A framework for the definition and interpretation of the use of surrogate endpoints in interventional trials.

Background: Interventional trials that evaluate treatment effects using surrogate endpoints have become increasingly common. This paper describes four linked empirical studies and the development of a framework for defining, interpreting and reporting surrogate endpoints in trials. Methods: As part of developing the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) and SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) extensions for randomised trials reporting surrogate endpoints, we undertook a scoping review, e-Delphi study, consensus meeting, and a web survey to examine current definitions and stakeholder (including clinicians, trial investigators, patients and public partners, journal editors, and health technology experts) interpretations of surrogate endpoints as primary outcome measures in trials. Findings: Current surrogate endpoint definitional frameworks are inconsistent and unclear. Surrogate endpoints are used in trials as a substitute of the treatment effects of an intervention on the target outcome(s) of ultimate interest, events measuring how patients feel, function, or survive. Traditionally the consideration of surrogate endpoints in trials has focused on biomarkers (e.g., HDL cholesterol, blood pressure, tumour response), especially in the medical product regulatory setting. Nevertheless, the concept of surrogacy in trials is potentially broader. Intermediate outcomes that include a measure of function or symptoms (e.g., angina frequency, exercise tolerance) can also be used as substitute for target outcomes (e.g., all-cause mortality)-thereby acting as surrogate endpoints. However, we found a lack of consensus among stakeholders on accepting and interpreting intermediate outcomes in trials as surrogate endpoints or target outcomes. In our assessment, patients and health technology assessment experts appeared more likely to consider intermediate outcomes to be surrogate endpoints than clinicians and regulators. Interpretation: There is an urgent need for better understanding and reporting on the use of surrogate endpoints, especially in the setting of interventional trials. We provide a framework for the definition of surrogate endpoints (biomarkers and intermediate outcomes) and target outcomes in trials to improve future reporting and aid stakeholders' interpretation and use of trial surrogate endpoint evidence. Funding: SPIRIT-SURROGATE/CONSORT-SURROGATE project is Medical Research Council Better Research Better Health (MR/V038400/1) funded.

Assessment of symptoms in COMET-ICE, a phase 2/3 study of sotrovimab for early treatment of non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The COMET-ICE trial demonstrated that sotrovimab clinically and statistically significantly reduces the risk of all-cause > 24-h hospitalization or death due to any cause among patients with COVID-19 at high risk of disease progression. Patient-reported outcomes are important to capture symptom burden of COVID-19 and assess treatment effectiveness. This study investigated symptoms and their impact over the acute phase of COVID-19 infection among patients on sotrovimab versus placebo. METHODS: Randomized (1:1), double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled, phase 2/3 study in 57 centers across five countries. Participants were non-hospitalized patients with symptomatic, mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and ≥ 1 baseline risk factor for disease progression (aged ≥ 55 years or ≥ 1 of the following: diabetes requiring medication, obesity, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or moderate-to-severe asthma). An intravenous infusion of sotrovimab 500 mg or placebo was administered on Day 1. The FLU-PRO Plus questionnaire was administered once-daily with 24-h recall from Day 1-21, and at Day 29. Intensity and duration of COVID-19 symptoms were determined from area under the curve (AUC) and mean change in total and individual domain scores through Days 7, 14, and 21. Time to symptom alleviation was assessed. RESULTS: In total, 1057 patients were randomized to sotrovimab (n = 528) or placebo (n = 529). At Day 7, mean decrease in FLU-PRO Plus total score (measured by AUC) was statistically significantly greater for patients on sotrovimab (-3.05 [95% confidence interval (CI) -3.27 to -2.83]) than placebo (-1.98 [95% CI -2.20 to -1.76]; difference -1.07 [95% CI -1.38 to -0.76]; p < 0.001). Significant differences were also observed at Days 14 and 21. A more rapid decline in symptom severity was observed with sotrovimab versus placebo through Week 1 and the first 21 days post-treatment. By Day 21, 41% of patients on sotrovimab and 34% on placebo reported symptom resolution. In a post-hoc analysis, median time to symptom alleviation was 4 and 6 days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sotrovimab provides significant and rapid improvements in patient-reported COVID-19 symptoms, as measured by the FLU-PRO Plus. These results further show the benefits of sotrovimab in alleviating symptoms among high-risk patients with COVID-19. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT04545060 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04545060 ). Date of registration: September 10, 2020 (retrospectively registered).

