Apalutamide plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Analysis of Pain and Fatigue in the Phase 3 TITAN Study.

PURPOSE: We performed an exploratory analysis of prostate cancer-related pain and fatigue on health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer receiving apalutamide (240 mg/day) or placebo, with continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), in the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled TITAN trial (NCT02489318). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient-reported outcomes for pain and fatigue were evaluated using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form and Brief Fatigue Inventory. Time to deterioration (TTD) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method; hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using Cox proportional hazards model. General estimating equations for logistic regression estimated treatment-related differences in the likelihood of worsening pain or fatigue. RESULTS: Compliance for completing the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form and Brief Fatigue Inventory was high (96% to 97%) in the first year. Median followup times were similar between treatments (19 to 22 months). Median pain TTD was longer with apalutamide than placebo for "pain at its least in the last 24 hours" (28.7 vs 21.8 months, respectively; p=0.0146), "pain interfered with mood" (not estimable vs 22.4 months; p=0.0017), "pain interfered with walking ability" (28.7 vs 20.2 months; p=0.0027), "pain interfered with relations" (not estimable vs 23.0 months; p=0.0139) and "pain interfered with sleep" (28.7 vs 20.9 months; p=0.0167). Likelihood for fatigue and worsening fatigue were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer receiving apalutamide plus ADT vs placebo plus ADT reported consistently favorable TTD of pain. No difference for change in fatigue was observed with apalutamide vs placebo.

Understanding symptomatic experience, impact, and emotional response in recently diagnosed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: We sought to explore the symptomatic experience of men recently told their castration-resistant prostate cancer has metastasized (mCRPC); the impact and emotional response to this; the emotional burden of monitoring development to metastatic status; and the emotional impact on the primary support person (PSP). METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 25 men recently diagnosed with mCRPC from the United States (US), France, and Germany. We also interviewed 14 PSPs. Thematic analysis was conducted using Atlas.ti. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 72.2 years; mean time since metastasis 7.8 months. The most frequent symptoms were fatigue/tiredness, sexual dysfunction, and pain. Metastasis had a negative emotional impact on the patient and PSP. Some explicitly associated certain symptoms/impacts with metastasis, such as localized pain, diarrhea, blood in stool, and increased impact on activities of daily living. About 72% of patients highlighted the emotional impact of a metastatic diagnosis, reporting worry/anxiety/fear, low mood/depression, shock, increased burden on PSP, and strain on relationships. Monitoring prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values was important; ten patients explicitly discussed feeling fear/worry when PSA was rising, and glad/happy/excited when PSA was falling. Most reported that, if a medication had been available to them to delay metastasis, they would have taken it, even if they were asymptomatic. CONCLUSIONS: Interviews highlighted the substantial burden of mCRPC to both patient and PSP. Development of metastasis was associated with symptoms worsening rather than the development of new symptoms, with physical and emotional impacts. Most patients were willing to take a medication to delay metastasis.

Does recall period matter? Comparing PROMIS® physical function with no recall, 24-hr recall, and 7-day recall.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of recall periods on the assessment of physical function, we compared, in cancer and general population samples, the standard administration of PROMIS Physical Function items without a recall period to administrations with 24-hour and 7-day recall periods. METHODS: We administered 31 items from the PROMIS Physical Function v2.0 item bank to 2400 respondents (n = 1001 with cancer; n = 1399 from the general population). Respondents were randomly assigned to one of three recall conditions (no recall, 24-hours, or 7-days) and one of two "reminder" conditions (with recall periods presented only at the start of the survey or with every item). We assessed items for potential differential item functioning (DIF) by recall time period. We then tested recall and reminder effects with analysis of variance controlling for demographics, English fluency, and co-morbidities. RESULTS: Based on conservative pre-set criteria, no items were flagged for recall time period-related DIF. Using analysis of variance, each condition was compared to the standard PROMIS administration for Physical Function (no recall period). There was no evidence of significant differences among groups in the cancer sample. In the general population sample, only the 24-hour recall condition with reminders was significantly different from the "no recall" PROMIS standard. At the item level, for both samples, the number of items with non-trivial effect size differences across conditions was minimal. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to no recall, the use of a recall period has little to no effect upon PROMIS physical function responses or scores. We recommend that PROMIS Physical Function be administered with the standard PROMIS "no recall" period.

