Flexible approaches to eCOA administration in clinical trials: The site perspective.

The Critical Path Institute convened the Support Flexible Approaches to PRO Data Collection project as part of the eCOA: Getting Better Together Initiative which was instigated to identify and address common challenges and drive positive change with eCOA implementation in clinical trials. The project aimed to identify clinical trial stakeholders' concerns related to electronic PRO (ePRO) implementation and propose areas of improvement via simplification and flexibility. One workstream focused on patient-/site-centric approaches for simplification and surveyed representatives of clinical sites and site monitors for their perspectives. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed and distributed via snowball sampling to site professionals and clinical research associates (CRAs) that had ePRO experience who had been identified via representative groups or sponsor-led site networks. Responses were received from various site roles across a range of global regions; the largest contribution was from the United States. Topics raised included helpdesk capabilities, technical concerns, device types, and user interfaces among others and are discussed further in this paper. The feedback derived from the questionnaire provided the basis for concrete ideas that sponsors should consider incorporating into protocol design for participant visits, technology use, devices, and methods of back-up data collection.

Best Practices for the Electronic Implementation and Migration of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

While the use of electronic methods to collect patient-reported outcome data in clinical trials continues to increase, it remains the case that many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have originally been developed and validated on paper. Careful consideration during the move from paper PROMs to electronic format is required to preserve the integrity of the measure and ensure a "faithful migration." Relevant literature has long called out the importance of following migration best practices during this process; nevertheless, such best practices are distributed across multiple documents. This article consolidates and builds upon existing electronic PROM implementation best practice recommendations to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date, single point of reference. It reflects the current consensus based on the significant advances in technology capabilities and knowledge gleaned from the growing evidence base on electronic migration and implementation, to balance the need for maintaining the integrity of the measure while optimizing respondent usability. It also specifies whether the practice is rooted in evidence or expert consensus, to enable those using these best practices to make informed and considered decisions when conducting migration.

Place of patient-reported outcomes & experiences measurements (PROMS/PREMS) in the assessment and pricing of Health technologies in France.

In the context of health technologies assessment, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become assessment criteria that are expected by evaluation agencies along with the other usual clinical criteria. PROMs instruments measure all aspects of patient experience in connection with their health: symptoms, activities of daily living (physical function, sleep, etc.), various aspects of health-related quality of life (QoL), compliance, global impression of change in wellbeing. PROMs are useful both as 1) a primary or secondary efficacy endpoints, and 2) a tolerability criterion to supplement vigilance data reported by clinicians. Measurement of PROMs must be subject to methodological rigor that is identical to that of other assessment criteria measured by an observer. Scales must be validated, suitable for the objective, and where possible specific to a disease. In addition to standard measures of quality of life, PROMs are taken into consideration in the assessments performed by the HAS, even if their impact on the conclusions is difficult to isolate, as assessments are multifactorial and take into account all data available with regard to the medical context. The CEPS will indirectly take into account PROMs in the fixing of the price or tariff only if they have contributed to the award of the ASA/ASMR by the ad hoc committee of the HAS. The working group has formulated three recommendations which aim to further the implementation of patient-reported outcome measures: (1) Better information for all parties involved in a dossier for technology assessment, (2) Systematization of the collection of PROMs for evaluation of health products, (3) Improved quality of dossiers thanks to the use of relevant and validated tools.

A Long-term Safety Study of Latanoprost in Pediatric Patients With Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension: A Prospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The objective was to assess the long-term effect of treatment with latanoprost on ocular development and safety in pediatric patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: This was a prospective 3-year cohort study conducted in 14 countries in Europe and South America. Patients aged < 18 years with glaucoma or ocular hypertension were enrolled into either the latanoprost or non-prostaglandin (non-PG) group in this observational study. The primary endpoint was change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to 3 years. Several secondary endpoints were evaluated, including corneal thickness and ocular hyperpigmentation. For treatment comparison, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used for continuous endpoints and Fisher exact test was applied for proportion of participants with clinically significant deterioration events. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients were enrolled: 102 in the latanoprost group (median follow-up: 36.7 months) and 73 in the non-PG group (median follow-up: 36.1 months). There was no statistically significant difference between the latanoprost and the non-PG groups (aged 5 to <18 years) in BCVA change from baseline (least square mean logMAR difference -0.03 [95% confidence interval: -0.12, 0.06]), corneal thickness, or ocular hyperpigmentation. CONCLUSIONS: Latanoprost had an acceptable safety profile with no evidence of inducing clinically meaningful or statistically significant changes in ocular development or ocular hyperpigmentation in pediatric patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension.