Epidemiology of interstitial lung disease in patients with metastatic breast cancer at baseline and after treatment with HER2-directed therapy: a real-world data analysis.

PURPOSE: Using real-world data, interstitial lung disease (ILD) prevalence before and after HER2-directed therapy was estimated. Potential ILD risk factors in patients receiving HER2-directed therapy for metastatic breast cancer (mBC) were evaluated. METHODS: Adults with HER2-directed therapy for mBC initiated between September 25, 1998, and February 22, 2020 were, included. ILD was defined broadly as one or more of 64 lung conditions. Patients were followed until incident ILD, death, last contact, or study end. RESULTS: In total, 533 patients were identified with median age at mBC of 57, 51% had de novo mBC, 43% were ever smokers, 30% had lung metastases, 9% had thoracic radiation, 6% had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 16% had prevalent ILD. ILD cumulative incidence at one year was 9% (95% CI 6%, 12%), with a median follow-up of 23 months. Smoking (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1, 4.8) and Black/African-American race (HR 3.4, 95% CI 1.6, 7.5) were significantly associated with ILD; HRs for preexisting lung conditions (HR 1.8, 95% CI 0.9, 3.8) and thoracic radiation (HR 2.3, 95% CI 0.8, 7.1) were not statistically significant. Prevalent ILD was associated with 13-fold greater occurrence of incident ILD. 85% of patients with prevalent or incident ILD were symptomatic. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world population of patients with mBC had a high prevalence of ILD prior to HER2-directed therapy, reflecting the multifactorial causation of interstitial lung changes. The cumulative incidence of ILD in patients receiving HER2-directed therapy for mBC augments prior reports. Symptomatic presentation suggests an opportunity for early intervention.

Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events: Methods for item selection in industry-sponsored oncology clinical trials.

As new cancer treatment regimens demonstrate increased potential to improve patients' survival, more focus is directed toward the quality of that extension of life and to obtaining additional information from patients regarding their experience with treatment. The utility of capturing patient-reported treatment-related symptoms to complement traditional clinician-rated symptomatic adverse event reporting is well-documented. The National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events is an item library aimed at capturing patient-reported symptoms to inform the patient perspective on a treatment's tolerability. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has recommended using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in clinical trials. A practical guideline is needed to inform a priori selection of specific Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items for use in any given industry-sponsored oncology clinical trial. Standardizing this selection process will foster systematic and consistent data collection as part of drug development and enhance our knowledge on how to use patient-relevant information as part of a treatment's risk/benefit assessment. This article presents methods and consensus recommendations for selecting specific Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items to include in early-phase and late-phase oncology clinical trials.

Clinical value of a patient-reported goal-attainment measure: the global development of self-assessment goal achievement (SAGA) questionnaire for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms.

AIMS: To discuss the importance of patients' treatment goals and perceived goal attainment to better address expectations in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), including overactive bladder (OAB). METHODS: The development of the Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire was driven by measurement principles from the field of qualitative and psychometric research adapted to elicit patients' treatment goals. At baseline, SAGA solicits individualized responses of patient's treatment expectations and goals, and at follow-up SAGA uses a goal-attainment scale (GAS) to document goal achievement. RESULTS: The SAGA questionnaire provides a basis for the patient and physician to discuss realistic treatment expectations and to measure the alignment between patients' expectations and treatment outcomes in terms of improvement in symptoms and impact on function. Therefore, incorporating the SAGA questionnaire into clinical trials may provide an additional dimension of treatment efficacy by incorporating data on treatment satisfaction from the patient's perspective. CONCLUSIONS: The SAGA questionnaire is a useful tool for patient-centered discussions about the treatment and management of LUTS, including OAB, and assisting physicians in tracking progress and managing patient expectations during therapy.

Content validity of the PedsQL™ 3.2 Diabetes Module in newly diagnosed patients with Type 1 diabetes mellitus ages 8-45.

