A Survey of Xylella fastidiosa in the U.S. State of Virginia Reveals Wide Distribution of Both Subspecies fastidiosa and multiplex in Grapevine.

Global travel and trade in combination with climate change are expanding the geographic distribution of plant pathogens. The bacterium Xylella fastidiosa is a prime example. Native to the Americas, it has spread to Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. To assess the risk that pathogen introductions pose to crops in newly invaded areas, it is key to survey their diversity, host range, and disease incidence in relation to climatic conditions where they are already present. We performed a survey of X. fastidiosa in grapevine in Virginia using a combination of quantitative PCR, multilocus sequencing, and metagenomics. We also analyzed samples from deciduous trees with leaf scorch symptoms. X. fastidiosa subspecies fastidiosa was identified in grapevines in all regions of the state, even in Northern Virginia, where the temperature was below -9°C for 10 days per year on average in the years preceding sampling. Unexpectedly, we also found for the first time grapevine samples infected with X. fastidiosa subspecies multiplex (Xfm). The Xfm lineage found in grapevines had been previously isolated from blueberries in the Southeastern United States and was distinct from that found in deciduous trees in Virginia. The obtained results will be important for risk assessment of X. fastidiosa introductions in other parts of the world.

A NitroPure Nitrocellulose Membrane-Based Grapevine Virus Sampling Kit: Development and Deployment to Survey Japanese Vineyards and Nurseries.

We developed a NitroPure Nitrocellulose (NPN) membrane-based method for sampling and storing grapevine sap for grapevine virus detection. We devised an efficient nucleic acid extraction method for the NPN membrane, resulting in 100% amplification success for grapevine leafroll-associated virus 2 (GLRaV2) and 3 (GLRaV3), grapevine rupestris stem pitting-associated virus (GRSPaV), grapevine virus A, grapevine virus B, and grapevine red blotch virus (GRBV). This method also allowed the storage of recoverable nucleic acid for 18 months at room temperature. We created a sampling kit to survey GLRaV2, GLRaV3, and GRBV in Japanese vineyards. We tested the kits in the field in 2018 and then conducted mail-in surveys in 2020-2021. The results showed a substantial prevalence of GLRaV3, with 48.5% of 132 sampled vines being positive. On the other hand, only 3% of samples tested positive for GLRaV2 and none for GRBV.

Recommendations on the Selection, Development, and Modification of Performance Outcome Assessments: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force.

In evaluating the clinical benefit of new therapeutic interventions, it is critical that the treatment outcomes assessed reflect aspects of health that are clinically important and meaningful to patients. Performance outcome (PerfO) assessments are measurements based on standardized tasks actively undertaken by a patient that reflect physical, cognitive, sensory, and other functional skills that bring meaning to people's lives. PerfO assessments can have substantial value as drug development tools when the concepts of interest being measured best suit task performance and in cases where patients may be limited in their capacity for self-report. In their development, selection, and modification, including the evaluation and documentation of validity, reliability, usability, and interpretability, the good practice recommendations established for other clinical outcome assessment types should continue to be followed, with concept elicitation as a critical foundation. In addition, the importance of standardization, and the need to ensure feasibility and safety, as well as their utility in patient groups, such as pediatric populations, or those with cognitive and psychiatric challenges, may enhance the need for structured pilot evaluations, additional cognitive interviewing, and evaluation of quantitative data, such as that which would support concept confirmation or provide ecological evidence and other forms of construct evidence within a unitary approach to validity. The opportunity for PerfO assessments to inform key areas of clinical benefit is substantial and establishing good practices in their selection or development, validation, and implementation, as well as how they reflect meaningful aspects of health is critical to ensuring high standards and in furthering patient-focused drug development.

Comparing patient global impression of severity and patient global impression of change to evaluate test-retest reliability of depression, non-small cell lung cancer, and asthma measures.

