Reducing the physical, social, and emotional impact of episodic migraine: Results from erenumab STRIVE and ARISE phase III randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine changes in the functional impact of migraine following treatment with erenumab, as measured by the Migraine Functional Impact Questionnaire (MFIQ). BACKGROUND: The MFIQ, a novel patient-reported outcome (PRO) measuring the impact of migraine on four domains (physical function, social function, and emotional function [PF, SF, and EF]; usual activities [UAs]) and a single item assessing overall impact on UA, was included in phase III trials evaluating erenumab 70 and 140 mg monthly for migraine prevention among people with episodic migraine (EM). METHODS: In the ARISE study, 577 patients with EM were randomized to erenumab 70 mg or placebo. In the STRIVE study, 955 patients with EM were randomized to erenumab, 70 mg or 140 mg or placebo. Pairwise comparisons of least-squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in MFIQ scores (with associated 95% confidence interval [CI]) were assessed for each active treatment versus placebo. RESULTS: In ARISE, greater reductions from baseline to month 3 were observed for 70 mg versus placebo for PF (LSM [95% CI]: -3.2 [-6.4 to -0.1]; p = 0.046) and EF (-4.0 [-7.3 to -0.7]; p = 0.019) domain scores. In STRIVE, between-group differences also reflected reductions from baseline to the average of months 4-6 that favored erenumab on all four MFIQ domain scores. Reductions in impact for 70 mg compared to placebo were -4.3 (95% CI: -6.8 to -1.7; p < 0.001) for PF, -4.0 (-6.3 to -1.7; p < 0.001) for UA, -3.7 (-6.1 to -1.2; p = 0.003) for SF, and -5.3 (-7.9 to -2.6; p < 0.001) for EF domain scores. Improvements were also observed for 140 mg versus placebo with between-group differences of -5.7 (95% CI: -8.2 to -3.2; p < 0.001) in PF, -5.1 (-7.5 to -2.8; p < 0.001) in UA, -5.0 (-7.4 to -2.6; p < 0.001) in SF, and -7.2 (-9.9 to -4.5; p < 0.001) in EF domain scores. There were also greater improvements in the overall impact on UA score for 70 mg (LSM [95% CI]: -4.3 [-7.0 to -1.7]; p = 0.001) and 140 mg (-5.3 [-8.5 to -3.2]; p < 0.001) versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The MFIQ measures the frequency of impacts and level of difficulty on multiple functional domains that provide a more complete picture of the effects of migraine. MFIQ scores showed that in comparison with placebo, patients treated with erenumab had greater reductions in the functional impact of migraine, providing insight into treatment benefits that extend beyond improvements in clinical status and health-related quality of life previously reported based on clinical end points and other PROs.

The Genetic Education for Men (GEM) Trial: Development of Web-Based Education for Untested Men in BRCA1/2-Positive Families.

Cascade testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer is an important public health priority. Increasing attention has been paid to the relevance of testing for men within BRCA1/2-positive families given that such testing may provide important information about their cancer risks, particularly for prostate cancer, and risks to their offspring. However, men are much less likely to seek genetic counseling and testing than their at-risk female relatives. To facilitate access to pre-test information and testing, we developed a web-based intervention (WI) for men that we are evaluating in a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT). This paper describes three phases of research in the development of the WI: (1) formative (qualitative) research among men from BRCA1/2 families to assess needs and preferences for education; (2) a detailed description of the organization, format, and content of the WI; and (3) usability testing. We discuss the aims and hypotheses of the pilot RCT in which the WI is being compared with an enhanced usual care condition among at-risk men. We expect that the WI described here will foster informed decisions and lead to increased use of BRCA1/2 counseling and testing, potentially yielding improved cancer control outcomes for this understudied group, and for their at-risk relatives.

Psychometric evaluation of the patient-reported experience of cognitive impairment in schizophrenia (PRECIS) scale.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia (CIAS) represents a distinct, persistent, and core group of schizophrenia symptoms. Cognitive symptoms have been shown to have an impact on quality of life. There are several published CIAS measures, but none based on direct patient self-report. It is important to capture the patient's perspective to supplement performancebased outcome measures of cognition to provide a complete picture of the patient's experience. This paper describes additional validation work on the Patient-Reported Experience of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia (PRECIS) instrument. METHODS: Data from two large, international, pharmaceutical clinical trials in medically and psychiatrically stable English-speaking patients with schizophrenia and 88 healthy controls were analyzed. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted in one trial (n = 215), using the original 35-item PRECIS. The factor structure suggested by EFA was further evaluated using item response theory (IRT; Samejima's graded response model), and tested using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Both EFA and CFA results were tested in a second trial with similar inclusion/exclusion characteristics (n = 410). Additional statistical properties were evaluated in healthy controls. RESULTS: EFA suggested that the best solution after item reduction suggested a factor structure of 6 factors based on 26 items (memory, communication, self-control, executive function, attention, sharpness of thought), supporting a total score, with an additional 2-item bother score (28 items in all). IRT analysis indicated the items were well-ordered within each domain. The CFA demonstrated excellent model fit, accounting for 69% of the variance. The statistical properties of the 28-item version of the PRECIS were confirmed in the second trial. Evidence for internal consistency and test-retest reliability was robust. Known-groups validity was supported by comparison of healthy controls with patients with schizophrenia. Correlations indicated moderate associations between PRECIS and functioning instruments like the Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS), but weak correlations with performance-based outcomes like MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB). DISCUSSION: Using two clinical trial samples, we identified a robust factor structure for the PRECIS and were able to replicate it in the second sample. Evaluation of the meaningful score difference (MSD) should be repeated in future studies, as these samples did not show enough change for it to be evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides strong evidence for the reliability and validity of the PRECIS, a 28-item, patient-reported instrument to assess cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia. The correlation with functioning and the weak correlation with performance on cognitive tasks suggests that patient reports of cognitive impairment measure a unique aspect of patient experience.

Assessing the Clinical Meaningfulness of the Alzheimer's Disease Composite Score (ADCOMS) Tool.

INTRODUCTION: The Alzheimer's Disease Composite Score (ADCOMS) is a tool developed to detect clinical progression and measure treatment effect in patients in early stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The psychometric properties of the ADCOMS have been established; however, the threshold for clinical meaningfulness has yet to be identified. METHODS: Anchor-based, distribution-based, and ROC curve analyses were used to estimate clinically meaningful thresholds for change in ADCOMS for patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD dementia. This study included data from three sources: the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC), and a legacy dataset that included data from four sources: the placebo group from three MCI trials and an earlier data cut from ADNI. Results were stratified by disease severity (MCI vs. dementia) and APOE ε4 carrier status. RESULTS: A total of 5355 participants were included in the analysis. The ADCOMS was able to detect change for MCI and dementia patients who experienced a meaningful decline in cognition (as defined by the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes [CDR-SOB]) between baseline and month 12. The following ADCOMS cut-offs were proposed: 0.05 for MCI and 0.10 for dementia. CONCLUSIONS: The ADCOMS was previously established as a valid and reliable tool for use in clinical trials for MCI due to AD and dementia populations. By defining thresholds for clinically meaningful change of ADCOMS, this work is an important step in interpreting clinical findings and estimates of treatment effects in early stage AD trials.