Establishing clinically meaningful within-individual improvement thresholds for eight patient-reported outcome measures in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: As disease-modifying therapies do not reverse the course of multiple sclerosis (MS), assessment of therapeutic success involves documenting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) concerning health-related quality of life, disease and treatment-related symptoms, and the impact of symptoms on function. Interpreting PRO data involves going beyond statistical significance to calculate within-patient meaningful change scores. These thresholds are needed for each PRO in order to fully interpret the PRO data. This analysis of PRO data from the PROMiS AUBAGIO study, which utilized 8 PRO instruments in teriflunomide-treated relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) patients, was designed to estimate clinically meaningful within-individual improvement thresholds in the same manner, for 8 PRO instruments. RESULTS: The analytical approach followed a triangulation exercise that considered results from anchor- and distribution-based methods and graphical representations of empirical cumulative distribution functions in PRO scores in groups defined by anchor variables. Data from 8 PRO instruments (MSIS-29 v2, FSMC, MSPS, MSNQ, TSQM v1.4, PDDS, HRPQ-MS v2, and HADS) were assessed from 434 RRMS patients. For MSIS-29 v2, FSMC, MSPS, and MSNQ total scores, available anchor variables enabled both anchor- and distribution-based methods to be applied. For instruments with no appropriate anchor available, distribution-based methods were applied. A recommended value for meaningful within-individual improvement was defined by comparing mean change in PRO scores between participants showing improvement of one or two categories in the anchor variable or those showing no change. A "lower bound" estimate was calculated using distribution-based methods. An improvement greater than the lower-bound estimate was considered "clinically meaningful". CONCLUSION: This analysis produced estimates for assessing meaningful within-individual improvements for 8 PRO instruments used in MS studies. These estimates should be useful for interpreting scores and communicating study results and should facilitate decision-making by regulatory and healthcare authorities where these 8 PROs are commonly employed.

Qualitative Patient Interviews to Characterize the Human Burden of Advanced Basal Cell Carcinoma Following Hedgehog Pathway Inhibitor Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence of patients' experiences of living with advanced basal cell carcinoma (aBCC) are limited, particularly after hedgehog pathway inhibitor (HHI) treatment. We explored the burden of aBCC on symptoms and patients' everyday lives post HHI treatment. METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured, approximately 1-h qualitative interviews of US patients with aBCC and prior HHI treatment were conducted. Data were assessed using thematic analysis with NVivo 1.0 software. Saturation analysis was performed to ensure all concepts were captured. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (median age, 63 years; locally advanced BCC, n = 9; metastatic BCC, n = 6) were interviewed. A patient-led conceptual model was developed from the responses using 10 symptoms and 15 impact categories (comprising emotional/psychological, physical, and social domains) identified as most commonly discussed and important to patients. Overall, reported impacts were discussed more commonly than reported symptoms. Impacts most commonly discussed were related to emotions (e.g., anxiety, worry, fear [n = 14; 93%]; low mood, depression [n = 12; 80%]) and physical function (e.g., hobbies or leisure activities [n = 13; 87%]). Symptoms most commonly discussed were fatigue and tiredness (n = 14; 93%) and itch (n = 13; 87%). Out of all reported impacts and symptoms, fatigue and tiredness (n = 7, 47%) and anxiety, worry, and fear (n = 6; 40%) were most bothersome to patients. As a descriptive exercise, participant responses were mapped to commonly used patient-reported outcome scales in aBCC clinical trials. Most expressed concepts were captured across two common measures in oncology/skin conditions (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 [EORTC QLQ-C30] and Skindex-16 questionnaires), but sun avoidance and others' perception of skin cancer were not explicitly mentioned by these instruments. CONCLUSION: Patients with aBCC experienced a significant disease burden post first-line HHI therapy, including major emotional and lifestyle impacts. Accordingly, through this study, patients with aBCC highlighted a significant unmet need for second-line treatment options post HHI therapy.

Considerations to address missing data when deriving clinical trial endpoints from digital health technologies.

Digital health technologies (DHTs) enable us to measure human physiology and behavior remotely, objectively and continuously. With the accelerated adoption of DHTs in clinical trials, there is an unmet need to identify statistical approaches to address missing data to ensure that the derived endpoints are valid, accurate, and reliable. It is not obvious how commonly used statistical methods to handle missing data in clinical trials can be directly applied to the complex data collected by DHTs. Meanwhile, current approaches used to address missing data from DHTs are of limited sophistication and focus on the exclusion of data where the quantity of missing data exceeds a given threshold. High-frequency time series data collected by DHTs are often summarized to derive epoch-level data, which are then processed to compute daily summary measures. In this article, we discuss characteristics of missing data collected by DHT, review emerging statistical approaches for addressing missingness in epoch-level data including within-patient imputations across common time periods, functional data analysis, and deep learning methods, as well as imputation approaches and robust modeling appropriate for handling missing data in daily summary measures. We discuss strategies for minimizing missing data by optimizing DHT deployment and by including the patients' perspectives in the study design. We believe that these approaches provide more insight into preventing missing data when deriving digital endpoints. We hope this article can serve as a starting point for further discussion among clinical trial stakeholders.

Enabling patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials, exemplified by cardiovascular trials.

OBJECTIVES: There has been limited success in achieving integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials. We describe how stakeholders envision a solution to this challenge. METHODS: Stakeholders from academia, industry, non-profits, insurers, clinicians, and the Food and Drug Administration convened at a Think Tank meeting funded by the Duke Clinical Research Institute to discuss the challenges of incorporating PROs into clinical trials and how to address those challenges. Using examples from cardiovascular trials, this article describes a potential path forward with a focus on applications in the United States. RESULTS: Think Tank members identified one key challenge: a common understanding of the level of evidence that is necessary to support patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in trials. Think Tank participants discussed the possibility of creating general evidentiary standards depending upon contextual factors, but such guidelines could not be feasibly developed because many contextual factors are at play. The attendees posited that a more informative approach to PROM evidentiary standards would be to develop validity arguments akin to courtroom briefs, which would emphasize a compelling rationale (interpretation/use argument) to support a PROM within a specific context. Participants envisioned a future in which validity arguments would be publicly available via a repository, which would be indexed by contextual factors, clinical populations, and types of claims. CONCLUSIONS: A publicly available repository would help stakeholders better understand what a community believes constitutes compelling support for a specific PROM in a trial. Our proposed strategy is expected to facilitate the incorporation of PROMs into cardiovascular clinical trials and trials in general.

Post Hoc Health-Related Quality of Life Analysis According to Response Among Patients with Prostate Cancer in the PROSELICA and FIRSTANA Studies.

BACKGROUND: The phase III PROSELICA (NCT01308580) and FIRSTANA (NCT01308567) trials investigated taxane chemotherapy among men with postdocetaxel metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) or chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC, respectively. We present a post hoc analysis of patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQL) among patients with or without a clinical (pain, tumor, or prostate-specific antigen [PSA]) response. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PROSELICA and FIRSTANA HRQL and pain data were collected and analyzed using protocol-defined Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and McGill-Melzack (Present Pain Intensity scale) questionnaires. Outcomes included definitive FACT-P Total Score (TS) improvements and longitudinal assessment of FACT-P TS. RESULTS: In PROSELICA and FIRSTANA, the proportion of patients receiving taxane chemotherapy with a definitive FACT-P TS improvement was significantly higher among patients with versus without a pain or PSA response (pain: PROSELICA: 67% vs. 33.5%; p < .001; FIRSTANA: 75.2% vs. 45.8%; p < .001; PSA: PROSELICA: 50.3% vs. 34.2%; p < .001; FIRSTANA: 49.8% vs. 38.9%; p = .001). In PROSELICA, the proportion of patients receiving taxane chemotherapy with a definitive FACT-P TS improvement was significantly higher among patients with versus without a tumor response; the proportion was numerically higher in FIRSTANA (PROSELICA: 54.4% vs. 36.7%; p = .001; FIRSTANA: 50.6% vs. 45.3%). FACT-P TS was significantly improved or maintained for the majority of treatment cycles analyzed. CONCLUSION: In PROSELICA and FIRSTANA, HRQL improvements were significantly higher among patients with a pain, tumor, or PSA response versus those without, with the exception of patients with a tumor response in FIRSTANA. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Using data from the FIRSTANA and PROSELICA phase III clinical trials, this study demonstrated that patients with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving docetaxel or cabazitaxel who exhibited a response (pain, tumor, prostate-specific antigen), often experienced significantly greater improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQL) compared with patients without a response. For patients with a pain response, significant HRQL improvements occurred early and were maintained. This study provides further insight into the impact of taxane chemotherapy on the HRQL of patients with mCRPC and allows for a better understanding of the relationship between treatment, response, and HRQL, supporting therapeutic decision making.

Determining Minimum Wear Time for Mobile Sensor Technology.

Part 1 in the DIA Study Endpoint Community Working Group on Mobile Sensor Technology (MST) series addresses considerations that may be useful when determining the minimum wear time associated with mobile sensor use to ensure reliable estimation of the clinical endpoint under consideration. What constitutes a minimum valid data set is a dilemma facing those using MSTs in clinical studies. If this alignment does not occur, the integrity of the data collected and conclusions drawn from these data may be in incorrect. While study participants should consent to engage with MSTs as defined in a protocol, participant behavior or technology lapses may result in capturing incomplete data. Drawing from the literature, we review what constitutes a minimum data set, the risks associated with missing data, alignment with the clinical endpoint(s) and goals of a study, as well as managing patient burden.