PURPOSE: Score reproducibility is an important measurement property of fit-for-purpose patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. It is commonly assessed via test-retest reliability, and best evaluated with a stable participant sample, which can be challenging to identify in diseases with highly variable symptoms. To provide empirical evidence comparing the retrospective (patient global impression of change [PGIC]) and current state (patient global impression of severity [PGIS]) approaches to identifying a stable subgroup for test-retest analyses, 3 PRO Consortium working groups collected data using both items as anchor measures. METHODS: The PGIS was completed on Day 1 and Day 8 + 3 for the depression and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) studies, and daily for the asthma study and compared between Day 3 and 10. The PGIC was completed on the final day in each study. Scores were compared using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for participants who reported "no change" between timepoints for each anchor. RESULTS: ICCs using the PGIS "no change" group were higher for depression (0.84 vs. 0.74), nighttime asthma (0.95 vs. 0.53) and daytime asthma (0.86 vs. 0.68) compared to the PGIC "no change" group. ICCs were similar for NSCLC (PGIS: 0.87; PGIC: 0.85). CONCLUSION: When considering anchor measures to identify a stable subgroup for test-retest reliability analyses, current state anchors perform better than retrospective anchors. Researchers should carefully consider the type of anchor selected, the time period covered, and should ensure anchor content is consistent with the target measure concept, as well as inclusion of both current and retrospective anchor measures.

Using validity theory and psychometrics to evaluate and support expanded uses of existing scales.

BACKGROUND: Scale development is a complex activity requiring significant investments of time and money to produce evidence of a scale's ability to produce reliable scores and valid inferences. With increasing use of clinical outcome assessments (COAs) in medical product development, evidentiary expectations of regulatory bodies to support inferences are a key consideration. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate how existing methods in measurement science can be used to identify and fill evidence gaps when considering re-purposing an existing scale for a new use case (e.g., new patient population, altering the recall period), rather than creating a new COA tool. METHODS: We briefly review select validity theory and psychometric concepts, linking them to the nomenclature in the COA/regulated space. Four examples (two in-text and two in online supplemental materials) of modifications are presented to demonstrate these ideas in practice for quality of life (QOL)-related measures. RESULTS: Each example highlights the initial process of evaluating the desired validity claims, identifying gaps in evidence to support these claims, and determining how such gaps could be filled, often without having to develop a new measure. CONCLUSIONS: If an existing scale, with minimal modification or additional evidence, can be shown to be fit for a new purpose, considerable effort can be saved and research waste avoided. In many cases, a new instrument is simply unnecessary. Far better to recycle an "old" scale for a new use-with sufficient evidence that it is fit for that purpose-than to "buy" a new one.

Investigating plant disease outbreaks with long-read metagenomics: sensitive detection and highly resolved phylogenetic reconstruction applied to Xylella fastidiosa.

Early disease detection is a prerequisite for enacting effective interventions for disease control. Strains of the bacterial plant pathogen Xylella fastidiosa have recurrently spread to new crops in new countries causing devastating outbreaks. So far, investigation of outbreak strains and highly resolved phylogenetic reconstruction have required whole-genome sequencing of pure bacterial cultures, which are challenging to obtain due to the fastidious nature of X. fastidiosa. Here, we show that culture-independent metagenomic sequencing, using the Oxford Nanopore Technologies MinION long-read sequencer, can sensitively and specifically detect the causative agent of Pierce's disease of grapevine, X. fastidiosa subspecies fastidiosa. Using a DNA sample from a grapevine in Virginia, USA, it was possible to obtain a metagenome-assembled genome (MAG) of sufficient quality for phylogenetic reconstruction with SNP resolution. The analysis placed the MAG in a clade with isolates from Georgia, USA, suggesting introduction of X. fastidiosa subspecies fastidiosa to Virginia from the south-eastern USA. This proof of concept study, thus, revealed that metagenomic sequencing can replace culture-dependent genome sequencing for reconstructing transmission routes of bacterial plant pathogens.

Metagenomic sequencing for detection and identification of the boxwood blight pathogen Calonectria pseudonaviculata.

Pathogen detection and identification are key elements in outbreak control of human, animal, and plant diseases. Since many fungal plant pathogens cause similar symptoms, are difficult to distinguish morphologically, and grow slowly in culture, culture-independent, sequence-based diagnostic methods are desirable. Whole genome metagenomic sequencing has emerged as a promising technique because it can potentially detect any pathogen without culturing and without the need for pathogen-specific probes. However, efficient DNA extraction protocols, computational tools, and sequence databases are required. Here we applied metagenomic sequencing with the Oxford Nanopore Technologies MinION to the detection of the fungus Calonectria pseudonaviculata, the causal agent of boxwood (Buxus spp.) blight disease. Two DNA extraction protocols, several DNA purification kits, and various computational tools were tested. All DNA extraction methods and purification kits provided sufficient quantity and quality of DNA. Several bioinformatics tools for taxonomic identification were found suitable to assign sequencing reads to the pathogen with an extremely low false positive rate. Over 9% of total reads were identified as C. pseudonaviculata in a severely diseased sample and identification at strain-level resolution was approached as the number of sequencing reads was increased. We discuss how metagenomic sequencing could be implemented in routine plant disease diagnostics.

