Levelling the playing field through the London Network of the UK clinical trials accelerator platform.

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a multisystem, genetic disease with a significantly reduced life expectancy. Despite substantial progress in therapies in the last 10-15 years, there is still no cure. There are dozens of drugs in the development pipeline and multiple clinical trials are being conducted across the globe. The UK Cystic Fibrosis Trust's (CFT) Clinical Trials Accelerator Platform (CTAP) is a national initiative bringing together 25 UK based CF centres to support the CF community in accessing and participating in CF clinical trials. CTAP enables more CF centres to run a broader portfolio of trials and increases the range of CF studies available for UK patients. There are four large specialist CF centres based in London, all within a small geographical region as well as two smaller centres which deliver CF care. At the launch of CTAP, these centres formed a sub-network in a consortium-style collaboration. The purpose of the network was to ensure equity of access to trials for patients across the UK's capital, and to share experience and knowledge. Four years into the programme we have reviewed our practices through working group meetings and an online survey. We sought to identify strengths and areas for improvement. We share our findings here, as we believe they are relevant to others delivering research in regions outside of London and in other chronic diseases.

Treatment Preference Among People With Cystic Fibrosis: The Importance of Reducing Treatment Burden.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing consensus that the perspective of the patient should be considered in the evaluation of novel interventions. RESEARCH QUESTION: What treatment outcomes matter to people with cystic fibrosis (CF), and what trade-offs would they make to realize these outcomes? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Adults attending a specialist CF center were invited to complete an online discrete choice experiment (DCE). The DCE required participants to evaluate hypothetical CF treatment profiles, defined by impact on lung function, pulmonary exacerbations, abdominal symptoms, life expectancy, quality of life, inhaled medicine usage, and physiotherapy requirement. Choice data were analyzed, using multinomial logit and latent class models. RESULTS: One hundred and three people with CF completed the survey (median age, 35 years; range, 18-76 years); 52% were female; mean FEV1 % predicted, 69% [SD, 22%]). On average, an improvement in life expectancy by 10 years or more had the greatest impact on treatment preference, followed by a 15% increase in lung function. However, it was shown that people would trade substantial reductions in these key outcomes to reduce treatment time or burden. Preference profiles were not uniform across the sample: three distinct subgroups were identified, each placing markedly different importance on the relative importance of both life expectancy and lung function compared with other attributes. INTERPRETATION: The relative importance of treatment burden to people with CF, compared with life expectancy and lung function, suggests it should be routinely captured in clinical trials as an important secondary outcome measure. When considering the patient perspective, it is important that decision-makers recognize that the values of people with CF are not homogeneous.

Exploring the nature of perceived treatment burden: a study to compare treatment burden measures in adults with cystic fibrosis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved].

Background: Despite the importance of reducing treatment burden for people with cystic fibrosis (CF), it has not been fully understood as a concept. This study aims to quantify the treatment burden perceived by CF adults and explore the association between different validated treatment burden measures. Methods: This is a cross-sectional observational study of CF adults attending a single large UK adult center. Participants completed an online survey that contained three different treatment burden scales; CF Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) subscale, CF Quality of Life (CFQoL) subscale, and the generic multimorbidity treatment burden questionnaire (MTBQ). Results: Among 101 participants, the median reported treatment burden by the CFQ-R subscale was 55.5 (IQR 33.3 - 66.6), the CFQoL subscale was 66.6 (IQR 46.6 - 86.6), and the MTBQ reversed global score was 84.6 (IQR 73.1 - 92.3). No correlation was found between respondents' demographic or clinical variables and treatment burden measured via any of the three measures. All treatment burden measures showed correlations against each other. More treatments were associated with high treatment burden as measured by the CFQ-R, CFQoL subscales, and the MTBQ. However, longer treatment time and more complex treatment plans were correlated with high treatment burden as measured by the CFQ-R and CFQoL subscales, but not with the MTBQ. Conclusions: Treatment burden is a substantial issue in CF. Currently, the only available way to evaluate it is with the CF-specific quality of life measure treatment burden subscales (CFQ-R and CFQoL); both indicated that treatment burden increases with more treatments, longer treatment time, and more complex treatments.