The value of co-creating a clinical outcome assessment strategy for clinical trial research: process and lessons learnt.

BACKGROUND: In support of UCB pharmaceutical research programs, the aim of this research was to implement a novel process for patient involvement in a multidisciplinary research group to co-create a clinical outcome assessment strategy to accurately reflect the experience of people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Patient experts were an integral part of the decision-making process for patient-reported outcome (PRO) research and instrument development. METHODS: In partnership with two patient organizations (Parkinson's UK and the Parkinson's Foundation), 6 patient experts were recruited into a multidisciplinary research group alongside clinical, patient engagement and involvement, regulatory science, and outcome measurement experts. The group was involved across two phases of research; the first phase identified what symptoms are cardinal to the experience of living with early-stage Parkinson's and the second phase involved the development of PRO instruments to better assess the symptoms that are important to people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Patient experts were important in performing a variety of roles, in particular, qualitative study protocol design, conceptual model development, and subsequent co-creation of two PRO instruments. RESULTS: Involving people with Parkinson's in PRO research ensured that the expertise of these representatives from the Parkinson's community shaped and drove the research; as such, PRO instruments were being developed with the patient at the forefront. Working with patient experts required considerable resource and time allocation for planning, communication, document development, and organizing meetings; however, their input enriched the development of PRO instruments and was vital in developing PRO instruments that are more meaningful for people with Parkinson's and clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting PRO research, in the context of clinical development involving pharmaceutical companies, requires balancing regulatory and scientific rigor with tight time constraints. Incorporating a multi-stakeholder perspective, which included patient experts as joint investigators, had a strong positive impact on our research, despite the logistical complexities of their involvement. Due to the input of patient experts, the innovative clinical outcome assessment strategy and the co-created novel PRO instruments were more relevant and holistic to the patient experience of early-stage Parkinson's.

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments allow people living with a disease and participating in a clinical study to describe the symptoms and experiences that they consider meaningful. PRO instruments use tools such as questionnaires and scales to capture patient perspectives on a treatment that might not be captured by a clinical measurement. It is recommended that the patient community and patient experts are included in the development of PRO instruments to accurately capture information that is important to them. Building on the experience of a recent PRO research project in support of UCB pharmaceutical programs, this article provides recommendations on how pharmaceutical companies can partner with patient organizations and involve patient experts as joint investigators in the co creation of PRO instruments. Despite the additional resource and time required, involving patient experts and patient organizations into the research collaboration had a strong positive impact and ensured that the PROs were meaningful to patients (in this instance, people living with early-stage Parkinson's). Patient organizations facilitated patient engagement and recruitment in research activities, maintained communication with the pharmaceutical company's research team, and built trust between collaborators by implementing patient engagement tools and best practices. Patient experts contributed to several parts of the PRO instrument development process: study design, identifying key symptoms and experiences, and developing individual PRO questions. Co-creation between the pharmaceutical company, patient experts, and patient organizations resulted in considerable improvements to typical PRO instrument development for use in clinical trials and is thus recommended.

Development and early qualitative evidence of two novel patient-reported outcome instruments to assess daily functioning in people with early-stage Parkinson's.

BACKGROUND: Previous research on concepts that are important to people living with early-stage Parkinson's indicated that 'functional' slowness, fine motor skills, and subtle gait abnormalities are cardinal concepts that are not comprehensively captured by existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments that are used in clinical practice and research to assess symptoms and daily functioning within this patient population. We sought to develop novel PRO instruments to address this unmet need. METHODS: PRO instrument development was led by a multidisciplinary research group, including people living with Parkinson's (termed 'patient experts'), as well as patient engagement and involvement, regulatory science, clinical, and outcome measurement experts. A first set of PRO instruments, termed Early Parkinson's Function Slowness (42 items) and Early Parkinson's Mobility (26 items), were drafted to capture 'functional' slowness, fine motor skills, and subtle gait abnormalities. These PRO instruments were used in cognitive debriefing interviews with people living with early-stage Parkinson's (who were not involved with the multidisciplinary research group) to identify issues with relevance, clarity, ease of completion, conceptual overlap, or missing concepts. RESULTS: Sixty people living with early-stage Parkinson's were interviewed, which led to refining the items to 45 for the Early Parkinson's Functional Slowness and 23 for the Early Parkinson's Mobility PRO instruments. Refinement included rewording items to address clarity issues, merging or splitting items to address overlap issues, and adding new items to address missing concepts. The Early Parkinson's Function Slowness PRO instrument resulted in a multidimensional instrument covering upper limb, complex/whole body, general activity, and cognitive functional slowness. The Early Parkinson's Mobility PRO instrument resulted in comprehensive coverage of everyday mobility tasks, with a focus on gait concepts, plus complex/whole body, balance, and lower limb mobility. CONCLUSIONS: The Early Parkinson's Function Slowness and Early Parkinson's Mobility PRO instruments aim to address gaps in existing PRO instruments to measure meaningful symptoms and daily functioning in people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Utilizing a meticulous study design led by a multidisciplinary research group that included patient experts helped to ensure that the PRO instruments were patient-centric, content valid, and meaningful from a clinical and measurement perspective.