Metagenomic Sequencing for Identification of Xylella fastidiosa from Leaf Samples.

Xylella fastidiosa (Xf) is a globally distributed plant-pathogenic bacterium. The primary control strategy for Xf diseases is eradicating infected plants; therefore, timely and accurate detection is necessary to prevent crop losses and further pathogen dispersal. Conventional Xf diagnostics primarily relies on quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays. However, these methods do not consider new or emerging variants due to pathogen genetic recombination and sensitivity limitations. We developed and tested a metagenomics pipeline using in-house short-read sequencing as a complementary approach for affordable, fast, and highly accurate Xf detection. We used metagenomics to identify Xf to the strain level in single- and mixed-infected plant samples at concentrations as low as 1 pg of bacterial DNA per gram of tissue. We also tested naturally infected samples from various plant species originating from Europe and the United States. We identified Xf subspecies in samples previously considered inconclusive with real-time PCR (quantification cycle [Cq], >35). Overall, we showed the versatility of the pipeline by using different plant hosts and DNA extraction methods. Our pipeline provides taxonomic and functional information for Xf diagnostics without extensive knowledge of the disease. This pipeline demonstrates that metagenomics can be used for early detection of Xf and incorporated as a tool to inform disease management strategies. IMPORTANCE Destructive Xylella fastidiosa (Xf) outbreaks in Europe highlight this pathogen's capacity to expand its host range and geographical distribution. The current disease diagnostic approaches are limited by a multiple-step process, biases to known sequences, and detection limits. We developed a low-cost, user-friendly metagenomic sequencing tool for Xf detection. In less than 3 days, we were able to identify Xf subspecies and strains in field-collected samples. Overall, our pipeline is a diagnostics tool that could be easily extended to other plant-pathogen interactions and implemented for emerging plant threat surveillance.

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.

Measuring the impact of chronic low back pain on everyday functioning: content validity of the Roland Morris disability questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Robust outcome measures are needed to assess and monitor the impact of chronic low back pain (CLBP) on physical functioning. The Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) is a well-established measure designed to capture the impacts of back pain on everyday functioning, with a particular emphasis on physical functioning. It has documented evaluation of psychometric properties. However, there is no documented qualitative evidence to confirm the content validity of the tool, nor have changes made for electronic administration been debriefed in participants with CLBP. METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured, concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with 23 US participants with confirmed CLBP. Interviews allowed participants to describe the impact of CLBP on their day-to-day functioning and discuss comprehension and suitability of the RMDQ. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing revealed the substantial burden associated with CLBP, highlighting 15 key areas of functional impact. These were grouped into overarching themes of mobility (walking, stairs, sitting/standing, bending/kneeling, lifting, lying down), activities (chores/housework, dressing, washing, driving, work) and other (relationships/socializing, mood, sleep, appetite), which are consistent with those evaluated within the RMDQ. All participants found the RMDQ to be relevant with most reporting that the instructions, recall period, and response options were suitable. A few suggested minor changes, however, none were consistent or necessary to support content validity. Updates to the measure for electronic administration and to clarify the response options were well received. CONCLUSION: The qualitative data from individuals with CLBP confirmed that the RMDQ has content validity and, alongside documented psychometric evidence, supports the use of the RMDQ as a reliable and valid tool to assess the impact of CLBP on physical functioning.

Why Reinvent the Wheel? Use or Modification of Existing Clinical Outcome Assessment Tools in Medical Product Development.

Assessment of clinical benefit in treatment trials can be made through report by a clinician, a patient, or a nonclinician observer (eg, caregiver) or through a performance-based assessment. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a final guidance for industry for one type of clinical outcome assessment (COA)-patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures-in 2009 that described how FDA reviews PRO measures for their adequacy to support medical product-labeling claims. Many of the principles described in the PRO Guidance could be applicable to the other types of COAs, including instruments completed by clinicians (ie, clinician-reported outcome assessments) and nonclinician observers (ie, observer-reported outcome assessments). FDA guidance describing the regulatory expectations for all COA types including performance outcome assessments, which are based on the patient's performance of a defined task or activity, is in progress to meet requirements described within the 21st Century Cures Act and PDUFA VI. This communication highlights potential ways in which existing instruments might be modified or used "as is" to conform to good measurement principles. An industry and a regulatory perspective are described.

Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder Scale: Performance of a Novel Patient-Reported Symptom Measure.

BACKGROUND: The Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder Scale (SMDDS) was expressly developed on the basis of qualitative data to directly incorporate patients' voices into evaluation of treatment benefit in major depressive disorder (MDD) clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: To collect quantitative data necessary to refine/optimize the SMDDS and document its psychometric properties. METHODS: In this multicenter, observational study, participants with clinically diagnosed MDD completed questionnaires in 2 waves. Wave 1 was designed to refine the SMDDS using Rasch measurement evaluations and item reduction analyses. On a subset of wave 1 subjects, 7 to 12 months later, wave 2 further examined item performance and measurement properties. Exploratory factor analyses and assessments of construct validity and reliability (internal consistency and reproducibility) were completed. RESULTS: Using wave 1 data (N = 315; females = 71%, white = 81%, mean age = 44 years), the SMDDS was revised from 36 to 16 items. The Rasch item threshold map indicated that all but 1 item (suicidal ideation) were appropriately ordered. The 207 wave 2 participants were 74% females, 82% white, with a mean age of 45 years. The exploratory factor analyses resulted in a single component (all standardized factor loadings >0.46). Cronbach α was 0.93 and the 7-day test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient (n = 93) was 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.77-0.89). SMDDS scores discriminated between MDD severity levels. CONCLUSIONS: The 16-item SMDDS generated highly reliable scores with substantial evidence of construct validity. On the basis of the evidence of appropriate content validity and sound psychometric performance, the Food and Drug Administration qualified the SMDDS as an outcome measure to support exploratory efficacy endpoints in MDD clinical trials.

Content validity of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 electronic patient-reported outcome.

PURPOSE: A concept elicitation, cognitive debriefing, and usability study was undertaken to: 1) ascertain the migraine experience with a particular focus on the impact on roles and daily functioning; 2) determine the comprehensiveness and comprehensibility of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 electronic patient-reported outcome Role Function-Restrictive (MSQ v2.1 ePRO RFR) domain items, and the appropriateness and understanding of the recall period, response options, and instructions; and 3) assess the usability on an electronic tablet device. METHODS: Eleven US English-speaking people with episodic or chronic migraine were recruited to participate in one-on-one interviews, encompassing methods appropriate for concept elicitation, cognitive debriefing, and usability testing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed following the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Participants (seven episodic and four chronic) had a mean age of 34.8 years, and nine were female. Through spontaneous mention or probing, the concepts of the MSQ v2.1 ePRO RFR domain items were described and endorsed by all participants as day-to-day functioning restrictions; except for item 5 (ability to concentrate), which was endorsed by 10 of 11 participants. Cognitive interviewing confirmed the MSQ v2.1 ePRO instructions were clear, meaningful, and important to assess as daily functioning impacts experienced as a result of migraine. Overall impressions of the ePRO device were favorable, and no participants reported any difficulties with use. CONCLUSIONS: The MSQ v2.1 ePRO RFR domain is content-valid and appropriate for inclusion in future studies designed to measure the functional impact of episodic or chronic migraine on the performance of day-to-day activities.

Psychometric Validation of the Role Function Restrictive Domain of the Migraine Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Version 2.1 Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome in Patients With Episodic and Chronic Migraine.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the measurement properties of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQv2.1) electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) Role Function-Restrictive (RFR) domain to evaluate the functional impact of migraine in patients with episodic (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) enrolled in clinical trials. METHODS: The 7-item MSQv2.1 ePRO RFR measures the functional impact of migraine on relationships with family and friends, leisure time, work or daily activities, productivity, concentration, tiredness, and energy. Measurement properties of the RFR were assessed using data from 2 EM (CGAG [n = 851] and CGAH [n = 909]) and 1 CM (CGAI [n = 1090]) Phase 3 galcanezumab clinical trials. Anchor- and distribution-based analyses were utilized to derive a responder threshold for clinical interpretation of change over time. The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S), Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and migraine headache days (MHD) served as anchors. Responsiveness and responder threshold analyses were completed from baseline to the average of months 4-6 for EM studies, and from baseline to month 3 for the CM study; timeframes selected were based on the primary endpoints in these studies. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha values for internal consistency reliability were 0.93, 0.92, and 0.92, for CGAG, CGAH, and CGAI, respectively. Test-retest reliability intra-class correlation coefficients were 0.82 and 0.84 for CGAG and CGAH, and 0.85 for CGAI in stable patients. Convergent validity was supported by moderate to strong correlations (≥0.30) between the RFR and both MIDAS and PGI-S. Known-groups validity was established between subgroups stratified by baseline PGI-S and MHD (P < .05; δ = 0.35-1.96). For the EM studies, anchor variables suggested a change of ≥25 points (equivalent to 9 points/state changes on raw scale) in the RFR was an appropriate threshold to interpret a treatment benefit. For the CM study a change of ≥17.14 points (6 points/state changes on raw scale) was an appropriate threshold. In all 3 studies, significantly (P < .01) more galcanezumab patients achieved the responder definition thresholds, as compared to placebo (odds ratios of 1.98, 2.45, 2.27, 2.44, 1.64, and 1.66 for the 120 and 240 mg arms in the CGAG, CGAH, and CGAI trials, respectively). CONCLUSION: The MSQv2.1 ePRO RFR has sufficient reliability, validity, responsiveness, and appropriate interpretation standards for use in EM and CM clinical trials to assess the functional impact of migraine.

