Garcia Julia K, Hopfinger Rene M, Foley Catherine, Whyte Julie, Gauthier Martha, Foster Brandon, Patel Vaishali
AbbVie, Irvine, CA, USA.
Lumanity, Boston, MA, USA.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2025 Jul 31:1-14. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2025.2537898.
Platysma prominence (PP) is characterized by vertical bands along the length of the neck and blunting of the jawline, impacting aesthetic appearance. No validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are available to assess patient experiences specific to PP.
Develop and validate fit-for-purpose PRO measures that capture patient experiences with PP and treatment outcomes.
PRO measures were developed and validated in alignment with the FDA's patient-focused drug development guidance. Three interviews (concept elicitation [CE], = 30; cognitive debriefing [CD] round 1, = 20; round 2, = 5) were conducted with treatment-naive and previously treated adults with PP. Instruments were drafted based on concepts emerging from CE interviews. Psychometric testing for reliability and validity was conducted using phase 2 PP treatment study (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03915067) data ( = 164). While there were no available gold standard measures, convergent and known-groups validity were assessed using multiple FACE-Q modules, the Participant Global Impression of Severity (PGIS)-Jawline, and the Participant Global Impression of Treatment Satisfaction (PGI-TS). The 2-way random intraclass correlation coefficient ICC(2,1) and R were calculated to evaluate test-retest reliability. Values of ≥0.70 were considered success for both the ICC(2,1) and R. Spearman correlations (ρ) between scores from draft instruments and co-validators were used to assess convergent validity (|ρ|≥0.40). Additionally, internal consistency reliability was examined for multi-item measures where Cronbach's α ≥ 0.70 was considered success.
"Bands" or a variation (e.g., cords, ridges, lines) were the most common terms used to describe PP, reported by 50% of participants. The most frequently reported psychosocial impacts were looking older than desired ( = 28, 93.3%), feeling self-conscious ( = 24, 80.0%), feeling less attractive ( = 20, 66.7%), and looking less attractive and dressing differently (both: = 19, 63.3%). Reduced platysma band prominence was the most cited change that would increase satisfaction ( = 15, 50.0%). Following CE interviews, 3 PRO measures were drafted: Appearance of Neck and Lower Face Questionnaire (ANLFQ): Impacts, ANLFQ: Satisfaction (Baseline/Follow-up), and the Bother Assessment Scale-Platysma Prominence (BAS-PP). CD interviews indicated that participants found the questionnaires understandable and relevant. In psychometric testing, established criteria for reliability and validity were predominantly met, with some exceptions. Three correlations were under the 0.40 threshold, and while these correlations were all in the expected direction, their smaller magnitudes were not unexpected given the restricted conceptual alignment between the PP PROs and co-validating measures.
These PRO measures demonstrated content and psychometric validity and are ready for use in research and practice to better understand the impact of PP from the patient perspective.
颈阔肌突出(PP)的特征是沿颈部长度出现垂直条纹以及下颌轮廓变钝,影响美观。目前尚无经过验证的患者报告结局(PRO)指标可用于评估PP患者的特定体验。
开发并验证适用于评估PP患者体验和治疗效果的PRO指标。
根据美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)以患者为中心的药物研发指南,开发并验证PRO指标。对未接受过治疗和曾接受过治疗的PP成年患者进行了三次访谈(概念激发[CE],n = 30;第一轮认知反馈[CD],n = 20;第二轮,n = 5)。根据CE访谈中出现的概念起草工具。使用2期PP治疗研究(ClinicalTrials.gov;NCT03915067)数据(n = 164)进行信度和效度的心理测量测试。虽然没有可用的金标准指标,但使用多个FACE-Q模块、参与者全球严重程度印象(PGIS)-下颌轮廓和参与者治疗满意度全球印象(PGI-TS)评估了收敛效度和已知组效度。计算双向随机组内相关系数ICC(2,1)和R以评估重测信度。ICC(2,1)和R的值≥0.70被视为成功。使用草案工具得分与共同验证指标之间的斯皮尔曼相关性(ρ)评估收敛效度(|ρ|≥0.40)。此外,对多项目指标进行了内部一致性信度检验,其中Cronbach's α≥0.70被视为成功。
“条纹”或其变体(如条索、嵴、线)是50%的参与者用于描述PP的最常见术语。最常报告的心理社会影响是看起来比期望的年龄大(n = 28,93.3%)、感到难为情(n = 24,80.0%)、感觉吸引力下降(n = 20,66.7%)以及看起来吸引力下降和穿着不同(两者:n = 19,63.3%)。颈阔肌条纹突出程度降低是最常被提及的会增加满意度的变化(n = 15,50.0%)。在CE访谈之后,起草了3项PRO指标:颈部和下脸外观问卷(ANLFQ):影响、ANLFQ:满意度(基线/随访)以及颈阔肌突出困扰评估量表(BAS-PP)。CD访谈表明参与者认为问卷易于理解且相关。在心理测量测试中,信度和效度的既定标准大多得到满足,但也有一些例外。三项相关性低于0.40阈值,虽然这些相关性都在预期方向,但鉴于PP的PRO指标与共同验证指标之间的概念一致性有限,其较小的幅度并不意外。
这些PRO指标证明了内容效度和心理测量效度,可用于研究和实践,以便从患者角度更好地理解PP的影响。