A Comparative Assessment of Approvals and Discontinuations of Systemic Antibiotics and Other Therapeutic Areas.

Since 1980, the US Congress has passed legislation providing several incentives to encourage the development and regulatory approval of new drugs, particularly antibiotics. We assessed long-term trends and characteristics of approvals and discontinuations of all new molecular entities, new therapeutic biologics, and gene and cell therapies approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as well as reasons for discontinuations by therapeutic class, in the context of laws and regulations implemented over the past four decades. In the period 1980-2021, the FDA approved 1310 new drugs, of which 210 (16.0%) had been discontinued as of 31 December 2021, including 38 (2.9%) withdrawn for safety reasons. The FDA approved 77 (5.9%) new systemic antibiotics, of which 32 (41.6%) had been discontinued at the end of the observation period, including 6 (7.8%) safety withdrawals. Since the enactment of the FDA Safety and Innovation Act in 2012, which created the Qualified Infectious Disease Product designation for antiinfectives to treat serious or life-threatening diseases due to resistant or potentially resistant bacteria, the FDA has approved 15 new systemic antibiotics, all using non-inferiority trials, for 22 indications and five different infections. Only one of the infections had labeled indications for patients with drug-resistant pathogens.

Prospective Assessment of Symptoms to Evaluate Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections in a Cohort of Health Care Workers.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections is unclear and may be influenced by how symptoms are evaluated. In this study, we sought to determine the frequency of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections in a prospective cohort of health care workers (HCWs). METHODS: A prospective cohort of HCWs, confirmed negative for SARS-CoV-2 exposure upon enrollment, were evaluated for SARS-CoV-2 infection by monthly analysis of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies as well as referral for polymerase chain reaction testing whenever they exhibited symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Participants completed the standardized and validated FLU-PRO Plus symptom questionnaire scoring viral respiratory disease symptom intensity and frequency at least twice monthly during baseline periods of health and each day they had any symptoms that were different from their baseline. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-three participants were enrolled between August 25 and December 31, 2020. Through February 28, 2021, 12 participants were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Symptom analysis demonstrated that all 12 had at least mild symptoms of COVID-19, compared with baseline health, near or at time of infection. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated, immunocompetent adults is less common than previously reported. While infectious inoculum doses and patient factors may have played a role in the clinical manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infections in this cohort, we suspect that the high rate of symptomatic disease was due primarily to participant attentiveness to symptoms and collection of symptoms in a standardized, prospective fashion. These results have implications for studies that estimate SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence and for public health measures to control the spread of this virus.

Evidence at time of regulatory approval and cost of new antibiotics in 2016-19: cohort study of FDA approved drugs.

Objective: To review the clinical evidence, regulatory background, and cost of antibiotics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 2016-19. Design: Cohort study of FDA approved drugs. Data sources: FDA databases, ClinicalTrials.gov, and drug labelling. Launch prices were extracted from IBM Micromedex Red Book. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Antibiotics approved by the FDA from October 2016 to December 2019 were identified, and key features of their clinical development were extracted from publicly available FDA databases, ClinicalTrials.gov, and drug labelling. Launch prices were extracted from IBM Micromedex Red Book to evaluate the cost of treatment against comparators. Results: 15 new antibiotics received at least one special regulatory designation and were supported by a median of two pivotal trials. More than half of the pivotal trials used an active control non-inferiority design. All drugs were approved based on surrogate outcome measures. 52 postmarketing requirements and commitments were included across the cohort (median 3 for each drug). From January 2021, 27 postmarketing requirements and commitments were listed as pending, seven as ongoing, three as delayed, one as submitted, eight as released, and four as fulfilled. The most expensive new antibiotic was pretomanid at $36 399 (£29 618; €34 582) for a course of treatment, and the least expensive was rifamycin ($176). Cost ratios between study drugs and comparators ranged from 0.48 to 134. Conclusions: New antibiotics have been approved by the FDA in recent years mostly based on fewer, smaller, and non-inferiority pivotal trials that often used surrogate outcome measures but were commonly more costly. Efforts to incentivise the development of antibiotics should balance growing the antibiotic development pipeline with ensuring that clinical trials provide clinically relevant evidence of effectiveness in showing added benefits for the patient.

Prospective Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Seroconversion (PASS) study: an observational cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 is a recently emerged pandemic coronavirus (CoV) capable of causing severe respiratory illness. However, a significant number of infected people present as asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic. In this prospective assessment of at-risk healthcare workers (HCWs) we seek to determine whether pre-existing antibody or T cell responses to previous seasonal human coronavirus (HCoV) infections affect immunological or clinical responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. METHODS: A cohort of 300 healthcare workers, confirmed negative for SARS-CoV-2 exposure upon study entry, will be followed for up to 1 year with monthly serology analysis of IgM and IgG antibodies against the spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2 and the four major seasonal human coronavirus - HCoV-OC43, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-229E, and HCoV-NL63. Participants will complete monthly questionnaires that ask about Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) exposure risks, and a standardized, validated symptom questionnaire (scoring viral respiratory disease symptoms, intensity and severity) at least twice monthly and any day when any symptoms manifest. SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing will be performed any time participants develop symptoms consistent with COVID-19. For those individuals that seroconvert and/or test positive by SARS-CoV-2 PCR, or receive the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, additional studies of T cell activation and cytokine production in response to SARS-CoV-2 peptide pools and analysis of Natural Killer cell numbers and function will be conducted on that participant's cryopreserved baseline peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Following the first year of this study we will further analyze those participants having tested positive for COVID-19, and/or having received an authorized/licensed SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, quarterly (year 2) and semi-annually (years 3 and 4) to investigate immune response longevity. DISCUSSION: This study will determine the frequency of asymptomatic and pauci-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in a cohort of at-risk healthcare workers. Baseline and longitudinal assays will determine the frequency and magnitude of anti-spike glycoprotein antibodies to the seasonal HCoV-OC43, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-229E, and HCoV-NL63, and may inform whether pre-existing antibodies to these human coronaviruses are associated with altered COVID-19 disease course. Finally, this study will evaluate whether pre-existing immune responses to seasonal HCoVs affect the magnitude and duration of antibody and T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, adjusting for demographic covariates.

Needs assessment for novel Gram-negative antibiotics in US hospitals: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based needs assessments for novel antibiotics against highly-resistant Gram-negative infections (GNIs) are scarce. We aimed to use real-world data from an electronic health record repository to identify treatment opportunities in US hospitals for GNIs resistant to all first-line drugs. METHODS: For this retrospective cohort study, population estimates with an unmet need for novel Gram-negative antibiotics were quantified using the Cerner Health Facts database (2009-15), aggregating episodes of infection in US hospitals with pathogens displaying difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR; resistance to carbapenems, other ß-lactams, and fluoroquinolones) and episodes involving empirical coverage with reserve drugs (colistin or polymyxin B and aminoglycosides). Episodes displaying extended-spectrum cephalosporin resistance (ECR) were also estimated. Episodes were multiplied by site-specific and fixed 14-day treatment durations for conservative and liberal days-of-therapy (DOT) estimates and stratified by site and taxon. Hospital type-specific DOT rates were reliability adjusted to account for random variation; cluster analyses quantified contribution from outbreaks. FINDINGS: Across 2 996 271 inpatient encounters and 134 hospitals, there were 1352 DTR-GNI episodes, 1765 episodes involving empirical therapy with colistin or polymyxin B, and 16 632 episodes involving aminoglycosides. Collectively, these yielded 39·0 (conservative estimate) to 138·2 (liberal estimate) DOT per 10 000 encounters for a novel DTR-GNI-targeted drug, whereas greater treatment opportunities were identified for ECR (six times greater) and ß-lactam susceptible GNIs (70 times greater). The most common DTR-GNI site and pathogen was lower respiratory (14·3 [43·3%] of 33 DOT per 10 000 encounters) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (522 [38·1%] of 1371 episodes), whereas Enterobacteriaceae urinary-tract infections dominated the ECR or carbapenem-sparing niche (59·0% [5589 of 9535 episodes]) equating to 210·7 DOT per 10 000 encounters. DTR Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Burkholderia spp, and Achromobacter spp represented less than 1 DOT per 10 000 encounters each. The estimated need for DTR-GNI-targeted antibiotics saw minor contributions by outbreaks and varied from 0·5 to 73·1 DOT per 10 000 encounters by hospital type. INTERPRETATION: Suspected or documented GNIs with no or suboptimal treatment options are relatively infrequent. Non-revenue-based strategies and innovative trial designs are probably essential to the development of antibiotics with improved effectiveness for these GNIs. FUNDING: Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration; Intramural Research Program, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the National Cancer Institute.

