Development and validation of the Child Hemophilia Treatment Experience Measure: A new observer-reported outcome measure.

INTRODUCTION: The Child Hemophilia Treatment Experience Measure (Child Hemo-TEM) was developed to capture the treatment burden experience of children with haemophilia (CwH). AIM: Describe the development of this novel haemophilia-specific measure. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with clinical experts, CwH and CwH's caregivers. Interviews were analysed according to adapted grounded theory principles. Based on the analysis, a preliminary measure was developed and debriefed. Psychometric analyses were performed according to an a priori analysis plan using data collected in a cross-sectional web survey and a final measure was generated. RESULTS: Interviews with four clinical experts, 25 CwH ages 8 to <12 years, and 25 caregivers of CwH <12 years were conducted. Concepts endorsed by ≥10% of CwH and caregivers were: adherence, ease of use, emotional impacts, physical impacts, treatment concerns, and interference with daily life. Cognitive debriefing assessments were conducted to ensure participant understanding and item relevance. Caregivers found the measure to be understandable, comprehensive, and relevant. However, several issues with CwH completing the measure were identified and it was decided to only develop an observer-reported outcome version. Data for psychometric validation was collected in a web survey (N = 187). Item reduction dropped 12 items. Factor analysis generated a single, 7-item, internally consistent (α = .855) factor, which consisted of items covering all relevant a priori concepts. The majority of a priori convergent and all known groups validity hypotheses were confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings provide evidence that the Child Hemo-TEM is a brief, well-designed, and valid and reliable measure of haemophilia treatment burden.

Patient-reported disease impact of systemic lupus erythematosus with active joint symptoms: Results from the systemic lupus erythematosus-update survey.

BACKGROUND: Many people with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) experience joint pain, swelling, and stiffness. These joint symptoms are associated with problems in physical functioning and work disability. We used survey data from adults with SLE to explore the burden and impact of joint symptoms. METHODS: SLE-UPDATE was a 2019 cross-sectional US survey of adults with SLE. We compared respondents with "currently active" joint symptoms' and those "without currently active" joint symptoms. The active joint cohort comprised survey respondents who self-reported current "stiffness in joints" or "pain/swelling in joints" and who had moderate to severe joint pain (Worst Joint Pain Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] score ≥ 4). Respondents not fulfilling these criteria were included in the non-active joint cohort. Outcomes included frequency and severity of pain, patient-reported outcomes (LupusPRO™ and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Lupus [WPAI-Lupus]), satisfaction with current treatments, and importance of different treatment goals. RESULTS: More respondents in the active joint cohort (N = 285) than in the non-active joint cohort (N = 215) reported pain most or all the time over the preceding 7 days (77.5% vs. 32.1%, p < .0001), fibromyalgia (45% vs. 12%, p < .0001), and higher (worse) mean scores on the Worst Pain NRS (6.5 vs. 4.8, p < .0001) and Worst Joint Pain NRS (6.7 vs. 4.5, p < .0001). Mean Lupus PRO health-related quality of life (HRQoL) total score was lower (worse) in the active joint cohort (48.9 vs. 64.1, p < .0001). WPAI-Lupus scores indicated greater work productivity losses and activity impairment in the active joint cohort. More respondents in the active joint cohort than in the non-active joint cohort were neutral or not satisfied with current treatments and rated reducing pain as a "very important" treatment goal (26.7% vs. 18.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Respondents with SLE and active joint manifestations in addition to having more pain report lower HRQoL and were less satisfied with their current treatments. Comorbid fibromyalgia may play a role in joint symptoms in patient with SLE joint manifestations. There is an unmet need for new therapeutic options to reduce joint symptom burden among patients with SLE.

