHH severity. CONCLUSION: HDSM-Ax is a well-defined and reliable measure of AHH severity. A 1-point change in HDSM-Ax score is clinically meaningful. J Drugs Dermatol.20(4):410-418. doi:10.36849/JDD.5569.

Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief 2.0 (ICSG 2.0): Validation of a revised measure of spiritual distress in bereavement.

Spirituality has long served as a source of solace for many grievers following a loss. For other mourners, whose bereavement experience has been significantly challenged by struggles in their relationship with God and/or their faith community, the opposite is true. Complicated spiritual grief (CSG) is a spiritual crisis following the loss of a loved one. To assess CSG in samples of bereaved adults, a simple-to-use, multidimensional measure of spiritual crisis following loss called the Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief (ICSG) was previously developed and validated. However, subsequent research providing greater clarity about the construct of CSG supported the need to revise and update the ICSG. The goal of the present study was to establish the psychometric validity of a revised measure of CSG, called the Inventory of Complicated Spiritual Grief 2.0 (ICSG 2.0), with a large, diverse cohort of bereaved Christian adults (N = 440). Analyses of the bifurcated sample supported a three-factor model measuring insecurity with God, estrangement from the spiritual community, and disruption in religious practices. Further analyses supported the convergent and incremental validity of a 28-item scale relative to other theoretically similar instruments and measures of poor bereavement outcome, indicating the instrument's research and clinical usefulness.

The Coping Assessment for Bereavement and Loss Experiences (CABLE): Development and initial validation.

The authors present the development and validation of the Coping Assessment for Bereavement and Loss Experiences (CABLE), the first instrument designed to assess a range of potentially constructive strategies for coping with grief following the death of a loved one. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis with an international sample of bereaved adults (N = 844) yielded a six-factor, 28-item structure. Use of this validated, clinically useful, self-report tool can inform clinicians and researchers in evaluating bereavement coping, and in developing interventions designed to increase the number and broaden the types of coping strategies used to facilitate healing following loss.

Novel Oral Lichen Planus Symptom Severity Measure for assessing patients' daily symptom experience.

OBJECTIVE: A novel Oral Lichen Planus Symptom Severity Measure was developed as a clinical outcome assessment of the daily symptom experience of patients with oral lichen planus. METHODS: A literature review and expert input were followed by open-ended concept elicitation interviews with 17 adults with oral lichen planus in the United States and Ireland. Item content was generated, and the interviews continued until input saturation was reached. The final electronic version of the measure was cognitively debriefed in 6 US patients and subsequently translated and linguistically validated in Germany and Denmark. RESULTS: Concept elicitation interviews demonstrated content validity and saturation in identifying symptoms and daily activities that generate symptoms in patients with oral lichen planus. The content and electronic daily diary format demonstrated content validity during cognitive debriefing interviews. Linguistic validation of the 7-item Oral Lichen Planus Symptom Severity Measure in Germany and Denmark confirmed the content validity of the German and Danish versions. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative research methods generated evidence that the 7-item Oral Lichen Planus Symptom Severity Measure version 1.0 is a well-defined assessment tool to characterize the severity, specificity and variations of symptoms in patients with oral lichen planus.