Patient Experience in Early-Stage Parkinson's Disease: Using a Mixed Methods Analysis to Identify Which Concepts Are Cardinal for Clinical Trial Outcome Assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Qualitative research on patient experiences in early-stage Parkinson's disease (PD) is limited. It is increasingly acknowledged that clinical outcome assessments used in trials do not fully capture the range of symptoms/impacts that are meaningful to people with early-stage PD. We aimed to conceptualize the patient experience in early-stage PD and identify, from the patient perspective, those cardinal symptoms/impacts which might be more useful to measure in clinical trials. METHODS: In a mixed-methods analysis, 50 people with early-stage PD and nine relatives were interviewed. Study design and results interpretation were led by a multidisciplinary group of patient, clinical, regulatory, and outcome measurements experts, and patient organization representatives. Identification of the cardinal concepts was informed by the relative frequency of reported concepts combined with insights from patient experts and movement disorder specialists. RESULTS: A conceptual model of the patient experience of early-stage PD was developed. Concept elicitation generated 145 unique concepts mapped across motor and non-motor symptoms, function, and impacts. Bradykinesia/slowness (notably in the form of "functional slowness"), tremor, rigidity/stiffness, mobility (particularly fine motor dexterity and subtle gait abnormalities), fatigue, depression, sleep/dreams, and pain were identified as cardinal in early-stage PD. "Functional slowness" (related to discrete tasks involving the upper limbs, complex mobility tasks, and general activities) was deemed to be more relevant than "difficulty" to patients with early-stage PD, who report being slower at completing tasks rather than encountering significant impairment with task completion. CONCLUSION: Patient experiences in early-stage PD are complex and wide-ranging, and the currently available patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments do not evaluate many early-stage PD concepts such as functional slowness, fine motor skills, and subtle gait abnormalities. The development of a new PRO instrument, created in conjunction with people with PD, that fully assesses symptoms and the experience of living with early-stage PD, is required.

We conducted research to find out about the experiences and symptoms that have the greatest impact on everyday living for people with early-stage Parkinson's disease. This research also looked at which symptoms patients think are important to be tracked in clinical trials. The research team running this study included people living with Parkinson's disease (called "patient experts"). The team also included technical experts and representatives of patient organizations. To begin with, people living with early-stage Parkinson's disease and relatives were interviewed. The interviews collected their thoughts on the impact of early-stage Parkinson's disease on their daily lives. These insights revealed which experiences and symptoms were most important. The research team analyzed ideas and quotes from the interviews to create a picture of early-stage Parkinson's disease. The symptoms that mattered the most to people living with early-stage Parkinson's disease were tremor, rigidity/stiffness, fatigue, depression, sleep/dreams, and pain. Another important symptom was slowness of movement (which is called "bradykinesia/slowness"), and in particular "functional slowness," which included tasks involving the upper limbs, complicated movement tasks, and general activities. Effects on mobility were also important, particularly fine motor skills and subtle walking abnormalities. This research shows the wide-ranging effects that early-stage Parkinson's disease has on patients from their perspective. It also shows which effects are important to capture in trials of therapies aimed at this patient group.

Ethical Considerations for the Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Research: The PRO Ethics Guidelines.

