Patient interpretations of patient-reported outcome measures to assess bowel urgency: qualitative interviews in ulcerative colitis

Objectives: Bowel urgency is an impactful core symptom of ulcerative colitis (UC). Patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires have been developed and used to assess the patient experience of this important symptom. The objective of this paper is to present evidence from qualitative research conducted to support the use and interpretation of select PRO questionnaires to assess bowel urgency related to the UC patient experience. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with ten adults with a clinician-confirmed diagnosis of moderately to severely active UC. Interviews aimed to document patient interpretation of modified recall periods for the Urgency Numeric Rating Scale (Urgency NRS), two global assessments (i.e., the Patient Global Impression of Severity [PGIS] and Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]), and four items (Items 11, 16, 23, and 26) of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), and explore the patient perspective of meaningful change on these questionnaires. Results: Both modified Urgency NRS versions (with 7-day or 3-day recall period) were interpreted as intended by most patients (≥ 88.9%), and slightly more than half of patients (60.0%) reported that the 7-day recall period was more relevant to their bowel urgency experience. Patients reported thinking of bowel urgency (≥ 80.0%) or bowel urgency-related accidents (70.0% of patients) when interpreting the global assessments and IBDQ items. Most patients reported a 1- to 3-point change as the smallest meaningful improvement that would be meaningful on the Urgency NRS (similar to findings on other questionnaires). Conclusion: Adults with UC can understand and respond to the Urgency NRS with modified recall periods (i.e., 7-day or 3-day), interpret the conceptual content of the PGIS, PGIC, and select IBDQ items to be inclusive of bowel urgency and bowel urgency-related accidents, and select answers representing meaningful improvements on the Urgency NRS, PGIS, PGIC, and IBDQ item response scales. These results further contribute patient-centered data to existing UC and bowel urgency research

Understanding key symptoms, side effects, and impacts of HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: qualitative study findings

Abstract Background Patients with breast cancer experience a variety of disease symptoms and treatment-related side effects that can adversely affect functioning. The breast cancer experience may differ across disease stages and biomarker subtypes. This study identified relevant disease symptoms, treatment-related side effects, and physical functioning impacts in women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer. Methods One-on-one concept elicitation interviews were conducted with 15 patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. Open-ended questions about patient experience with breast cancer and its treatment were drawn from a semi-structured interview guide. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and codes were used to document and organize patient descriptions of their experiences. Coded concepts were defined, supported by exemplary patient quotes, and analyzed for frequency of mention and saturation. Five interviews with experienced oncologists were conducted to supplement the concept elicitation interviews. Results The average age of the patients was 66 years. Most (53%) self-identified as White/Caucasian; 40%, as Black/African American. Patients were reported to have metastases to bone (87%), liver (20%), lung (13%), skin (7%), and lymph nodes (7%). The most frequently reported disease-related concepts were fatigue and lump in breast (47% each) and pain (40%), while the most frequently reported treatment-related side effects were hair loss (67%), fatigue/tiredness (47%), and nausea (40%). Patients identified 10 concepts associated with both breast cancer and its treatment, including fatigue/tiredness, shortness of breath, weakness, and nausea. The most frequently reported impacts on physical function included working around home (73%), walking (73%), and cooking (53%). The most frequently reported symptoms and side effects from the expert perspective included fatigue, pain, and hot flashes (n = 5 each, 100%), while the ability to work (n = 5, 100%) and walk (n = 3, 60%) were reported impacts, aligning with those concepts reported by patients. The resulting concepts were organized into a patient-based conceptual model. Conclusions Patients have varied experiences due to HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer and its treatment, and commonly experience fatigue/tiredness, hair loss, general pain, lump in breast, and nausea, as well as impacts to physical functioning (specifically, activities of daily living and mobility)

Interleukin‐1 Trap Rilonacept Improved Health‐Related Quality of Life and Sleep in Patients With Recurrent Pericarditis: Results From the Phase 3 Clinical Trial RHAPSODY

Background Recurrent pericarditis is characterized by painful flares and inflammation, which negatively impact health‐related quality of life. RHAPSODY (rilonacept inhibition of interleukin‐1 alpha and beta for recurrent pericarditis: a pivotal symptomatology and outcomes study) evaluated the efficacy and safety of rilonacept (IL‐1α and ‐β cytokine trap) in recurrent pericarditis. A secondary analysis of these data evaluated the patient‐reported outcome questionnaire score change during the trial. Methods and Results Participants completed 5 patient‐reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires assessing pericarditis pain, health‐related quality of life, general health status, sleep impact, and overall symptom severity. PRO score changes during the treatment run‐in period (12 weeks) and the blinded randomized withdrawal period (up to 24 weeks) were evaluated using descriptive statistics and mixed model repeated measures analyses. Participants with PRO data from the run‐in period (n=84) and the randomized withdrawal period (n=61; 30 rilonacept, 31 placebo) were included in analyses. Run‐in baseline PRO scores indicated that pericarditis symptoms during pericarditis recurrence impacted health‐related quality of life. All PRO scores significantly improved (P<0.001) on rilonacept treatment during the run‐in period. For the randomized withdrawal period, PRO scores were maintained for participants receiving rilonacept. For those receiving placebo and who experienced a recurrence, PRO scores deteriorated at the time of recurrence and then improved following rilonacept bailout. At randomized withdrawal Week 24/End of Study, scores of participants who received bailout rilonacept were similar to those of participants who had continued rilonacept. Conclusions These results demonstrate the burden of pericarditis recurrences and the improved physical and emotional health of patients with recurrent pericarditis while on rilonacept treatment. These findings extend prior rilonacept efficacy results, demonstrating improvements in patient‐reported health‐related quality of life, sleep, pain, and global symptom severity while on treatment. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03737110