Health-related quality of life after apalutamide treatment in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (TITAN): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 TITAN study, the addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly improved the primary endpoints of overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. We aimed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in TITAN, including pain and fatigue. METHODS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study, patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (defined as not receiving ADT at the time of metastatic disease progression) aged 18 years and older, receiving continuous ADT (selected at the investigator's discretion), and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive web response system, to receive oral apalutamide (four 60 mg tablets, once daily) or matching placebo. Previous localised disease treatment or previous docetaxel for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer were allowed. Randomisation was stratified by Gleason score at diagnosis, region, and previous docetaxel treatment. Randomisation was done using randomly permuted blocks (block size of four). Investigators, research staff, sponsor study team, and patients were masked to the identities of test and control treatments. Patient-reported outcomes were prespecified exploratory endpoints and were the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), and EuroQoL 5D questionnaire 5 level (EQ-5D-5L). BPI and BFI were completed for 7 consecutive days (days -6 to 1 inclusive of each cycle visit), then at months 4, 8, and 12 in follow-up. FACT-P and EQ-5D-5L were completed during cycles 1-7, then every other cycle until the end of treatment, and at months 4, 8, and 12 in follow-up. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Missing patient-reported outcome assessments were calculated as the expected number of assessments for a visit minus the actual number of assessments received for that visit. For time-to-event endpoints, when median values could not be calculated because less than 50% of patients had degradation, 25th percentiles were compared. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02489318, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Dec 9, 2015, and July 25, 2017, 1052 eligible patients were enrolled randomly assigned to apalutamide (n=525) or placebo (n=527). Data cutoff for this analysis of patient-reported outcomes was Nov 23, 2018. Median follow-up for time to pain-related endpoints ranged from 19·4 to 22·1 months. Patients were mostly asymptomatic at baseline: on the BPI-SF pain severity scale of 0-10, median pain scores (indicating worst pain in the past 24 h) were 1·14 (IQR 0-3·17) in the apalutamide group and 1·00 (0-2·86) in the placebo group, and median worst fatigue scores on the BFI were 1·29 (IQR 0-3·29) in the apalutamide group and 1·43 (0·14-3·14) in the placebo group. Patient experience of pain and fatigue (intensity and interference) did not differ between the groups for the duration of treatment. Median time to worst pain intensity progression was 19·09 months (95% CI 11·04-not reached) in the apalutamide group versus 11·99 months (8·28-18·46) in the placebo group (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·75-1·06]; p=0·20). Median time to pain interference progression was not reached in either group (95% CI 28·58-not reached in the apalutamide group; not reached-not reached in the placebo group). 25th percentiles for time to pain interference progression were 9·17 months (5·55-11·96) in the apalutamide group and 6·24 months (4·63-7·43) in the placebo group (HR 0·90 [95% CI 0·73-1·10]; p=0·29). FACT-P total scores and EQ-5D-5L data showed preservation of HRQOL in both groups. The median time to deterioration as determined by FACT-P total score was 8·87 months (95% CI 4·70-11·10) in the apalutamide group and 9·23 months (7·39-12·91) in the placebo group (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·85-1·22]; p=0·85). INTERPRETATION: Apalutamide with ADT is a well-tolerated and effective option for men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. The combination significantly improves survival outcomes compared with ADT alone while maintaining HRQOL despite additive androgen blockade. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Effect of apalutamide on health-related quality of life in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: an analysis of the SPARTAN randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the SPARTAN trial, addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy, as compared with placebo plus androgen deprivation therapy, significantly improved metastasis-free survival in men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were at high risk for development of metastases. We aimed to investigate the effects of apalutamide versus placebo added to androgen deprivation therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQOL). METHODS: SPARTAN is a multicentre, international, randomised, phase 3 trial. Participants were aged 18 years or older, with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 10 months or less, and a prostate-specific antigen concentration of 2 ng/mL or more in serum. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to 240 mg oral apalutamide per day plus androgen deprivation therapy, or matched oral placebo plus androgen deprivation therapy, using an interactive voice randomisation system. Permuted block randomisation was used according to the three baseline stratification factors: prostate-specific antigen doubling time (>6 months vs ≤6 months), use of bone-sparing drugs (yes vs no), and presence of local-regional nodal disease (N0 vs N1). Each treatment cycle was 28 days. The primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival. The trial was unblinded in July, 2017. In this prespecified exploratory analysis we assessed HRQOL using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires, which we collected at baseline, day 1 of cycle 1 (before dose), day 1 of treatment cycles 1-6, day 1 of every two cycles from cycles 7 to 13, and day 1 of every four cycles thereafter. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01946204. FINDINGS: Between Oct 14, 2013, and Dec 15, 2016, we randomly assigned 1207 patients to receive apalutamide (n=806) or placebo (n=401). The clinical cutoff date, as for the primary analysis, was May 19, 2017. Median follow-up for overall survival was 20·3 months (IQR 14·8-26·6). FACT-P total and subscale scores were associated with a preservation of HRQOL from baseline to cycle 29 in the apalutamide group; there were similar results for EQ-5D-3L. At baseline, the mean for FACT-P total score in both the apalutamide and placebo groups were consistent with the FACT-P general population norm for US adult men. Group mean patient-reported outcome scores over time show that HRQOL was maintained from baseline after initiation of apalutamide treatment and was similar over time among patients receiving apalutamide versus placebo. Least-squares mean change from baseline shows that HRQOL deterioration was more apparent in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: In asymptomatic men with high-risk non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, HRQOL was maintained after initiation of apalutamide treatment. Considered with findings from SPARTAN, patients who received apalutamide had longer metastasis-free survival and longer time to symptomatic progression than did those who received placebo, while preserving HRQOL. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Patient-reported outcomes following abiraterone acetate plus prednisone added to androgen deprivation therapy in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer (LATITUDE): an international, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the LATITUDE trial, addition of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improved overall survival compared with placebos plus ADT in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk, metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer. Understanding the effects of treatments on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is important for treatment decisions; therefore we aimed to analyse the effects of ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone versus ADT plus placebos on PROs and HRQOL in patients in the LATITUDE study. METHODS: In the multicentre, international, randomised, phase 3 LATITUDE trial, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had newly diagnosed, high-risk, metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer confirmed by bone scan (bone metastases) or by CT or MRI (visceral, soft tissue, or nodal metastases), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 2 or less. Patients from 235 clinical sites in 34 countries were randomly assigned (1:1) following a country-by-country scheme done by permuted block randomisation (with two blocks) and stratified by the presence of visceral metastasis and ECOG performance status to receive ADT plus 1000 mg oral abiraterone acetate and 5 mg oral prednisone once daily or ADT plus placebos. Selection of ADT, chemical or surgical, was at the investigator's discretion. The co-primary endpoints of the trial, overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival, have been published. PRO data were collected directly on electronic tablet devices at the clinical sites during screening and before any other visit procedure on day 1 of cycles 1-3, monthly during cycles 4-13, and then every 2 months until the end of treatment, by use of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Prostate scale (FACT-P), and the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires. PRO analyses were an exploratory endpoint. Analyses were by intention-to-treat. Results from the first pre-planned interim analysis (Oct 31, 2016), are presented here. This ongoing study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01715285. FINDINGS: Between Feb 12, 2013, and Dec 11, 2014, 1199 patients were randomly assigned: 597 to ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone and 602 to ADT plus placebos. Median follow-up was 30·9 months (IQR 21·2-33·2) in the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group versus 29·7 months (1·4-43·5; 16·1-31·3) in the ADT plus placebos group. Median time to worst pain intensity progression assessed by the BPI-SF score was not reached in either group (ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone, not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 11·07 months [95% CI 9·23-18·43]; ADT plus placebos group, not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 5·62 [95% CI 4·63-7·39]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·52-0·77]; p<0·0001). Median time to worst fatigue intensity was not reached in either the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group (not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 18·4 months [95% CI 12·9-27·7]) or the ADT plus placebos group (not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 6·5 months [95% CI 5·6-9·2]; HR 0·65 [95% CI 0·53-0·81], p=0·0001). Median time to deterioration of functional status assessed by the FACT-P total score scale was 12·9 months (95% CI 9·0-16·6) in the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group versus 8·3 months (7·4-11·1) in the ADT plus placebos group (HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74-0·99]; p=0·032). INTERPRETATION: The addition of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to ADT in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer improved overall PROs by consistently showing a clinical benefit in the progression of pain, prostate cancer symptoms, fatigue, functional decline, and overall HRQOL. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Assessment of sleep in patients with fibromyalgia: qualitative development of the fibromyalgia sleep diary.