Developing and Implementing Performance Outcome Assessments: Evidentiary, Methodologic, and Operational Considerations.

The use of performance outcome (PerfO) assessments to measure cognitive or physical function in drug trials presents several challenges for both sponsors and regulators, owing in part to a relative lack of scientific guidance on their development, implementation, and interpretation. In December 2016, the Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy convened a 2-day workshop to explore the evidentiary, methodologic, and operational challenges associated with PerfO measures, and to identify potential paths to addressing these challenges. This paper presents both a summary of the discussion as well as additional input from a working group of experts from FDA, industry, academia, and public-private consortia. It is intended to advance the discussion around the development and use of PerfO measures to assess patient functioning in clinical trials intended to support registration of new treatments, and to highlight the key gaps in knowledge where additional research, collaboration, and discussion are needed.

The Potential Role of Individual-Level Benefit-Risk Assessment in Treatment Decision Making: A DIA Study Endpoints Community Workstream.

Benefit-risk assessment is the cornerstone of decision making in medical care, playing a critical role in bringing treatments to market by informing decisions regarding drug development, licensing and reimbursement, and informing treatment decisions made by health care professionals and patients in clinical practice. In regulatory approval decision making, benefit and risk attributes are identified and defined based on available, aggregated clinical data from registration trials. In the context of major developments in recent years for involvement of patients as partners in all phases of drug development and in health care improvement, decision makers increasingly recognize the importance of informing treatment decisions by patient needs, values, experiences, and preferences. Using this as a basis, a DIA workstream was convened to explore the potential of individual-level benefit-risk assessment as a supplement to traditional group-level benefit-risk assessment for evaluating treatment. Various approaches as to how this information could be collected, including via patient-reported outcome measures, open-ended questioning, and stated-preference methods are presented. The utility of this information for various stakeholders is discussed.

Evaluation of the Measurement Properties of Four Performance Outcome Measures in Patients with Elective Hip Replacements, Elective Knee Replacements, or Hip Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the measurement properties of four performance outcome (PerfO) measures (timed up and go, four-step stair climb, long stair climb, and repeated chair stand) in three patient populations(elective total hip replacement [eTHR], elective total knee replacement [eTKR], and hip fracture [HF]). METHODS: A cross-sectional and longitudinal design was used to assess the PerfO measurement properties using the US Food and Drug Administration guidance for industry around patient-reported outcome measures to support labeling claims. Patient-reported outcome measures and patient- and clinician-reported global concept items were completed along with four PerfO measures at visit 1 and two follow-up visits. Measurement properties assessed included reliability, construct validity, ability to detect change, and estimates of meaningful change. RESULTS: A total of 280 patients (100 eTHR, 105 eTKR, and 75 HF) were recruited, with most (n = 276) providing data at visit 1. Most of the patients were female (64%) and retired (64%), and had at least one comorbidity (91%). Inter-rater and test-retest reliability ranged from good to excellent (0.73 ≤ intraclass correlation coefficient ≤ 0.95) for each PerfO measure. Known-groups validity was demonstrated for all PerfO measures, with those reporting less pain better physical functioning and those who did not use an assistive device having quicker mean completion times. Construct validity and ability to detect change were demonstrated and estimates of meaningful change derived. CONCLUSIONS: This study found the measurement properties of four PerfO measures in samples of patients with eTHR, eTKR, and HF to be supported for consideration of future use, and provided estimates for interpretation of change.