Procalcitonin-Guided Antibiotic Discontinuation and Mortality in Critically Ill Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Procalcitonin (PCT)-guided antibiotic discontinuation appears to decrease antibiotic use in critically ill patients, but its impact on survival remains less certain. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PCT-guided antibiotic discontinuation in critically ill adults reporting survival or antibiotic duration. Searches were conducted without language restrictions from inception to July 23, 2018. Two reviewers independently conducted all review stages; another adjudicated differences. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Study quality was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and evidence was graded using GRADEpro. RESULTS: Among critically ill adults (5,158 randomized; 5,000 analyzed), PCT-guided antibiotic discontinuation was associated with decreased mortality (16 RCTs; risk ratio [RR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97; I2 = 0%; low certainty). Death was the primary outcome in only one study and a survival benefit was not observed in the subset specified as sepsis (10 RCTs; RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85-1.03; I2 = 0%), those without industry sponsorship (nine RCTs; RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.87-1.10; I2 = 0%), high PCT-guided algorithm adherence (five RCTs; RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.71-1.22; I2 = 0%), and PCT-guided algorithms without C-reactive protein (eight RCTs; RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.87-1.06; I2 = 0%). PCT-guided antibiotic discontinuation decreased antibiotic duration (mean difference, 1.31 days; 95% CI, -2.27 to -0.35; I2 = 93%) (low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings of increased survival and decreased antibiotic utilization associated with PCT-guided antibiotic discontinuation represent low-certainty evidence with a high risk of bias. This relationship was primarily observed in studies without high protocol adherence and in studies with algorithms combining PCT and C-reactive protein. Properly designed studies with mortality as the primary outcome are needed to address this question. TRIAL REGISTRY: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); No.: CRD42016049715; URL: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO_REBRANDING/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42016049715.

Assessment of the Perceived Acceptability of an Early Enrollment Strategy Using Advance Consent in Health Care-Associated Pneumonia.

Importance: Better treatment options are needed in life-threatening infections, including health care-associated pneumonia. Enrolling patients in antibacterial clinical trials before diagnosis may circumvent existing time-to-enrollment constraints. However, the acceptability of an early enrollment strategy using advance consent is unknown. Objective: To assess the perceived acceptability of an early enrollment strategy for enrolling patients in an antibacterial clinical trial before a pneumonia diagnosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative, descriptive study used semistructured telephone interviews. Framed within a planned noninferiority pneumonia antibiotic trial, an early enrollment strategy was described and perceptions were assessed. Using this strategy, patients give consent to enroll before developing pneumonia, to be monitored by study staff, and to be randomly assigned a study antibiotic if pneumonia develops. All interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using applied thematic analysis. Fifty-two key stakeholders from across the United States, including 18 patients at risk of pneumonia, 12 caregivers, 10 representatives of institutional review boards, 7 investigators, and 5 study coordinators, were interviewed from June 20 to August 19, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Perceived acceptability of the early enrollment strategy. Results: Among the 52 stakeholders interviewed (ages 29-75 years; 14 women), patients and caregivers expressed no concerns about patients being approached about participation before developing pneumonia; however, some patients may experience anxiety on learning about their risk for pneumonia. No concerns with study staff accessing patients' medical records were expressed. The clarity of consent information was important for understanding the study rather than having the condition under investigation. Among patients, caregivers, and institutional review board representatives, preferences varied regarding opt-out and precedent autonomy procedures. Nearly all patients would be willing to join a trial using the early enrollment strategy and caregivers would be willing to provide proxy consent. Institutional review board representatives were supportive of the strategy and made recommendations for the study protocol, primarily around informed consent. Investigators and study coordinators believed the strategy would not be burdensome and offered suggestions to ensure its feasibility. Conclusion and Relevance: Results of the study suggest that the early enrollment strategy is acceptable. Future research should evaluate whether the strategy improves enrollment rates in registrational pneumonia trials and in trials of other acute infection syndromes with narrow enrollment windows and/or patients with transient decisional incapacity.

Analysis of an ordinal endpoint for use in evaluating treatments for severe influenza requiring hospitalization.

Background/Aims A single best endpoint for evaluating treatments of severe influenza requiring hospitalization has not been identified. A novel six-category ordinal endpoint of patient status is being used in a randomized controlled trial (FLU-Intravenous Immunoglobulin - FLU-IVIG) of intravenous immunoglobulin. We systematically examine four factors regarding the use of this ordinal endpoint that may affect power from fitting a proportional odds model: (1) deviations from the proportional odds assumption which result in the same overall treatment effect as specified in the FLU-IVIG protocol and which result in a diminished overall treatment effect, (2) deviations from the distribution of the placebo group assumed in the FLU-IVIG design, (3) the effect of patient misclassification among the six categories, and (4) the number of categories of the ordinal endpoint. We also consider interactions between the treatment effect (i.e. factor 1) and each other factor. Methods We conducted a Monte Carlo simulation study to assess the effect of each factor. To study factor 1, we developed an algorithm for deriving distributions of the ordinal endpoint in the two treatment groups that deviated from proportional odds while maintaining the same overall treatment effect. For factor 2, we considered placebo group distributions which were more or less skewed than the one specified in the FLU-IVIG protocol by adding or subtracting a constant from the cumulative log odds. To assess factor 3, we added misclassification between adjacent pairs of categories that depend on subjective patient/clinician assessments. For factor 4, we collapsed some categories into single categories. Results Deviations from proportional odds reduced power at most from 80% to 77% given the same overall treatment effect as specified in the FLU-IVIG protocol. Misclassification and collapsing categories can reduce power by over 40 and 10 percentage points, respectively, when they affect categories with many patients and a discernible treatment effect. But collapsing categories that contain no treatment effect can raise power by over 20 percentage points. Differences in the distribution of the placebo group can raise power by over 20 percentage points or reduce power by over 40 percentage points depending on how patients are shifted to portions of the ordinal endpoint with a large treatment effect. Conclusion Provided that the overall treatment effect is maintained, deviations from proportional odds marginally reduce power. However, deviations from proportional odds can modify the effect of misclassification, the number of categories, and the distribution of the placebo group on power. In general, adjacent pairs of categories with many patients should be kept separate to help ensure that power is maintained at the pre-specified level.

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).

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

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

Progress in the Fight Against Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria? A Review of U.S. Food and Drug Administration-Approved Antibiotics, 2010-2015.

A weak antibiotic pipeline and the increase in drug-resistant pathogens have led to calls for more new antibiotics. Eight new antibiotics were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between January 2010 and December 2015: ceftaroline, fidaxomicin, bedaquiline, dalbavancin, tedizolid, oritavancin, ceftolozane-tazobactam, and ceftazidime-avibactam. This study evaluates the development course and pivotal trials of these antibiotics for their innovativeness, development process, documented patient outcomes, and cost. Data sources were FDA approval packages and databases (January 2010 to December 2015); the Red Book (Truven Health Analytics); Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (FDA); and supplementary information from company filings, press releases, and media reports. Four antibiotics were approved for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infection. Seven had similar mechanisms of action to those of previously approved drugs. Six were initially developed by small to midsized companies, and 7 are currently marketed by 1 of 3 large companies. The drugs spent a median of 6.2 years in clinical trials (interquartile range [IQR], 5.4 to 8.8 years) and 8 months in FDA review (IQR, 7.5 to 8 months). The median number of patients enrolled in the pivotal trials was 666 (IQR, 553 to 739 patients; full range, 44 to 1005 patients), and median trial duration was 18 months (IQR, 15 to 22 months). Seven drugs were approved on the basis of pivotal trials evaluating noninferiority. One drug demonstrated superiority on an exploratory secondary end point, 2 showed decreased efficacy in patients with renal insufficiency, and 1 showed increased mortality compared with older drugs. Seven of the drugs are substantially more expensive than their trial comparators. Limitations are that future research may show benefit to patients, new drugs from older classes may show superior effectiveness in specific patient populations, and initial U.S. prices for each new antibiotic were obtained from public sources. Recently marketed antibiotics are more expensive but have been approved without evidence of clinical superiority.

