Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints in Cancer Clinical Trials-Innovative Medicines Initiative (SISAQOL-IMI): stakeholder views, objectives, and procedures.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, functioning, and other health-related quality-of-life concepts are gaining a more prominent role in the benefit-risk assessment of cancer therapies. However, varying ways of analysing, presenting, and interpreting PRO data could lead to erroneous and inconsistent decisions on the part of stakeholders, adversely affecting patient care and outcomes. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints in Cancer Clinical Trials-Innovative Medicines Initiative (SISAQOL-IMI) Consortium builds on the existing SISAQOL work to establish recommendations on design, analysis, presentation, and interpretation for PRO data in cancer clinical trials, with an expanded set of topics, including more in-depth recommendations for randomised controlled trials and single-arm studies, and for defining clinically meaningful change. This Policy Review presents international stakeholder views on the need for SISAQOL-IMI, the agreed on and prioritised set of PRO objectives, and a roadmap to ensure that international consensus recommendations are achieved.

Relative Meaningfulness and Impacts of Symptoms in People with Early-Stage Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Patient perspectives on meaningful symptoms and impacts in early Parkinson's disease (PD) are lacking and are urgently needed to clarify priority areas for monitoring, management, and new therapies. OBJECTIVE: To examine experiences of people with early-stage PD, systematically describe meaningful symptoms and impacts, and determine which are most bothersome or important. METHODS: Forty adults with early PD who participated in a study evaluating smartwatch and smartphone digital measures (WATCH-PD study) completed online interviews with symptom mapping to hierarchically delineate symptoms and impacts of disease from "Most bothersome" to "Not present," and to identify which of these were viewed as most important and why. Individual symptom maps were coded for types, frequencies, and bothersomeness of symptoms and their impacts, with thematic analysis of narratives to explore perceptions. RESULTS: The three most bothersome and important symptoms were tremor, fine motor difficulties, and slow movements. Symptoms had the greatest impact on sleep, job functioning, exercise, communication, relationships, and self-concept- commonly expressed as a sense of being limited by PD. Thematically, most bothersome symptoms were those that were personally limiting with broadest negative impact on well-being and activities. However, symptoms could be important to patients even when not present or limiting (e.g., speech, cognition). CONCLUSION: Meaningful symptoms of early PD can include symptoms that are present or anticipated future symptoms that are important to the individual. Systematic assessment of meaningful symptoms should aim to assess the extent to which symptoms are personally important, present, bothersome, and limiting.

Mapping Relevance of Digital Measures to Meaningful Symptoms and Impacts in Early Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Adoption of new digital measures for clinical trials and practice has been hindered by lack of actionable qualitative data demonstrating relevance of these metrics to people with Parkinson's disease. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated of relevance of WATCH-PD digital measures to monitoring meaningful symptoms and impacts of early Parkinson's disease from the patient perspective. METHODS: Participants with early Parkinson's disease (N = 40) completed surveys and 1:1 online-interviews. Interviews combined: 1) symptom mapping to delineate meaningful symptoms/impacts of disease, 2) cognitive interviewing to assess content validity of digital measures, and 3) mapping of digital measures back to personal symptoms to assess relevance from the patient perspective. Content analysis and descriptive techniques were used to analyze data. RESULTS: Participants perceived mapping as deeply engaging, with 39/40 reporting improved ability to communicate important symptoms and relevance of measures. Most measures (9/10) were rated relevant by both cognitive interviewing (70-92.5%) and mapping (80-100%). Two measures related to actively bothersome symptoms for more than 80% of participants (Tremor, Shape rotation). Tasks were generally deemed relevant if they met three participant context criteria: 1) understanding what the task measured, 2) believing it targeted an important symptom of PD (past, present, or future), and 3) believing the task was a good test of that important symptom. Participants did not require that a task relate to active symptoms or "real" life to be relevant. CONCLUSION: Digital measures of tremor and hand dexterity were rated most relevant in early PD. Use of mapping enabled precise quantification of qualitative data for more rigorous evaluation of new measures.

Pexidartinib Provides Modest Pain Relief in Patients With Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor: Results From ENLIVEN.

BACKGROUND: The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 study of orally administered PLX3397 in patients with pigmented villonodular synovitis or giant cell tumor of the tendon sheath (ENLIVEN) showed that pexidartinib provides a robust objective tumor response in adults with tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCT) not amenable to improvement with surgery. Based on these results, in 2019, pexidartinib received accelerated approval in the United States in this population as a breakthrough therapy under an orphan drug designation. However, the ability of pexidartinib to relieve pain in ENLIVEN was not fully detailed, and the relationship between pain relief and objective tumor response was not described. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What level of pain relief was achieved by pexidartinib treatment in ENLIVEN? (2) How was pain relief related to objective tumor responses? (3) How durable was pain relief? METHODS: The current study included planned primary and exploratory assessments of patient-assessed worst pain at the site of the tumor in the ENLIVEN trial. ENLIVEN was a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial in which adults with TGCT not amenable to improvement with surgery received pexidartinib or placebo for 24 weeks, after which eligible patients could receive open-label pexidartinib. Of 174 patients assessed for eligibility, 121 were randomized (50% [60] to placebo, 50% [61] to pexidartinib), and 120 were given either placebo or pexidartinib (59 received placebo and 61 received pexidartinib) and were included in an intent-to-treat analysis. Fifty-nine percent (71 of 120) of the overall treated population was female, and 88% (106 of 120) were White. Mean age was 45 ± 13 years. Tumors were mostly in the lower extremities (92% [110 of 120]), most commonly in the knee (61% [73 of 120]) and ankle (18% [21 of 120]). As a secondary outcome, patients scored worst pain at the site of the tumor in the past 24 hours on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS). The primary definition of a pain response was a decrease of at least 30% in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score and increase of less than 30% in narcotic analgesic use between baseline and week 25. Planned exploratory assessments of pain included the frequency of a pain response using alternative thresholds, including a decrease in worst-pain NRS score of 50% or more and a decrease of at least 2 points (minimum clinically important difference [MCID]), the magnitude of pain reduction between baseline and week 25, correlation between worst-pain NRS score and tumor shrinkage by RECIST 1.1 criteria, and the durability of the pain response during the open-label extension. Pain responses during the randomized portion of the trial were compared according to intention-to-treat analysis, with a one-sided threshold of p < 0.025 to reduce the risk of false-positive results. Pain assessment was complete for 59% (35 of 59) of patients in the placebo group and 54% (33 of 61) of patients in the pexidartinib group. Demographic and disease characteristics did not differ between the two treatment groups. RESULTS: A difference in the primary assessment of a pain response was not detected between pexidartinib and placebo (response percentage 31% [19 of 61] [95% CI 21% to 44%] versus 15% [9 of 59] [95% CI 8% to 27%]; one-sided p = 0.03). In the exploratory analyses, pexidartinib provided a modest improvement in pain (response percentage 26% [16 of 61] [95% CI 17% to 38%] versus 10% [6 of 59] [95% CI 5% to 20%]; one-sided p = 0.02 using the 50% threshold and 31% [19 of 61] [95% CI 21% to 44%] versus 14% [8 of 59] [95% CI 7% to 25%]; one-sided p = 0.02 using the MCID threshold). The least-squares mean change in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score between baseline and week 25 was larger in patients treated with pexidartinib than placebo (-2.5 [95% CI -3.0 to -1.9] versus -0.3 [95% CI -0.9 to 0.3]; p < 0.001), although the mean difference between the two groups (-2.2 [95% CI -3.0 to -1.4]) was just over the MCID. Improvement in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score correlated with the reduction in tumor size (r = 0.44; p < 0.001) and tumor volume score (r = 0.61; p < 0.001). For patients in the open-label extension, the change in the worst-pain NRS score from baseline was similar to the change at the end of the randomized portion and just above the MCID (mean -2.7 ± 2.2 after 25 weeks and -3.3 ± 1.7 after 50 weeks of receiving pexidartinib). CONCLUSION: Based on the current study, a modest reduction in pain, just larger than the MCID, may be an added benefit of pexidartinib in these patients, although the findings are insufficient to justify the routine use of pexidartinib for pain relief. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (NSCLC-SAQ): Measurement Properties and Estimated Clinically Meaningful Thresholds From a Phase 3 Study.