Evaluating the Content Validity of Four Performance Outcome Measures in Patients with Elective Hip Replacements and Hip Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the content validity of performance outcome (PerfO) measures for use with patients undergoing hip fracture (HF) surgery and elective total hip replacement (eTHR). METHODS: This study was a substudy of a broader evaluation of measurement properties of PerfO measures. The PerfO measures assessed were timed up and go (TUG), four-step stair climb (4SC), long stair climb (LSC), and repeated chair stand (RCS). For this substudy, HF and eTHR participants were interviewed to evaluate the relevance and difficulty of each PerfO measure. Qualitative analysis was conducted on interview transcripts, and summaries of coded data were produced to assess saturation. RESULTS: All 18 HF participants related the PerfO measures (TUG, 4SC, and RSC) to activities they completed in daily life, with slight variations in some specific aspects. For the eight eTHR participants, the correspondence between the PerfO measures (TUG, 4SC, and LSC) and activities in daily life varied: all participants saw similarity in the movements for the TUG; most undertook short stair climbs in daily life, but most did not regularly undertake LSC in daily life. Nevertheless, all HF and eTHR participants reported that the PerfO measures were relevant and had a level of difficulty similar to daily activities. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes novel methods that adapt US regulatory guidance for patient-reported outcome measures to the evaluation of PerfO measures. A structured approach was used to explore specific details of each measure and correspondence to everyday life. This study demonstrates how content validity of PerfO measures can be meaningfully assessed.

Response scale selection in adult pain measures: results from a literature review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this literature review was to examine the existing patient-reported outcome measurement literature to understand the empirical evidence supporting response scale selection in pain measurement for the adult population. METHODS: The search strategy involved a comprehensive, structured, literature review with multiple search objectives and search terms. RESULTS: The searched yielded 6918 abstracts which were reviewed against study criteria for eligibility across the adult pain objective. The review included 42 review articles, consensus guidelines, expert opinion pieces, and primary research articles providing insights into optimal response scale selection for pain assessment in the adult population. Based on the extensive and varied literature on pain assessments, the adult pain studies typically use simple response scales with single-item measures of pain-a numeric rating scale, visual analog scale, or verbal rating scale. Across 42 review articles, consensus guidelines, expert opinion pieces, and primary research articles, the NRS response scale was most often recommended in these guidance documents. When reviewing the empirical basis for these recommendations, we found that the NRS had slightly superior measurement properties (e.g., reliability, validity, responsiveness) across a wide variety of contexts of use as compared to other response scales. CONCLUSIONS: Both empirical studies and review articles provide evidence that the 11-point NRS is likely the optimal response scale to evaluate pain among adult patients without cognitive impairment.

Patient-Centered Research to Support the Development of the Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder Scale (SMDDS): Initial Qualitative Research.

BACKGROUND: Content valid, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures of major depressive disorder (MDD) symptoms are needed to assess MDD treatment benefit. While a range of questionnaires are currently available to evaluate aspects of depression from the patient's perspective, their comprehensiveness and qualitative development histories are unclear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe the process and results of the preliminary qualitative development of a new symptom-based PRO measure intended to assess treatment benefit in MDD clinical trials. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with adult MDD patients in the USA who recently experienced a major depressive episode. Experienced interviewers conducted concept elicitation (CE) and cognitive interviews using semi-structured interview guides. The CE interview guide was used to elicit spontaneous reports of symptom experiences along with probing to further explore and confirm concepts. The cognitive interview guide was developed to evaluate concept relevance, understandability, and structure of the draft items, and to facilitate further instrument refinement. RESULTS: Forty patients participated in the CE interviews. A total of 3022 symptom codes, representing 84 different concepts were derived from the transcripts. Data from the CE interviews were considered alongside existing literature and clinical expert opinion during an item-generation process, leading to development of a preliminary version of the Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder Scale (SMDDS). Fifteen patients participated in three waves of cognitive interviews, during which the SMDDS was further refined. CONCLUSIONS: The SMDDS is a 35-item PRO measure intended for use as an endpoint in MDD clinical trials to support medical product labeling. The SMDDS uses a 7-day recall period and verbal rating scales. It was developed in accordance with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s PRO Guidance and best practices. Qualitative interviews have provided evidence for content validity. Future quantitative studies will confirm the SMDDS's measurement properties and support FDA qualification.