55 research outputs found

    Development and validation of the impact of dry eye on everyday life (IDEEL) questionnaire, a patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measure for the assessment of the burden of dry eye on patients

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>To develop and validate a comprehensive patient-reported outcomes instrument focusing on the impact of dry eye on everyday life (IDEEL).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Development and validation of the IDEEL occurred in four phases: 1) focus groups with 45 dry eye patients to develop a draft instrument, 2) item generation, 3) pilot study to assess content validity in 16 patients and 4) psychometric validation in 210 subjects: 130 with non-Sjögren's keratoconjunctivitis sicca, 32 with Sjögren's syndrome and 48 controls, and subsequent item reduction.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Focus groups identified symptoms and the associated bother, the impact of dry eye on daily life and the patients' satisfaction with their treatment as the central concepts in patients' experience of dry eye. Qualitative analysis indicated that saturation was achieved for these concepts and yielded an initial 112-item draft instrument. Patients understood the questionnaire and found the items to be relevant indicating content validity. Patient input, item descriptive statistics and factor analysis identified 55 items that could be deleted. The final 57-item IDEEL assesses dry eye impact constituting 3 modules: dry eye symptom-bother, dry eye impact on daily life comprising impact on daily activities, emotional impact, impact on work, and dry eye treatment satisfaction comprising satisfaction with treatment effectiveness and treatment-related bother/inconvenience. The psychometric analysis results indicated that the IDEEL met the criteria for item discriminant validity, internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability and floor/ceiling effects. As expected, the correlations between IDEEL and the Dry Eye Questionnaire (a habitual symptom questionnaire) were higher than between IDEEL and Short-Form-36 and EuroQoL-5D, indicating concurrent validity.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The IDEEL is a reliable, valid and comprehensive questionnaire relevant to issues that are specific to dry eye patients, and meets current FDA patient-reported outcomes guidelines. The use of this questionnaire will provide assessment of the impact of dry eye on patient dry eye-related quality of life, impact of treatment on patient outcomes in clinical trials, and may aid in treatment effectiveness evaluation.</p

    Intrinsically disordered proteins and conformational noise: Implications in cancer

    Get PDF
    Intrinsically disordered proteins, IDPs, are proteins that lack a rigid 3D structure under physiological conditions, at least in vitro. Despite the lack of structure, IDPs play important roles in biological processes and transition from disorder to order upon binding to their targets. With multiple conformational states and rapid conformational dynamics, they engage in myriad and often “promiscuous” interactions. These stochastic interactions between IDPs and their partners, defined here as conformational noise, is an inherent characteristic of IDP interactions. The collective effect of conformational noise is an ensemble of protein network configurations, from which the most suitable can be explored in response to perturbations, conferring protein networks with remarkable flexibility and resilience. Moreover, the ubiquitous presence of IDPs as transcriptional factors and, more generally, as hubs in protein networks, is indicative of their role in propagation of transcriptional (genetic) noise. As effectors of transcriptional and conformational noise, IDPs rewire protein networks and unmask latent interactions in response to perturbations. Thus, noise-driven activation of latent pathways could underlie state-switching events such as cellular transformation in cancer. To test this hypothesis, we created a model of a protein network with the topological characteristics of a cancer protein network and tested its response to a perturbation in presence of IDP hubs and conformational noise. Because numerous IDPs are found to be epigenetic modifiers and chromatin remodelers, we hypothesize that they could further channel noise into stable, heritable genotypic changes

    Comparative Outcomes of Commonly Used Off-Label Atypical Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Dementia-Related Psychosis: A Network Meta-Analysis

    Get PDF
    Introduction Dementia-related psychosis (DRP) is characterized by hallucinations and delusions, which may increase the debilitating effects of underlying dementia. This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluated the comparative efficacy, safety, and acceptability of atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) commonly used off label to treat DRP. Methods We included 22 eligible studies from a systematic literature review of AAPs (quetiapine, risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole, and brexpiprazole) used off label to treat DRP. Study outcomes were: (1) efficacy—neuropsychiatric inventory-nursing home (NPI-NH psychosis subscale), (2) safety—mortality, cerebrovascular events (CVAEs), and others (somnolence, falls, fractures, injuries, etc.), and (3) acceptability—discontinuations due to all causes, lack of efficacy, and adverse events (AEs). We used random-effects modeling to estimate pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) for NPI-NH psychosis subscale scores and odds ratios (OR) for other dichotomous outcomes, with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Compared with placebo, aripiprazole (SMD − 0.12; 95% CI − 0.31, 0.06), and olanzapine (SMD − 0.17; 95% CI − 0.04; 0.02) demonstrated small, non-significant numerical improvements in NPI-NH psychosis scores (5 studies; n = 1891), while quetiapine (SMD 0.04; 95% CI − 0.23, 0.32) did not improve symptoms. The odds of mortality (15 studies, n = 4989) were higher for aripiprazole (OR 1.58; 95% CI 0.62, 4.04), brexpiprazole (OR 2.22; 95% CI 0.30, 16.56), olanzapine (OR 2.21; 95% CI 0.84, 5.85), quetiapine (OR 1.68; 95% CI 0.70, 4.03), and risperidone (OR 1.63; 95% CI 0.93, 2.85) than for placebo. Risperidone (OR 3.68; 95% CI 1.68, 8.95) and olanzapine (OR 4.47; 95% CI 1.36, 14.69) demonstrated significantly greater odds of CVAEs compared to placebo. Compared with placebo, odds of all-cause discontinuation were significantly lower for aripiprazole (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.51, 0.98; 20 studies; 5744 patients) and higher for other AAPs. Aripiprazole (OR 0.5; 95% CI 0.31, 0.82) and olanzapine (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.31, 0.74) had significantly lower odds of discontinuation due to lack of efficacy (OR 12 studies; n = 4382) compared to placebo, while results for quetiapine and risperidone were not significant. Compared with placebo, the odds of discontinuation due to AEs (19 studies, n = 5445) were higher for olanzapine (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.75, 3.92), brexpiprazole (OR 1.80; 95% CI 0.80, 4.07), quetiapine (OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.82, 1.91), aripiprazole (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.90, 2.13), and risperidone (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.02, 1.94). Conclusions Overall results demonstrate that, compared with placebo, quetiapine is not associated with improvement in psychosis in patients with dementia, while olanzapine and aripiprazole have non-significant small numerical improvements. These off-label AAPs (quetiapine, risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole, and brexpiprazole) are associated with greater odds of mortality, CVAEs, and discontinuations due to AEs than placebo. These results underscore the ongoing unmet need for newer pharmacological options with a more favorable benefit-risk profile for the treatment of DRP

    Comparative Efficacy, Safety, Tolerability, and Effectiveness of Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Dementia-Related Psychosis (DRP): A Systematic Literature Review

    Get PDF
    Objectives To evaluate the comparative efficacy, safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) for the treatment of dementia related psychosis (DRP) in older adults. Methods In this systematic literature review (SLR), we qualitatively synthesized evidence on the comparative efficacy (based on neuropsychiatric inventory), tolerability (weight gain), and safety (cerebrovascular adverse events [CVAE], cardiovascular events, mortality, somnolence, extrapyramidal symptoms [EPS]) of AAPs used to treat DRP. We also assessed effectiveness based on all-cause discontinuations and discontinuations due to lack of efficacy or adverse events (AE). Published articles from through March 2021 from PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases evaluated. We included double-blind, active-comparator/placebo-controlled randomized trials, open-label trials, and observational studies. Results This qualitative synthesis included 51 eligible studies with sample size of 13,334 and mean age of 79.36 years. Risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, and aripiprazole demonstrated numerically small improvement in psychotic symptoms among patients with DRP. Somnolence was the most reported AE for all the AAPs, with weight gain and tardive dyskinesia more common with olanzapine and risperidone, respectively. These AAPs are associated with falls, EPS, cognitive declines, CVAE, and mortality. Aripiprazole and olanzapine had lower odds of discontinuation due to lack of efficacy, with olanzapine having greater discontinuation odds due to AEs. Conclusion This SLR demonstrated that AAPs used off-label to treat DRP are associated with small numerical symptom improvement but with a high risk of AEs, including cognitive decline and potentially higher mortality. These results underscore the need for new treatments with a favorable benefit-risk profile for treating DRP
    corecore