Introduction: The NSCLC Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (NSCLC-SAQ) was developed to assess NSCLC symptom severity in accordance with Food and Drug Administration evidentiary expectations leading to Food and Drug Administration qualification in 2018. This study evaluated the NSCLC-SAQ's measurement properties within a clinical trial. Methods: The KEYNOTE-598 phase 3 study of participants with stage IV metastatic NSCLC with programmed death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score greater than or equal to 50% was used to assess the NSCLC-SAQ's reliability, construct validity, responsiveness, and estimate clinically meaningful within-person change. Other patient-reported outcome measures included patient global impression items of severity and change in lung cancer symptoms, and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30 and lung cancer module, LC13. Results: Participants (N = 560) were mostly men (70%), had a mean age of 64 years, and had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 (64%) or 0 (36%). Internal consistency at baseline (Cronbach's α = 0.74) and test-retest reliability after 3 weeks (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.79) were satisfactory. NSCLC-SAQ items, domains, and total score correlated moderately to highly with patient-reported outcome measures capturing similar content, and the total score differentiated among patient global impression of severity groups (p < 0.001). The total score detected improvement over time and the estimated clinically meaningful within-person change threshold for improvement ranged from three to five points on the 0 to 20 scale. Few participants exhibited symptom worsening (n = 38), limiting inferences in this group. Conclusions: The NSCLC-SAQ was found to be reliable, valid, responsive, and interpretable for assessing symptom improvement in NSCLC. Further evaluation is recommended in trial participants whose symptoms worsen over time.

Psychometric validation and meaningful change thresholds of the Worst Itching Intensity Numerical Rating Scale for assessing itch in patients with chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is characterized by persistent itch that often leads to substantially impaired quality of life. The Worst Itching Intensity Numerical Rating Scale (WI-NRS) is a single-item patient-reported outcome measure in which patients indicate the intensity of the worst itching they experienced over the past 24 h. Here, we evaluated the content validity and psychometric properties of the WI-NRS and confirmed the threshold of meaningful change in hemodialysis patients with moderate-to-severe CKD-aP. METHODS: Content validity interviews were conducted in 23 patients. Psychometric properties of the WI-NRS were assessed using data from one phase 2 (N = 174) and two phase 3 (N = 848) clinical trials investigating an anti-pruritic treatment. Anchor-based methods were used to confirm meaningful within-patient change score thresholds in the phase 3 trial patients and mixed-method exit interviews (N = 70) contributed further insight. RESULTS: Content validity interviews indicated patients considered the WI-NRS to be straightforward, comprehensive, and relevant. Test-retest reliability was strong in both trial cohorts (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.75). Construct validity analyses indicated high correlation between the WI-NRS and other measures of itch. Anchor-based analyses showed a reduction of ≥ 3 points from baseline score represented an appropriate clinically meaningful within-patient change on the WI-NRS. In the exit interviews, all patients with a reduction ≥ 3 points considered the change meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: The WI-NRS is a reliable, valid, and responsive measure of itch intensity for patients with moderate-to-severe CKD-aP. These results support its use to assess treatment efficacy and in clinical evaluation and management of pruritus in hemodialysis patients.

Itching is a distressing medical condition common in patients with chronic kidney disease, especially those undergoing hemodialysis. The itch often leads to skin damage due to a continuous and uncontrollable urge to scratch. It affects about 60% of hemodialysis patients and can be severe enough to seriously affect quality of life. At present, there are no approved therapies. To evaluate whether new treatments for itch are effective, clinicians need to assess if the intensity of itch decreases over time. However, because itch intensity can only be measured accurately by the person experiencing it, a measure is required that can be easily understood and used by patients. This study evaluated a scale in which patients mark a number between '0' (corresponding to no itch) and '10' (the worst itching imaginable), to describe the worst itch intensity they experienced over the last 24 hours. Using data from three clinical trials of a novel treatment for itch in patients undergoing hemodialysis with moderate-to-severe pruritus, we found that the scale was reliable in repeat-testing experiments, and mirrored other methods of measuring changes in itch. In interviews, patients said they found the scale straightforward and easy to complete. Our analysis and patients' opinions showed a 3-point reduction in itch intensity on the scale represented a meaningful improvement. These findings support the use of this scale to assess the efficacy of new treatments and in clinical evaluation and management of pruritus in patients with chronic kidney disease.

Pexidartinib improves physical functioning and stiffness in patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumor: results from the ENLIVEN randomized clinical trial.