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

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

Repairing the broken market for antibiotic innovation.

Multidrug-resistant bacterial diseases pose serious and growing threats to human health. While innovation is important to all areas of health research, it is uniquely important in antibiotics. Resistance destroys the fruit of prior research, making it necessary to constantly innovate to avoid falling back into a pre-antibiotic era. But investment is declining in antibiotics, driven by competition from older antibiotics, the cost and uncertainty of the development process, and limited reimbursement incentives. Good public health practices curb inappropriate antibiotic use, making return on investment challenging in payment systems based on sales volume. We assess the impact of recent initiatives to improve antibiotic innovation, reflecting experience with all sixty-seven new molecular entity antibiotics approved by the Food and Drug Administration since 1980. Our analysis incorporates data and insights derived from several multistakeholder initiatives under way involving governments and the private sector on both sides of the Atlantic. We propose three specific reforms that could revitalize innovations that protect public health, while promoting long-term sustainability: increased incentives for antibiotic research and development, surveillance, and stewardship; greater targeting of incentives to high-priority public health needs, including reimbursement that is delinked from volume of drug use; and enhanced global collaboration, including a global treaty.

Community-acquired pneumonia: symptoms and burden of illness at diagnosis among US adults aged 50 years and older.

PURPOSE: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in older adults, yet few studies have comprehensively measured the burden of CAP symptoms and their impact from the patient perspective. Our Web-survey used the newly developed CAP burden of illness questionnaire (CAP-BIQ) designed to assess the presence of key symptoms, comorbid conditions affected by CAP, psychosocial impacts, productivity, and CAP-associated physician visits in US adults aged 50 years and older. METHODS: The CAP-BIQ was developed from semi-structured one-on-one interviews and finalized after cognitive debriefings with recently diagnosed CAP patients. The CAP-BIQ was then administered to 500 survey participants with a CAP diagnosis within the past 120 days confirmed by chest imaging recruited from a Web-based panel. Analyses of survey results were weighted for national representativeness, and were compared between relevant age, hospitalization status, and pneumonia-risk subgroups. RESULTS: The survey participants' mean age was 62.4 years; 45 % were men; and 39.6 % were hospitalized due to CAP. On average, the surveys were completed 56.9 days after pneumonia diagnosis. Nearly all participants reported tiredness, cough, body aches, weakness, shortness of breath, wheezing, and a weak appetite at the time of diagnosis (99.0, 96.8, 96.9, 94.1, 89.1, 85.8, and 78.5 %, respectively). There was generally greater symptom prevalence at diagnosis in younger, nonhospitalized, or high-risk subgroups when compared to their respective older, hospitalized, or low-risk counterparts. Most participants reported at least one cough-related and weakness-related impact on their daily life and activities from CAP. Over three quarters of the respondents (77.4 %) needed assistance from a friend or family member during their bout with pneumonia and a majority of respondents (83.6 %) were satisfied with the care they received from their doctors across the course of their illness. CONCLUSIONS: This study systematically assessed CAP symptoms and their impacts using the CAP-BIQ, a questionnaire with established content validity. At CAP diagnosis, the range of patient-reported symptoms was broader than previous studies have reported. Additionally, the overwhelming need for caregiver assistance demonstrates the burden this illness places on older adults.