OBJECTIVES: Sleep disturbance is a common experience in fibromyalgia (FM). The field lacks a sleep specific patient reported outcome (PRO) measure developed and validated in a FM population. The study objective is to gain an in-depth understanding of sleep in FM and to develop a PRO measure of it. METHODS: Research involved the following stages: 1) A literature review conducted to identify key concepts associated with FM patient experience of sleep and PRO measures that have been used to assess this; 2) Qualitative interviews with therapeutic area experts; 3) Focus groups with FM patients who experienced sleep disturbance; 4) Development of a conceptual framework and the Fibromyalgia Sleep Diary (FMSD); and 5) Cognitive interviews with patients to explore content validity of the FMSD. RESULTS: The literature review and expert interviews supported sleep disturbance being an important aspect of the FM patient experience, and underscored the need for a new FM specific sleep PRO measure. Results from the focus groups demonstrated that FM patients experience sleep disturbances that they attribute to their FM symptoms, such as pain and stiffness, confirming the importance of understanding more about sleep changes. Aspects of sleep raised by FM patients included poor sleep quality and insufficient quantity including difficulty with falling asleep, getting comfortable, and staying asleep; restlessness; light sleep; not feeling rested upon awakening; and difficulty starting the day. Cognitive interview results showed that the 8-item FMSD, developed to reflect the concepts identified above, was relevant to FM patients with content that was interpreted as intended. CONCLUSIONS: The FMSD was developed in line with the recommendations of the FDA PRO guidance and ISPOR PRO Task Force. The qualitative evidence generated thus far strongly supports the content validity of the FMSD as a PRO measure of sleep disturbance in FM populations. Psychometric evaluation of the FMSD to demonstrate reliability, validity and sensitivity to change is recommended as a next step.