Impact of alemtuzumab on health-related quality of life over 6 years in CARE-MS II trial extension patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: In CARE-MS II (Comparison of Alemtuzumab and Rebif® Efficacy in Multiple Sclerosis; NCT00548405), alemtuzumab (12 mg/day; baseline: 5 days; 12 months later: 3 days) significantly improved health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes versus subcutaneous interferon beta-1a (SC IFNB-1a) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients over 2 years. Patients completing CARE-MS II could enter a 4-year extension study (NCT00930553). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess 6-year HRQL outcomes in alemtuzumab-treated CARE-MS II patients, including those with highly active disease (HAD). METHODS: During extension, patients could receive additional alemtuzumab for clinical/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity or other disease-modifying therapies per investigator's discretion. Assessments include Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis (FAMS), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), and EQ-5D visual analog scale (EQ-VAS). RESULTS: Alemtuzumab-treated patients improved or stabilized all HRQL measures over 6 years with significant improvements from baseline at all time points on EQ-VAS and for up to 5 years on FAMS, SF-36 MCS, and SF-36 PCS. Alemtuzumab-treated patients with HAD showed significant improvements versus baseline at Year 2 on all HRQL measures, and significant improvements versus SC IFNB-1a on SF-36 PCS and EQ-VAS; however, the improvements did not reach the threshold for clinical relevance. CONCLUSION: Alemtuzumab-treated CARE-MS II patients improved or stabilized HRQL versus baseline over 6 years. This is the first study to show long-term HRQL benefits in patients with HAD.

Aflibercept Plus FOLFIRI for Second-line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Observations from the Global Aflibercept Safety and Health-Related Quality-of-Life Program (ASQoP).

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the safety profile of aflibercept and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) provided with aflibercept access before marketing authorization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received aflibercept followed by FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan) on day 1 of a 2-week cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or patient/investigator decision to discontinue. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated, and HRQL was assessed at baseline, cycle 3, and every other cycle using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-CR29, and EuroQol 5-Dimensions 3-Levels questionnaires (NCT01571284). RESULTS: Overall, 779 adult patients with mCRC, who received ≥ 1 prior oxaliplatin-based regimen and had disease progression during or following their last administration of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, were enrolled. At data cutoff, all patients had discontinued treatment, mainly owing to disease progression (51.7%). The most common TEAEs of any grade were diarrhea (61.6%), hypertension (48.4%), and nausea (43.3%). The most common grade 3/4 TEAEs were hypertension (24.1%), neutropenia (23.1%), and diarrhea (15.3%). Clinically meaningful changes in HRQL were reported for all measures. Most patients either had an improvement in their HRQL scores or remained stable during the treatment period based on patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSION: The data from this study support the tolerability of the combination of aflibercept and FOLFIRI in a setting that more closely approximates real life in patients with mCRC who failed to respond to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, and also suggest an improvement in HRQL.

An observational, multicentre study of cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel (CAPRISTANA).

OBJECTIVES: To obtain routine clinical practice data on cabazitaxel usage patterns for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and to describe physician-assessed cabazitaxel effectiveness, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CAPRISTANA was an international, observational cohort study examining cabazitaxel use for the treatment of patients with mCRPC. Effectiveness was assessed by overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF) and disease control rate. HRQoL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate questionnaire (FACT-P) and the three-level European Quality of Life questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L). Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) reporting. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients were treated across 54 centres between April 2012 and June 2016. At baseline, 58.7% had ≥1 comorbidity, 93.7% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1, and 60.1% had a Gleason score at diagnosis of ≥8. Patients received a median of 6 cabazitaxel cycles; 84.7% received cabazitaxel as second-line therapy. The median OS, PFS and TTF were 13.2, 5.6 and 4.4 months, respectively. Cabazitaxel led to disease control in 52.9% of patients. HRQoL was maintained (40.3%) or improved (32.2%) in 72.5% of patients based on total FACT-P scores. Interestingly, 53.6% of patients reported pain improvement and a further 21.2% maintained pain control based on FACT-P prostate cancer-specific pain scores. The most common treatment-related grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (7.9%) and anaemia (2.1%). CONCLUSION: Patients in CAPRISTANA treated with cabazitaxel had similar disease outcomes and safety profiles compared with large phase III clinical trials. Most patients had maintained or improved HRQoL scores; >70% of patients had maintained or improved pain control.