The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary: Conceptualization and Development of Item Content.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with primary axillary hyperhidrosis (AHH) suffer from a variety of symptoms. Improved patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are needed to better assess and categorize the severity of AHH symptoms experienced by patients because the widely used Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale (HDSS) is a single-item measure that cannot capture the broad scope of disease impact. METHODS: The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Measure-Axillary (HDSM-Ax) was developed for determining the severity of excessive sweating in patients with primary focal AHH based on face-to-face concept elicitation interviews with 58 AHH patients, a literature review, and expert clinical input. Two waves of face-to-face cognitive interviews (n=26 and n=27) were conducted to evaluate HDSM-Ax clarity and relevance. Additional interviews (n=5) were conducted to confirm content. Adding Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analyses allowed for an iterative streamlined approach to documenting content validity and other cross-sectional measurement properties of the new HDSM-Ax measurement. RESULTS: The 11-item HDSM-Ax PRO scale (0-4 scale per item; 0-44 total scale) represents an AHH symptom range of 0 (no sweating) to 44 (worst possible sweating). Content validity of the HDSM-Ax was documented by showing that chronologically-grouped interviews demonstrated saturation in AHH symptom severity concepts. Cognitive debriefing interviews provided evidence that item content is complete, comprehensible, meaningful, and relevant. RMT-based exploration indicated that targeting of the HDSM-Ax was adequate, suggesting good matching between items and persons; item fit was adequate, suggesting a clinically cohesive scale; and items appeared to be stable between subgroups, thereby supporting a summary score. CONCLUSIONS: The HDSM-Ax is a well-developed measure of AHH severity based on patient-reported signs and symptoms. It is a superior measure to the HDSS and can be used in clinical research and clinical practice to quantify changes in symptom severity in response to treatment. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(7):707-714.

Content validity of symptom-based measures for diabetic, chemotherapy, and HIV peripheral neuropathy.

INTRODUCTION: No treatments for axonal peripheral neuropathy are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Although patient- and clinician-reported outcomes are central to evaluating neuropathy symptoms, they can be difficult to assess accurately. The inability to identify efficacious treatments for peripheral neuropathies could be due to invalid or inadequate outcome measures. METHODS: This systematic review examined the content validity of symptom-based measures of diabetic peripheral neuropathy, HIV neuropathy, and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. RESULTS: Use of all FDA-recommended methods to establish content validity was only reported for 2 of 18 measures. Multiple sensory and motor symptoms were included in measures for all 3 conditions; these included numbness, tingling, pain, allodynia, difficulty walking, and cramping. Autonomic symptoms were less frequently included. CONCLUSIONS: Given significant overlap in symptoms between neuropathy etiologies, a measure with content validity for multiple neuropathies with supplemental disease-specific modules could be of great value in the development of disease-modifying treatments for peripheral neuropathies. Muscle Nerve 55: 366-372, 2017.

Patient-Reported Outcome and Observer-Reported Outcome Assessment in Rare Disease Clinical Trials: An ISPOR COA Emerging Good Practices Task Force Report.

BACKGROUND: Rare diseases (RDs) affect a small number of people within a population. About 5000 to 8000 distinct RDs have been identified, with an estimated 6% to 8% of people worldwide suffering from an RD. Approximately 75% of RDs affect children. Frequently, these conditions are heterogeneous; many are progressive. Regulatory incentives have increased orphan drug designations and approvals. OBJECTIVE: To develop emerging good practices for RD outcomes research addressing the challenges inherent in identifying, selecting, developing, adapting, and implementing patient-reported outcome (PRO) and observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) assessments for use in RD clinical trials. GOOD PRACTICES FOR OUTCOMES RESEARCH: This report outlines the challenges and potential solutions in determining clinical outcomes for RD trials. It follows the US Food and Drug Administration Roadmap to Patient-Focused Outcome Measurement in Clinical Trials. The Roadmap consists of three columns: 1) Understanding the Disease or Condition, 2) Conceptualizing Treatment Benefit, and 3) Selecting/Developing the Outcome Measure. Challenges in column 1 include factors such as incomplete natural history data and heterogeneity of disease presentation and patient experience. Solutions include using several information sources, for example, clinical experts and patient advocacy groups, to construct the condition's natural history and understand treatment patterns. Challenges in column 2 include understanding and measuring treatment benefit from the patient's perspective, especially given challenges in defining the context of use such as variations in age or disease severity/progression. Solutions include focusing on common symptoms across patient subgroups, identifying short-term outcomes, and using multiple types of COA instruments to measure the same constructs. Challenges in column 3 center around the small patient population and heterogeneity of the condition or study sample. Few disease-specific instruments for RDs exist. Strategies include adapting existing instruments developed for a similar condition or that contain symptoms of importance to the RD patient population, or using a generic instrument validated for the context of use. CONCLUSIONS: This report provides state-of-the-art solutions to patient-reported outcome (PRO) and observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) assessments challenges in clinical trials of patients with RDs. These recommended solutions are both pragmatic and creative and posed with clear recognition of the global regulatory context used in RD clinical development programs.