Systematic literature review of the signs and symptoms of respiratory syncytial virus.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is responsible for over 30 million lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) and 3 million hospitalizations worldwide each year. Despite the risk RSV poses to young children, older adults, and individuals with comorbidities or suppressed immunity, there is limited understanding of RSV symptom presentation across these at-risk groups, and there is no vaccine for RSV. We conducted two systematic literature reviews (SLRs) of studies that document signs and symptoms (S&S) of RSV in (1) children aged ≤5 years and (2) immunocompromised adolescents and adults, and adults at high risk for severe RSV due to age or comorbidities. Symptom duration and hospital length of stay (LOS) were explored. Electronic database searches were performed following PRISMA guidelines. Studies captured RSV S&S across community and hospital settings. Clinicians and caregivers reported (n = 25 studies) nasal discharge/congestion, cough, shortness of breath, feeding abnormalities, and fever in ≥40% of children across studies and settings. Median hospital stays for children ranged from 2 days in the United States to 7.5 days in China. High-risk adults with RSV (n = 6 studies) commonly (≥40% of adults) reported cough, sputum, dyspnea, and fever/feverishness. Median length of hospital stay in adults ranged from 6 to 15 days across studies. Caregivers and clinicians reported similar RSV S&S in young children, including upper and lower respiratory and systemic symptoms. In high-risk and immunocompromised adults, the most frequent (in multiple publications) and commonly reported RSV S&S were primarily LRTI symptoms. RSV symptoms could last for weeks and are variable based on geography.

Development of patient- and observer-reported outcome measures to assess COVID-19 signs and symptoms in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC) is a 30-item patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate the presence and severity of COVID-19 signs/symptoms in adults. This study expanded the context of use of the adult SIC among adolescents aged 12-17 years and supported a pediatric adaptation (the Pediatric SIC [PedSIC]) for caregiver assessment of signs/symptoms in children aged < 12 years. METHODS: Draft versions of the PedSIC and reference materials containing sign/symptom definitions for adolescents, based on an assessment of the reading level of SIC items by a professional linguist, were developed to facilitate accurate completion of the SIC by adolescents and observer-report (PedSIC) by caregivers. For adolescents, reference materials were intended to provide definitions for selected signs/symptoms identified to have a higher reading level. Iterative rounds of cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted from November 2020 to January 2021 to evaluate adolescent understanding of the SIC reference materials and inform refinement of the PedSIC for caregivers of children too young to reliably self-report. Participants were identified via databases of individuals who previously expressed interest in participating in qualitative research and were then screened for eligibility. Recruitment quotas were established to improve sample diversity. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were used to assess qualitative and demographic data, respectively. RESULTS: Nine healthy adolescents (mean [SD, range] age, 14 [1.76, 12-17] years, 56% female, 22% non-White; round 1, n = 6; round 2, n = 3) and 17 caregivers (mean [SD, range] age, 34 [6.28, 26-41] years, 59% female, 35% non-White; round 1, n = 9; round 2, n = 8) were interviewed. Adolescents understood the majority of signs/symptoms (22 of the 30 SIC items) without assistance or use of the reference materials during the cognitive debriefing interview. Definitions were added to the reference materials for 5 additional items, and clarifications provided to existing definitions for 3 items. Seven observer-report (PedSIC) items were modified following feedback from caregivers of healthy young children. Reference materials (similar to those for adolescent use) were developed to support caregiver understanding of the intent of the PedSIC items collecting input from children ages ≥ 5- < 12 years. CONCLUSIONS: Results support using the SIC, PedSIC, and their associated reference materials to evaluate the presence and severity of COVID-19 signs/symptoms in adolescents and children aged < 12 years via caregiver-supported report, respectively.

Psychometric evaluation of the Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC): results from a cross-sectional study and a phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC) is a 30-item patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure scored by body system composites to assess signs/symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In addition to cross-sectional and longitudinal psychometric evaluations, qualitative exit interviews were conducted to support the content validity of the SIC. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, adults diagnosed with COVID-19 in the United States completed the web-based SIC and additional PRO measures. A subset was invited to participate in phone-based exit interviews. Longitudinal psychometric properties were assessed in ENSEMBLE2, a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of the Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine. Psychometric properties evaluated included structure, scoring, reliability, construct validity, discriminating ability, responsiveness, and meaningful change thresholds of SIC items and composite scores. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional study, 152 participants completed the SIC (mean age, 51.0 ± 18.6 years) and 20 completed follow-up interviews. Fatigue (77.6%), feeling unwell (65.8%), and cough (60.5%) were symptoms most frequently reported. SIC inter-item correlations were all positive and mostly moderate (r ≥ 0.3) and statistically significant. SIC items and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29) scores correlated as hypothesized (all r ≥ 0.32). Internal consistency reliabilities of all SIC composite scores were satisfactory (Cronbach's alpha, 0.69-0.91). SIC composite scores correlated moderately (r = 0.30-0.49) to strongly (r ≥ 0.50) with PROMIS-29 scores and Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) ratings (all P < 0.01). A variety of signs/symptoms were cited in exit interviews, and participants considered the SIC straightforward, comprehensive, and easy to use. From ENSEMBLE2, 183 participants with laboratory-confirmed moderate to severe/critical COVID-19 were included (51.5 ± 14.8 years). Strong test-retest reliabilities were observed for most SIC composite scores (intraclass correlations ≥ 0.60). Statistically significant differences across PGIS severity levels were found for all but 1 composite score, supporting known-groups validity. All SIC composite scores demonstrated responsiveness based on changes in PGIS. CONCLUSIONS: The psychometric evaluations provided strong evidence for the reliability and validity of the SIC for measuring COVID-19 symptoms, supporting its use in vaccine and treatment trials. In exit interviews, participants described a broad range of signs/symptoms consistent with previous research, further supporting the content validity and format of the SIC.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a serious disease that continues to evolve globally. Researchers developed the Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC), a 30-item questionnaire designed for patients to report signs and symptoms of COVID-19. In this study, the researchers formally analyzed how well the SIC measures the patient experience with COVID-19, using survey and clinical trial data as well as telephone interviews. Adults with COVID-19 and at least 2 bothersome symptoms completed the web-based survey, and some of these individuals also participated in in-depth interviews. Participants in a clinical trial for a COVID-19 vaccine also completed the SIC measure. The SIC was compared with other commonly used questionnaires that evaluate patient experience. The most commonly reported symptoms of COVID-19 were fatigue, feeling unwell, cough, weakness, and headache. The items for individual symptoms (e.g., "cough") and combined scores for body systems (e.g., "respiratory system") performed well in statistical analyses. Participants found the SIC to be straightforward, comprehensive, and easy to use. The SIC may prove useful in the future for vaccine and treatment trials for COVID-19.

Randomized, Open-Label Phase 2 Study of Apalutamide plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy versus Apalutamide Monotherapy versus Androgen Deprivation Monotherapy in Patients with Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

Purpose: This randomized phase 2 study sought to assess the treatment effect of a finite duration of apalutamide with and without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BCR PC). Materials and Methods. Patients with BCR PC after primary definitive therapy and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time ≤12 months were randomized to open-label apalutamide (240 mg/d) alone, apalutamide plus ADT, or ADT alone (1 : 1:1 ratio) for 12 months followed by a 12-month observation period (NCT01790126). Mean changes from baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) at 12 months (primary endpoint) and other prespecified assessments of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), PSA nadir, time to PSA progression, time to testosterone recovery, recovered testosterone >150 ng/dL without PSA progression at 24 months, and molecular markers were evaluated. Results: In 90 enrolled patients (apalutamide plus ADT (n = 31), apalutamide (n = 29), ADT (n = 30)), FACT-P at 12 months was not significantly different between apalutamide, ADT and apalutamide, and ADT groups. Addition of apalutamide to ADT prolonged time to PSA progression but this change did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio (HR): 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.23-1.36, P=0.196); time to testosterone recovery was similar in the ADT-containing groups. In apalutamide plus ADT, apalutamide, and ADT groups, 37.9%, 37.0%, and 19.2% of patients, respectively, had testosterone >150 ng/dL at 24 months without confirmed PSA progression. Of the few biomarkers expressed in blood, EPHA3 was significantly associated with shorter time to PSA progression (P=0.02) in the overall population. Conclusions: HRQoL was similar in patients treated with apalutamide alone, ADT alone, or their combination, although apalutamide plus ADT did not demonstrate statistically significant noninferiority in change from baseline in overall HRQoL. The aggregated efficacy and safety outcomes support further evaluation of apalutamide plus ADT in BCR PC.