The psychometric properties of the King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire and thresholds for meaningful treatment response in patients with progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of fully validated patient-reported outcome measures for progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease (ILD). We aimed to validate the King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease (K-BILD) questionnaire for measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in these patients. We also aimed to estimate the meaningful change threshold for interpreting stabilisation of HRQoL as a clinical end-point in progressive fibrosing ILD, where the current goal of treatment is disease stability and slowing progression. METHODS: This analysis evaluated data from 663 patients with progressive fibrosing ILD other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis from the INBUILD trial. Validation of the measurement properties was assessed for internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity, known-groups validity and responsiveness. We calculated meaningful change thresholds for treatment response using anchor-based (within-patient) and distribution-based methods. RESULTS: K-BILD had strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α was 0.94 for total score, 0.88 for breathlessness and activities, 0.91 for psychological, and 0.79 for chest symptoms). The test-retest reliability intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.74 for K-BILD total score. K-BILD demonstrated weak correlations with forced vital capacity (FVC) percent predicted. Known-groups validity showed significant differences in K-BILD scores for patient groups with different disease severity based on use of supplemental oxygen or baseline FVC % pred (≤70% or >70%). We estimated a meaningful change threshold of ≥ -2 units for K-BILD total score for defining patients who remain stable/improved versus those with progressive deterioration. CONCLUSIONS: Our results validate K-BILD as a tool for assessing HRQoL in patients with progressive fibrosing ILD and set a meaningful change threshold of ≥ -2 units for K-BILD total score.

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.

Conversations and Reactions Around Severe Hypoglycemia (CRASH) Study: Results From People With Diabetes and Caregivers in the United States.

A survey was conducted in eight countries to examine conversations around, and experiences and treatments during, severe hypoglycemia among people with diabetes and caregivers of people with diabetes. This article reports a subgroup analysis from the United States involving 219 people with diabetes and 210 caregivers. Most respondents (79.7%) did not use professional health care services during their most recent severe hypoglycemic event, and 40.3% did not report the event to their health care providers at a subsequent follow-up visit. Hypoglycemic events left respondents feeling scared (70.9%), unprepared (42.7%), and helpless (46.9%). These clinically important psychosocial impacts on people with diabetes and caregivers underscore the need for conversations about hypoglycemia prevention and management.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Symptom Assessment Questionnaire: Psychometric Performance and Regulatory Qualification of a Novel Patient-Reported Symptom Measure.

BACKGROUND: The Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (NSCLC-SAQ) was developed to incorporate the patient's perspective into evaluation of clinical benefit in advanced non-small cell lung cancer trials and meet regulatory expectations for doing so. Qualitative evidence supported 7 items covering 5 symptom concepts. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated measurement properties of the NSCLC-SAQ's items, overall scale, and total score. METHODS: In this observational cross-sectional study, a purposive sample of patients with clinician-diagnosed advanced non-small cell lung cancer, initiating or undergoing treatment, provided sociodemographic information and completed the NSCLC-SAQ, National Comprehensive Cancer Network/Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Lung Symptom Index (FLSI-17), and a Patient Global Impression of Severity item. Rasch analyses, factor analyses, and assessments of construct validity and reliability were completed. RESULTS: The 152 participants had a mean age of 64 years, 57% were women, and 87% where White. The majority were Stage IV (83%), 51% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 (32% performance status 0 and 17% performance status 2), and 33% were treatment naïve. Rasch analyses showed ordered thresholds for response options. Factor analyses demonstrated that items could be combined for a total score. Internal consistency (Cronbach  α = 0.78) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.87) were quite satisfactory. NSCLC-SAQ total score correlation was 0.83 with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network/Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Lung Symptom Index-17. The NSCLC-SAQ was able to differentiate between symptom severity levels and performance status (both P values < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The NSCLC-SAQ generated highly reliable scores with substantial evidence of construct validity. The Food and Drug Administration's qualification supports the NSCLC-SAQ as a measure of symptoms in drug development. Further evaluation is needed on its longitudinal measurement properties and interepretation of meaningful within-patient score change. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2021; 82:XXX-XXX).

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.

Initial psychometric validation of the questionnaire on pain caused by spasticity (QPS).