Clinician-Reported Outcome Assessments of Treatment Benefit: Report of the ISPOR Clinical Outcome Assessment Emerging Good Practices Task Force.

A clinician-reported outcome (ClinRO) assessment is a type of clinical outcome assessment (COA). ClinRO assessments, like all COAs (patient-reported, observer-reported, or performance outcome assessments), are used to 1) measure patients' health status and 2) define end points that can be interpreted as treatment benefits of medical interventions on how patients feel, function, or survive in clinical trials. Like other COAs, ClinRO assessments can be influenced by human choices, judgment, or motivation. A ClinRO assessment is conducted and reported by a trained health care professional and requires specialized professional training to evaluate the patient's health status. This is the second of two reports by the ISPOR Clinical Outcomes Assessment-Emerging Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force. The first report provided an overview of COAs including definitions important for an understanding of COA measurement practices. This report focuses specifically on issues related to ClinRO assessments. In this report, we define three types of ClinRO assessments (readings, ratings, and clinician global assessments) and describe emerging good measurement practices in their development and evaluation. The good measurement practices include 1) defining the context of use; 2) identifying the concept of interest measured; 3) defining the intended treatment benefit on how patients feel, function, or survive reflected by the ClinRO assessment and evaluating the relationship between that intended treatment benefit and the concept of interest; 4) documenting content validity; 5) evaluating other measurement properties once content validity is established (including intra- and inter-rater reliability); 6) defining study objectives and end point(s) objectives, and defining study end points and placing study end points within the hierarchy of end points; 7) establishing interpretability in trial results; and 8) evaluating operational considerations for the implementation of ClinRO assessments used as end points in clinical trials. Applying good measurement practices to ClinRO assessment development and evaluation will lead to more efficient and accurate measurement of treatment effects. This is important beyond regulatory approval in that it provides evidence for the uptake of new interventions into clinical practice and provides justification to payers for reimbursement on the basis of the clearly demonstrated added value of the new intervention.

Domains of Social Support That Predict Bereavement Distress Following Homicide Loss.

Psychological adaptation following homicide loss can prove more challenging for grievers than other types of losses. Although social support can be beneficial in bereavement, research is mixed in terms of identifying whether it serves as a buffer to distress following traumatic loss. In particular, studies have not parsed out specific domains of social support that best predict positive bereavement outcomes. Recruiting a sample of 47 African Americans bereaved by homicide, we examined six types of social support along with the griever's perceived need for or satisfaction with each and analyzed them in relation to depression, anxiety, complicated grief, and posttraumatic stress disorder outcomes. Results of multivariate analyses revealed that the griever's level of satisfaction with physical assistance at the initial assessment best predicted lower levels of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder levels 6 months later, while less need for physical assistance predicted lower complicated grief at follow-up. Clinical implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Patient-Focused Drug Development: A New Direction for Collaboration.

CONTEXT: Patient-Focused Drug Development (PFDD) is a new initiative from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) intended to bring patient perspectives into an earlier stage of product development. The goal is that patients will be able to provide context for benefit-risk assessments and input to review divisions, and also aid in the development of new assessment tools, study endpoints, and risk communications. This paper provides a summary on what is known to date about FDA's PFDD initiative and describes implications for patients, researchers, payers, and the biopharmaceutical industry. It also provides a roadmap for stakeholders to consider in defining their role in and in shaping PFDD's direction, and for expanding PFDD principles to conditions beyond the current 20 under FDA consideration. METHODS: A search was conducted of the peer-reviewed and gray literature using PubMed and Google. This included laws, FDA guidance documents, the peer-reviewed literature, and FDA presentations for content relevant to the search term "patient-focused drug development." FINDINGS: Currently, FDA activities within PFDD are limited to gaining patient insights through 20 disease-specific meetings. However, many stakeholders see the initiative much more generally as representing a broad shift toward patient centeredness in biopharmaceutical product development. CONCLUSIONS: Depending upon the trajectory taken and whether or not all PFDD aims are eventually addressed, the initiative has the potential to change product development in fundamental ways. Further research should explore how patient input on disease manifestation and treatment options is best ascertained from patients and documented before initiating and during drug development.

Clinical Outcome Assessments: Conceptual Foundation-Report of the ISPOR Clinical Outcomes Assessment - Emerging Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force.

An outcome assessment, the patient assessment used in an endpoint, is the measuring instrument that provides a rating or score (categorical or continuous) that is intended to represent some aspect of the patient's health status. Outcome assessments are used to define efficacy endpoints when developing a therapy for a disease or condition. Most efficacy endpoints are based on specified clinical assessments of patients. When clinical assessments are used as clinical trial outcomes, they are called clinical outcome assessments (COAs). COAs include any assessment that may be influenced by human choices, judgment, or motivation. COAs must be well-defined and possess adequate measurement properties to demonstrate (directly or indirectly) the benefits of a treatment. In contrast, a biomarker assessment is one that is subject to little, if any, patient motivational or rater judgmental influence. This is the first of two reports by the ISPOR Clinical Outcomes Assessment - Emerging Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force. This report provides foundational definitions important for an understanding of COA measurement principles. The foundation provided in this report includes what it means to demonstrate a beneficial effect, how assessments of patients relate to the objective of showing a treatment's benefit, and how these assessments are used in clinical trial endpoints. In addition, this report describes intrinsic attributes of patient assessments and clinical trial factors that can affect the properties of the measurements. These factors should be considered when developing or refining assessments. These considerations will aid investigators designing trials in their choice of using an existing assessment or developing a new outcome assessment. Although the focus of this report is on the development of a new COA to define endpoints in a clinical trial, these principles may be applied more generally. A critical element in appraising or developing a COA is to describe the treatment's intended benefit as an effect on a clearly identified aspect of how a patient feels or functions. This aspect must have importance to the patient and be part of the patient's typical life. This meaningful health aspect can be measured directly or measured indirectly when it is impractical to evaluate it directly or when it is difficult to measure. For indirect measurement, a concept of interest (COI) can be identified. The COI must be related to how a patient feels or functions. Procedures are then developed to measure the COI. The relationship of these measurements with how a patient feels or functions in the intended setting and manner of use of the COA (the context of use) could then be defined. A COA has identifiable attributes or characteristics that affect the measurement properties of the COA when used in endpoints. One of these features is whether judgment can influence the measurement, and if so, whose judgment. This attribute defines four categories of COAs: patient reported outcomes, clinician reported outcomes, observer reported outcomes, and performance outcomes. A full description as well as explanation of other important COA features is included in this report. The information in this report should aid in the development, refinement, and standardization of COAs, and, ultimately, improve their measurement properties.

Risk Factors for Anticipatory Grief in Family Members of Terminally Ill Veterans Receiving Palliative Care Services.

Anticipatory grief is the process associated with grieving the loss of loved ones in advance of their inevitable death. Because anticipatory grief has been associated with a variety of outcomes, risk factors for this condition deserve closer consideration. Fifty-seven family members of terminally ill, hospice-eligible veterans receiving palliative care services completed measures assessing psychosocial factors and conditions. Elevated anticipatory grief was found in families characterized by relational dependency, lower education, and poor grief-specific support, who also experienced discomfort with closeness and intimacy, neuroticism, spiritual crisis, and an inability to make sense of the loss. Thus, in this sample, anticipatory grief appears to be part of a cluster of factors and associated distress that call for early monitoring and possible intervention.

Pain palliation measurement in cancer clinical trials: the US Food and Drug Administration perspective.

