Dataset Information

Understanding and modifying Fabry disease: Rationale and design of a pivotal Phase 3 study and results from a patient-reported outcome validation study.

ABSTRACT: The use of available treatments for Fabry disease (FD) (including enzyme replacement therapy [ERT]) may be restricted by their limited symptom improvement and mode of administration. Lucerastat is currently being investigated in the MODIFY study as oral substrate reduction therapy for the treatment of FD. By reducing the net globotriaosylceramide (Gb3) load in tissues, lucerastat has disease-modifying potential to improve symptoms and delay disease progression. MODIFY is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group Phase 3 study (ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT03425539); here we present the rationale and design of this study. Eligible adults with a genetically confirmed diagnosis of FD and FD-specific neuropathic pain entered screening. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive either oral lucerastat twice daily or placebo for 6 months; treatment allocation was stratified according to sex and ERT treatment status. The main objectives of MODIFY are to assess the effects of lucerastat on neuropathic pain, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, FD biomarkers, and determine its safety and tolerability. Neuropathic pain and GI symptoms are key features of FD that have a significant impact on quality of life. Despite various tools available to assess pain and GI symptoms, there are currently limited tools available to assess neuropathic and GI symptoms in FD, validated according to health authority guidelines. Based on FDA recommendations, we undertook a patient-reported outcome (PRO) validation study, using a novel eDiary-based PRO tool to assess the validity of evaluating neuropathic pain as a primary efficacy endpoint in MODIFY. Results from the PRO validation study are included. To date, MODIFY is the largest Phase 3 clinical study conducted in patients with FD. Enrollment to MODIFY is now complete, with 118 patients randomized. Results will be presented in a separate publication. Long-term effects of lucerastat are being assessed in the ongoing open-label extension study (NCT03737214).

SUBMITTER: Wanner C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9248229 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOver 75% of the annual estimated 9.5 million deaths in India occur in the home, and the large majority of these do not have a certified cause. India and other developing countries urgently need reliable quantification of the causes of death. They also need better epidemiological evidence about the relevance of physical (such as blood pressure and obesity), behavioral (such as smoking, alcohol, HIV-1 risk taking, and immunization history), and biological (such as blood lipids and gene polymorphisms) measurements to the development of disease in individuals or disease rates in populations. We report here on the rationale, design, and implementation of the world's largest prospective study of the causes and correlates of mortality.Methods and findingsWe will monitor nearly 14 million people in 2.4 million nationally representative Indian households (6.3 million people in 1.1 million households in the 1998-2003 sample frame and 7.6 million people in 1.3 million households in the 2004-2014 sample frame) for vital status and, if dead, the causes of death through a well-validated verbal autopsy (VA) instrument. About 300,000 deaths from 1998-2003 and some 700,000 deaths from 2004-2014 are expected; of these about 850,000 will be coded by two physicians to provide causes of death by gender, age, socioeconomic status, and geographical region. Pilot studies will evaluate the addition of physical and biological measurements, specifically dried blood spots. Preliminary results from over 35,000 deaths suggest that VA can ascertain the leading causes of death, reduce the misclassification of causes, and derive the probable underlying cause of death when it has not been reported. VA yields broad classification of the underlying causes in about 90% of deaths before age 70. In old age, however, the proportion of classifiable deaths is lower. By tracking underlying demographic denominators, the study permits quantification of absolute mortality rates. Household case-control, proportional mortality, and nested case-control methods permit quantification of risk factors.ConclusionsThis study will reliably document not only the underlying cause of child and adult deaths but also key risk factors (behavioral, physical, environmental, and eventually, genetic). It offers a globally replicable model for reliably estimating cause-specific mortality using VA and strengthens India's flagship mortality monitoring system. Despite the misclassification that is still expected, the new cause-of-death data will be substantially better than that available previously.

Project description:ObjectivesTo examine the acceptability and validity of two patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for adult acne, comparing them to the validated Acne-specific Quality of Life (Acne-QoL) measure.DesignMixed-methods validation study.SettingParticipants were recruited by (1) mail-out through primary care if they had ever consulted for acne and received a prescription for acne treatment within the last 6 months, (2) opportunistically in secondary care and (3) poster advertisement in community venues.Participants221 (204 quantitative and 17 qualitative) participants with acne, aged 18-50 years.Outcome measuresQuantitative sub-study participants completed Acne-QoL, Skindex-16 and Comprehensive Acne Quality of Life Scale (CompAQ) at baseline, 24 hours and 6 weeks. Qualitative sub-study participants took part in cognitive think-aloud interviews, while completing the same measures. Transcribed audio recordings were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.ResultsQuantitative analyses suggested high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.74-0.96) and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient values 0.88-0.97) for both questionnaires. Both scales showed floor effects on some subdomains. Skindex-16 and CompAQ showed good evidence of construct validity when compared with Acne-QoL with Spearman's correlation coefficients 0.54-0.81, and good repeatability over 24 hours.Qualitative data uncovered wide-ranging views regarding usability and acceptability. Interviewees held strong but differing views about layout, question/response wording, redundant/similar questions and guidance notes. Similarly, interviewees differed in perceptions of acceptability of the different scales, particularly on relatability of questions and emotive reactions to scales.ConclusionsAll PROMs performed well in statistical analyses. No PROM showed superior usability and acceptability in the qualitative study. Any PROM should be acceptable for further research in adult acne but researchers should consider the different domains and whether they will measure only facial or facial and trunk acne before making a selection. A new PROM or further evaluation of novel PROMs may be beneficial.