Background and purpose - The ENLIVEN trial showed that, after 25 weeks, pexidartinib statistically significantly reduced tumor size more than placebo in patients with symptomatic, advanced tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) for whom surgery was not recommended. Here, we detail the effect of pexidartinib on patient-reported physical function and stiffness in ENLIVEN.Patients and methods - This was a planned analysis of patient-reported outcome data from ENLIVEN, a double-blinded, randomized phase 3 trial of adults with symptomatic, advanced TGCT treated with pexidartinib or placebo. Physical function was assessed using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-physical function (PF), and worst stiffness was assessed using a numerical rating scale (NRS). A mixed model for repeated measures was used to compare changes in PROMIS-PF and worst stiffness NRS scores from baseline to week 25 between treatment groups. Response rates for the PROMIS-PF and worst stiffness NRS at week 25 were calculated based on threshold estimates from reliable change index and anchor-based methods.Results - Between baseline and week 25, greater improvements in physical function and stiffness were experienced by patients receiving pexidartinib than patients receiving placebo (change in PROMIS-PF = 4.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-6.3] vs. -0.9 [CI -3.0 to 1.2]; change in worst stiffness NRS = -2.5 [CI -3.0 to -1.9] vs. -0.3 [CI -0.9 to 0.3]). Patients receiving pexidartinib had higher response rates than patients receiving placebo for meaningful improvements in physical function and stiffness. Improvements were sustained after 50 weeks of pexidartinib treatment.Interpretation - Pexidartinib treatment provided sustained, meaningful improvements in physical function and stiffness for patients with symptomatic, advanced TGCT.

Psychometric validation and meaningful within-patient change of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 electronic patient-reported outcome in patients with episodic and chronic migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the measurement properties of all three domains of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQ v2.1) electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) to assess the functional impact of migraine in patients with episodic or chronic migraine (CM); and identify meaningful within-patient change thresholds for the Role Function-Restrictive (RFR), Role Function-Preventive (RFP), and Emotional Function (EF) domains. METHODS: Data were drawn from three double-blind, placebo-controlled, and randomized Phase 3 clinical studies (episodic migraine [EM]: EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2; CM: REGAIN). The psychometric properties of the MSQ v2.1 ePRO domains were demonstrated by evaluating reliability (internal consistency and test-retest), construct validity (convergent and known groups), and responsiveness. Meaningful within-patient change thresholds for domains were estimated using anchor-based approaches, supplemented by empirical cumulative distribution function curves and probability density function plots to enable interpretation of meaningful change over 3 months. The Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S) and Patient Global Impression of Improvement served as anchors. RESULTS: A total of 2,850 patients with either EM (EVOLVE-1: 851; EVOLVE-2: 909) or CM (REGAIN: 1,090) were included. The Cronbach's alpha estimates of internal consistency exceeded the recommended threshold of ≥0.70 for all domains from the three studies, indicating adequate internal consistency. Test-retest reliability intraclass correlation coefficients were ≥0.80 for all domains across all three studies, demonstrating almost perfect agreement. Convergent validity was supported by moderate-to-strong correlation (r ≥ 0.30) between all domains of MSQ v2.1 ePRO and studied anchors (Migraine Disability Assessment Score and PGI-S scores) across all three studies. Known group validity was established between all domains and subgroups of patients stratified by baseline PGI-S scores and baseline number of monthly migraine headache days for all three studies. The 3-month meaningful within-patient change thresholds were the same for EM and CM for RFP: 20.00 and EF: 26.67; and for RFR: 25.71. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that all three domains of the MSQ v2.1 ePRO have sufficient reliability, validity, responsiveness, and appropriate interpretation standards. Our results suggest that MSQ v2.1 ePRO is a well-defined and reliable patient-reported outcome instrument that is suitable for use in clinical studies for evaluating the impact of migraine on patient functioning in episodic and CM.

A Qualitative Study to Assess the Content Validity of the 24-Hour Migraine Quality of Life Questionnaire in Patients with Migraine.