OBJECTIVES: The content validity of the 28-item PedsQL™ 3.0 Diabetes Module has not been established in research on pediatric and adult patients with newly diagnosed Type 1 diabetes across a broad age range. This study aimed to document the content validity of three age-specific versions (8-12 years, 13-18 years, and 18-45 years) of the PedsQL™ Diabetes Module in a population of newly diagnosed patients with Type 1 diabetes. METHODS: The study included in-depth interviews with 31 newly diagnosed patients with Type 1 diabetes between the ages of 8 and 45 years, as well as 14 parents and/or caregivers of child and teenage patients between the ages of 8 and 18 years of age; grounded theory data collection and analysis methods; and review by clinical and measurement experts. RESULTS: Following the initial round of interviews, revisions reflecting patient feedback were made to the Child and Teen versions of the Diabetes Module, and an Adult version of the Diabetes Module was drafted. Cognitive interviews of the modified versions of the Diabetes Module were conducted with an additional sample of 11 patients. The results of these interviews support the content validity of the modified 33-item PedsQL™ 3.2 Diabetes Module for pediatric and adult patients, including interpretability, comprehensiveness, and relevance suitable for all patients with Type 1 Diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative methods support the content validity of the modified PedsQL™ 3.2 Diabetes Module in pediatric and adult patients. It is recommended that the PedsQL™ 3.2 Diabetes Module replaces version 3.0 and is suitable for measuring patient-reported outcomes in all patients with newly diagnosed, stable, or long-standing diabetes in clinical research and practice.

European content validation of the Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire in patients with overactive bladder.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire is a patient-completed instrument designed to assess goal attainment in the behavioral or pharmacologic treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), including overactive bladder (OAB). The SAGA questionnaire allows patients to identify and rank the importance of treatment goals before treatment is initiated; the follow-up SAGA questionnaire quantifies the achievement of these patient-identified goals. The objective of this qualitative research was to confirm the content validity of the German, Spanish, Swedish, and English (UK) language versions of the SAGA questionnaire in patients with OAB with or without other LUTS. METHODS: The SAGA questionnaire was translated to each language in accordance with a well-established forward and backward harmonization method. Patient interviews were then conducted according to a cognitive debriefing methodology. Qualitative analysis of patients' input allowed assessment of content validity of each linguistically adapted SAGA questionnaire. RESULTS: All patients (n = 29; six to eight per targeted country) found the SAGA questionnaire easy to understand and to complete. Most patients completed the nine prespecified (fixed) treatment goals and were able to add up to five personal goals in the open-ended portion and rate each goal by importance. Differences were identified in how the various languages communicated some of the concepts assessed with the SAGA questionnaire. Rewording of the translated versions of the questionnaire was necessary in some cases. CONCLUSIONS: This linguistic content validation study in four European languages indicates that SAGA is a comprehensive, easy-to-understand, and relevant questionnaire for patient-completed evaluation of LUTS/OAB symptoms and treatment goal attainment.

Linguistic validation of translation of the Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire from English.

BACKGROUND: A linguistic validation of the Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire was conducted for 12 European languages, documenting that each translation adequately captures the concepts of the original English-language version of the questionnaire and is readily understood by subjects in the target population. METHODS: Native-speaking residents of the target countries who reported urinary problems/lower urinary tract problems were asked to review a translation of the SAGA questionnaire, which was harmonized among 12 languages: Danish, Dutch, English (UK), Finnish, French, German, Greek, Icelandic, Italian, Norwegian, Spanish, and Swedish. During a cognitive debriefing interview, participants were asked to identify any words that were difficult to understand and explain in their own words the meaning of each sentence in the questionnaire. The qualitative analysis was conducted by local linguistic validation teams (original translators, back translator, project manager, interviewer, and survey research expert). RESULTS: Translations of the SAGA questionnaire from English to 12 European languages were well understood by the participants with an overall comprehension rate across language of 98.9%. In addition, the translations retained the original meaning of the SAGA items and instructions. Comprehension difficulties were identified, and after review by the translation team, minor changes were made to 7 of the 12 translations to improve clarity and comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: Conceptual, semantic, and cultural equivalence of each translation of the SAGA questionnaire was achieved thus confirming linguistic validation.

Pain in castration-resistant prostate cancer with bone metastases: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases are a common painful and debilitating consequence of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CPRC). Bone pain may predict patients' prognosis and there is a need to further explore CRPC patients' experiences of bone pain in the overall context of disease pathology. Due to the subjective nature of pain, assessments of pain severity, onset and progression are reliant on patient assessment. Patient reported outcome (PRO) measures, therefore, are commonly used as key endpoints for evaluating the efficacy of CRPC treatments. Evidence of the content validity of leading PRO measures of pain severity used in CRPC clinical trials is, however, limited. METHODS: To document patients' experience of CRPC symptoms including pain, and their impact on health-related quality of life (HRQL), semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 17 patients with CRPC and bone metastases. The content validity of the Present Pain Intensity (PPI) scale from the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and the 'Average Pain' and 'Worst Pain' items of the Brief Pain Inventory Short-Form (BPI-SF) was also assessed. RESULTS: Patients with CRPC and bone metastases present with a constellation of symptoms that can have a profound effect on HRQL. For patients in this study, bone pain was the most prominent and debilitating symptom associated with their condition. Bone pain was chronic and, despite being generally well-managed by analgesic medication, instances of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) were common. Cognitive debriefing of the selected PRO measures of pain severity highlighted difficulties among patients in understanding the verbal response scale (VRS) of the MPQ PPI scale. There were also some inconsistencies in the way in which the BPI-SF 'Average Pain' item was interpreted by patients. In contrast, the BPI-SF 'Worst Pain' item was well understood and interpreted consistently among patients. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings support the importance of PRO measures of pain severity as key endpoints for evaluating the efficacy of treatments for CRPC, particularly for patients with bone metastases where episodes of BTcP are common. Qualitative evidence from CRPC patients supports the content validity of the BPI-SF ''Worst Pain' item and promotes use of this item for measuring pain severity in this population.

Goal attainment scaling in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms: development and pilot testing of the Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (SAGA) questionnaire was developed to identify treatment goals and assess goal-achievement in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). METHODS: This study consisted of (1) gathering information on goal setting/attainment concepts, (2) goal elicitation (n = 41 patients with LUTS), (3) cognitive debriefing of draft questionnaire (n = 11), and (4) pilot testing (n = 104). RESULTS: SAGA consists of baseline (goal-assessment; ranking) and follow-up (goal-achievement) modules. In addition to goals most frequently mentioned, patients can list up to five open goals. Goals most commonly reported as "very important" in pilot testing included reducing urgency (72%), incontinence (65%), and nocturia (64%). Treatment goals spontaneously reported as "very important" were reducing incontinence (45%), nocturia (40%), and frequency (26%). CONCLUSIONS: SAGA may be used to identify treatment goals and assess goal-achievement in patients with LUTS in the clinic and for research (with additional validation). This information may promote patient-physician interaction and help patients establish realistic treatment goals, which may in turn improve treatment adherence and outcomes.

Clinical risk factors for age-related macular degeneration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of blindness in Western countries. Numerous risk factors have been reported but the evidence and strength of association is variable. We aimed to identify those risk factors with strong levels of evidence which could be easily assessed by physicians or ophthalmologists to implement preventive interventions or address current behaviours. METHODS: A systematic review identified 18 prospective and cross-sectional studies and 6 case control studies involving 113,780 persons with 17,236 cases of late AMD that included an estimate of the association between late AMD and at least one of 16 pre-selected risk factors. Fixed-effects meta-analyses were conducted for each factor to combine odds ratio (OR) and/or relative risk (RR) outcomes across studies by study design. Overall raw point estimates of each risk factor and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Increasing age, current cigarette smoking, previous cataract surgery, and a family history of AMD showed strong and consistent associations with late AMD. Risk factors with moderate and consistent associations were higher body mass index, history of cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and higher plasma fibrinogen. Risk factors with weaker and inconsistent associations were gender, ethnicity, diabetes, iris colour, history of cerebrovascular disease, and serum total and HDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking, previous cataract surgery and a family history of AMD are consistent risk factors for AMD. Cardiovascular risk factors are also associated with AMD. Knowledge of these risk factors that may be easily assessed by physicians and general ophthalmologists may assist in identification and appropriate referral of persons at risk of AMD.

Safety and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Atezolizumab Plus Chemotherapy With or Without Bevacizumab Versus Bevacizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Atezolizumab, bevacizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel (ABCP) demonstrated survival benefit versus bevacizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel (BCP) in chemotherapy-naïve nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We present safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to provide additional information on the relative impact of adding atezolizumab to chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab in nonsquamous NSCLC. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel (ACP), ABCP, or BCP. Coprimary end points were overall survival and investigator-assessed progression-free survival. The incidence, nature, and severity of adverse events (AEs) were assessed. PROs, a secondary end point, were evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ)-Core 30 and EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer 13. RESULTS: Overall, 400 (ACP), 393 (ABCP), and 394 (BCP) patients were safety evaluable (ie, intention-to-treat population that received one or more doses of any study treatment). More patients had grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs during the induction versus maintenance phase (ACP, 40.5% v 8.2%; ABCP, 48.6% v 21.2%; BCP, 44.7% v 11.1%). During induction, the incidence of serious AEs (SAEs) was 28.3%, 28.5%, and 26.4% in the ACP, ABCP, and BCP arms, respectively. During maintenance, SAE incidences were 20.0%, 26.3%, and 13.0%, respectively. Completion rates of the PRO questionnaires were > 88% at baseline and remained ≥ 70% throughout most study visits. Across arms, patients on average reported no clinically meaningful worsening of global health status or physical functioning scores through cycle 13. Patients across arms rated common symptoms with chemotherapy and immunotherapy similarly. CONCLUSION: ABCP seems tolerable and manageable versus ACP and BCP in first-line nonsquamous NSCLC. Treatment tolerability differed between induction and maintenance phases across treatment arms. PROs reflect a minimal treatment burden (eg, health-related quality of life, symptoms) with each regimen.

Development and validation of the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Questionnaire (COPD-AQ).

AIMS: To develop a practical patient-completed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment questionnaire (COPD-AQ) to improve COPD assessment and management in primary care, based on the concept of COPD stability. METHODS: An Expert Working Group defined parameters of COPD stability and a 10-item Physician's Global Assessment was established. A 21-item COPD-AQ was developed and validated in a cross-sectional, non-randomised study of patients with COPD (n=395). Items most discriminative of stability status (stable/unstable) were selected to produce a 5-item COPD-AQ, which was then validated. RESULTS: In the development sample, internal consistency reliability of the 5-item COPD-AQ was 0.74 (n=296). The COPD-AQ discriminated between stability groups based on physician assessment (F=44.26; p<0.0001) and post-bronchodilator spirometry measures (F=2.92; p<0.05). A questionnaire score >20 (range: 5.0-25.0) had a specificity of 82.9% and sensitivity of 64.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The 5-item COPD-AQ proved a practical tool for assessing COPD status and was sufficiently simple for routine clinical use. However, overall validation was limited by small numbers of patients in the validation sample. Difficulties also existed over using the term 'stability' to define COPD status. COPD-AQ was not progressed further, but this work will prove valuable in the future development of a global questionnaire to improve COPD management in primary care.

The Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium: Lessons Learned Along the Path to PRO Instrument Qualification.

