coreSCD: multi-stakeholder consensus on core outcomes for sickle cell disease clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: With the dramatic increase in the pipeline for new sickle cell disease (SCD) therapies in recent years, the time is ripe to ensure a robust body of evidence is available for decision making by regulators, payers, clinicians, and patients. Harmonization of the outcomes selected across interventional trials enables optimal post-trial appraisal and decision making through valid pooled analyses and indirect comparisons. We employed a structured, multi-stakeholder consensus process to develop core outcome sets (COS) for use in clinical trials of SCD interventions. METHODS: CoreSCD utilized a modified Delphi method adapted from the standards recommended by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative. An initial list of candidate outcomes was developed through a targeted literature review and input from an 11-member advisory committee. A 44-member multi-stakeholder Delphi Panel was established and included patients and family members, advocates, clinicians, researchers, payers, health technology assessors, representatives from government agencies, and industry representatives. Patients/advocates comprised 25% of the Delphi Panel and orientation and training was provided prior to the consensus process to ensure all were prepared to participate meaningfully. Panelists completed three rounds of an online survey to rate the importance of candidate outcomes for inclusion in the COS. Summary data was provided between each voting round and an in-person consensus meeting was held between the second and third round of voting. Consensus rules were applied following each round of voting to eliminate outcomes that did not meet predetermined criteria for retention. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for two core outcome sets. The final COS for trials of disease-modifying therapies includes ten outcomes and the COS for trials of acute interventions includes six outcomes. Both core sets include clinical outcomes as well as outcomes related to functioning/quality of life, resource utilization, and survival/mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the COS in clinical development programs for SCD will help to ensure that relevant, consistent outcomes are available for decision making across the product lifecycle.

A multistakeholder Delphi consensus core outcome set for clinical trials in moderate-to-severe asthma (coreASTHMA).

BACKGROUND: Treatments for long-term control of asthma have improved and include a promising but expensive class of biologic therapies. However, the clinical trials evaluating these and other novel treatments have used a variety of different outcomes to evaluate efficacy. The evolution of asthma care calls for a re-examination of outcomes that are most important to patients and other stakeholders. OBJECTIVE: To develop a core set of outcomes to be measured in phase 3 and phase 4 clinical drug trials in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. METHODS: We used a robust and in-depth multistakeholder consensus process bringing together patients, clinicians, regulators, payers, health technology assessors, researchers, and product developers to reach consensus on outcomes. We used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus, an approach adapted from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative aligned with contemporary methodological standards for core outcome set development. RESULTS: The following outcomes were included in the final core set: severe asthma exacerbation, change in asthma control, asthma-specific or severe asthma-specific quality of life, asthma-specific hospital stay (ie, >24-hour stays at any level of care) or admission, and asthma-specific emergency department visit. CONCLUSION: These 5 outcomes represent a minimum set of core outcomes for use in phase 3 and phase 4 clinical drug trials in moderate-to-severe asthma. Consistent collection of these outcomes as minimum, independent of whether additional heterogeneous primary or secondary outcomes are included, will allow for meaningful comparisons of the effect of asthma therapies across clinical trials.

The asthma evidence base: a call for core outcomes in interventional trials.

OBJECTIVES: Biologic therapies are emerging as an option to treat a subset of patients with severe asthma, however no direct comparison between these agents has been conducted. Furthermore, heterogeneity of outcomes in clinical trials makes it difficult to compare these agents and traditional therapies. The extent to which this heterogeneity exists has major implications for evidence-based decisions and is yet to be fully reported. We conducted a literature search to examine outcomes currently being used in clinical trials for asthma. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Library and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for clinical trials of asthma interventions. STUDY SELECTIONS: We limited our search to phase 2 through 4 clinical trials in adults, as early-phase trials tend to have pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic endpoints as primary outcomes. Interventions for acute exacerbations were excluded. RESULTS: We identified 117 studies and subsequently identified 111 outcomes. The most prevalent outcomes were asthma control and symptom severity, FEV1, and change in ACQ scale. Twenty patient-reported outcomes instruments were identified and de-facto standard asthma outcomes and PROs were under-reported in examined literature. Existing quality of life tools did not capture the day-to-day experience or the unique treatment burden from oral corticosteroids for patient with severe asthma. Compounding the absence of trials directly comparing therapies, the significant variation we identified in outcome definitions and measurement create hurdles to effectively compare traditional and biologic therapies. CONCLUSION: With the growing number of clinical trials evaluating advanced therapies such as biologics, a wide range of primary and secondary outcomes are evaluated. A core outcome set created by relevant stakeholders is needed to collectively evaluate pooled outcomes in order to allow more meaningful comparisons of asthma therapies and to incorporate the patient experience.

Intentional avermectin pesticide ingestion: a retrospective multicenter study.