BACKGROUND: The Questionnaire on Pain caused by Spasticity (QPS) is a modular patient- and observer-reported outcome measure of spasticity-related pain (SRP) in children with cerebral palsy (CP). Originally developed for an English-speaking population, we conducted a psychometric validation of a recently developed Chinese language version of the QPS. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study involving 137 children/adolescents with CP and upper and/or lower limb spasticity and their parents at three sites in China. Six QPS modules were used, three each for upper and lower limb SRP assessment: a patient self-report module; an interviewer-administered module used by site staff based on the cognitive, communicative, and motor abilities of a patient; and a parent/caregiver module administered for all children as an observer-reported outcome to complement the patient-reported outcome. If no assessment by the patient was possible because of age or cognitive impairments, only the parent/caregiver module was completed. Two visits with a 3-week interval provided data to evaluate and establish administrative ease of use, scoring of the QPS (factor analyses, Rasch analyses), reliability (Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficient), validity (correlations with quality of life [PedsQL™], motor impairment [Gross Motor Function Classification System, Gross Motor Function Measure-66, Manual Ability Classification System], and spasticity [Ashworth Scale, Modified Tardieu Scale]). RESULTS: For most children, clinic staff reported no difficulties associated with general QPS use or deciding which module to use. Children (and parents) who reported more demanding activities also reported higher levels of associated SRP (or observed SRP behavior). Activity-related SRP items were combined for a total QPS score. Cronbach's α was low for child self-report, but was acceptable for interviewer-administered and parent reports on SRP. Test-retest reliability was high for all modules. Moderate-strong associations were frequently seen between QPS and quality of life, and were particularly strong in the child self-report group. Relatively weak associations were observed between QPS and motor impairment and spasticity. CONCLUSIONS: This first study was successful in providing initial evidence for the psychometric properties. Clinic staff were able to administer the QPS modules easily, and both children and parents were able to complete the designated QPS appropriately.

Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments to Assess Chronic Low Back Pain.

Objective: To identify patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments that assess chronic low back pain (cLBP) symptoms (specifically pain qualities) and/or impacts for potential use in cLBP clinical trials to demonstrate treatment benefit and support labeling claims. Design: Literature review of existing PRO measures. Methods: Publications detailing existing PRO measures for cLBP were identified, reviewed, and summarized. As recommended by the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) PRO development guidance, standard measurement characteristics were reviewed, including development history, psychometric properties (validity and reliability), ability to detect change, and interpretation of observed changes. Results: Thirteen instruments were selected and reviewed: Low Back Pain Bothersomeness Scale, Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory, PainDETECT, Pain Quality Assessment Scale Revised, Revised Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, Low Back Pain Impact Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index, Pain Disability Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, Brief Pain Inventory and Brief Pain Inventory Short Form, Musculoskeletal Outcomes Data Evaluation and Management System Spine Module, Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire, and the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory Interference Scale. The instruments varied in the aspects of pain and/or impacts that they assessed, and none of the instruments fulfilled all criteria for use in clinical trials to support labeling claims based on recommendations outlined in the FDA PRO guidance. Conclusions: There is an unmet need for a validated PRO instrument to evaluate cLBP-related symptoms and impacts for use in clinical trials.

Assessing the impact of non-severe hypoglycemic events and treatment in adults: development of the Treatment-Related Impact Measure-Non-severe Hypoglycemic Events (TRIM-HYPO).

PURPOSE: Non-severe hypoglycemic events (NSHEs) are commonly experienced by diabetes patients, particularly among insulin users, and can have serious impacts on daily functioning, emotional well-being, sleep, work productivity, and treatment adherence. Currently, no PRO measures are available to assess the impacts of non-severe hypoglycemia. To address this gap, the Treatment-Related Impact Measure-Non-severe Hypoglycemic Events (TRIM-HYPO) was developed. This paper describes the TRIM-HYPO development and validation. METHODS: The creation of the TRIM-HYPO followed FDA's guideline for PRO development. Concept elicitation data were gathered from literature review, clinical expert interviews, and focus groups of patients with Type 1 or 2 diabetes in four countries. Based on the qualitative analysis, draft items were generated and cognitively debriefed. Psychometric validation included factor analysis, item response theory analysis, and assessment of psychometric characteristics for the TRIM-HYPO. RESULTS: Eight clinical experts and 167 patients participated in concept elicitation. The validation study included 407 patients. Thirteen of the 46 items from the preliminary measure were dropped due to ceiling/floor effects and high correlations between conceptually similar items. Factor analysis confirmed five domains in the TRIM-HYPO: daily function, emotional well-being, diabetes management, sleep disruption, and work productivity. All scores were internally consistent (0.86-0.95) and reproducible with a test-retest range of 0.75-0.98. All but one a priori hypothesized associations for validity were confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings demonstrate that the final, 33-item TRIM-HYPO is reliable and valid and may be useful for assessing impacts related to NSHEs in research and clinical practice.

Development and validation of the Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain Impact (DPNPI) measure, a patient-reported outcome measure.

