Treatment goals for rheumatoid arthritis: patient engagement and goal collection.

Aim: We developed the Patient-Engaged Health Technology Assessment strategy for survey-based goal collection from patients to yield patient-important outcomes suitable for use in multi-criteria decision analysis. Methods: Rheumatoid arthritis patients were recruited from online patient networks for proof-of-concept testing of goal collection and prioritization using a survey. A Project Steering Committee and Expert Panel rated the feasibility of scaling to larger samples. Results: Survey respondents (n = 47) completed the goal collection exercise. Finding effective treatments was rated by respondents as the most important goal, and reducing stiffness was rated as the least important. Feedback from our steering committee and expert panel support the approach's feasibility for goal identification and ranking. Conclusion: Goals relevant for treatment evaluation can be identified and rated for importance by patients to permit wide input from patients with lived experience of disease.

Conversion of Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue to Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Fatigue Scores in Two Phase III Baricitinib Rheumatoid Arthritis Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) is validated for measuring fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, 10 of 13 FACIT-F items are identified as relevant to patients with RA. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) uses an item response theory-calibrated T score metric. The PROMIS Fatigue item bank includes the FACIT-F items, enabling score conversion. The performance of converted PROMIS Fatigue scores has not been evaluated in RA populations or clinical trials. Our objective was to assess the performance of converted PROMIS Fatigue scores in 2 RA clinical trials of baricitinib. METHODS: Crosswalk tables and pattern-scoring methods converted FACIT-F scores to PROMIS Fatigue for both the 13-item FACIT-F and the 10-item RA-optimized FACIT-F instrument, in 2 RA clinical trials evaluating baricitinib, RA-BEAM, and RA-BEACON. RA-BEAM patients had an inadequate response to methotrexate. RA-BEACON patients had an inadequate response or intolerance to ≥1 tumor necrosis factor inhibitor. Baricitinib was compared to all treatment arms via analysis of covariance on PROMIS Fatigue score conversions. RESULTS: Baseline FACIT-F-derived PROMIS Fatigue scores reflected severe fatigue across treatment groups and were similar using different scoring methods. At week 24 in both studies, baricitinib was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in PROMIS Fatigue scores. PROMIS Fatigue scores were consistent for conversion methods and for the 13-item or 10-item FACIT-F. CONCLUSION: All 4 conversion methods showed differentiation of active treatment compared with placebo from week 12, supporting the use of the PROMIS Fatigue and converting the 10-item FACIT-F to assess fatigue and demonstrate treatment benefit in RA clinical trials on a standardized metric.

Development of a Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy item library and primary symptom list for the assessment of patient-reported adverse events associated with immune checkpoint modulators.

AIM: To develop a comprehensive item library of patient-reported, immunotherapy-related adverse events (irAEs) that draws from and expands on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System. METHODS: Literature review and iterative expert input. Based on a literature review of irAEs, we developed a framework of immunotherapy classes and their associated symptoms. Clinical experts then reviewed iterations of symptom summaries and item maps linked to the immunotherapy framework. Experts provided content review and feedback was shared across experts until consensus was reached. The iterative process facilitated creation of a Primary Symptom List associated with immune checkpoint modulators (ICMs), drawn from the larger set of symptoms. Existing FACIT items were mapped to the symptom list, and new items were written as needed to create the item library. RESULTS: The full item library of irAEs is comprised of 239 items, covering 142 unique symptoms across 75 inflammatory reactions/immune conditions. A subset of 66 items comprises a Primary Symptom List considered most common/relevant to ICM treatment. This includes gastrointestinal, skin, pulmonary, neurologic, musculoskeletal, and multiple miscellaneous and constitutional symptoms. CONCLUSION: The FACIT Immunotherapy Item Library is a compilation of 239 self-report items that capture the wide range of AEs experienced by people receiving immune treatments. A subset of 66 items comprises a Primary Symptom List meant for ICM therapy. Use of items selected from this library is encouraged in clinical research and clinical practice evaluation.

What Does the Patient Global Health Assessment in Rheumatoid Arthritis Really Tell Us? Contribution of Specific Dimensions of Health-Related Quality of Life.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the contributions of health-related quality of life domains to the patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Data are drawn from baseline visits of 2 observational RA cohorts. Participants completed forms for patient-reported outcome measures, including PtGA and measures from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, and clinical data were collected. Factor analysis was used to identify latent variables, and multivariable linear regression was used to estimate determinants of the PtGA. RESULTS: Patients were mostly female (81%), white (78%), and had established disease (mean ± SD 12.3 ± 10.7 years), with 62% in remission or having low disease activity. In cohort 1 (n = 196), the following 2 factors emerged: 1) daily function (moderate-to-strong [i.e., >|0.65|] loadings of physical function, pain interference, social participation, and fatigue, and weak [>0.35] loadings of sleep disturbance); and 2) emotional distress (strong loadings of depression and anxiety). In crude analysis, daily function explained up to 53% and emotional distress up to 20% of the variance in PtGA. In both cohorts, in adjusted analyses, daily function and, to a much lesser extent, swollen joint count independently predicted PtGA; age was inversely related to PtGA in cohort 1 only. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that in patients with RA, PtGA ratings largely reflect the extent to which patients feel they can function in everyday roles and are not impacted by mood. This suggests that higher than expected PtGA scores may offer an opportunity to discuss patient expectations regarding roles and activities and the impact of their RA symptoms on daily function.

OMERACT Filter 2.1: Elaboration of the Conceptual Framework for Outcome Measurement in Health Intervention Studies.

OBJECTIVE: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.0 framework was developed in 2014 to aid core outcome set development by describing the full universe of "measurable aspects of health conditions" from which core domains can be selected. This paper provides elaborations and updated concepts (OMERACT Filter 2.1). METHODS: At OMERACT 2018, we discussed challenges in the framework application caused by unclear or ambiguous wording and terms and incompletely developed concepts. RESULTS: The updated OMERACT Filter 2.1 framework makes benefits and harms explicit, clarifies concepts, and improves naming of various terms. CONCLUSION: We expect that the Filter 2.1 framework will improve the process of core set development.

Improving Benefit-harm Assessment of Therapies from the Patient Perspective: OMERACT Premeeting Toward Consensus on Core Sets for Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) convened a premeeting in 2018 to bring together patients, regulators, researchers, clinicians, and consumers to build upon previous OMERACT drug safety work, with patients fully engaged throughout all phases. METHODS: Day 1 included a brief introduction to the history of OMERACT and methodology, and an overview of current efforts within and outside OMERACT to identify patient-reported medication safety concerns. On Day 2, two working groups presented results; after each, breakout groups were assembled to discuss findings. RESULTS: Five themes pertaining to drug safety measurement emerged. CONCLUSION: Current approaches have failed to include data from the patient's perspective. A better understanding of how individuals with rheumatic diseases view potential benefits and harms of therapies is essential.

Montreal Accord on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) use series - Paper 3: patient-reported outcomes can facilitate shared decision-making and guide self-management.

BACKGROUND: There is a shift toward making health care patient centered, whereby patients are part of medical decision-making and take responsibility for managing their health. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) capture the patient voice and can be used to engage patients in medical decision-making. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to present important factors from patients', clinicians', researchers', and decision-makers' perspectives that influence successful adoption of PROs in clinical practice. Factors recommended in this paper were informed by a patient partner. DISCUSSION: Based on themes arising from the Montreal Accord proceedings, we describe factors that influence the adoption of PROs and how PROs can have a positive effect by enhancing communication and providing opportunities to engage patients, carers, and clinicians in care. Consideration of patient factors (e.g., health literacy), family support and networks (e.g., peer-support networks), technology (e.g., e-health), and health care system factors (e.g., resources to implement PROs) is necessary to ensure PROs are successfully adopted. PRO evaluation plans most likely to succeed over the long term are those incorporating PROs identified by patients as necessary for self-management and that coincide with providers' needs for collaboratively developing treatment plans with patients and families.

Montreal Accord on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) use series - Paper 8: patient-reported outcomes in electronic health records can inform clinical and policy decisions.

BACKGROUND: Given that the goal of health care systems is to improve and maintain the health of the populations they serve, the indicators of performance must include outcomes that are meaningful to patients. The growth of health technologies provides an unprecedented opportunity to integrate the patient voice into clinical care by linking electronic health records (EHRs) to patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection. However, PRO data must be relevant, meaningful, and actionable for those who will have to invest the time and effort to collect it. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we highlight opportunities to integrate PRO data collection into EHRs. We consider how stakeholder perspectives should influence the selection of PROs and ways to enhance engagement in and commitment to PRO implementation. We propose a research and policy agenda to address unanswered questions and facilitate the widespread adoption of PRO data collection into EHRs. DISCUSSION: Building a learning health care system that gathers PRO data in ways that can inform individual patient care, quality improvement, and comparative effectiveness research has the potential to accelerate the application of new evidence and knowledge to patient care.

Patients' Experience of Myositis and Further Validation of a Myositis-specific Patient Reported Outcome Measure - Establishing Core Domains and Expanding Patient Input on Clinical Assessment in Myositis. Report from OMERACT 12.