CONTEXT: Avermectin pesticides are widely used in agriculture, and are thought to have low toxicity in humans. However, information on their toxicity after accidental or deliberate ingestion is limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical manifestations of avermectin pesticide ingestion and identify factors associated with severe outcomes (death, intubation, or sustained hypotension requiring inotrope therapy). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included patients who visited the emergency departments of six teaching hospitals due to acute avermectin pesticide ingestion between January 2012 and May 2020. Patients who reported ingestion of any other pesticides, drugs, or substances were excluded. RESULTS: In total, 64 patients (median age, 72 years) were included: 60 had ingested emamectin pesticides, and 4 had ingested abamectin. Almost all (98%) were cases of self-harm. The most common presentation was drowsiness (47%), with a median Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 14, followed by shortness of breath (SOB)/dyspnea (33%) and nausea/vomiting (22%). Concurrent methanol exposure (via the solvent) was confirmed or suspected in five patients. Seventeen patients (27%) were intubated. Three patients who developed respiratory failure were not intubated because of a "do-not-resuscitate" (DNR) order. Four patients developed sustained hypotension requiring inotrope therapy. Fifty patients (78%) were admitted, of whom 27 (42%) required intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Four patients died, three of whom had a DNR order. Based on our definition, 20 patients (31%) had severe outcomes. A multivariate logistic regression model showed that a GCS score < 13 (OR 68.1, 95% CI 3.8-999) and the presence of SOB/dyspnea (OR 50.2, 95% CI 3.0-849.9) were associated with severe outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients who intentionally ingested avermectin pesticides required inpatient treatment. Forty-two percent needed ICU care and 31% had severe outcomes. A GCS score < 13 and SOB/dyspnea were independently associated with severe outcomes.

Polydrug Use During Pregnancy and Preterm Birth in a Low-Income, Multiethnic Birth Cohort, Boston, 1998-2018.

OBJECTIVE: The opioid epidemic in the United States increasingly affects women of reproductive age and has resulted in a rise in concurrent polydrug use. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of this polydrug use on preterm birth in a multiethnic birth cohort. METHODS: We analyzed data from 8261 mothers enrolled in the Boston Birth Cohort from 1998 to 2018 in Boston, Massachusetts. We grouped substances used during pregnancy based on their primary effects (stimulant or depressant) and assessed independent and combined associations with smoking on preterm birth. RESULTS: Of 8261 mothers, 131 used stimulant drugs and 193 used depressant drugs during pregnancy. The preterm birth rate was 27.5% (2271 of 8261) in the sample. Mothers who smoked had 35% increased odds of preterm birth across adjusted models. Mothers who used stimulant drugs without smoking were not at increased risk of preterm delivery compared with mothers who used neither (odds ratio [OR] = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-1.98), whereas mothers who used depressant drugs without smoking had more than twice the odds of having preterm delivery (OR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.19-4.44), and infants were at risk of a 1-week reduction in gestational age (OR = -1.05; 95% CI, -2.07 to -0.03). Concurrently smoking and using depressant drugs was associated with increased odds of preterm birth (OR = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.28-2.61), as was concurrently smoking and using stimulant drugs (OR = 1.73; 95% CI, 1.14-2.59). CONCLUSIONS: Using stimulant drugs and depressant drugs during pregnancy is a risk factor for preterm birth. The individual and combined effects of using these drugs with smoking must be considered together to reduce the risk of preterm birth in the United States.

Prenatal Risk Factors and Perinatal and Postnatal Outcomes Associated With Maternal Opioid Exposure in an Urban, Low-Income, Multiethnic US Population.

Importance: The opioid epidemic increasingly affects pregnant women and developing fetuses, resulting in high rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome. However, longitudinal studies that prospectively observe newborns with neonatal abstinence syndrome or with maternal opioid use and examine their long-term physical and neurodevelopmental outcomes are lacking. Objective: To examine prenatal risk factors associated with maternal opioid use during pregnancy and the short-term and long-term health consequences on their children. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed data from the Boston Birth Cohort, an urban, low-income, multiethnic cohort that enrolled mother-newborn pairs at birth at Boston Medical Center (Boston, Massachusetts) starting in 1998, and a subset of children were prospectively observed at Boston Medical Center pediatric primary care and subspecialty clinics from birth to age 21 years. Data analysis began in June 2018 and was completed in May 2019. Exposures: In utero opioid exposure was defined as maternal self-reported opioid use and/or clinical diagnosis of neonatal abstinence syndrome. Main Outcomes and Measures: Pregnancy outcomes, postnatal child physical health, and major neurodevelopmental disabilities, documented in maternal and child medical records. Results: This study included 8509 Boston Birth Cohort mother-newborn pairs for prenatal and perinatal analyses. Of those, 3153 children continued to receive pediatric care at Boston Medical Center and were included in assessing postnatal outcomes. Overall, 454 of the 8509 children (5.3%) in the Boston Birth Cohort had in utero opioid exposure. At birth, opioid exposure was associated with higher risks of fetal growth restriction (odds ratio [OR], 1.87; 95% CI, 1.41-2.47) and preterm birth (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.19-1.86). Opioid exposure was associated with increased risks of lack of expected physiological development (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.17-2.79) and conduct disorder/emotional disturbance (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.20-3.77) among preschool-aged children. In school-aged children, opioid exposure was associated with a higher risk of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.42-4.57). Conclusions and Relevance: In this sample of urban, high-risk, low-income mother-child pairs, in utero opioid exposure was significantly associated with adverse short-term and long-term outcomes across developmental stages, including higher rates of physical and neurodevelopmental disorders in affected children. Efforts to prevent the opioid epidemic and mitigate its health consequences would benefit from more intergenerational research.