OBJECTIVE: A concept elicitation, cognitive debriefing, and usability study was undertaken to: (1) explore migraine symptoms and day-to-day impacts; (2) determine the comprehensiveness and comprehensibility of the previously developed 24-Hour Migraine Quality of Life Questionnaire electronic patient-reported outcome (24-Hr MQoLQ ePRO) items, and the appropriateness and understanding of the recall period, response options, and instructions; and (3) assess the usability on an electronic hand-held device. METHODS: Eleven United States English-speaking people with episodic migraine were recruited to participate in one-on-one interviews, which followed methods appropriate for concept elicitation, cognitive debriefing, and usability testing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed following the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Participants had a mean age of 42 years, and 8 were female. Through spontaneous mention or probing, all concepts of the 24-Hr MQoLQ ePRO were endorsed by a majority of the participants. Cognitive interviewing confirmed the 24-Hr MQoLQ ePRO instructions were clear, meaningful, and important to assess as symptoms and day-to-day impacts experienced as a result of migraine. Overall impressions of the ePRO device were overwhelmingly favorable, and the ePRO device was preferred to paper and pencil by all participants. Participant responses regarding the level of headache pain that would be acceptable in order to continue to go about daily activities ranged from 3 to 6, on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being "no headache" and 10 being "the worst headache." CONCLUSIONS: The 24-Hr MQoLQ ePRO is content-valid and appropriate for inclusion in future acute treatment for migraine studies designed to measure the symptoms and health-related quality of life of migraine.

Psychometric properties of a custom Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function short form and worst stiffness numeric rating scale in tenosynovial giant cell tumors.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the PROMIS-Physical Function (PF) and Worst Stiffness Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) among patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCT). METHODS: Measurement properties of the customized lower extremity (LE) and upper extremity (UE) PROMIS-PF scales and Worst Stiffness NRS were assessed using data from the Phase 3 ENLIVEN trial (n = 120). Anchor- and distribution-based analyses were utilized to derive a responder threshold for meaningful change over time. The Patient Global Rating of Concept (PGRC)-Physical Functioning and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)-Stiffness served as anchors. Responsiveness and responder threshold analyses were from baseline to week 25. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha values for internal consistency reliability were 0.93 and 0.91 for the PROMIS-PF LE and UE, respectively. Test-retest reliability intra-class correlation coefficients were > 0.75 for both instruments. Convergent validity for both instruments was supported by moderate to strong correlations (≥0.30) with the Brief Pain Inventory and EQ-5D. Known-groups validity was established between subgroups stratified by pain level (p < 0.05). Responsiveness was supported by evaluating change scores among different levels of change in PGRC-Physical Functioning and PGIC-Stiffness (overall F values < 0.001). Triangulation of responder definition analyses resulted in a threshold of ≥3 for the PROMIS-PF and ≥ 1 for the Worst Stiffness NRS. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to establish the psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures in TGCT. The evidence demonstrates that the PROMIS-PF and Worst Stiffness NRS have good reliability, validity, and responsiveness, and provides guidance for the interpretation of meaningful change.

Patient-reported outcomes and quality of life in advanced ALK+ non-small-cell lung cancer trial of brigatinib (ALTA).

Aim: Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) can support clinically relevant primary end points. Materials & methods: The ALTA trial, an open-label, Phase II, randomized dose-comparison study, evaluated the safety and efficacy of brigatinib in ALK+ non-small-cell lung cancer. PRO data collection included the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core-30 (QLQ-C30). A linear mixed model for repeated measures was used to analyze change from baseline in the Global Health Status/Quality of Life subscale (GHS/QOL), with a change of greater than or equal to ten points deemed meaningful. Results: Improvement in mean GHS/QOL scores was statistically significant in the majority of treatment cycles; <10% of patients experienced a meaningful worsening of their GHS/QOL and symptom scores. Conclusion: PRO-measured benefits are consistent with objective response benefits associated with brigatinib.

Content validity of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 electronic patient-reported outcome.

PURPOSE: A concept elicitation, cognitive debriefing, and usability study was undertaken to: 1) ascertain the migraine experience with a particular focus on the impact on roles and daily functioning; 2) determine the comprehensiveness and comprehensibility of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 electronic patient-reported outcome Role Function-Restrictive (MSQ v2.1 ePRO RFR) domain items, and the appropriateness and understanding of the recall period, response options, and instructions; and 3) assess the usability on an electronic tablet device. METHODS: Eleven US English-speaking people with episodic or chronic migraine were recruited to participate in one-on-one interviews, encompassing methods appropriate for concept elicitation, cognitive debriefing, and usability testing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed following the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Participants (seven episodic and four chronic) had a mean age of 34.8 years, and nine were female. Through spontaneous mention or probing, the concepts of the MSQ v2.1 ePRO RFR domain items were described and endorsed by all participants as day-to-day functioning restrictions; except for item 5 (ability to concentrate), which was endorsed by 10 of 11 participants. Cognitive interviewing confirmed the MSQ v2.1 ePRO instructions were clear, meaningful, and important to assess as daily functioning impacts experienced as a result of migraine. Overall impressions of the ePRO device were favorable, and no participants reported any difficulties with use. CONCLUSIONS: The MSQ v2.1 ePRO RFR domain is content-valid and appropriate for inclusion in future studies designed to measure the functional impact of episodic or chronic migraine on the performance of day-to-day activities.