Established in 2008, the Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium is a collaboration among the US Food and Drug Administration's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, the Critical Path Institute, the pharmaceutical/biotechnology industry, and other stakeholders. The purpose of the consortium is to qualify PRO instruments through the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research's drug development tool qualification process for use as clinical trial endpoints to support drug approval and product labeling claims. The PRO Consortium has made notable progress toward collaborative development of PRO instruments in the following areas: asthma, mild cognitive impairment, depression, functional dyspepsia, irritable bowel syndrome, non-small cell lung cancer, and rheumatoid arthritis. This progress has come with considerable challenges, including navigating a new and evolving regulatory initiative, gaining consensus on key issues, and maintaining communication and engagement in a precompetitive environment. The purpose of this paper is to describe some of the challenges and lessons learned since the creation of the PRO Consortium in hopes that this information may provide direction and insight for similar collaborations.

Development of a next day functioning measure to assess the impact of sleep disturbance due to restless legs syndrome: the restless legs syndrome-next day impact questionnaire.

OBJECTIVES: Symptoms of Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) affect patients' quality and duration of sleep, which can have next day sequelae detrimental to daytime performance. To date, no measure sufficiently assesses such sequelae. This study aimed to develop a new self-reported outcome measure to assess the impact of disturbed sleep due to RLS on next day functioning and to support its content validity. METHODS: The development of the Restless Legs Syndrome-Next Day Impact (RLS-NDI) questionnaire included concept elicitation interviews with RLS patients in the United States (n=20); grounded theory data collection and analysis methods; and review by clinical and measurement experts to generate items, responses, and instructions. Cognitive interviews (n=15) were conducted to ensure understanding of the RLS-NDI, concept comprehensiveness, and identification of any necessary item revisions. RESULTS: Impacts on next day functioning attributed to disturbed sleep due to RLS symptoms included activities of daily living (i.e., work, household chores), cognitive functioning (i.e., concentration, forgetfulness, mental tiredness, alertness), emotional functioning (i.e., irritability, depressed mood), physical functioning (i.e., physical tiredness, active leisure activities), energy, daytime sleepiness, and social functioning (i.e., relationships, social activities/situations). The final measure consists of 14 items assessed "today" and rated on a numeric rating scale. CONCLUSIONS: The RLS-NDI is an evaluative tool with demonstrated content validity.

Development and validation of the Overactive Bladder Satisfaction (OAB-S) Questionnaire.

AIMS: To develop and validate a measure of patient satisfaction with treatment in overactive bladder: the Overactive Bladder Satisfaction Questionnaire (OAB-S). METHODS: Development of the questionnaire included a comprehensive literature review, development of a conceptual model, item elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews with US-English and US-Spanish patients, and assessment of the questionnaire's translatability in other languages. Psychometric validation of the questionnaire was run on a longitudinal, non-randomized study involving 201 OAB patients. Analyses included construct validity, concurrent validity, tests of reliability, known-group validity, and responsiveness (exploratory). RESULTS: The OAB-S is a patient-completed questionnaire including five scales: OAB Control Expectations (ten items); Impact on Daily Living with OAB (ten items); OAB Control (ten items); OAB Medication Tolerability (six items); and Satisfaction with Control (ten items) and five single-item overall assessments of patient's fulfillment of OAB medication expectations, interruption of day-to-day life due to OAB, overall satisfaction with OAB medication; willingness to continue OAB medication and improvement in day-to-day life due to OAB medication. The hypothesized structure of the questionnaire was supported by statistical analyses. Internal consistency reliability coefficients (ranging from 0.76 to 0.94) and test-retest reliability coefficients (ranging from 0.72 to 0.87) were good for all dimensions. All dimensions except tolerability discriminated well according to self-reported OAB severity level and incontinence status. CONCLUSION: The OAB-S is a valid, comprehensive instrument to assess satisfaction with treatment of OAB based on independent scales that have demonstrated satisfactory psychometric performance.