RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Long-chain fatty acid oxidation disorders (LC-FAOD) are a group of rare autosomal-recessive genetic disorders characterized by metabolic deficiencies in which the body is unable to convert long-chain fatty acids into energy. To date, however, there is limited understanding of the patient experience of LC-FAOD. METHODS: The symptoms, observable signs, and quality of life (QoL) impacts associated with LC-FAOD were explored via a focus group (nâ=â8) and semi-structured interviews (nâ=â6) with patients and caregivers of patients with LC-FAOD, and interviews (nâ=â4) with expert clinicians. Data were analyzed via thematic analysis and summarized in a conceptual model. RESULTS: Participants reported a wide range of signs and symptoms associated with LC-FAOD, broadly categorized as musculoskeletal, endocrine/nutritional/metabolic, neurological, gastrointestinal/digestive, sensory, cardiovascular, respiratory, urological, and constitutional. LC-FAOD were reported to have a significant impact on various aspects of patients' lives including physical functioning, participation in daily activities, emotional/psychological wellbeing, and social functioning. Lifestyle modifications (such as diet and exercise restrictions) were necessary because of the condition. Symptoms were typically episodic in presentation often arising or exacerbated during catabolic conditions such as prolonged exercise, fasting, physiological stress, and illness/infection. Symptoms were also commonly reported to lead to emergency room visits, hospitalization, and clinical complications. CONCLUSION: LC-FAOD have a considerable impact on patients' lives. There is a high degree of concordance in the signs, symptoms, and impacts of LC-FAOD reported by patients, caregivers, and clinicians; however, there were many symptoms and impacts that were only reported by patients and caregivers, thus demonstrating that insights from patient/caregiver experience data are integral for informing medical product development and facilitating patient-centered care.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Defining the transition from relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) can be challenging and delayed. A digital tool (MSProDiscuss) was developed to facilitate physician-patient discussion in evaluating early, subtle signs of multiple sclerosis (MS) disease progression representing this transition. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine cut-off values and corresponding sensitivity and specificity for predefined scoring algorithms, with or without including Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores, to differentiate between RRMS and SPMS patients and to evaluate psychometric properties. METHODS: Experienced neurologists completed the tool for patients with confirmed RRMS or SPMS and those suspected to be transitioning to SPMS. In addition to age and EDSS score, each patient's current disease status (disease activity, symptoms, and its impacts on daily life) was collected while completing the draft tool. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves determined optimal cut-off values (sensitivity and specificity) for the classification of RRMS and SPMS. RESULTS: Twenty neurologists completed the draft tool for 198 patients. Mean scores for patients with RRMS (n=89), transitioning to SPMS (n=47), and SPMS (n=62) were 38.1 (SD 12.5), 55.2 (SD 11.1), and 69.6 (SD 12.0), respectively (P<.001, each between-groups comparison). Area under the ROC curve (AUC) including and excluding EDSS were for RRMS (including) AUC 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95, RRMS (excluding) AUC 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.93, SPMS (including) AUC 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.95, and SPMS (excluding) AUC 0.86, 95% CI 0.81-0.91. In the algorithm with EDSS, the optimal cut-off values were ≤51.6 for RRMS patients (sensitivity=0.83; specificity=0.82) and ≥58.9 for SPMS patients (sensitivity=0.82; specificity=0.84). The optimal cut-offs without EDSS were ≤46.3 and ≥57.8 and resulted in similar high sensitivity and specificity (0.76-0.86). The draft tool showed excellent interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=.95). CONCLUSIONS: The MSProDiscuss tool differentiated RRMS patients from SPMS patients with high sensitivity and specificity. In clinical practice, it may be a useful tool to evaluate early, subtle signs of MS disease progression indicating the evolution of RRMS to SPMS. MSProDiscuss will help assess the current level of progression in an individual patient and facilitate a more informed physician-patient discussion.