OBJECTIVE: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) myositis working group was established to examine patient-reported outcomes (PRO) as well as to validate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) in myositis. METHODS: Qualitative studies using focus group interviews and cognitive debriefing of the myositis-specific Myositis Activities Profile (MAP) were used to explore the experience of adults living with polymyositis (PM) and dermatomyositis (DM). RESULTS: Preliminary results underscore the importance of patient input in the development of PROM to ensure content validity. Results from multicenter focus groups indicate the range of symptoms experienced including pain, fatigue, and impaired cognitive function, which are not currently assessed in myositis. Preliminary cognitive debriefing of the MAP indicated that while content was deemed relevant and important, several activities were not included; and that questionnaire construction and wording may benefit from revision. A research agenda was developed to continue work toward optimizing PRO assessment in myositis with 2 work streams. The first would continue to conduct and analyze focus groups until saturation in the thematic analysis was achieved to develop a framework that encompassed the patient-relevant aspects of myositis. The second would continue cognitive debriefing of the MAP to identify potential areas for revision. There was agreement that further work would be needed for inclusion body myositis and juvenile dermatomyositis, and that the inclusion of additional contributors such as caregivers and individuals from the pharmaceutical/regulatory spheres would be desirable. CONCLUSIONS: The currently used PROM do not assess symptoms or the effects of disease that are most important to patients; this emphasizes the necessity of patient involvement. Our work provides concrete examples for PRO identification.

Ultrasound assessment of response to intra-articular therapy in osteoarthritis of the knee.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the synovium in patients with knee OA is of great potential value for clinical trials. Ultrasonography could provide this but few data exist on its ability to assess synovial response to therapies. The aim of this study was to examine whether US can detect synovial response to IA corticosteroid (IACS) therapy and to explore associations between synovial characteristics and symptoms. METHODS: A total of 35 people with ACR radiographic knee OA were included, including those who required an injection of 80 mg of IA methylprednisolone. All participants completed a visual analogue scale for pain and underwent US of the knee at baseline, 1 and 4 weeks. Minimum clinically important improvement (MCII) in pain was ≥20 mm. RESULTS: One week of data were available for 33 patients (19 received IACS and 14 others). Synovial thickness (ST) decreased in 16 IACS patients and 2 others [mean between-group difference 4.7 mm (95% CI 1.1, 8.2), P = 0.012]. Absolute reduction was not associated with absolute reduction in pain (r = 0.20, P = 0.289), but decreased ST was substantively associated with reduction in pain greater than or equal to the MCII (52.9% vs 23.1%, P = 0.098, φ = 0.30). The power Doppler score decreased in 13 IACS patients and 3 others {median change in IACS patients -1.0 [interquartile range (IQR) -5.0-0.0], others 0.0 [-0.3-1.3], P = 0.004}. Absolute changes in pain and power Doppler score were weakly associated (ρ = 0.36, P = 0.049) and a decreased power Doppler score was associated with reduction in pain greater than or equal to the MCII (64.3% vs 18.8%, P = 0.011, φ = 0.46). CONCLUSION: Ultrasonography can detect short-term synovial response in knee OA. In particular, power Doppler score may be both responsive to and associated with pain, warranting further investigation.

Updating the OMERACT filter: implications of filter 2.0 to select outcome instruments through assessment of "truth": content, face, and construct validity.

OBJECTIVE: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter provides guidelines for the development and validation of outcome measures for use in clinical research. The "Truth" section of the OMERACT Filter requires that criteria be met to demonstrate that the outcome instrument meets the criteria for content, face, and construct validity. METHODS: Discussion groups critically reviewed a variety of ways in which case studies of current OMERACT Working Groups complied with the Truth component of the Filter and what issues remained to be resolved. RESULTS: The case studies showed that there is broad agreement on criteria for meeting the Truth criteria through demonstration of content, face, and construct validity; however, several issues were identified that the Filter Working Group will need to address. CONCLUSION: These issues will require resolution to reach consensus on how Truth will be assessed for the proposed Filter 2.0 framework, for instruments to be endorsed by OMERACT.