Development of a novel patient-reported outcome measure to assess signs and symptoms of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Given the urgent need for vaccines and treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC), a comprehensive, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of signs and symptoms associated with COVID-19, was developed in full alignment with current US regulatory guidance to support evaluations of vaccines and treatments in development. METHODS: An initial version of the SIC was developed to address concepts identified through a targeted literature review and consultation with experts in infectious diseases and clinicians routinely managing COVID-19 in a hospital setting. A qualitative study was conducted in sites in the United States among 31 participants aged ≥ 18 years who were English-speaking and willing and able to provide informed consent and a self-reported history by telephone or online method. The measure was refined based on additional feedback from the clinicians and three iterative rounds of combined concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews conducted with patients, caregivers, and healthy volunteers. RESULTS: Among 39 scientific articles identified in the literature review, 35 COVID-19 signs and symptoms were reported and confirmed during interviews with clinicians, patients, and caregivers. Patients and healthy participants suggested changes for refining the draft SIC to ensure consistent interpretation and endorsed both the 24-h recall period and use of an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) for capturing change in symptom severity. The final version of the SIC captures the daily presence or absence of 30 symptoms and a rating of severity for 25 of the 30 symptoms using an NRS for those symptoms reported as present. CONCLUSIONS: The SIC comprehensively addresses observations described in the literature, by clinicians, and by patients, and captures patients' experiences with COVID-19 in a manner that minimizes complexity and facilitates completion for both patients and healthy volunteers. This measure is thus appropriate for use in clinical trials of both therapeutics and vaccines for COVID-19.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Health-Related Quality of Life and Adverse Events of Apalutamide Versus Enzalutamide in Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The present study aimed to indirectly compare apalutamide and enzalutamide with respect to tolerability and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). METHODS: Patient-level data from the SPARTAN study [apalutamide + androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus placebo + ADT] and aggregate published data from the PROSPER study (enzalutamide + ADT versus placebo + ADT) were used. Anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted by weighting patients' baseline characteristics from SPARTAN to match aggregated baseline characteristics in PROSPER. Odds ratios (ORs) of reported adverse events (AEs) and baseline-to-follow-up least squares mean differences in HRQoL [measured with Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) score] with 95% credible intervals were re-estimated for SPARTAN arms using weighted population and indirectly compared with those in PROSPER through a Bayesian framework. Events of special interest included fatigue, hot flush, nausea, diarrhea, hypertension, falls, dizziness, decreased appetite, arthralgia, asthenia and headache. In addition, any AEs and serious AEs were explored. RESULTS: Of 1207 SPARTAN patients, 1171 were matched to 1401 PROSPER patients. Relative to enzalutamide, apalutamide demonstrated better tolerability as evidenced by the highest probability of reduced occurrence of fatigue [p(OR < 1) = 99.5%], hypertension [p(OR < 1) = 99.2%], decreased appetite [p(OR < 1) = 98.3%], fall [p(OR < 1) = 90.3%], headaches [p(OR < 1) = 86.7%], and nausea [p(OR < 1) = 80.0%]. The probabilities of reduced occurrence of any AEs and SAEs with apalutamide versus enzalutamide were 66.9% and 90.9%, respectively. Relative to enzalutamide, apalutamide treatment was associated with a higher probability of a better HRQoL based on the FACT-P total score [p(diff > 0) = 73.1%]. The probability of a better HRQoL with apalutamide versus enzalutamide was highest for the physical [p(diff > 0) = 97.3%] and functional [p(diff > 0) = 86.7%] wellbeing subscales, and the pain-related subscale [p(diff > 0) = 90.1%]. CONCLUSION: Anchored MAIC suggests that treatment of men with nmCRPC with apalutamide is associated with a higher probability of better tolerability due to fewer AEs and better HRQoL than enzalutamide.

Use of antipsychotic blood levels in clinician decision making: A cross-over study using clinical vignettes of patients with schizophrenia.

The cause of treatment failure of antipsychotic medications is often difficult to determine in patients with schizophrenia. Evaluation of antipsychotic blood levels (ABLs) may aid clinicians in determining the cause of antipsychotic failure. The Clinical Assessment of the Schizophrenia Patient (CASP) was developed to evaluate clinical decision making during outpatient visits. The CASP assesses changes in medications, psychosocial treatments, and acute interventions along with factors influencing clinical decision making. Nine vignettes representative of clinical situations in patients with schizophrenia were created in two versions (one with ABLs, one without ABLs). The CASP was used to evaluate clinical decisions using the vignettes. Thirty-four clinicians participated in the study. In 8 out of 9 vignettes, most clinicians (at least 89.7%) made a different clinical decision with ABLs compared to without ABLs. In assessing the usefulness of ABLs, a majority (60.7%-85.7%, depending on the vignette) of clinicians responded that ABLs changed their clinical decision for 8 vignettes. Most clinicians (79%-93%) responded that they were more confident in their decisions with ABL information. This study demonstrated that ABLs have the potential to influence clinical decision making in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia.