Importance: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can inform health care decisions, regulatory decisions, and health care policy. They also can be used for audit/benchmarking and monitoring symptoms to provide timely care tailored to individual needs. However, several ethical issues have been raised in relation to PRO use. Objective: To develop international, consensus-based, PRO-specific ethical guidelines for clinical research. Evidence Review: The PRO ethics guidelines were developed following the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network's guideline development framework. This included a systematic review of the ethical implications of PROs in clinical research. The databases MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, AMED, and CINAHL were searched from inception until March 2020. The keywords patient reported outcome* and ethic* were used to search the databases. Two reviewers independently conducted title and abstract screening before full-text screening to determine eligibility. The review was supplemented by the SPIRIT-PRO Extension recommendations for trial protocol. Subsequently, a 2-round international Delphi process (n = 96 participants; May and August 2021) and a consensus meeting (n = 25 international participants; October 2021) were held. Prior to voting, consensus meeting participants were provided with a summary of the Delphi process results and information on whether the items aligned with existing ethical guidance. Findings: Twenty-three items were considered in the first round of the Delphi process: 6 relevant candidate items from the systematic review and 17 additional items drawn from the SPIRIT-PRO Extension. Ninety-six international participants voted on the relevant importance of each item for inclusion in ethical guidelines and 12 additional items were recommended for inclusion in round 2 of the Delphi (35 items in total). Fourteen items were recommended for inclusion at the consensus meeting (n = 25 participants). The final wording of the PRO ethical guidelines was agreed on by consensus meeting participants with input from 6 additional individuals. Included items focused on PRO-specific ethical issues relating to research rationale, objectives, eligibility requirements, PRO concepts and domains, PRO assessment schedules, sample size, PRO data monitoring, barriers to PRO completion, participant acceptability and burden, administration of PRO questionnaires for participants who are unable to self-report PRO data, input on PRO strategy by patient partners or members of the public, avoiding missing data, and dissemination plans. Conclusions and Relevance: The PRO ethics guidelines provide recommendations for ethical issues that should be addressed in PRO clinical research. Addressing ethical issues of PRO clinical research has the potential to ensure high-quality PRO data while minimizing participant risk, burden, and harm and protecting participant and researcher welfare.

'Give Us The Tools!': development of knowledge transfer tools to support the involvement of patient partners in the development of clinical trial protocols with patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in accordance with SPIRIT-PRO Extension.

OBJECTIVES: (a) To adapt the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT)-patient-reported outcome (PRO) Extension guidance to a user-friendly format for patient partners and (b) to codesign a web-based tool to support the dissemination and uptake of the SPIRIT-PRO Extension by patient partners. DESIGN: A 1-day patient and public involvement session. PARTICIPANTS: Seven patient partners. METHODS: A patient partner produced an initial lay summary of the SPIRIT-PRO guideline and a glossary. We held a 1-day PPI session in November 2019 at the University of Birmingham. Five patient partners discussed the draft lay summary, agreed on the final wording, codesigned and agreed the final content for both tools. Two additional patient partners were involved in writing the manuscript. The study compiled with INVOLVE guidelines and was reported according to the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2 checklist. RESULTS: Two user-friendly tools were developed to help patients and members of the public be involved in the codesign of clinical trials collecting PROs. The first tool presents a lay version of the SPIRIT-PRO Extension guidance. The second depicts the most relevant points, identified by the patient partners, of the guidance through an interactive flow diagram. CONCLUSIONS: These tools have the potential to support the involvement of patient partners in making informed contributions to the development of PRO aspects of clinical trial protocols, in accordance with the SPIRIT-PRO Extension guidelines. The involvement of patient partners ensured the tools focused on issues most relevant to them.

A Preliminary Investigation of the Views of People With Parkinson's (With and Without Psychosis) and Caregivers on Participating in Clinical Trials During the Covid-19 Pandemic: An Online Survey.

Background: The coronavirus pandemic is having a profound impact on non-COVID-19 related research, including the delivery of clinical trials for patients with Parkinson's disease. Objectives: A preliminary investigation to explore the views of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients, with and without experience of psychosis symptoms, and carers on the resumption of clinical research and adaptations to trials in light of COVID-19. Methods: An anonymous self-administered online survey was completed by 30 PD patients and six family members/carers via the Parkinson's UK Research Support Network to explore current perceptions on taking part in PD research and how a planned clinical trial for psychosis in PD may be adapted so participants feel safe. Results: Ninety-one percent of respondents were enthusiastic about the continuation of non-COVID-19 related research as long as certain safety measures were in place. Ninety-four percent stated that they would be happy to complete assessments virtually. However, they noted that care should be taken to ensure that this does not exclude participants, particularly those with more advanced PD who may require assistance using portable electronic devices. Regular and supportive communication from the research team was also seen as important for maintaining the psychological well-being of participants while taking part in the trial. Conclusions: In the era of COVID-19 pandemic, standard approaches will have to be modified and rapid adoption of virtual assessments will be critical for the continuation of clinical research. It is important that alongside the traditional methods, new tools are developed, and older ones validated for virtual assessments, to allow safe and comprehensive assessments vital for ongoing research in people with Parkinson's.