Impact of Virtual Navigation on the Education and Access of Patients with Cancer: A National Mixed Methods Investigation.

Introduction: Despite growing evidence of efficacy, oncology patient navigation is not ubiquitously offered. Navigation may reduce barriers to cancer care, yet geographic location may limit patient access. To overcome geographical barriers and increase patient education in oncology, our medical center developed a virtual navigation program. Objective: To examine the efficacy of the Virtual Navigation Program designed to increase patient access and education across local and national contexts. Methods: In this mixed-methods study, a total of 105 individuals completed an online survey administered nationally to oncology patients who used the navigation program. Clinical and demographic data were collected. Nonparametric tests were used for group comparisons (Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks test). Results: Virtual navigation increased access as the majority of patients utilized the Virtual Navigation Program beyond the local area; 42% of patients were local; 58% were patients located across the US. 55 (52%) were female; 25% were non-White. Pancreatic cancer was the largest tumor type: 51 (49%). Patients agreed the virtual cancer education helped them make critical health choices (mean 4.89 SD = 84); understand their diagnosis (mean 4.44 SD = .77); were able to make informed decisions (mean 4.43 SD = .83), and empowered to manage their cancer care (mean 4.58 SD = .82). Post navigation, the user experience survey revealed significant increases in a subset of patients' cancer knowledge (P < 0.001), access to quality cancer education (P = 0.045), decision-making in cancer care (P < 0.05), and coordinated cancer care (P = 0.03). Conclusion: This study explores a unique role that virtual navigation may play in helping accommodate healthcare for many cancer patients in underserved areas. The use of innovative aspects of research and education in virtual navigation may be successful in promoting patient empowerment in the cancer continuum. Internet-strategies are needed to inform sustainable patient navigation in low-resource contexts.

Validity, reliability, responsiveness, and clinically meaningful change threshold estimates of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network-Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16).

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in women. Patient-reported outcome measures are used to evaluate patients' health-related quality of life in clinical breast cancer studies. This study evaluated the structure, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network-Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) subscales in a clinical trial featuring patients with advanced/metastatic breast cancer (aBC), and estimated NFBSI-16 meaningful change thresholds. METHODS: Data from 101 patients with aBC enrolled in a phase II trial (Xenera-1) were included for psychometric evaluation of the NFBSI-16. Subscale structure was evaluated by assessing inter-item correlations, item-total correlations, and internal consistency (cycles 2 and 5). Validity was assessed using scale-level convergent validity (cycles 2 and 5) and known-groups (Baseline). Reliability was analysed via test-retest at cycles 3-4, and responsiveness to improvement and worsening was evaluated at cycles 5, 7, and 9. Meaningful change thresholds were estimated using anchor-based methods (supported by distribution-based methods) at cycles 5, 7, and 9. RESULTS: NFBSI-16 internal consistency was acceptable, but item-total correlations suggested that its subscales and the GP5 item (side-effect of treatment) scores may be preferred over a total score. Convergent and known-groups evidence supported NFBSI-16 validity. Test-retest reliability was good to excellent for Total and DRS-P (disease-related symptoms: physical) scales, and moderate for the GP5 item. Responsiveness to worsening was generally demonstrated, but responsiveness to improvement could not be demonstrated due to limited observed improvement. Anchor-based meaningful change thresholds were estimated for DRS-P and Total scores. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that the NFBSI-16 has desirable psychometric properties for use in clinical studies in aBC. It also provides estimates of group- and individual-level meaningful change thresholds to facilitate score interpretation in future aBC research.

The European Voice of the Patient living with pulmonary hypertension associated with interstitial lung disease: Diagnosis, symptoms, impacts, and treatments.