Caregiver burden in schizophrenia following paliperidone palmitate long acting injectables treatment: pooled analysis of two double-blind randomized phase three studies.

The pooled analysis of two double-blind, randomized, multicenter, phase-3 studies evaluated predictors of improvement or worsening of schizophrenia-related caregiver burden following paliperidone palmitate long-acting injectables (1-monthly [PP1M] and 3-monthly [PP3M]) treatment. Caregivers were offered to complete the involvement evaluation questionnaire (involvement evaluation questionnaire; 31-item scale). Total, 1498 caregivers (intent-to-treat open-label analysis set, n = 1497; mean [SD] age: 51.5 [13.02] years, 27 countries) were included: 49% were parents and >50% caregivers spent >32 hours/week in caregiving. Majority of caregivers with considerable burden (n = 1405; mean [SD] baseline involvement evaluation questionnaire scores: 28.4 [15.07]) improved significantly from baseline to end-of-study (n = 756; mean [SD] change from open-label baseline to double-blind endpoint in long-acting injectable scores:-8.9 [14.73]); most improvements were seen in urging followed by worrying, tension, and supervision domains (mean [SD] change from open-label baseline to double-blind endpoint in involvement evaluation questionnaire scores, urging: -3.7 [6.45]; worrying:-2.6 [5.11]; tension:-2.3 [4.84]; supervision: -1.3 [3.69]). Improvements significantly correlated with relapse status, patient age, and age of diagnosis (p < 0.001) while long-acting injectable use at baseline, number, and duration of prior psychiatric hospitalizations (<24 months) had no significant correlation. Caregiver burden was significantly improved for patients on prior oral antipsychotics post-switching to long-acting injectable, with less impact on leisure days and hours spent in caregiving (p < 0.001). Family members of patients with schizophrenia experience considerable caregiver burden. Switching from oral antipsychotic to long-acting injectable can provide meaningful and significant improvement in caregiver burden. DRUG FORMULATION: EASING THE TOLL OF CAREGIVING: Switching from oral to long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication improves overall caregiver burden. The physical, emotional and financial toll of providing care for patients with schizophrenia is often underestimated. Poor adherence to conventional oral antipsychotics is a major cause of symptomatic relapse in patients and of stress for carers. Srihari Gopal and colleagues at Janssen Pharmaceuticals have pooled data from two large studies involving 1498 caregivers across 27 countries. They found that administration of either 1- or 3-monthly long-acting injectable antipsychotics not only eased the burden of daily dosing and patient compliance, but also had a positive impact on the stress conditions of caregivers. Using the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire to measure caregiver burden, the authors showed that the switch in drug formulation decreased the need to urge patients to self-care and the hours spent caregiving.

Measurement properties of a patient-reported outcome measure assessing psoriasis severity: The psoriasis symptoms and signs diary.

BACKGROUND: Collecting reliable and valid symptom information from patients is critical for assessing psoriasis severity in clinical research. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate measurement properties of a new patient-reported outcome (PRO), the Psoriasis Symptoms and Signs Diary (PSSD). METHODS: One hundred six US patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis completed two versions of the PSSD [a 24-hour recall (PSSD-24h) and 7-day recall (PSSD-7d)] using a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Reliability (test-retest and internal consistency), validity (convergent, divergent and known-groups), responsiveness, and version equivalence were evaluated. Minimally important difference was estimated. RESULTS: Based on exploratory factor analysis and clinical input, symptom, sign, and total severity scores were established. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ≥ 0.944) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.824) were acceptable. Correlations with Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) (0.489 to 0.644) indicated convergent validity, while low correlations (< 0.30) with several Short Form (SF)-36 scales indicated divergent validity. PSSD scores differed when patients were categorized by Body Surface Area, DLQI, and Psoriasis Area Severity Index scores. PSSD-24h and PSSD-7d versions were equivalent (Pearson correlations ≥ 0.953). LIMITATIONS: PSSD responsiveness should be evaluated in patients receiving treatment. CONCLUSION: The PSSD is reliable and valid in measuring symptoms/signs of patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Patient-reported Symptoms of Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumors.

PURPOSE: Tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT), a rare locally aggressive neoplasm of the synovium of joints and tendon sheaths, is associated with joint destruction, inflammation, pain, and swelling, in part due to colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor-bearing macrophages recruited to the tumor by genetic elevation of colony-stimulating factor 1 activity. The most common treatment is surgery, although promising pharmacologic treatments are in development. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are critical end points in demonstrating the clinical relevance of standard oncologic outcome measures and the overall impact of novel pharmacologic therapies in nonmalignant neoplastic conditions such as TGCT. The content validity of PROs relevant to patients with TGCT has not been formally investigated, and instruments to evaluate such outcomes do not exist for this condition. METHODS: PRO instruments of potential relevance were evaluated by using a literature review and by clinical and PRO experts. Patients with TGCT were recruited through clinical sites and the Internet for participation in qualitative research interviews to identify predominant symptoms and to test the relevance and content validity of several PRO measures. Select PRO measures were included in a Phase I clinical trial, and preliminary results of the PRO end points are reported descriptively. FINDINGS: Of the 22 subjects who participated in qualitative interviews, 73% were female, and their mean age was 42.5 years (range, 27-56 years). The TGCTs (19 diffuse and 3 localized) were located in the knee (n = 15), hip (n = 3), ankle (n = 2), elbow (n = 1), and forearm (n = 1). The most common symptoms cited were pain (82%), swelling (86%), stiffness (73%), reduced range of motion (64%), and joint instability (64%), which were consistent with clinical expert input and with the content of instruments chosen by PRO experts. The worst pain numeric rating scale, Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical functioning items, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, as well as a worst stiffness numeric rating scale developed for TGCT, were confirmed as meaningful measures of TGCT patient symptoms and were well understood in qualitative interviews. Results from the Phase I trial showed trends of improvement in both pain and stiffness over time. IMPLICATIONS: This study is the first to gather information directly from patients with TGCT regarding their symptom experiences. Pain, stiffness, and physical functioning are important treatment outcomes in patients with TGCT. We have identified content-valid PRO measures of these concepts, which are included in an ongoing Phase III TGCT clinical trial with pexidartinib (PLX3397) (NCT02371369).

Effects of meal size and composition on incretin, alpha-cell, and beta-cell responses.

The incretins glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) regulate postprandial insulin release from the beta-cells. We investigated the effects of 3 standardized meals with different caloric and nutritional content in terms of postprandial glucose, insulin, glucagon, and incretin responses. In a randomized crossover study, 18 subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus and 6 healthy volunteers underwent three 4-hour meal tolerance tests (small carbohydrate [CH]-rich meal, large CH-rich meal, and fat-rich meal). Non-model-based and model-based estimates of beta-cell function and incremental areas under the curve of glucose, insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, GLP-1, and GIP were calculated. Mixed models and Friedman tests were used to test for differences in meal responses. The large CH-rich meal and fat-rich meal resulted in a slightly larger insulin response as compared with the small CH-rich meal and led to a slightly shorter period of hyperglycemia, but only in healthy subjects. Model-based insulin secretion estimates did not show pronounced differences between meals. Both in healthy individuals and in those with diabetes, more CH resulted in higher GLP-1 release. In contrast with the other meals, GIP release was still rising 2 hours after the fat-rich meal. The initial glucagon response was stimulated by the large CH-rich meal, whereas the fat-rich meal induced a late glucagon response. Fat preferentially stimulates GIP secretion, whereas CH stimulates GLP-1 secretion. Differences in meal size and composition led to differences in insulin and incretin responses but not to differences in postprandial glucose levels of the well-controlled patients with diabetes.

Validation of a questionnaire to assess niacin-induced cutaneous flushing.

BACKGROUND: Niacin is currently the most effective approved agent for raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. However, niacin-induced cutaneous flushing (redness, warmth, tingling and/or itching) significantly limits patient acceptance. To further characterize flushing, a patient-reported Flushing Symptom Questionnaire (FSQ) was developed and validated. METHODS: The FSQ was validated in an 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of extended-release (ER) niacin and placebo. The primary flushing endpoint of the study was based on the single Global Flushing Severity Score (GFSS), an item within the FSQ, which assesses overall flushing severity on a 0-10 discretized analog scale. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients were randomized to one of four treatment groups (sequences of placebo and ER niacin [given as niacin (NIASPAN) 1 g (N1) and 2g (N2)]. Test-retest reliability and reproducibility coefficients for the single-item GFSS were all above 0.75. Construct validity was supported by moderate to strong correlations (r > 0.5) with other FSQ items. All FSQ item scores and specifically the GFSS discriminated between treatment groups and demonstrated expected relationships with predefined known groups. The GFSS demonstrated high responsiveness in patients who switched from ER niacin to placebo. The ability of the GFSS and GFBS to discriminate changes in flushing symptoms in patients who increased drug dose was less than expected possibly due to accommodation to the flushing effects of niacin over time; differential drop-out due to flushing; and/or FSQ items not being sensitive enough to detect a change that was present. CONCLUSIONS: The FSQ items and specifically the Global Flushing Severity Score (GFSS), are reliable and valid measures to assess niacin-induced flushing.