Bharadia Trishna, Vandercappellen Jo, Chitnis Tanuja, Eelen Piet, Bauer Birgit, Brichetto Giampaolo, Lloyd Andrew, Schmidt Hollie, King Miriam, Fitzgerald Jennifer, Hach Thomas, Hobart Jeremy
Patient Author, Marlow, UK.
Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin. 2022 Jun 22;8(2):20552173221105642. doi: 10.1177/20552173221105642. eCollection 2022 Apr-Jun.
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are widely measured in multiple sclerosis (MS) studies. However, the quality of instrument development processes varies, raising concerns about the meaningfulness of associated data.
To review the development of selected PROs commonly used in MS studies, including definitions of the concepts measured, use of conceptual frameworks, and degree of input from people living with MS (PlwMS). To gain insights and recommendations from PlwMS on their experience with these PROs.
We assessed 6 PROs (FSIQ-RMS, modified-FIS, MSQoL-54, Leeds 8-item MSQoL, MSIS-29 and EQ-5D) for alignment with regulatory and scientific requirements on PRO structure/development. PlwMS evaluated the degree to which the PROs reflect disease aspects they perceive important.
Definitions, clarifications and conceptualisations of the measurement variables were often lacking. PlwMS were variably involved in PRO development. Ethnic diversity was rarely documented. PlwMS identified individualisation, ease of understanding, time burden, and mode of administration as factors affecting PRO usability.
To date, the PRO development process has consistently lacked clear definitions of concepts of interest, use of conceptual frameworks and patient involvement, thereby compromising the validity of data they generate. PRO instrument development must be conducted more robustly to maximise the value of pivotal clinical trials.
患者报告结局(PROs)在多发性硬化症(MS)研究中被广泛测量。然而,工具开发过程的质量各不相同,这引发了对相关数据意义的担忧。
回顾MS研究中常用的特定PROs的开发情况,包括所测量概念的定义、概念框架的使用以及MS患者(PlwMS)的参与程度。了解PlwMS对这些PROs的使用体验并获取相关见解和建议。
我们评估了6种PROs(FSIQ - RMS、改良FIS、MSQoL - 54、利兹8项MSQoL、MSIS - 29和EQ - 5D)是否符合关于PRO结构/开发的监管和科学要求。PlwMS评估了这些PROs在多大程度上反映了他们认为重要的疾病方面。
测量变量的定义、澄清和概念化往往缺失。PlwMS参与PRO开发的程度各不相同。种族多样性很少被记录。PlwMS将个性化、易于理解、时间负担和管理方式确定为影响PRO可用性的因素。
迄今为止,PRO开发过程一直缺乏对感兴趣概念的明确定义、概念框架的使用以及患者参与,从而损害了它们所产生数据的有效性。必须更稳健地进行PRO工具开发,以最大限度地提高关键临床试验的价值。