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) adds a substantial disease burden, including higher mortality, when associated with interstitial lung disease (ILD), a severe, chronic, progressive condition. Yet little is known of the lived experiences, perspectives, priorities, and viewpoints of patients and carers living with PH-ILD. The Voice of the Patient meeting at the center of this qualitative research study aims to provide these difficult-to-obtain insights from a European perspective for the first time. The multistakeholder approach brought together four PH-ILD patients, three primary caregivers, two patient associations, clinical experts, sponsor representatives, and a facilitator. Of the six major themes identified in the thematic analysis, symptoms, and physical limitations were the most impactful. Shortness of breath was the most bothersome symptom affecting patients daily. Further symptoms included fatigue, cough, dizziness, syncope, edema, and palpitations. Physical limitations focused on reduced mobility, impacting patients' ability to perform daily tasks, hobbies, sports, and to enjoy travel. Existing antifibrotic and pulmonary arterial hypertension-targeted treatments were perceived as beneficial. However, despite advances in treatment, severe disease burdens and high unmet medical needs persist from the perspectives of patients. Most meaningful to patients' daily wellbeing was supplemental oxygen, enabling greater mobility. Patients and carers reported difficulties and barriers in navigating the healthcare system and obtaining adequate information to reduce their considerable uncertainties, documenting the substantial challenges that rare and complex conditions such as PH-ILD pose for routine clinical practice beyond PH expert centers and indicating an urgent need for high-quality patient- and clinician-directed information to support patient-centered care.

Leveraging patient experience data to guide medicines development, regulation, access decisions and clinical care in the EU.

Patient experience data (PED), provided by patients/their carers without interpretation by clinicians, directly capture what matters more to patients on their medical condition, treatment and impact of healthcare. PED can be collected through different methodologies and these need to be robust and validated for its intended use. Medicine regulators are increasingly encouraging stakeholders to generate, collect and submit PED to support both scientific advice in development programs and regulatory decisions on the approval and use of these medicines. This article reviews the existing definitions and types of PED and demonstrate the potential for use in different settings of medicines' life cycle, focusing on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) and Patient Preferences (PP). Furthermore, it addresses some challenges and opportunities, alluding to important regulatory guidance that has been published, methodological aspects and digitalization, highlighting the lack of guidance as a key hurdle to achieve more systematic inclusion of PED in regulatory submissions. In addition, the article discusses opportunities at European and global level that could be implemented to leverage PED use. New digital tools that allow patients to collect PED in real time could also contribute to these advances, but it is equally important not to overlook the challenges they entail. The numerous and relevant initiatives being developed by various stakeholders in this field, including regulators, show their confidence in PED's value and create an ideal moment to address challenges and consolidate PED use across medicines' life cycle.

Leveraging sensor-based functional outcomes to enhance understanding of the patient experience: challenges and opportunities.

INTRODUCTION: Sensor-based digital health technology (DHT) has emerged as a promising means to assess patient functioning within and outside clinical trials. Sensor-based functional outcomes (SBFOs) provide valuable insights that complement other measures of how a patient feels or functions to enhance understanding of the patient experience to inform medical product development. AREAS COVERED: This perspective paper provides recommendations for defining SBFOs, discusses the core evidence required to support SBFOs to inform decision-making, and considers future directions for the field. EXPERT COMMENTARY: The clinical outcome assessment (COA) development process provides an important starting point for developing patient-centered SBFOs; however, given the infancy of the field, SBFO development may benefit from a hybrid approach to evidence generation by merging exploratory data analysis with patient engagement in measure development. Effective SBFO development requires combining unique expertise in patient engagement, measurement and regulatory science, and digital health and analytics. Challenges specific to SBFO development include identifying concepts of interest, ensuring measurement of meaningful aspects of health, and identifying thresholds for meaningful change. SBFOs are complementary to other COAs and, as part of an integrated evidence strategy, offer great promise in fostering a holistic understanding of patient experience and treatment benefits, particularly in real-world settings.

Patient listening on social media for patient-focused drug development: a synthesis of considerations from patients, industry and regulators.

Patients, life science industry and regulatory authorities are united in their goal to reduce the disease burden of patients by closing remaining unmet needs. Patients have, however, not always been systematically and consistently involved in the drug development process. Recognizing this gap, regulatory bodies worldwide have initiated patient-focused drug development (PFDD) initiatives to foster a more systematic involvement of patients in the drug development process and to ensure that outcomes measured in clinical trials are truly relevant to patients and represent significant improvements to their quality of life. As a source of real-world evidence (RWE), social media has been consistently shown to capture the first-hand, spontaneous and unfiltered disease and treatment experience of patients and is acknowledged as a valid method for generating patient experience data by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While social media listening (SML) methods are increasingly applied to many diseases and use cases, a significant piece of uncertainty remains on how evidence derived from social media can be used in the drug development process and how it can impact regulatory decision making, including legal and ethical aspects. In this policy paper, we review the perspectives of three key stakeholder groups on the role of SML in drug development, namely patients, life science companies and regulators. We also carry out a systematic review of current practices and use cases for SML and, in particular, highlight benefits and drawbacks for the use of SML as a way to identify unmet needs of patients. While we find that the stakeholders are strongly aligned regarding the potential of social media for PFDD, we identify key areas in which regulatory guidance is needed to reduce uncertainty regarding the impact of SML as a source of patient experience data that has impact on regulatory decision making.

Patient Engagement and Patient Experience Data in Regulatory Review and Health Technology Assessment: A Global Landscape Review.

BACKGROUND: Working with patients through meaningful patient engagement (PE) and incorporating patient experience data (PXD) is increasingly important in medicines and medical device development. However, PE in the planning, organization, generation, and interpretation of PXD within regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) decision-making processes remains challenging. We conducted a global review of the PE and PXD landscape to identify evolving resources by geography to support and highlight the potential of integration of PE and PXD in regulatory assessment and HTA. METHODS: A review of literature/public information was conducted (August 2021-January 2023), led by a multistakeholder group comprising those with lived or professional experience of PE and PXD, to identify relevant regulatory and HTA initiatives and resources reviewed and categorized by geography and focus area. RESULTS: Overall, 53 relevant initiatives/resources were identified (global, 14; North America, 11; Europe, 11; Asia, nine; UK, six; Latin America, one; Africa, one). Most focused either on PE (49%) or PXD (28%); few (11%) mentioned both PE and PXD (as largely separate activities) or demonstrated an integration of PE and PXD (11%). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis demonstrates increasing interest in PE, PXD, and guidance on their use individually in decision-making. However, more work is needed to offer guidance on maximizing the value of patient input into decisions by combining both PE and PXD into regulatory and HTA processes; the necessity of integrating PE in the design and interpretation of PXD programs should be highlighted. A co-created framework to achieve this integration is part of a future project.

Co-creation of the Global Patient Experience Data Navigator: a multi-stakeholder initiative to ensure the patient voice is represented in health decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Putting patients' needs and priorities at the forefront of healthcare initiatives and medical product development is critical to achieve outcomes that matter most to patients. This relies on the integration of early, meaningful patient engagement (PE) to learn what is important to patients, and collection of representative patient experience data (PXD). The increased number of PE/PXD efforts across global regulatory, health technology assessment, and healthcare systems is an important step forward to deliver improved health outcomes for patients. However, these initiatives are fragmented and lack integration, which is necessary to maximize efforts and reduce burden on patients. To overcome these challenges, the Global Patient Experience Data Navigator has been co-created by Patient Focused Medicines Development to provide practical resources that can facilitate and optimize PXD generation, collection, analysis, and dissemination for patient benefit and aims to be applicable across all therapeutic areas for all stakeholders. METHODS: Co-creation of the Navigator took place through an iterative process of validation and formalization driven by a diverse, multi-stakeholder working group with individuals who have varying knowledge/experience in PE/PXD. RESULTS: A series of workshops took place to conduct a gap analysis, develop a taxonomy model, and integrate existing frameworks. The collective insights led to the development of the Navigator consisting of four specific tools in the form of downloadable templates, which can be used to: (1) prioritize outcomes that matter most to patients and their caregivers; (2) select appropriate measurement methods for these outcomes; (3) identify when and why PXD is used throughout the product development cycle for each stakeholder; (4) identify when and why PXD is used throughout the healthcare process for each stakeholder. A public consultation was carried out to collect user feedback before the Navigator was made publicly available in December 2022. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, the Global Patient Experience Data Navigator is the only publicly available toolkit developed with a multi-stakeholder and disease-agnostic approach providing taxonomically grouped resources to optimize the collection and collation of PXD for patient benefit. Future work will aim to further engage patients by adding a PE dimension to the Navigator.

Engaging patients at the start of healthcare and medical product development projects can help better understand their experiences and what is most important to them. Ultimately this will achieve the best outcomes. However, if not carefully planned, projects that engage patients can lead to inefficiencies, such as patients being asked for the same information repeatedly. The collection of patient experience data­information related to patients' experiences, needs, and priorities­also needs to be carefully managed. To help solve this problem, Patient Focused Medicines Development developed a publicly available "toolkit" called the Global Patient Experience Data Navigator. The Navigator has downloadable templates that can be filled in and used for projects in any disease area and by anyone collecting patient experience data. To represent different perspectives, individuals with a range of experiences and understanding of patient engagement projects worked together to co-create the toolkit. Several meetings took place to understand what the toolkit needed to do and to help provide a structure for the templates. There are four templates in the toolkit. These can be used to: (1) prioritize outcomes that matter most to patients and their caregivers; (2) select the best ways of measuring these outcomes; (3) identify when, why, and by whom patient experience data is used throughout the product development cycle; and (4) identify when, why and by whom patient experience data is used throughout the healthcare process. Future work will utilize public feedback to make the toolkit more user-friendly and provide education on how the Navigator can be used.

How can patient preferences be used and communicated in the regulatory evaluation of medicinal products? Findings and recommendations from IMI PREFER and call to action.

Objective: Patients have unique insights and are (in-)directly affected by each decision taken throughout the life cycle of medicinal products. Patient preference studies (PPS) assess what matters most to patients, how much, and what trade-offs patients are willing to make. IMI PREFER was a six-year European public-private partnership under the Innovative Medicines Initiative that developed recommendations on how to assess and use PPS in medical product decision-making, including in the regulatory evaluation of medicinal products. This paper aims to summarize findings and recommendations from IMI PREFER regarding i) PPS applications in regulatory evaluation, ii) when and how to consult with regulators on PPS, iii) how to reflect PPS in regulatory communication and iv) barriers and open questions for PPS in regulatory decision-making. Methods: PREFER performed six literature reviews, 143 interviews and eight focus group discussions with regulators, patient representatives, industry representatives, Health Technology Assessment bodies, payers, academics, and clincians between October 2016 and May 2022. Results: i) With respect to PPS applications, prior to the conduct of clinical trials of medicinal products, PPS could inform regulators' understanding of patients' unmet needs and relevant endpoints during horizon scanning activities and scientific advice. During the evaluation of a marketing authorization application, PPS could inform: a) the assessment of whether a product meets an unmet need, b) whether patient-relevant clinical trial endpoints and outcomes were studied, c) the understanding of patient-relevant effect sizes and acceptable trade-offs, and d) the identification of key (un-)favorable effects and uncertainties. ii) With respect to consulting with regulators on PPS, PPS researchers should ideally have early discussions with regulators (e.g., during scientific advice) on the PPS design and research questions. iii) Regarding external PPS communication, PPS could be reflected in the assessment report and product information (e.g., the European Public Assessment Report and the Summary of Product Characteristics). iv) Barriers relevant to the use of PPS in regulatory evaluation include a lack of PPS use cases and demonstrated impact on regulatory decision-making, and need for (financial) incentives, guidance and quality criteria for implementing PPS results in regulatory decision-making. Open questions concerning regulatory PPS use include: a) should a product independent broad approach to the design of PPS be taken and/or a product-specific one, b) who should optimally be financing, designing, conducting, and coordinating PPS, c) when (within and/or outside clinical trials) to perform PPS, and d) how can PPS use best be operationalized in regulatory decisions. Conclusion: PPS have high potential to inform regulators on key unmet needs, endpoints, benefits, and risks that matter most to patients and their acceptable trade-offs. Regulatory guidelines, templates and checklists, together with incentives are needed to foster structural and transparent PPS submission and evaluation in regulatory decision-making. More PPS case studies should be conducted and submitted for regulatory assessment to enable regulatory discussion and increase regulators' experience with PPS implementation and communication in regulatory evaluations.

Mapping Relevance of Digital Measures to Meaningful Symptoms and Impacts in Early Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Adoption of new digital measures for clinical trials and practice has been hindered by lack of actionable qualitative data demonstrating relevance of these metrics to people with Parkinson's disease. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated of relevance of WATCH-PD digital measures to monitoring meaningful symptoms and impacts of early Parkinson's disease from the patient perspective. METHODS: Participants with early Parkinson's disease (N = 40) completed surveys and 1:1 online-interviews. Interviews combined: 1) symptom mapping to delineate meaningful symptoms/impacts of disease, 2) cognitive interviewing to assess content validity of digital measures, and 3) mapping of digital measures back to personal symptoms to assess relevance from the patient perspective. Content analysis and descriptive techniques were used to analyze data. RESULTS: Participants perceived mapping as deeply engaging, with 39/40 reporting improved ability to communicate important symptoms and relevance of measures. Most measures (9/10) were rated relevant by both cognitive interviewing (70-92.5%) and mapping (80-100%). Two measures related to actively bothersome symptoms for more than 80% of participants (Tremor, Shape rotation). Tasks were generally deemed relevant if they met three participant context criteria: 1) understanding what the task measured, 2) believing it targeted an important symptom of PD (past, present, or future), and 3) believing the task was a good test of that important symptom. Participants did not require that a task relate to active symptoms or "real" life to be relevant. CONCLUSION: Digital measures of tremor and hand dexterity were rated most relevant in early PD. Use of mapping enabled precise quantification of qualitative data for more rigorous evaluation of new measures.

Defining Clinical Meaningfulness in Huntington's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) represents the smallest within-person change on an outcome measure considered meaningful to the patient. Anchor-based MCID methods evaluate the relationship between changes in an outcome measure and the patient-reported clinical importance of that change. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to estimate longitudinal MCID for clinically relevant outcome measures for individuals who have Stages 2 or 3 disease as measured by the Huntington's Disease Integrated Staging System (HD-ISS). METHODS: Data were drawn from Enroll-HD, a large global longitudinal, observational study and clinical research platform for HD family members. We analyzed HD participants (N = 11,070) by staging group using time frames ranging from 12 to 36 months. The anchor was the physical component summary score of the 12-item short-form health survey. HD-relevant motor, cognitive, and functional outcome measures were independent, external criterion outcomes. Complex analysis was conducted using multiple, independent, linear mixed effect regression models with decomposition to calculate MCID for each external criterion by group. RESULTS: MCID estimates varied by progression stage. MCID estimates increased as stage progression increased and as the time frame increased. MCID values for key HD measures are provided. For example, starting in HD-ISS stage 2, meaningful group change over 24 months equals an average increase of 3.6 or more points on the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale Total Motor Score. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine MCID estimation thresholds for HD. The results can be used to improve clinical interpretation of study outcomes and enable treatment recommendations to support clinical decision-making and clinical trial methodology. © 2023 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