Psychometric Validation of the Role Function Restrictive Domain of the Migraine Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Version 2.1 Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome in Patients With Episodic and Chronic Migraine.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the measurement properties of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQv2.1) electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) Role Function-Restrictive (RFR) domain to evaluate the functional impact of migraine in patients with episodic (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) enrolled in clinical trials. METHODS: The 7-item MSQv2.1 ePRO RFR measures the functional impact of migraine on relationships with family and friends, leisure time, work or daily activities, productivity, concentration, tiredness, and energy. Measurement properties of the RFR were assessed using data from 2 EM (CGAG [n = 851] and CGAH [n = 909]) and 1 CM (CGAI [n = 1090]) Phase 3 galcanezumab clinical trials. Anchor- and distribution-based analyses were utilized to derive a responder threshold for clinical interpretation of change over time. The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S), Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and migraine headache days (MHD) served as anchors. Responsiveness and responder threshold analyses were completed from baseline to the average of months 4-6 for EM studies, and from baseline to month 3 for the CM study; timeframes selected were based on the primary endpoints in these studies. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha values for internal consistency reliability were 0.93, 0.92, and 0.92, for CGAG, CGAH, and CGAI, respectively. Test-retest reliability intra-class correlation coefficients were 0.82 and 0.84 for CGAG and CGAH, and 0.85 for CGAI in stable patients. Convergent validity was supported by moderate to strong correlations (≥0.30) between the RFR and both MIDAS and PGI-S. Known-groups validity was established between subgroups stratified by baseline PGI-S and MHD (P < .05; δ = 0.35-1.96). For the EM studies, anchor variables suggested a change of ≥25 points (equivalent to 9 points/state changes on raw scale) in the RFR was an appropriate threshold to interpret a treatment benefit. For the CM study a change of ≥17.14 points (6 points/state changes on raw scale) was an appropriate threshold. In all 3 studies, significantly (P < .01) more galcanezumab patients achieved the responder definition thresholds, as compared to placebo (odds ratios of 1.98, 2.45, 2.27, 2.44, 1.64, and 1.66 for the 120 and 240 mg arms in the CGAG, CGAH, and CGAI trials, respectively). CONCLUSION: The MSQv2.1 ePRO RFR has sufficient reliability, validity, responsiveness, and appropriate interpretation standards for use in EM and CM clinical trials to assess the functional impact of migraine.

Comprehensive validation of the functional assessment of anorexia/cachexia therapy (FAACT) anorexia/cachexia subscale (A/CS) in lung cancer patients with involuntary weight loss.

PURPOSE: Comprehensive (qualitative and quantitative) assessments of the 12-item functional assessment of anorexia/cachexia therapy (FAACT) anorexia/cachexia subscale (A/CS) and relevant subscales were undertaken for use in constructing potential endpoints in clinical trials of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with involuntary weight loss. METHODS: Eleven participants (≥ 18 years) from six clinical sites with a diagnosis of stage III unresectable or stage IV NSCLC and involuntary weight loss (either ≥ 5% body weight loss within six months prior to screening or screening BMI < 20 kg/m2) were interviewed to evaluate the content validity of the A/CS domain. A psychometric evaluation was conducted on the A/CS domain, and symptoms and concerns subscales, using data from previously completed phase III clinical trials (ROMANA1 [N = 474] and ROMANA2 [N = 488]). RESULTS: Anorexia-related symptoms were highly relevant to participants and had important impacts on their lives including energy levels, and physical, social, and psychological functioning. The majority of participants endorsed the A/CS domain items and found them to be easily understood, relevant, and comprehensive. Confirmatory factor analyses established that the A/CS symptoms and concerns subscales provided an acceptable fit as single factor models in ROMANA1 and ROMANA2. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness were established for the 12item A/CS domain, 5item anorexia symptoms subscale, and 4-item anorexia concerns subscale. CONCLUSIONS: These scales have good content validity, favorable psychometric properties, and can be used for characterizing the effect of treatment on anorexia symptoms and/or anorexia-related concerns in patients with NSCLC.

The American neurogastroenterology and motility society gastroparesis cardinal symptom index-daily diary (ANMS GCSI-DD): Psychometric evaluation in patients with idiopathic or diabetic gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the measurement properties of the American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index-Daily Diary, a patient-reported outcome instrument developed to meet US FDA recommendations for a symptom-based clinical trial endpoint in gastroparesis. The ANMS GCSI-DD assesses nausea, early satiety, postprandial fullness, and upper abdominal pain on a severity score from none (0) to very severe (4) and number of vomiting episodes during the past 24 hours. The composite score includes the first four symptoms, the core symptom score includes all five symptoms. METHODS: Seventy-one patients diagnosed with idiopathic or diabetic gastroparesis were recruited for a four-week observational study. Patients completed the ANMS GCSI-DD at home between Baseline and Week 4. Statistical analyses included confirmatory factor analysis, item response theory analysis, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct and known-groups validity. KEY RESULTS: Unidimensionality for the composite and core symptom scores was supported, and items exhibited good fit. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha =0.85 and 0.83) and test-retest reliability were 0.89 and 0.88, for composite and core symptom scores, respectively. Convergent validity was supported by strong correlations with patient-reported and clinician measures. Baseline and Week 4 scores differed for three measures used to define disease severity status (P < 0.0001), supporting known-groups validity. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: The ANMS GCSI-DD has excellent reliability and validity, supporting its use to assess symptom-based endpoints in gastroparesis clinical studies. Further analyses will be conducted using clinical trial data to ascertain treatment responsiveness and define a responder.

The measurement of physical functioning among patients with Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor (TGCT) using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS).

BACKGROUND: Tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT), a rare, locally aggressive neoplasm of the synovium of joints and tendon sheaths, is associated with joint destruction, pain and swelling. Impacts on physical function (PF) vary depending on tumor size and location. The aim of this study was to identify relevant items, and demonstrate the content validity of custom measures of lower extremity PF from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) item bank among patients with TGCT. METHODS: Patients were recruited for qualitative research interviews to identify predominant TGCT symptoms and impacts. Patients completed a checklist to evaluate the relevance of each PROMIS-PF item. The publicly available PROMIS-PF item response theory (IRT) parameters were used to select items representing the range of the latent PF trait. RESULTS: Participants (n = 20) were 75% female, mean age 42.5 years. TGCTs were located in the knee (n = 15), hip (n = 3), and ankle (n = 2). Fifty-four PROMIS-PF items were identified as relevant by ≥20% of the participants. PF concepts discussed by participants during the qualitative interviews were also used to select relevant items. Selected items (n = 13) were used to create a physical function subscale specific to lower extremity tumors. CONCLUSIONS: We describe a novel method of combining qualitative research and IRT-based item information to select a relevant and content valid subset of PROMIS-PF items to assess heterogeneous impacts on PF in TGCT, a rare disease population.

The content validity of the ANMS GCSI-DD in patients with idiopathic or diabetic gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: The American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index-Daily Diary (ANMS GCSI-DD) was developed to meet Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommendations for patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoints in gastroparesis studies, including therapeutic trials. The current version of the ANMS GCSI-DD contains five items pertaining to nausea, early satiety, post-prandial fullness, upper abdominal pain, and vomiting. The specific aims of this study were to determine if the appropriate symptoms are included in the ANMS GCSI-DD and to assess the content validity in patients with idiopathic (IG) and diabetic gastroparesis (DG). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with IG or DG were recruited by five clinical sites in the United States for a cross-sectional, qualitative study involving one-on-one in-person concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. Concept elicitation included open-ended questions to elicit patients' symptoms and impacts of gastroparesis, while cognitive debriefing was designed to assess the comprehensiveness of the ANMS GCSI-DD and clarity of the instructions, items, and response scales. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using a content analysis approach with ATLAS.ti. RESULTS: Of 25 patients interviewed, 15 (60%) had IG and 10 (40%) DG. Mean age of the sample was 42.3 years (range: 20-70 years), and most patients were female (n = 19, 76%) and white (n = 19, 76%). During concept elicitation, patients endorsed the following signs and symptoms as relevant and important to their condition: early satiety (n = 25, 100%), post-prandial fullness (n = 25, 100%), nausea (n = 22, 88%), upper abdominal pain (n = 18, 72%), vomiting (n = 15, 60%), and bloating (n = 11, 44%). Many patients (n = 20, 80%) experienced day-to-day symptom change. During cognitive debriefing, patients confirmed the ANMS GCSI-DD content was comprehensive and reflective of their gastroparesis experience. Patients could easily select a response option and describe how they arrived at their answers. Overall, patients found the instrument's instructions, recall period, items, and response options clear and understandable. CONCLUSIONS: The ANMS GCSI-DD was easily understood, found to contain the most important symptoms for patients with IG and DG, and no changes were recommended. Results support the content validity of the ANMS GCSI-DD for clinical trials and clinical care among IG or DG patients.