Project description:BackgroundTibial shaft fractures (TSFs) are among the most common long bone injuries often resulting from high-energy trauma. To date, musculoskeletal complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI) and compromised fracture healing following fracture fixation of these injuries are still prevalent. The relatively high complication rates prove that, despite advances in modern fracture care, the management of TSFs remains a challenge even in the hands of experienced surgeons. Therefore, the Fracture-Related Outcome Study for operatively treated Tibia shaft fractures (F.R.O.S.T.) aims at creating a registry that enables data mining to gather detailed information to support future clinical decision-making regarding the management of TSF's.MethodsThis prospective, international, multicenter, observational registry for TSFs was recently developed. Recruitment started in 2019 and is planned to take 36?months, seeking to enroll a minimum of 1000 patients. The study protocol does not influence the clinical decision-making procedure, implant choice, or surgical/imaging techniques; these are being performed as per local hospital standard of care. Data collected in this registry include injury specifics, treatment details, clinical outcomes (e.g., FRI), patient-reported outcomes, and procedure- or implant-related adverse events. The minimum follow up is 12?months.DiscussionAlthough over the past decades, multiple high-quality studies have addressed individual research questions related to the outcome of TSFs, knowledge gaps remain. The scarcity of data calls for an international high-quality, population-based registry. Creating such a database could optimize strategies intended to prevent severe musculoskeletal complications. The main purpose of the F.R.O.S.T registry is to evaluate the association between different treatment strategies and patient outcomes. It will address not only operative techniques and implant materials but also perioperative preventive measures. For the first time, data concerning systemic perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, the influence of local antimicrobials, and timing of soft-tissue coverage will be collected at an international level and correlated with standardized outcome measures in a large prospective, multicenter, observational registry for global accessibility.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03598530 .

Project description:BACKGROUND:Measures that reflect patients' assessment of their health are of increasing importance as outcome measures in randomised controlled trials. The methodological approach used in the pre-validation development of new instruments (item generation, item reduction and question formatting) should be robust and transparent. The totality of the content of existing PRO instruments for a specific condition provides a valuable resource (pool of items) that can be utilised to develop new instruments. Such 'top down' approaches are common, but the explicit pre-validation methods are often poorly reported. This paper presents a systematic and generalisable 5-step pre-validation PRO instrument methodology. METHODS:The method is illustrated using the example of the Aberdeen Glaucoma Questionnaire (AGQ). The five steps are: 1) Generation of a pool of items; 2) Item de-duplication (three phases); 3) Item reduction (two phases); 4) Assessment of the remaining items' content coverage against a pre-existing theoretical framework appropriate to the objectives of the instrument and the target population (e.g. ICF); and 5) qualitative exploration of the target populations' views of the new instrument and the items it contains. RESULTS:The AGQ 'item pool' contained 725 items. Three de-duplication phases resulted in reduction of 91, 225 and 48 items respectively. The item reduction phases discarded 70 items and 208 items respectively. The draft AGQ contained 83 items with good content coverage. The qualitative exploration ('think aloud' study) resulted in removal of a further 15 items and refinement to the wording of others. The resultant draft AGQ contained 68 items. CONCLUSIONS:This study presents a novel methodology for developing a PRO instrument, based on three sources: literature reporting what is important to patient; theoretically coherent framework; and patients' experience of completing the instrument. By systematically accounting for all items dropped after the item generation phase, our method ensures that the AGQ is developed in a transparent, replicable manner and is fit for validation. We recommend this method to enhance the likelihood that new PRO instruments will be appropriate to the research context in which they are used, acceptable to research participants and likely to generate valid data.

Project description:BackgroundStandardised generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) which measure health status are often unresponsive to change in primary care. Alternative formats, which have been used to increase responsiveness, include individualised PROMs (in which respondents specify the outcomes of interest in their own words) and transitional PROMs (in which respondents directly rate change over a period). The objective of this study was to test qualitatively, through cognitive interviews, two PROMs, one using each respective format.MethodsThe individualised PROM selected was the Measure Yourself Medical Outcomes Profile (MYMOP). The transitional PROM was the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI). Twenty patients who had recently attended the GP were interviewed while completing the questionnaires. Interview data was analysed using a modification of Tourangeau's model of cognitive processing: comprehension, response, recall and face validity.ResultsPatients found the PEI simple to complete, but for some it lacked face validity. The transitional scale was sometimes confused with a status scale and was problematic in situations when the relevant GP appointment was part of a longer episode of care. Some patients reported a high enablement score despite verbally reporting low enablement but high regard for their GP, which suggested hypothesis-guessing. The interpretation of the PEI items was inconsistent between patients. MYMOP was more difficult for patients to complete, but had greater face validity than the PEI. The scale used was open to response-shift: some patients suggested they would recalibrate their definition of the scale endpoints as their illness and expectations changed.ConclusionsThe study provides information for both users of PEI/MYMOP and developers of individualised and transitional questionnaires. Users should heed the recommendation that MYMOP should be interview-administered, and this is likely to apply to other individualised scales. The PEI is open to hypothesis-guessing and may lack face-validity for a longer episode of care (e.g. in patients with chronic conditions). Developers should be cognisant that transitional scales can be inconsistently completed: some patients forget during completion that they are measuring change from baseline. Although generic questionnaires require the content to be more general than do disease-specific questionnaires, developers should avoid questions which allow broad and varied interpretations.

Dataset Information

Understanding and modifying Fabry disease: Rationale and design of a pivotal Phase 3 study and results from a patient-reported outcome validation study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets