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.

Effect of Bronchodilation, Exercise Training, and Behavior Modification on Symptoms and Physical Activity in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

RATIONALE: Bronchodilation and exercise training (ExT) improve exercise tolerance in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, behavior modification is required to impact daily physical activity (PA). OBJECTIVES: To assess whether tiotropium/olodaterol, with or without ExT, would improve exercise endurance time (EET) and PA compared with placebo in patients participating in a self-management behavior-modification (SMBM) program. METHODS: This was a 12-week, randomized, partially double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial in patients with COPD (PHYSACTO; NCT02085161). All patients were enrolled into SMBM and randomized 1:1:1:1 to once-daily placebo, tiotropium 5 µg, tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg, or tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg plus 8 weeks ExT. EET, measured by endurance shuttle walk test after 8 weeks, was the primary endpoint. Additional endpoints assessed downstream effects on PA (measured via accelerometry), and activity-related dyspnea and difficulty (using validated patient-reported questionnaires). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: SMBM plus tiotropium/olodaterol, with or without ExT, significantly improved EET at Week 8 versus SMBM plus placebo (treatment ratio vs. placebo: with ExT, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.78; P = 0.0002; without ExT, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.57; P = 0.0109). No significant increases in steps per day from baseline were observed over SMBM plus placebo at Week 12 (increase of 1,098) when other therapies were added. Adding tiotropium/olodaterol, with or without ExT, to SMBM reduced activity-related dyspnea versus placebo, whereas adding tiotropium/olodaterol plus ExT reduced activity-related difficulty. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium/olodaterol, with or without ExT, improved EET in patients with COPD taking part in an SMBM program. Combination bronchodilation, with or without ExT, did not provide additional increases in objective PA compared with SMBM alone but did reduce PA-related dyspnea and difficulty. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02085161).

Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO©) Scores in Influenza-Positive Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO©) scores for quantifying the presence and severity of influenza symptoms. METHODS: An observational prospective cohort study of adults (≥18 years) with influenza-like illness in the United States, the United Kingdom, Mexico, and South America was conducted. Participants completed the 37-item draft FLU-PRO daily for up to 14 days. Item-level and factor analyses were used to remove items and determine factor structure. Reliability of the final tool was estimated using Cronbach α and intraclass correlation coefficients (2-day reliability). Convergent and known-groups validity and responsiveness were assessed using global assessments of influenza severity and return to usual health. RESULTS: Of the 536 patients enrolled, 221 influenza-positive subjects comprised the analytical sample. The mean age of the patients was 40.7 years, 60.2% were women, and 59.7% were white. The final 32-item measure has six factors/domains (nose, throat, eyes, chest/respiratory, gastrointestinal, and body/systemic), with a higher order factor representing symptom severity overall (comparative fit index = 0.92; root mean square error of approximation = 0.06). Cronbach α was high (total = 0.92; domain range = 0.71-0.87); test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, day 1-day 2) was 0.83 for total scores and 0.57 to 0.79 for domains. Day 1 FLU-PRO domain and total scores were moderately to highly correlated (≥0.30) with Patient Global Rating of Flu Severity (except nose and throat). Consistent with known-groups validity, scores differentiated severity groups on the basis of global rating (total: F = 57.2, P < 0.001; domains: F = 8.9-67.5, P < 0.001). Subjects reporting return to usual health showed significantly greater (P < 0.05) FLU-PRO score improvement by day 7 than did those who did not, suggesting score responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that FLU-PRO scores are reliable, valid, and responsive to change in influenza-positive adults.

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.

Beyond study participants: a framework for engaging patients in the selection or development of clinical outcome assessments for evaluating the benefits of treatment in medical product development.

BACKGROUND: Patients are participating more actively in health care decision-making with regard to their health, as well as in the broader realm of assessing the value of medical products and influencing decisions about their registration and reimbursement. There is an increasing trend to include patients' perspectives throughout the stages of medical product development by broadening the traditional study-participant role to that of an active partner throughout the process. Including patients in the selection and development of clinical outcome assessments (COAs) to evaluate the benefit of treatment is particularly important. Still, despite widespread enthusiasm, there is substantial uncertainty regarding how and when to engage patients in this process. PURPOSE: This manuscript proposes a methodological framework for engaging patients at varying levels in the selection and development of COAs for medical product development. FRAMEWORK: The framework builds on the Food and Drug Administration's roadmap for patient-focused COA. Methods for engaging patients across each stage in this roadmap are summarized by levels of engagement. Opportunities and examples of patient engagement (PE) in the selection and/or development of COAs are summarized, together with best practices and practical considerations. CONCLUSION: This paper offers a framework for understanding, planning, and implementing methods to advance PE in the selection and/or development of COAs for evaluating the benefit of medical products. The intent is to further this important discussion and enhance the process and outcome of PE in this context.

A New Approach for Identifying Patients with Undiagnosed Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

RATIONALE: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often unrecognized and untreated. OBJECTIVES: To develop a method for identifying undiagnosed COPD requiring treatment with currently available therapies (FEV1 <60% predicted and/or exacerbation risk). METHODS: We conducted a multisite, cross-sectional, case-control study in U.S. pulmonary and primary care clinics that recruited subjects from primary care settings. Cases were patients with COPD and at least one exacerbation in the past year or FEV1 less than 60% of predicted without exacerbation in the past year. Control subjects were persons with no COPD or with mild COPD (FEV1 ≥60% predicted, no exacerbation in the past year). In random forests analyses, we identified the smallest set of questions plus peak expiratory flow (PEF) with optimal sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: PEF and spirometry were recorded in 186 cases and 160 control subjects. The mean (SD) age of the sample population was 62.7 (10.1) years; 55% were female; 86% were white; and 16% had never smoked. The mean FEV1 percent predicted for cases was 42.5% (14.2%); for control subjects, it was 82.5% (15.7%). A five-item questionnaire, CAPTURE (COPD Assessment in Primary Care to Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk), was used to assess exposure, breathing problems, tiring easily, and acute respiratory illnesses. CAPTURE exhibited an SN of 95.7% and an SP of 44.4% for differentiating cases from all control subjects, and an SN of 95.7% and an SP of 67.8% for differentiating cases from no-COPD control subjects. The PEF (males, <350 L/min; females, <250 L/min) SN and SP were 88.0% and 77.5%, respectively, for differentiating cases from all control subjects, and they were 88.0% and 90.8%, respectively, for distinguishing cases from no-COPD control subjects. The CAPTURE plus PEF exhibited improved SN and SP for all cases versus all control subjects (89.7% and 78.1%, respectively) and for all cases versus no-COPD control subjects (89.7% and 93.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CAPTURE with PEF can identify patients with COPD who would benefit from currently available therapy and require further diagnostic evaluation. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01880177).

Psychometric properties of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

The St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) has been used to measure health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF).This analysis evaluated the psychometric properties of the SGRQ using data from 428 patients with IPF who participated in a 12-month, randomised, placebo-controlled phase II trial of nintedanib.Internal consistency (Cronbach's α) was 0.91 for SGRQ total and >0.70 for domain scores. Test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients) was 0.77, 0.77, 0.69 and 0.66 for SGRQ total, activity, impact and symptoms scores, respectively. Construct validity of SGRQ total and domain scores was supported by weak to moderate cross-sectional correlations with the Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale (0.32-0.55), 6-min walk test distance (-0.25- -0.34), percentage predicted forced vital capacity (-0.11- -0.15) and measures of gas exchange (-0.26-0.03). There was some evidence that the SGRQ total score was sensitive to detecting change.The reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of the SGRQ in patients with IPF suggest that this is an acceptable measure of HRQoL in patients with IPF.

A systematic approach for studying the signs and symptoms of fever in adult patients: the fever assessment tool (FAST).

BACKGROUND: Although body temperature is one of four key vital signs routinely monitored and treated in clinical practice, relatively little is known about the symptoms associated with febrile states. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity, reliability and feasibility of the Fever Assessment Tool (FAST) in an acute care research setting. METHODS: Qualitative: To assess content validity and finalize the FAST instrument, 12 adults from an inpatient medical-surgical unit at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center participated in cognitive interviews within approximately 12 h of a febrile state (tympanic temperature ≥ 38° Celsius). Quantitative: To test reliability, validity and feasibility, 56 new adult inpatients completed the 21-item FAST. RESULTS: The cognitive interviews clarified and validated the content of the final 21-item FAST. Fifty-six patients completed the FAST from two to 133 times during routine vital sign assessment, yielding 1,699 temperature time points. Thirty-four percent of the patients (N = 19) experienced fever at one or more time points, with a total of 125 febrile time points. Kuder-Richardson 20 (KR-20) reliability of the FAST was 0.70. Four nonspecific symptom categories, Tired or Run-Down (12), Sleepy (13), Weak or Lacking Energy (11), and Thirsty (9) were among the most frequently reported symptoms in all participants. Using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE), the odds of reporting eight symptoms, Warm (4), Sweating (5), Thirsty (9), General Body Aches (10), Weak or Lacking Energy (11), Tired or Run Down (12) and Difficulty Breathing (17), were increased when patients had a fever (Fever Now), compared to the two other subgroups-patients who had a fever, but not at that particular time point, (Fever Not Now) and patients who never had a fever (Fever Never). Many, but not all, of the comparisons were significant in both groups. CONCLUSION: Results suggest the FAST is reliable, valid and easy to administer. In addition to symptoms usually associated with fever (e.g. feeling warm), symptoms such as Difficulty Breathing (17) were identified with fever. Further study in a larger, more diverse patient population is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Number: NCT01287143 (January 2011).

Plasma Fibrinogen Qualification as a Drug Development Tool in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Perspective of the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Biomarker Qualification Consortium.

The COPD Foundation Biomarker Qualification Consortium (CBQC) is a unique public-private partnership established in 2010 between the COPD Foundation, the pharmaceutical industry, and academic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) experts with advisors from the U.S. NHLBI and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This was a direct response to the 2009 publication of a guidance on qualification of drug development tools by the FDA. Although data were believed to be available from publicly funded and industry-funded studies that could support qualification of several tools, the necessary data resided in disparate databases. The initial intent of the CBQC was to integrate these data and submit a dossier for the qualification. This led to the FDA qualification of plasma fibrinogen as a prognostic or enrichment biomarker for all-cause mortality and COPD exacerbations in July 2015. It is the first biomarker drug development tool qualified for use in COPD under the FDA's drug development tool qualification program. This perspective summarizes the FDA's qualification process, the formation of the CBQC, and the effort that led to a successful outcome for plasma fibrinogen and discusses implications for future biomarker qualification efforts.

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 ).

Development of the Flu-PRO: a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument to evaluate symptoms of influenza.

BACKGROUND: To develop content validity of a comprehensive patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure following current best scientific methodology to standardize assessment of influenza (flu) symptoms in clinical research. METHODS: Stage I (Concept Elicitation): 1:1 telephone interviews with influenza-positive adults (≥18 years) in the US and Mexico within 7 days of diagnosis. Participants described symptom type, character, severity, and duration. Content analysis identified themes and developed the draft Flu-PRO instrument. Stage II (Cognitive Interviewing): The Flu-PRO was administered to a unique set of influenza-positive adults within 14 days of diagnosis; telephone interviews addressed completeness, respondent interpretation of items and ease of use. RESULTS: Samples: Stage I: N = 46 adults (16 US, 30 Mexico); mean (SD) age: 38 (19), 39 (14) years; % female: 56%, 73%; race: 69% White, 97% Mestizo. Stage II: N = 34 adults (12 US, 22 Mexico); age: 37 (14), 39 (11) years; % female: 50%, 50%; race: 58% White, 100% Mestizo. SYMPTOMS: Symptoms identified by >50%: coughing, weak or tired, throat symptoms, congestion, headache, weakness, sweating, chills, general discomfort, runny nose, chest (trouble breathing), difficulty sleeping, and body aches or pains. No new content was uncovered during Stage II; participants easily understood the instrument. CONCLUSIONS: Results show the 37-item Flu-PRO is a content valid measure of influenza symptoms in adults with a confirmed diagnosis of influenza. Research is underway to evaluate the suitability of the instrument for children and adolescents. This work can form the basis for future quantitative tests of reliability, validity, and responsiveness to evaluate the measurement properties of Flu-PRO for use in clinical trials and epidemiology studies.

Development of the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease morning symptom diary (COPD-MSD).

BACKGROUND: The morning tends to be the most difficult time of day for many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) when symptoms can limit one's ability to perform even simple activities. Morning symptoms have been linked to higher levels of work absenteeism, thereby increasing the already substantial economic burden associated with COPD. A validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument designed to capture morning symptoms will allow for a more comprehensive approach to the evaluation of treatment benefit in COPD clinical trials. METHODS: A qualitative interview study was conducted among a sample of symptomatic adults with COPD. Concept elicitation interviews (n = 35) were conducted to identify COPD morning symptoms, followed by cognitive interviews (n = 21) to ensure patient comprehension of the items, instructions and response options of the draft COPD Morning Symptom Diary (COPD-MSD). All interview transcript data were coded using ATLAS.ti software for content analysis. RESULTS: Mean age of the concept elicitation and cognitive interview sample was 65.0 years (±7.5) and 62.3 years (±8.3), respectively. The study sample represented the full range of COPD severity (Global Initiative for Chronic Lung Disease [GOLD] classifications I-IV) and included a mix of racial backgrounds, employment status and educational achievement. During the concept elicitation interviews, the three most frequently reported morning symptoms were shortness of breath (n = 35/35; 100 %), phlegm/mucus (n = 31/35; 88.6 %), and cough (n = 30/35; 85.7 %). A group of clinical and instrument development experts convened to review the concept elicitation data and develop the initial 32-item draft COPD-MSD. Cognitive interviews indicated subjects found the draft COPD-MSD to be comprehensive, clear, and easy to understand. The COPD-MSD underwent minor editorial revisions and streamlining based on cognitive interviews and input from the experts to yield the final 19-item daily diary. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the content validity of the new COPD-MSD and positions the diary for quantitative psychometric testing.

Correlation of PROMIS scales and clinical measures among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with and without exacerbations.

PURPOSE: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(®)) initiative was developed to advance the methodology of PROs applicable to chronic diseases. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive chronic disease associated with poor health. This study was designed to examine the correlation of PROMIS health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scales and clinical measures among COPD patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted comparing patients who were stable (n = 100) with those currently experiencing a COPD exacerbation (n = 85). All PROMIS measures for adults available at the time of the study (2008), disease-targeted and other HRQOL instruments, health literacy, percent predicted FEV1, and a 6-min walk distance were assessed when patients were considered clinically stable. RESULTS: Stable COPD patients reported significantly (p ≤ 0.05) better health-related quality of life on PROMIS domains than patients experiencing an exacerbation. PROMIS domain scores were significantly (p ≤ 0.01) correlated with each of legacy measures. Six-min walk scores were most highly correlated with the PROMIS physical function domain scores (r = 0.53) followed by the fatigue (r = -0.26), social (r = 0.24) and to a lesser extent depression (r = -0.23), and anxiety (r = -0.22) domain scores. Percent predicted FEV1 score was significantly associated with PROMIS physical function scores (r = 0.27). CONCLUSION: This study provides support for the validity of the PROMIS measures in COPD patients.

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.

Validation of Constant Work Rate Cycling Endurance Time for Use in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Clinical Trials.

Rationale: A COPD Foundation working group sought to identify measures of exercise endurance, a meaningful aspect of physical functioning in everyday life among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that is not fully accepted in regulatory decision making, hampering drug development. Objectives: To demonstrate, as we previously asserted (Casaburi COPD 2022;9:252), that constant work rate cycling endurance time is an appropriate exercise endurance measure in patients with COPD. Methods: To validate this assertion, we assembled an integrated database of endurance time responses, including 8 bronchodilator (2,166 subjects) and 15 exercise training (3,488 subjects) studies (Casaburi COPD 2022;9:520). Results: Construct validity was demonstrated: 1) peak physiologic and perceptual responses were similar for constant work rate and incremental cycling; 2) after bronchodilator therapy, there were greater increases in endurance time in patients with more severe airflow limitation; 3) after exercise training, endurance time increases were similar across airflow limitation severities; and 4) there were correlations between changes in endurance time and changes in mechanistically related physiologic and perceptual variables. Test-retest reliability was demonstrated, with consistency of changes in endurance time at two time points after the intervention. Responsiveness was confirmed, with significant increases in endurance time after active (but not placebo) bronchodilator therapy, with greater increases seen with more severe airflow limitation and after exercise training. On the basis of regression analysis using multiple anchor variables, the minimum important difference for endurance time increase is estimated to be approximately 1 minute. Conclusions: Constant work rate cycling endurance time is a valid exercise endurance measure in COPD, suitable for contributing to the evaluation of treatment benefit supporting regulatory decision making and evidence-based therapeutic recommendations.

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).

The COPD Biomarker Qualification Consortium (CBQC).

Knowledge about the pathogenesis and pathophysiology of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has advanced dramatically over the last 30 years. Unfortunately, this has had little impact in terms of new treatments. Over the same time frame, only one new class of medication for COPD has been introduced. Even worse, the rate at which new treatments are being developed is slowing. The development of new tools for the assessment of new treatments has not kept pace with understanding of the disease. In part, this is because drug development tools require a regulatory review, and no interested party has been in a position to undertake such a process. In order to facilitate the development of novel tools to assess new treatments, the Food and Drug Administration, in collaboration with the COPD Foundation, the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and scientists from the pharmaceutical industry and academia conducted a workshop to survey the available information that could contribute to new tools. Based on this, a collaborative project, the COPD Biomarkers Qualification Consortium, was initiated. The Consortium in now actively preparing integrated data sets from existing resources that can address the problem of drug development tools for COPD.