PURPOSE: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) occurs in 26-47 % of diabetes patients and may have negative impacts on physical functioning, sleep, well-being, and quality of life. The Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathic Pain Impact measure (DPNPI) was developed to measure disease impacts and treatment effects. Presented are the DPNPI conceptual development and validation findings. METHODS: The DPNPI was developed following the FDA Guidance for Industry on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Concept elicitation (CE) included literature review, clinical expert interviews, and patient interviews/focus groups. Qualitative data were analyzed following grounded theory principles, and draft items were cognitively debriefed. The measure underwent psychometric validation, and an a priori statistical analysis plan assessed the measurement model, reliability, and validity. Simultaneous analyses of item functioning were conducted using Rasch measurement theory (RMT). All tests were performed for the total score and each domain. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients and three clinical experts participated in CE which resulted in a 27-item validation ready measure. In the validation study (N = 124), nine draft items were dropped due to high missing data and/or high correlations between items. Factor analysis revealed three domains: physical functioning/mobility, sleep, and daily activities. RMT confirmed adequate item fit and placement within domains. Internal consistency ranged from 0.91 to 0.96 and test-retest from 0.84 to 0.91. All prespecified hypotheses for convergent and discriminant validity were met. CONCLUSIONS: CE and psychometric results provide evidence that the final, 18-item DPNPI is a reliable and valid PRO measure of disease impacts and treatment for DPNP. Further validation work should include responsiveness assessment.

Equivalence and measurement properties of an electronic version of the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the equivalence of electronic and paper versions of the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory and to examine measurement properties of the electronic version. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, crossover, non-interventional study in adult subjects (age ≥18 years) with plaque psoriasis conducted over a period of 15 days, subjects were randomized to two groups, completing either the paper or electronic Psoriasis Symptom Inventory daily for 7 consecutive days followed by the alternate version. Equivalence was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between both administration modes. Differences in scores were also tested using paired Student's t test. Measurement properties included internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity between the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory and (1) disease-specific (Dermatology Life Quality Index) and (2) general health (SF-36v2) status. RESULTS: Eighty subjects [74 % (59/80) moderate-to-severe psoriasis; 26 % (21/80) mild psoriasis receiving systemic treatment] were enrolled from 8 sites in the USA. The two modes were highly concordant for both total (ICC = 0.97) and individual item scores (ICC range = 0.93-0.97). Response bias testing showed no differences based on completion order with all ICC values >0.91. All mean score differences, except for one item ("flaking"), were non-significant (P > 0.05). Minimum values for reliability (>0.70) and validity (convergent, r ≥ 0.40) were exceeded for the electronic Psoriasis Symptom Inventory. CONCLUSIONS: Equivalence between paper and electronic versions of the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory and strong measurement properties of the electronic mode indicated a successful migration from paper to electronic format of the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory.

Use of LCP-Tacrolimus (LCPT) in Kidney Transplantation: A Delphi Consensus Survey of Expert Clinicians.

BACKGROUND LCPT (Envarsus XR®) is a common once-daily, extended-release oral tacrolimus formulation used in kidney transplantation. However, there are minimal evidence-based recommendations regarding optimal dosing and treatment in the de novo and conversion settings. MATERIAL AND METHODS Using Delphi methodology, 12 kidney transplantation experts with LCPT experience reviewed available data to determine potential consensus topics. Key statements regarding LCPT use were generated and disseminated to the panel in an online Delphi survey. Statements were either accepted, revised, or rejected based on the level of consensus, perceived strength of evidence, and alignment with clinical practice. Consensus was defined a priori as ≥75% agreement. RESULTS Twenty-three statements were generated: 14 focused on de novo LCPT use and 9 on general administration or LCPT conversion use. After 2 rounds, consensus was achieved for 11/14 of the former and 7/9 of the latter statements. In a de novo setting, LCPT was recognized as a first-line option based on its safety and efficacy compared to immediate-release tacrolimus. In particular, African Americans and rapid metabolizer populations were identified as preferred for first-line LCPT therapy. In a conversion setting, full consensus was achieved for converting to LCPT to address neurological adverse effects related to immediate-release tacrolimus and for the time required (approximately 7 days) for steady-state LCPT trough levels to be reached. CONCLUSIONS When randomized clinical trials do not replicate current utilization patterns, the Delphi process can successfully generate consensus statements by expert clinicians to inform clinical decision-making for the use of LCPT in kidney transplant recipients.

Understanding the economic burden of nonsevere nocturnal hypoglycemic events: impact on work productivity, disease management, and resource utilization.

OBJECTIVE: Nonsevere hypoglycemic events are common and may occur in one-third of persons with diabetes as often as several times a week. This study's objective was to examine the economic burden of nonsevere nocturnal hypoglycemic events (NSNHEs). METHODS: A 20-minute Web-based survey, with items derived from the literature, expert input, and patient interviews, assessing the impact of NSNHEs was administered in nine countries to 18 years and older patients with self-reported diabetes having an NSNHE in the past month. RESULTS: A total of 20,212 persons were screened, with 2,108 respondents meeting criteria and included in the analysis sample. The cost of lost work productivity per NSNHE was estimated to be between $10.21 (Germany) and $28.13 (the United Kingdom), representing 3.3 to 7.5 hours of lost work time per event. A reduction in work productivity (presenteeism) was also reported. Compared with respondents' usual blood sugar monitoring practice, on average, 3.6 ± 6.6 extra tests were conducted in the week following the event at a cost of approximately $87.1 per year. Additional costs were also incurred for doctor visits as well as medical care required because of falls or injuries incurred during the NSNHE for an annual cost of $2,111.3 per person per year. When taking into consideration the multiple impacts of NSNHEs for the total sample and the frequency that these events occur, the resulting total annual economic burden was $288,000 or $127 per person per event. CONCLUSIONS: NSNHEs have serious consequences for patients. Greater attention to treatments that reduce NSNHEs can have a major impact on reducing the economic burden of diabetes.

Understanding treatment burden in hemophilia: development and validation of the Hemophilia Treatment Experience Measure (Hemo-TEM).

BACKGROUND: To capture the broad range of treatment burden issues experienced by adolescent and adult people with hemophilia (PWH), the Hemophilia Treatment Experience Measure (Hemo-TEM) was developed. We describe the development of this new hemophilia-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure including concept elicitation, cognitive debriefing, and psychometric validation. RESULTS: Concept elicitation interviews were conducted with 5 clinical experts and 30 adult PWH in the United States (US). The qualitative analysis of these interviews and a review of the literature informed the PRO measure development. The project team reviewed concept endorsement rates and generated a 27-item preliminary version of the Hemo-TEM. Cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted to ensure participant understanding and item relevance in samples of (adolescent (n = 20) and adult (n = 14)) PWH in the US. The refined, validation-ready version of the Hemo-TEM included 30 items. Lastly, data from 3 clinical trials comprised the 4 analysis sets used for the psychometric validation with a sample size of N = 88. Item reduction dropped 4 items resulting in a final 26-item measure. Factor analysis generated 5 domains in the Hemo-TEM [injection difficulties (3 items), physical impact (6 items), treatment bother (7 items), interference with daily life (4 items), and emotional impact (6 items)] and a total score. All scores were reliable [internally consistent (0.84-0.88)]. For convergent validity, with the exception of one domain, all hypothesized associations were met. Preliminary sensitivity to change effect sizes were between - 0.30 and - 0.70. Meaningful change thresholds ranged from 6 points (physical impact and emotional impact) to 10 points (treatment bother) with 8 points for the Hemo-TEM total score. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from the concept elicitation, cognitive debriefing, and psychometric validation phases provide evidence that the Hemo-TEM is a well-designed, valid, and reliable measure of the burden of hemophilia treatment, including treatment impact on adolescent and adult PWH.

Psychometric Validation of the Growth Hormone Deficiency-Child Treatment Burden Measure (GHD-CTB) and the Growth Hormone Deficiency-Parent Treatment Burden Measure (GHD-PTB).

PURPOSE: The aim was to evaluate the measurement properties of the Growth Hormone Deficiency-Child Treatment Burden Measure-Child (GHD-CTB-Child), a patient-reported outcome (PRO) for children aged 9 to < 13 years; the Growth Hormone Deficiency-Child Treatment Burden Measure-Observer (GHD-CTB-Observer), an observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) version completed by parents/guardians of children with growth hormone deficiency (GHD) aged 4 to < 9 years; and the Growth Hormone Deficiency-Parent Treatment Burden Measure (GHD-PTB), a PRO that assesses the treatment burden of parents/guardians living with children with GHD aged 4 to < 13 years. METHODS: A non-interventional, multi-center, clinic-based study across 30 private practice and large institutional sites in the United States and the United Kingdom was conducted. The sample consisted of 145 pre-pubertal children aged 9 to < 13 years at enrollment with a physician confirmed GHD diagnosis as well as 98 parents/guardians of pre-pubertal younger children aged 4 to < 9 years at enrollment with a physician confirmed GHD diagnosis. The child sample consisted of 59 treatment-naïve children (no prior exposure to growth hormone [GH] therapy; were starting GH treatment at study start per standard of care) and 184 children already maintained on treatment for at least 6 months. At baseline, all study participants completed a paper validation battery including all measures needed to conduct the validation analyses. Follow-up assessments with children in the maintenance group and their caregiver/parent were conducted approximately 2 weeks post-baseline to evaluate test-retest reproducibility. To evaluate sensitivity to change and meaningful change thresholds, treatment-naïve participants in both child and parent/guardian populations were assessed within 1 week of report of minimal improvement between week 3 and week 11 and at week 12. Psychometric analyses were implemented following an a priori statistical analysis plan. RESULTS: Factor analyses confirmed the a priori conceptual domains and Overall score for each measure (GHD-CTB-Child and GHD-CTB-Observer domains: Physical, Emotional Well-being, and Interference; GHD-PTB domains: Emotional Well-being and Interference). Internal consistency was acceptable for all measures (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70). Test-retest reliability was acceptable for the Physical, Emotional, and Overall domains of the GHD-CTB versions, and the Emotional and Overall domains of the GHD-PTB (intraclass correlation coefficient above 0.70). All but one of the convergent validity hypotheses for the GHD-CTB versions and all hypotheses for the GHD-PTB were proven (r > 0.40). Known-groups validity hypotheses were significant for length of time to administer the injections in the GHD-CTB versions (p < 0.001 for Physical, Emotional, and Overall, and p < 0.01 for Interference) and whether parents/guardians versus child gave the injections more often for the Emotional domain of the GHD-PTB (p < 0.05). Associated effect sizes ranged from -0.27 to -0.57 for GHD-CTB versions and from -0.74 to -0.69 for the GHD-PTB, indicating that the measures are sensitive to change. Anchor-based patient and parent/guardian ratings of severity suggest preliminary meaningful change thresholds (GHD-CTB: 6 points for Physical score, 9 for Emotional, and 6 for Interference; GHD-PTB: 10 points for Emotional and 6 for Interference scores). CONCLUSIONS: The psychometric properties of the GHD-CTB-Child, GHD-CTB-Observer, and GHD-PTB support the validity of their use as PRO and ObsRO measures to capture the experiences associated with treatment burden for children with GHD and their parents/guardians in both clinical and research settings. The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT02580032 was first posted October 20, 2015.

The EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index: comparative psychometric properties to its parent WHOQOL-BREF.

OBJECTIVES: To test the psychometric properties of the EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index, a shortened version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument-Abbreviated Version (WHOQOL-BREF). METHODS: The sample consisted of 2359 subjects identified from primary care settings, with 1193 having a confirmed diagnosis of depression. Data came from six countries (Australia, Brazil, Israel, Russia, Spain, and the United States) involved in a large international study, the Longitudinal Investigation of Depression Outcomes. The structure of the EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index follows that of the WHOQOL-BREF assessment. Internal consistency was measured by using Cronbach's alpha. Convergent validity was assessed by using correlations with different measures for mental health (Symptom Checklist 90), physical health (self-evaluation), and quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF and short form 36 health survey). Discriminant group validity was assessed between diagnosed depressed and nondepressed patients. Differential item functioning and unidimensionality were analyzed by using Rasch analysis. Factor structure was assessed with structural equation modeling analyses. RESULTS: Internal consistency was acceptable (ranged between 0.72 and 0.81 across countries), and the index discriminated well between depression (t = 6.31-20.33; P < 0.001) across all countries. Correlations between the EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index and different measures--Symptom Checklist 90 (r = -0.42), physical health (r = -0.42), WHOQOL-BREF domains (r = 0.61-0.77), and short form 36 health survey (r = 0.58)--were all significant (P < 0.001). The index is unidimensional with desired item fit statistics. Two items ("daily living activities" and "enough money to meet your needs") had residuals exceeding 4. Differential item functioning was observed with general quality of life, general health, relationships, and home items for age. A common one-factor structure with acceptable fit was identified in three out of six countries (comparative fit index = 0.85, root mean square error of approximation = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: The EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index showed acceptable cross-cultural performance and a satisfactory discriminant validity and would be a useful measure to include in studies to assess treatment effectiveness.