BACKGROUND: Pain palliation resulting from antitumor therapy provides direct evidence of treatment benefit when combined with evidence of antitumor activity. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) previously issued guidance regarding the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures to support labeling claims. The purpose of this article is to identify common challenges and key design strategies when measuring pain palliation in antitumor therapy clinical trials that are consistent with PRO Guidance principles. METHODS: Antitumor clinical protocols submitted to the FDA between 1995 and 2012 that included pain palliation as a primary or secondary endpoint were reviewed. Challenges in critical trial design components were identified. Design strategies consistent with PRO Guidance principles are proposed. RESULTS: The challenges identified were measurement of pain intensity and analgesic use, enrollment eligibility criteria, data collection methods, responder definitions, missing data, and blinding. Strategies included the use of well-defined, reliable, PRO assessments of pain intensity and analgesics; ensuring that enrollment criteria define patients with clinically significant pain attributable to cancer on an optimal analgesic regimen; defining responders using both pain and analgesic use criteria; incorporating an analysis of tumor response to support evidence of pain response; and minimizing missing data and inadvertent unblinding. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in cancer-related pain resulting from antitumor therapy is an important treatment benefit that can support drug approval and labeling claims when adequately measured if study results demonstrate statistically and clinically significant findings. Sponsors are encouraged to discuss pain palliation assessment methods with the FDA early in and throughout product development.

Development and Content Validation of Novel Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Disease Severity and Change in Patients with Erythropoietic Protoporphyria: The EPP Impact Questionnaire (EPIQ).

Purpose: Erythropoietic protoporphyria (EPP), a rare inherited disorder, presents in early childhood with severe, painful phototoxicity, with significant impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Previous studies have not captured all concepts important to patients. Therefore, this study sought to develop a novel, comprehensive, and content valid patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure to assess the efficacy of new therapies. Patients and Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with EPP participants and clinical experts to obtain views on concepts relevant to patients. Results informed the development of novel PROs, which were debriefed during subsequent combined concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. Results: Twenty-three interviews were conducted with 17 adults and 6 adolescents with EPP. Concept elicitation revealed that participants experienced many symptoms with significant variability. The most common were burning, pain, swelling, and tingling. Tingling was the most common prodromal symptom, while burning was the most bothersome, and pain was the worst full reaction symptom. Participants reported being negatively impacted in their ability to do daily activities, and social and emotional functioning. Many reported impacted ability to work and be productive at their job. Participants reviewed and completed the newly developed PRO measures assessing full reactions and ability to do activities, as well as items to assess severity and change in severity of prodromal symptoms, full reactions, and EPP overall. All measures were found to be comprehensive, clear, and relevant. Conclusion: PRO measures are needed to assess important aspects of HRQoL and evaluate therapeutic response. These PRO measures are unique in assessing overall severity and change in EPP.

Patient-Centered Core Impacts Sets (PC-CIS): What They Are and What They Are Not.

Letter to the Editor We are writing regarding the Innovations in Pharmacy commentary entitled, "Evidentiary Standards for Patient-Centered Core Impact Value Claims."(1) We thank Dr. Langley for commenting on the National Health Council's work on patient-centered core impact sets (PC-CIS), an initiative spearheaded by the nonprofit organization and its membership with multi-stakeholder representation and input.(2-4) While we have tried to be clear and transparent about the intent of PC-CIS, the commentary made it apparent to us we need to (and will) do more to be explicit about what a PC-CIS is and is not, and its possible downstream uses. We believe the PC-CIS concept was misrepresented in the commentary and want to provide clarification for readers so they can consider the merits of the initiative for themselves.

Do clinical trials prepare to fail by failing to prepare? An examination of MS trials and recommendations for patient-reported outcome measure selection.