A Versatile and Scalable Platform That Streamlines Data Collection for Patient-Centered Studies: Usability and Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) established the Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) Initiative with several objectives, including the expansion and enhancement of CBER's access to fit-for-purpose data sources, analytics, tools, and infrastructures to improve the understanding of patient experiences with conditions related to CBER-regulated products. Owing to existing challenges in data collection, especially for rare disease research, CBER recognized the need for a comprehensive platform where study coordinators can engage with study participants and design and deploy studies while patients or caregivers could enroll, consent, and securely participate as well. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to increase awareness and describe the design, development, and novelty of the Survey of Health and Patient Experience (SHAPE) platform, its functionality and application, quality improvement efforts, open-source availability, and plans for enhancement. METHODS: SHAPE is hosted in a Google Cloud environment and comprises 3 parts: the administrator application, participant app, and application programming interface. The administrator can build a study comprising a set of questionnaires and self-report entries through the app. Once the study is deployed, the participant can access the app, consent to the study, and complete its components. To build SHAPE to be scalable and flexible, we leveraged the open-source software development kit, Ionic Framework. This enabled the building and deploying of apps across platforms, including iOS, Android, and progressive web applications, from a single codebase by using standardized web technologies. SHAPE has been integrated with a leading Health Level 7 (HL7®) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR®) application programming interface platform, 1upHealth, which allows participants to consent to 1-time data pull of their electronic health records. We used an agile-based process that engaged multiple stakeholders in SHAPE's design and development. RESULTS: SHAPE allows study coordinators to plan, develop, and deploy questionnaires to obtain important end points directly from patients or caregivers. Electronic health record integration enables access to patient health records, which can validate and enhance the accuracy of data-capture methods. The administrator can then download the study data into HL7® FHIR®-formatted JSON files. In this paper, we illustrate how study coordinators can use SHAPE to design patient-centered studies. We demonstrate its broad applicability through a hypothetical type 1 diabetes cohort study and an ongoing pilot study on metachromatic leukodystrophy to implement best practices for designing a regulatory-grade natural history study for rare diseases. CONCLUSIONS: SHAPE is an intuitive and comprehensive data-collection tool for a variety of clinical studies. Further customization of this versatile and scalable platform allows for multiple use cases. SHAPE can capture patient perspectives and clinical data, thereby providing regulators, clinicians, researchers, and patient advocacy organizations with data to inform drug development and improve patient outcomes.

Building from Patient Experiences to Deliver Patient-Focused Healthcare Systems in Collaboration with Patients: A Call to Action.

Patients' experiences of their diagnosis, condition, and treatment (including the impact on their lives), and their experiences surrounding expectations of care, are becoming increasingly important in shaping healthcare systems that meet the evolving needs and priorities of different patient communities over time; this is an ongoing goal of all healthcare stakeholders. Current approaches that capture patient experiences with data are fragmented, resulting in duplication of effort, numerous requests for information, and increased patient burden. Application of patient experience data to inform healthcare decisions is still emerging and there remains an opportunity to align diverse stakeholders on the value of these data to strengthen healthcare systems. Given the collective value of understanding patient experiences across multiple stakeholder groups, we propose a more aligned approach to the collection of patient experience data. This approach is built on the principle that the patients' experiences are the starting point, and not just something to be considered at the end of the process. It must also be based on meaningful patient engagement, where patients are collaborators and decision makers at each step, thereby ensuring their needs and priorities are accurately reflected. The resulting data and evidence should be made available for all stakeholders, to inform their decision making and healthcare strategies in ways that meet patient priorities. We call for multi-stakeholder collaboration that will deliver healthcare systems and interventions that are better centered around and tailored to patient experiences, and that will help address patients' unmet needs.

Symptoms and Treatment Needs of People with Dementia-Related Psychosis: A Mixed-Methods Study of the Patient Experience.

OBJECTIVES: This study describes the person-centered experience and impact of symptoms and the treatment needs of dementia-related psychosis (DRP) from a patient and care partner perspective. METHODS: Qualitative interviews and a quantitative survey were used to collect patient experience data from persons with DRP or their care partners. RESULTS: Sixteen participants (1 person with DRP, 15 care partners) completed the qualitative interview; 212 participants (26 persons with DRP, 186 care partners) completed the quantitative survey. The most commonly reported symptoms were visual hallucinations, auditory hallucinations, persecutory delusions, and distortion of senses. The most common impacts were difficulty differentiating what is real from what is not real, increased anxiety, and effects on personal relationships. Current treatments were less than moderately helpful, and the ability to distinguish what is real from what is not real and overall symptom improvement were described as the most important benefits of an ideal treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Patient experience data provide insights into urgent therapeutic needs of patients by describing the nature, frequency, and severity of symptoms and the impacts they have on individuals' lives. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patient experience data demonstrate an unmet need for treatments to reduce the symptoms and impacts of DRP.