Development and validation of the self-management profile for type 2 diabetes (SMP-T2D).

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the measurement properties of a newly developed instrument - the Self-Management Profile for Type 2 Diabetes (SMP-T2D). METHODS: The 18-item SMP-T2D assesses 12 constructs: level and perceived ease of performance in five self-care domains (blood glucose monitoring, medication-taking, healthy eating, being physically active, and coping), and two global constructs (ease of weight management, confidence with ability to manage diabetes). Validation analyses were based on two studies involving 240 patients with T2D, Study 1 (Clinicaltrials.gov #NCT00637273) with SMP-T2D administration supplemented by SMP-T2D retest one week later, and Study 2 (Clinical trials.gov #NCT00877890) with SMP-T2D administration supplemented by 24-week SMP-T2D follow-up after medication change. Validation included clinical indicators and measures of patient reported quality of life, psychological well-being and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: All multi-item SMP-T2D measures showed acceptable internal consistency (alphas = 0.71 to 0.87); ten measures had test-retest reliability >0.75. Correlations among SMP-T2D measures and between SMP-T2D measures and validation measures, which were as hypothesized, provided evidence of convergent and discriminant validity. Scores for six SMP-T2D measures improved significantly during Study 2. Multiple regression analysis showed independent associations between change in SMP-T2D measures and change in trial outcomes from baseline to end-of-study. CONCLUSIONS: Two studies provide preliminary evidence regarding the reliability, validity and responsiveness of the SMP-T2D. Further research on the utility of the instrument is needed.

Responsiveness and meaningful change thresholds of the Living with Pulmonary Fibrosis (L-PF) questionnaire Dyspnoea and Cough scores in patients with progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases.

BACKGROUND: The Living with Pulmonary Fibrosis (L-PF) questionnaire assesses symptoms and quality of life in patients with fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). Its Dyspnoea and Cough domains, whose items' responses are based on a 24-hour recall, have scores ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity. We evaluated the ability of these domain scores to detect change and estimated their meaningful change thresholds in patients with progressive fibrosing ILDs. METHODS: The INBUILD trial enrolled subjects with progressive fibrosing ILDs other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. The L-PF questionnaire was completed at baseline and week 52. The responsiveness of the Dyspnoea and Cough scores was evaluated by comparing changes in these scores with 52-week changes in three anchors: forced vital capacity % predicted and two self-reported items, one for global physical health and one for global quality of life. We used a triangulation approach including anchor-based and distribution-based methods to estimate meaningful change thresholds. RESULTS: The analyses included 542 subjects with an L-PF Dyspnoea score at baseline and week 52, and 538 subjects with an L-PF Cough score at baseline and week 52. The L-PF Dyspnoea and Cough scores were responsive to change over 52 weeks. Triangulation of anchor-based and distribution-based estimates resulted in meaningful change thresholds of 6 to 7 points for the L-PF Dyspnoea score and 4 to 5 points for the L-PF Cough score to differentiate subjects who were stable or improved from those who deteriorated. CONCLUSION: These analyses support the responsiveness, one aspect of validity, of the L-PF Dyspnoea and Cough domains scores as measures of symptom severity in patients with progressive fibrosing ILDs. Estimates for meaningful change thresholds in these domain scores may be of value in interpreting the effects of interventions in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02999178.

Interpreting Evaluating Respiratory SymptomsTM in COPD Diary Scores in Clinical Trials: Terminology, Methods, and Recommendations.

Accurately interpreting scores on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures is essential to understanding and communicating treatment benefit. Over the years, terminology and methods for developing recommendations for PRO score interpretation in clinical trials have evolved, leading to some confusion in the field. The phrase "minimal clinically important difference (MCID)" has been simplified to "minimal important difference (MID)" and use of responder thresholds to interpret statistically significant treatment effects has increased. Anchor-based derivation methods continue to be the standard, with specific variations preferred by regulatory authorities for drug development programs. In the midst of these changes, the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms™ in COPD (E-RS:COPD) was developed and qualified for use as an endpoint in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) drug development programs. This paper summarizes the evolution of terminology and method preferences for the development of recommendations for interpreting scores from PRO measures used in clinical trials, and how these changes are reflected in the E-RS:COPD recommendations. The intent is to add clarity to discussions around PRO endpoints and facilitate use of the E-RS:COPD as a key efficacy endpoint in clinical trials of COPD.