The delivery of evidence-based preventive care for older Americans with arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research suggests patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may receive suboptimal care with respect to preventive tests and services. We evaluated the proportion of older Americans with RA, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and osteoarthritis (OA) receiving these services and the specialty of the providers delivering this care. METHODS: Using data from 1999 to 2006 from the Medicare Chronic Conditions Warehouse, we identified persons age >/= 65 in the national 5% sample. Over the required five-year observation period, we identified tests and services recommended for older adults and the associated healthcare provider. Services of interest included dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), influenza and pneumococcal vaccination, hyperlipidemia lab testing, mammography and colonoscopy. RESULTS: After accounting for the sampling fraction, we identified 141,140 RA, 6,300 PsA, and 770,520 OA patients eligible for analysis. Over five years, a majority of RA, PsA, and OA patients were tested for hyperlipidemia (84%, 89% and 87% respectively) and received DXA (69%, 75%, and 52%). Only approximately one-third of arthritis patients received pneumococcal vaccination; 19% to 22% received influenza vaccination each year. Approximately 20% to 35% of arthritis patients never underwent mammography and colonoscopy over five years. Concomitant care from both a rheumatologist and a primary care physician was significantly associated with a greater likelihood of receiving almost all preventive tests and services. CONCLUSIONS: Among older Americans on Medicare, the absolute proportion of persons with arthritis receiving various recommended preventive services and screening tests was substantially less than 100%. Improved co-management between primary care and arthritis physicians may in part improve the delivery of preventive care for arthritis patients, but novel systematic interventions in this area are needed.

Standardizing assessment and reporting of adverse effects in rheumatology clinical trials II: the Rheumatology Common Toxicity Criteria v.2.0.

OBJECTIVE: The OMERACT Drug Safety Working Group focuses on standardization of assessment and reporting of adverse events in clinical trials and longitudinal and observational studies in rheumatology. This group developed the Rheumatology Common Toxicity Criteria (RCTC) in 1999, building on the Oncology Common Toxicity Criteria. At OMERACT 8, a workshop group reviewed the use of the RCTC and other instruments in rheumatology clinical trials to date, to revise and to stimulate its implementation. METHODS: The Working Group drafted a revision of the RCTC after an iterative examination of its contents, terms, and definitions. The RCTC were compared with the Oncology Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC v.2.0), and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v.3.0). In addition a pharmaceutical company focus group met to clarify the challenges of application of RCTC terms and definitions, relative to the standard in pharmaceutical clinical trials, i.e., verbatim recording of adverse events followed by mapping to Medical Dictionary of Drug Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terms. The workshop focused on the proposed revision of RCTC to version 2.0 and on the research agenda, including a validation of the RCTC in future trials. RESULTS: At OMERACT 8, breakout groups amended the contents of the 4 current and 2 new categories of adverse event terms within the draft RCTC v.2.0. Participants recognized the need to standardize the definitions for disease flares, infection, malignancy, and certain syndromes such as drug hypersensitivity and infusion reactions. Moderate consensus (62%) was reached in the final plenary session that the amended RCTC v.2.0 should be promulgated and tested in available trials of anti-tumor necrosis factor agents. CONCLUSION: The RCTC has face validity and construct validity. However, documentation of discrimination and feasibility (the other elements of the OMERACT filter) is needed. Collaboration with drug safety working groups in rheumatology professional organizations is necessary to enable this project.

Assessment of coxib utilization by rheumatologists for nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug gastroprotection prior to the coxib market withdrawals.

OBJECTIVE: To examine cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor (coxib) utilization by rheumatologists for patients receiving nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) prior to the coxib market withdrawals. METHODS: A prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis enrolled in the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America registry was performed. RESULTS: Of 1,833 patients receiving prescription NSAIDs, 1,380 (75.3%) received gastroprotection, defined as either coxib monotherapy and/or gastroprotective agent (GPA) cotherapy, and 1,207 (65.8%) received coxibs. The distribution of gastroprotective strategies included 860 (46.9%) patients who were prescribed coxib monotherapy, 347 (18.9%) prescribed dual coxib plus GPA cotherapy, 173 (9.4%) prescribed a nonselective NSAID (NS-NSAID) plus GPA cotherapy, and 453 (24.7%) prescribed an NS-NSAID without GPA cotherapy. For patients with 0, 1, and > or =2 identifiable gastrointestinal (GI) risk factors, coxib prescribing rates as a proportion of NSAID agents were 64.1%, 66.4%, and 68.6%, respectively; among dual aspirin/NSAID users, coxib prescribing rates were 66.2%, 78.3%, and 68.5% of NSAID prescriptions, respectively. CONCLUSION: The majority of NSAID users were prescribed a gastroprotective strategy, primarily attributable to coxib utilization. Coxib utilization rates were consistently high across all levels of GI risk, including patients without identifiable risk factors. These data indicate that rheumatologists broadly adopted the coxib class of NSAIDs in a nonselective manner with respect to underlying GI risk and concomitant aspirin use. As novel therapeutic classes are introduced, early evaluation of prescribing patterns using arthritis registries can determine the appropriateness of prescribing patterns and may improve patient outcomes.