Patients' Perception of the Impact of Innovation on Hemophilia Care Management Organization: A Qualitative Study Protocol (INNOVHEMO Study).

BACKGROUND: New therapies provide a favorable evolution in the care management of persons with hemophilia. However, the impact of these new therapies on patient care organization remains to be determined. A qualitative study will be implemented to analyze patients' perception regarding the impact of innovation on the organization of their care management. Secondary objectives will include refining specific factors related to persons with hemophilia (barriers or facilitators, especially the place of treatment) to consider within an organizational impact analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Semi-structured individual interviews will be conducted via videoconferencing or by phone by two researchers using an interview guide. Participants will be recruited from the Rhône-Alpes region, in France. Physicians from two hemophilia treatment centers will identify eligible patients. Moreover, a call for volunteers will be launched by the Rhône-Alpes committee of the French hemophilia association. Interviews will be conducted with adult patients, adolescent patients or parents of a minor with hemophilia regularly treated prophylactically or on demand. Data analysis will be performed with NVivo® software. Each interview will be analyzed by two researchers using an inductive content analytic method. DISCUSSION: The INNOVHEMO study is an original study analyzing the way patients perceive the impact of an innovation on their care management organization. The resulting patient-specific factors, identified as barriers or facilitators, will need to be integrated into a more comprehensive analysis of the impact of innovation on care management organization.

Pulmonary hypertension due to interstitial lung disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a patient experience study of symptoms and their impact on quality of life.

Pulmonary hypertension resulting from chronic lung disease such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and interstitial lung disease is categorized by the World Health Organization as Group 3 pulmonary hypertension. To identify the symptoms and impacts of World Health Organization Group 3 pulmonary hypertension and to capture data related to the patient experience of this disease, qualitative research interviews were undertaken with 3 clinical experts and 14 individuals with pulmonary hypertension secondary to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or interstitial lung disease. Shortness of breath, fatigue, cough, and swelling were the most frequently reported symptoms of pulmonary hypertension due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or interstitial lung disease, and shortness of breath was further identified as the single most bothersome symptom for most patients (71.4%). Interview participants also described experiencing a number of impacts related to pulmonary hypertension and pulmonary hypertension symptoms, including limitations in the ability to perform activities of daily living and impacts on physical functioning, family life, and social life as well as emotional impacts, which included frustration, depression, anxiety, isolation, and sadness. Results of these qualitative interviews offer an understanding of the patient experience of pulmonary hypertension due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or interstitial lung disease, including insight into the symptoms and impacts that are most important to patients in this population. As such, these results may help guide priorities in clinical treatment and assist researchers in their selection of patient-reported outcome measures for clinical trials in patients with pulmonary hypertension due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or interstitial lung disease.

Patient experience data as enacted: Sociomaterial perspectives and 'singular-multiples' in health care quality improvement research.

Over the last three decades, sociomaterial approaches to the study of health care practices have made an important contribution to the sociology of health care. Significant attention has been paid to the role of technology and artefacts in health care and the operation of actor-networks but less space has been given to questions of ontological multiplicity in health care practices. In this paper, we draw upon our study of patient experience data in five acute hospitals in England to illustrate how treating patient experience data as 'singular-multiples' can enable useful insights into patient experience data work in health care organisations. Our data was generated during 12 months of fieldwork at five participating hospitals and included organisational documents, field notes, informal and formal interviews with frontline and managerial staff and patient representatives at the study sites. We use the examples of the Friends and Family Test (FFT) and the National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (NCPES) in England to consider the multiple nature of data as it is enacted in practice and the work data does when coordinated as an entity in the singular. We argue that, and discuss how, the sociomaterial insights we discuss here are relevant to health care quality and improvement research and practice.

