Co-design and Consultation Ensure Consumer Needs Are Met: Building an eHealth Platform for Children with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Crohn's Colitis Care is an adult inflammatory bowel disease eHealth system. Crohn's Colitis Care required additional pediatric functionality to enable life-long records and mitigate transition inadequacies. AIM: This study describes and evaluates a consensus method developed to ensure consumer needs were met. METHODS: Pediatric-specific functionality and associated resources considered important for inclusion were developed by a clinician consensus group. This group was divided into thematic subgroups and underwent two voting rounds. The content validity index was used to determine items reaching consensus. Children with inflammatory bowel disease and their parents were later shown a descriptive list of non-clinical inclusion topics proposed by the consensus group, and asked to vote on whether topic-related functionality and resources should be included. RESULTS: The consensus process consulted 189 people in total (38 clinicians, 32 children with inflammatory bowel disease and 119 parents). There was agreement across all groups to incorporate functionality and resources pertaining to quality of life, mental health, self-management, and transition readiness; however, divergence was seen for general inflammatory bowel disease facts, your inflammatory bowel disease history, and satisfaction. Cost saw the greatest disparity, being less supported by consumers compared to clinicians. Over 75% of consumers agreed it would be okay for appointments to take longer for survey completion, and > 90% thought Crohn's Colitis Care should allow consumers to ask their treating team questions. CONCLUSIONS: Widespread consumer co-design and consultation were important in unveiling differing perspectives to ensure Crohn's Colitis Care was built to support both consumer and clinician perspectives. Consumers collaborate to create a list of functionality and resources to be included in software (left), influencing the final product build (right).

Comparative Evaluation of 4 Commercially Available ELISA Kits for Measuring Adalimumab and Anti-adalimumab Antibodies.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, such as adalimumab (ADM), is increasingly being performed for the management of autoimmune diseases. However, there can be significant variation in drug and antibody concentrations obtained by different assay methods. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of 4 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kits for measuring ADM and anti-ADM antibodies. METHOD: Dilutions of ADM or anti-ADM spiked sera were assessed for recovery rate and precision using the following 4 kits: LISA-Tracker (Theradiag, Croissy-Beaubourg, France), Promonitor (Grifols, Barcelona, Spain), Ridascreen (R-Biopharm, Darmstadt, Germany), and Shikari (Matriks Biotek, Gölbasi/Ankara Turkey). Interference samples were also assessed. RESULTS: At the therapeutic concentration, ADM detection was comparable among the 4 ELISA kits. Lisa-Tracker and Shikari kits produced low-range false positive results in normal sera. Infliximab and etanercept caused false positives in Lisa-Tracker and Shikari kits. Anti-ADM antibody ELISA kits performed differently with spiked samples because of different measuring units and ranges. Ridascreen and Shikari kits were dose responsive across the entire standard curve and correlated well with each other (r = 0.997). Cross reactivity was observed in rheumatoid factor positive sera tested on the Promonitor anti-ADM kit. CONCLUSIONS: All ADM kits tested were dose responsive within the therapeutic range and correlated well. The significance of observed low-range false positives and cross reactivity with infliximab in LISA-Tracker and Shikari kits is dependent on the indications received for testing in the laboratory. Anti-ADM ELISA kits produced varied results for spiked sera; however, they showed good precision. Inter-kit variability suggested that anti-ADM levels should be compared only when using the same method.