Use of Survey and Delphi Process to Understand Trauma Anesthesia Care Practices.

BACKGROUND: Few trauma guidelines evaluate and recommend anesthesiology practices and there are no trauma anesthesia-specific guidelines. There is no information on how anesthesiologists perceive clinical practice patterns. Our objective was to understand the perceptions of anesthesiologists regarding trauma anesthesia practices. METHODS: A survey assessing anesthesia management of trauma patients was distributed to 21,491 anesthesiologists. A subset of 10 of these questions was subsequently reviewed by a trauma anesthesiology focus group through a 3-round web-based Delphi process. A question was deemed to have respondent consensus if the response with the highest percentage of agreement was unchanged between rounds 1 and 2. RESULTS: A total of 2360 anesthesiologists (11% response rate) responded to the survey. Results demonstrated that the practitioners' answers conflicted with existing surgical trauma society recommendations (ie, when to transfuse component therapy), and several areas that lacked any guidelines, resulted in response variability among anesthesiologists where not 1 answer achieved >75% agreement (ie, intubation technique of choice for patients with uncleared cervical spine). Thirteen trauma anesthesiologists participated in round 1 (response rate 100%), and 12 responded in rounds 2 and 3 (response rate 92%) of the Delphi process. None of the questions received 100% agreement. Consensus was achieved on 9 of 10 statements pertaining to trauma anesthesia care. Consensus was not reached on the intubating technique in a hemodynamically unstable patient with an uncleared cervical spine with deficits. Delphi participant opinion conflicted with existing guidelines on 2 statements: the use of cricoid pressure, and when to begin blood component therapy. CONCLUSIONS: There are several important areas of trauma anesthesia practice where guidelines do not exist and several where existing guidelines are not endorsed by the majority of practitioners who completed our survey. The lack of consensus on trauma anesthesia management and the variation in survey responses demonstrate a need to develop evidence-based trauma anesthesia guidelines.

Academic Anesthesiology Career Development: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of the Role of Foundation for Anesthesiology Education and Research Funding.

BACKGROUND: In 1986, the American Society of Anesthesiologists created the Foundation for Anesthesiology Education and Research (FAER) to fund young anesthesiology investigators toward the goal of helping launch their academic careers. Determining the impact of the FAER grant program has been of importance. METHODS: This mixed-methods study included quantitative data collection through a Research Electronic Data Capture survey and curriculum vitae (CV) submission and qualitative interviews. CVs were abstracted for education history, faculty appointment(s), first and last author peer-reviewed publications, grant funding, and leadership positions. Survey nonrespondents were sent up to 3 reminders. Interview questions elicited details about the experience of submitting a FAER grant. Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative data were analyzed with NVivo. RESULTS: Of 830 eligible participants, 38.3% (N = 318) completed surveys, 170 submitted CVs, and 21 participated in interviews. Roughly 85% held an academic appointment. Funded applicants were more likely than unfunded applicants to apply for National Institutes of Health funding (60% vs 35%, respectively; P < .01), but the probability of successfully receiving an National Institutes of Health grant did not differ (83% vs 85%, respectively; P = .82). The peer-reviewed publication rate (publications per year since attending medical school) did not differ between funded and unfunded applicants, with an estimated difference in means (95% confidence interval) of 1.3 (-0.3 to 2.9) publications per year. The primary FAER grant mentor for over one-third of interview participants was a nonanesthesiologist. Interview participants commonly discussed the value of having multiple mentors. Key mentor attributes mentioned were availability, guidance, reputation, and history of success. CONCLUSIONS: This cross-sectional data demonstrated career success in publications, grants, and leadership positions for faculty who apply for a FAER grant. A FAER grant application may be a marker for an anesthesiologist who is interested in pursuing a physician-scientist career.