Alexandra I. Barsdorf

Neurocognitive impairment in childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus: Measurement issues in diagnosis

To assess the prevalence of neurocognitive impairment (NCI) in childhood‐onset systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) by comparing published classification criteria, and to examine associations between NCI, disease characteristics, psychosocial well‐being, and intelligence.

Moving towards a comprehensive assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)

To evaluate the utility of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the LUTS Tool when assessing lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Secondary objectives were to examine associations of LUTS and treatment seeking.

Patient preferences for diabetic retinopathy health States.

PURPOSE. To develop standardized descriptions of health states that characterize vision-specific functional impacts of diabetic retinopathy (DR) according to levels of visual acuity and contrast sensitivity and to elicit preferences for these health states from persons with DR and assign weighted values to them. METHODS. Vision-specific descriptions of health states were developed based on a literature review and patient and physician interviews. The content was based on items from the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire (VFQ) and reflected functional impacts experienced by DR patients. Values were assigned to the range of health states, anchored by the extremes full vision and death, by using the time-tradeoff method in a sample of 98 Canadian DR patients from three clinical centers. RESULTS. The mean age of the sample was 60.4 years, and 56% were men. Mean preferences decreased from 0.98 (better-eye logMAR [Snellen equivalent] acuity, > or =20/40; worse-eye Snellen equivalent, > or =20/200) to 0.67 (Snellen equivalent visual acuity, < or =20/200, contrast sensitivity, < or =21 letters bilaterally). Preferences decreased with increasing severity of functional deficits and did not vary significantly by sex, age, VFQ quartile, or better- or worse-eye acuity. CONCLUSIONS. This is the first study that has been conducted to estimate preferences for standardized DR-specific health states, accounting for visual acuity and contrast sensitivity in both eyes. The results showed that the development and progression of DR are associated with substantial declines in preferences. In addition to the progressively greater impact from declining ETDRS visual acuity and contrast sensitivity, preference weights declined with increasing bilateral disparity. These preference values are useful for comparing the cost effectiveness of ophthalmic treatments.

Patient preferences in the treatment of diabetic retinopathy

Objective: Accounting for patient preferences may be especially important in diabetes mellitus, given the challenge in identifying factors associated with treatment adherence. Although preference studies have been performed in diabetes, none have examined treatments used in diabetic retinopathy (DR). The objective of this study was to elicit patient preferences for attributes associated with antivascular endothelial growth factor, focal and panretinal laser, and steroid therapy used in DR management. Methods: A cross-sectional conjoint survey was administered to DR patients at three Canadian eye centers. The survey involved making tradeoffs among 11 DR treatment attributes, including the chance of improving vision and risks of adverse events over a 1-year treatment period. Attribute utilities were summed for each product profile to determine the most preferred treatment. Results: Based on the results from 161 patients, attributes affecting visual functioning, including improving visual acuity and reducing adverse events (eg, chance of cataracts), were more important than those not directly affecting vision (eg, administration). Overall, 52%, 20%, 17%, and 11% preferred the product profiles matching to the antivascular endothelial growth factor, steroid, focal laser, and panretinal laser therapies. Preferences did not vary substantially by previous treatment experience, age, or type of DR (macular edema, proliferative DR, both or neither), with the exception that more macular edema only patients preferred focal laser over steroid treatment (19% versus 14%, respectively). Conclusions: When considering the potential effects of treatment over a 1-year period, treatment preferences in DR are most influenced by those that may positively or negatively affect visual functioning.

Optimizing Electronic Capture of Clinical Outcome Assessment Data in Clinical Trials The Case of Patient-Reported Endpoints

For a number of compelling scientific, operational, and regulatory reasons, the use of electronic data capture is becoming the preferred means of collecting clinical outcome assessment (eg, patient-reported outcome [PRO]) data in clinical trials. Electronic PRO (ePRO) data collection leverages screen-based technologies (eg, handheld devices, tablet computers, and web-based systems) and telephone-based (eg, interactive voice response) systems. Data collection is routinely either site based (ie, clinical study site) or field based (eg, subject’s home, school, or workplace). While tablet computers are often used for site-based PRO data collection, handheld devices have become the mainstay for ePRO data capture in field-based settings. The data collection devices are usually provisioned to the sites or subjects by an ePRO system provider contracted by the clinical trial sponsor. With site-based data collection, study staff are responsible for ensuring subject compliance with the protocol-driven data collection procedures, whereas with field-based data collection, the subject is responsible for compliance with the data entry requirements and sites are accountable for remotely monitoring the data for compliance. In addition to site and subject compliance issues, technology-related factors must be anticipated in order to adhere to the electronic PRO data collection plan. The objective of this paper is to describe study site-, subject-, and technology-related factors that may lead to deviations from the planned electronic collection of PRO data (eg, defaulting to paper-based data collection) and to provide recommendations aimed at preventing potential problems or quickly resolving problems once they occur.

The content validation of the Self-Reported Misuse, Abuse and Diversion of Prescription Opioids (SR-MAD) instrument for use in patients with acute or chronic pain

Abstract Background: Establishing content validity is an essential component of instrument development. Objective: To assess the content validity and patient interpretation of the Self-Reported Misuse, Abuse and Diversion of Prescription Opioids (SR-MAD) instrument. Methods: A cross-sectional, qualitative study was conducted in patients with chronic or acute pain. Patients were recruited from three patient groups (opioid naïve, known opioid abusers, and chronic opioid non-abusers). After patients completed the SR-MAD, they participated in an in-person cognitive interview to assess the patient’s understanding of the instrument. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were performed. Results: Fifty-seven patients (Wave 1: 20; Wave 2: 37) were enrolled and completed the SR-MAD and cognitive interview. Mean age was 54.5 ± 13.7 years (range 25–84) with 12.5 years of living with pain. The most common chronic pain conditions were back pain (68%), neck pain (32%), and osteoarthritis (25%). Overall, most patients understood the meaning of each question and were able to describe each item using their own words. Many patients reported that some questions were not applicable to them but understood the meaning of the questions as well as the need to ask questions about misuse, abuse, and diversion of opioid medications. Minor revisions to the SR-MAD wording, response options, recall period, and the definition of “opioid”, were recommended by the patients in both waves. Limitations: Given its qualitative design, this study has a small sample size. Additionally, quantitative validation of the SR-MAD is needed. Conclusion: The SR-MAD, developed based on expert consensus and revised with patient input, is a 15-item self-report instrument that can be used to identify and monitor prescription opioid abuse, misuse, and diversion.

Patient-reported health-related quality of life, work productivity, and activity impairment during treatment with ALO-02 (extended-release oxycodone and sequestered naltrexone) for moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain

BackgroundThe efficacy of ALO-02, an abuse-deterrent formulation containing extended-release oxycodone and sequestered naltrexone, in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) was studied in a 12-week randomized controlled trial. Primary efficacy endpoint results have been published previously (Rauck et al., 2015). The current paper focuses on patient-reported outcomes for health-related quality of life (HRQL), work productivity, and activity impairment that were assessed during this study.MethodsThis was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal study in patients with moderate-to-severe CLBP. After a screening period (≤2 weeks), patients entered an open-label titration period (4–6 weeks). Treatment responders were then randomized to a double-blind placebo-controlled treatment period (12 weeks). HRQL was assessed using changes in the Short Form-36 v2 Health Survey (SF-36v2) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions Health Questionnaire 3-Level version (EQ-5D-3L). Work productivity and regular activities were evaluated using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI:SHP).ResultsA total of 410 patients received ALO-02 during the open-label titration period, of which 280 (intent-to-treat (ITT) population) were treated during the double-blind placebo-controlled treatment period (placebo, n = 134; ALO-02, n = 146). Significant improvement was observed for all SF-36v2 subscales and component scores (p < 0.005) and the EQ-5D-3L summary index and visual analog scale (p < 0.0001) during the titration period. Improvement was also significant (p < 0.0001) for all WPAI:SHP outcomes except ‘work time missed due to CLBP’ for the titration period. Significant differences favoring ALO-02 compared with placebo were only observed for the SF-36v2 Bodily Pain subscale (p ≤ 0.0232; ITT population) during the double-blind treatment period and the overall study period (screening to the end of the double-blind treatment period). The percentage change in activity impairment due to low back pain subscale of the WPAI:SHP significantly favored ALO-02 compared with placebo for the ITT population when considering the overall study period (p = 0.0040).ConclusionsHRQL, work productivity, and activity impairment may be improved with ALO-02 treatment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01571362, registered April 3, 2012.