BACKGROUND: Many clinical trials use patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, which can influence treatment decision-making, drug approval and label claims. Given that many PRO measure options exist, and there are conceptual and contextual complexities with PRO measurement, we aimed to evaluate how and why specific PRO measures have been selected for pivotal multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials. Specifically, we aimed to identify the reasons documented for PRO measure selection in contemporary phase III MS disease-modifying treatment (DMT) clinical trials. METHODS: We searched for phase III clinical trials of MS DMTs published between 2015 and 2021 and evaluated trial protocols, or primary publications where available, for PRO measure selection information. Specifically, we examined study documents for their clarification of clinical concepts measured, definitions of concepts measured, explanations of which PRO measures were considered, why specific PRO measures were chosen, and trade-offs in PRO measure selection. RESULTS: We identified 1705 abstracts containing 61 unique phase III MS DMT clinical trials. We obtained and examined 27/61 trial protocols. Six protocols were excluded: four contained no mention of PRO measures and two contained redacted sections preventing adequate assessment, leaving 21 protocols for assessment. For the remaining 34 trials (61-27), we retrieved 31 primary publications; 15 primary publications mentioned the use of a PRO measure. None of the 36 clinical trials that mentioned the use of PRO measures (21 protocols and 15 primary publications) documented clear PRO or clinical outcome assessment (COA) measurement strategies, provided clear justifications for PRO selection, or reasons why specific PRO measures were selected when alternatives existed. CONCLUSION: PRO measure selection for clinical trials is not evidence-based or underpinned by structured systematic approaches. This represents a critical area for study design improvement as PRO measure results directly affect patient care, PRO measurement has conceptual and contextual complexities, and there is a wide range of options when selecting a PRO measure. We recommend trial designers use formal approaches for PRO measure selection to ensure PRO measurement-based decisions are optimised. We provide a simple, logical, five-stage approach for PRO measure selection in clinical trials.

Development and content validation of a sunlight exposure diary in patients with erythropoietic protoporphyria.

BACKGROUND: Erythropoietic protoporphyria is a rare, inherited disorder presenting in early childhood with severe, painful phototoxicity. EPP has significant impacts on health-related quality of life, though there is variable disease severity. Accurately capturing how much time individuals with EPP can spend outdoors before they develop symptoms is critical to understanding HRQoL and measuring therapeutic response. Therefore, the goal of this study was to develop a comprehensive and content valid sun exposure diary to assess the efficacy of new therapies in individuals with EPP. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with adult and adolescent EPP participants, as well as five clinical experts, to obtain their input on the content of an existing sun exposure diary. Revisions to the diary were made based on evidence generated in cognitive debriefing interviews analyzed in eight consecutive groups of EPP participant. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 17 adults and 6 adolescents with EPP. The average age of adults was 40 years and of adolescents was 14 years. Clinical experts thought the original diary needed clarification on the description of symptoms, how time outdoors was captured, and the distinction between direct vs. indirect sunlight. Participants with EPP also noted these items needed revision, and that the distinction between prodromal symptoms and full reaction symptoms should be clarified. In the final diary version, participants with EPP found most items to be clear and easy to complete/think about. Seventy-six percent of participants (13/17) asked thought the diary was easy to complete. The remainder thought the majority of the diary was easy to complete with the exception of select questions. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluating a new treatment for EPP requires accurately capturing time in sunlight and symptoms in this unique disorder. The newly developed sun exposure diary is content valid and can be used to assess important aspects of symptoms and daily life and therefore evaluate clinically meaningful therapeutic response.

Towards a novel clinical outcome assessment for systemic lupus erythematosus: first outcomes of an international taskforce.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a disease of high unmet therapeutic need. The challenge of accurately measuring clinically meaningful responses to treatment has hindered progress towards positive outcomes in SLE trials, impeding the approval of potential new therapies. Current primary end points used in SLE trials are based on legacy disease activity measures that were neither specifically designed for the clinical trial context, nor developed according to contemporary recommendations for clinical outcome assessments (COAs), such as that substantial patient input should be incorporated into their design. The Treatment Response Measure for SLE (TRM-SLE) Taskforce is a global collaboration of SLE clinician-academics, patients and patient representatives, industry partners and regulatory experts, established to realize the goal of developing a new COA for SLE clinical trials. The aim of this project is a novel COA designed specifically to measure treatment effects that are clinically meaningful to patients and clinicians, and intended for implementation in a trial end point that supports regulatory approval of novel therapeutic agents in SLE. This Consensus Statement reports the first outcomes of the TRM-SLE project, including a structured process for TRM-SLE development.