New Drug and Biologics Approvals in 2019: A Systematic Analysis of Patient Experience Data in FDA Drug Approval Packages and Product Labels.

BACKGROUND: The FDA Patient-Focused Drug Development Initiative was launched to ensure the incorporation of the patient voice into drug development and evaluation. Since 2017, the FDA must publish a statement outlining patient experience data (PED) considered in the approval of new drugs. This study investigated the presence and role of PED in drug approval and translation into product label claims. METHODS: PED reported in approval packages of the 48 drugs approved by FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research in 2019 was identified and categorized. PED in the form of clinical outcome assessments (COAs) was characterized by endpoint positioning and outcome. The product labels were analyzed for PED-related claims. RESULTS: PED was reported as relevant for 39 of 48 (81.3%) drugs approved in 2019. COAs were the predominant PED type; other PED was identified for only 9 (18.8%) drugs, and none included qualitative or patient preference studies. COAs were the only type of PED for which associated claims were identified in the product labels. 27 out of 48 (56.3%) labels contained one or more efficacy claims based on COAs; of these, patient-reported outcomes were the most prevalent with claims identified in 19 labels (39.6%). CONCLUSION: There are ample opportunities for incorporating PED beyond COAs to inform drug development and facilitate availability of medicines tailored to patient needs. A higher level of transparency on the role of PED in regulatory decision-making and a clear path to PED-based label claims could incentivize sponsors and enable patient empowerment in treatment decisions.

Parent Experiences of Sanfilippo Syndrome Impact and Unmet Treatment Needs: A Qualitative Assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Sanfilippo syndrome (MPS III) is a rare, degenerative condition characterized by symptoms impacting cognitive ability, mobility, behavior, and quality of life. Currently there are no approved therapies for this severe life-limiting disease. Integrating patient and caregiver experience data into drug development and regulatory decision-making has become a priority of the Food and Drug Administration and rare disease patient communities. METHODS: This study assesses parents' perceptions of their child's Sanfilippo syndrome disease-related symptoms using a research approach that is consistent with the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) guidance. This study was initiated by the Cure Sanfilippo Foundation, and all steps in the research process were informed by a multidisciplinary advisory committee, with an objective of informing biopharmaceutical companies and regulatory agencies. We explored caregiver burden, symptoms with greatest impact, and meaningful but unmet treatment needs. Data were collected from 25 parents through three focus groups and a questionnaire. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis, and descriptive analysis of quantitative data was conducted. RESULTS: Participating parents' children ranged in age from 4 to 36 years. Participants endorsed high caregiving burden across all stages of the disease. Analysis revealed multiple domains of unmet need that impact child and family quality of life, including cognitive-behavioral challenges in communication, relationships, behavior, anxiety, and child safety; and physical health symptoms including sleep, pain, and mobility. Participants reported placing high value on incremental benefits targeting those symptoms, and on a treatment that would slow or stop symptom progression. CONCLUSION: Even modest treatment benefits for Sanfilippo syndrome were shown to be highly valued. Despite high caregiver burden, most parents expressed a willingness to "try anything," including treatments with potentially high risk profiles, to maintain their child's current state.

2020 Food and Drug Law Institute (FDLI) Annual Conference (October 6-8, 2020 - Virtual Meeting).

This year's annual conference of the Food and Drug Law Institute (FDLI) drew more than 700 attendees, including over 200 from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and featured 93 speakers. Despite being held virtually for the first time, the event offered a full agenda comprising breakout sessions, award presentations, and opportunities for networking that included postsession roundtable discussions and a sponsor virtual exhibit hall. Not surprisingly, the reality of the COVID-19 public health emergency was a recurrent and emphasized theme throughout the 3 days of the conference. This report summarizes several of the 29 breakout sessions from the event.