End points for sickle cell disease clinical trials: patient-reported outcomes, pain, and the brain

To address the global burden of sickle cell disease (SCD) and the need for novel therapies, the American Society of Hematology partnered with the US Food and Drug Administration to engage the work of 7 panels of clinicians, investigators, and patients to develop consensus recommendations for clinical trial end points. The panels conducted their work through literature reviews, assessment of available evidence, and expert judgment focusing on end points related to: patient-reported outcomes (PROs), pain (non-PROs), the brain, end-organ considerations, biomarkers, measurement of cure, and low-resource settings. This article presents the findings and recommendations of the PROs, pain, and brain panels, as well as relevant findings and recommendations from the biomarkers panel. The panels identify end points, where there were supporting data, to use in clinical trials of SCD. In addition, the panels discuss where further research is needed to support the development and validation of additional clinical trial end points

Saudi SCD patients’ symptoms and quality of life relative to the number of ED visits

Background Individuals living with sickle cell disease (SCD) have significantly increased emergency department (ED) use compared to the general population. In Saudi Arabia, health care is free for all individuals and therefore has no bearing on increased ED visits. However, little is known about the relationship between quality of life (QoL) and frequency of acute care utilization in this patient population. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted on 366 patients with SCD who attended the outpatient department at King Fahad Hospital, Hofuf, Saudi Arabia. Data were collected through self-administered surveys, which included: demographics, SCD-related ED visits, clinical issues, and QoL levels. We assessed the ED use by asking for the number of SCD-related ED visits within a 6-month period. Results The self-report survey of ED visits was completed by 308 SCD patients. The median number of SCD-related ED visits within a 6-month time period (IQR) was four (2-7 visits). According to the unadjusted negative binomial model, the rate of SCD-related ED visits increased by (46, 39.3, 40, and 53.5 %) for patients with fever, skin redness with itching, swelling, and blood transfusion, respectively. Poor QoL tends to increase the rate of SCD-related ED visits. Well education and poor general health positively influenced the rate of SCD-related ED visits. Well education tends to increase the rate of SCD-related ED visits by 50.2 %. The rate of SCD-related ED visits decreased by 1.4 % for every point increase in general health. Conclusion Saudi patients with sickle cell disease reported a wide range of SCD-related ED visits. It was estimated that six of 10 SCD patients had at least three ED visits within a 6-month period. Well education and poor general health resulted in an increase in the rate of SCD-related ED visits

Provider Perspective on Integrative Medicine for Pediatric Sickle Cell Disease-related Pain

Objective Integrative medicine (IM) approaches are sometimes used to manage sickle cell disease (SCD)— related pain. The purpose of this research is to (1) understand provider perspective towards the use of IM for pain in children with SCD at a large urban children\u27s hospital and (2) provide recommendations on how to better promote IM for children and adolescents with SCD. Methods After approval from the institutional review board, a qualitative case study approach was used with criterion-type purposeful sampling to select providers from the division of hematology to adequately inform the study. Semistructured interviews were completed using audiotape to facilitate transcription. NVivo 10 analytic software (QSR International Pty Ltd, Doncaster, Victoria, Australia) was used to organize data into themes to answer the study questions. Results Ten provider interviews were completed. Attitudes were generally positive, and most providers felt that IM is generally helpful. All providers reported that they do not optimally use integrative therapies for children with SCD. The barriers uncovered focused on lack of process for integration of IM, specifically that IM resources seem transient and based on short-term funding. Provider attitude towards CAM is generally positive, but provider comfort level is highly variable. No providers are completely comfortable with their knowledge base about IM, and increased knowledge is desired. Conclusions Creation of protocols and processes to incorporate IM into management plans for patients with SCD could help to promote its use. Education of providers about utility and efficacy of IM for SCD-related pain and about existing resources would aid in promotion of IM for children with SCD