Improving Benefit-harm Assessment of Therapies from the Patient Perspective: OMERACT Premeeting Toward Consensus on Core Sets for Randomized Controlled Trials

Stakeholder endorsement advancing the implementation of a patient-reported domain for harms in rheumatology clinical trials: Outcome of the OMERACT Safety Working Group

OBJECTIVES

To develop an understanding of the concept of safety/harms experienced by patients involved in clinical trials for their rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) and to seek input from the OMERACT community before moving forward to developing or selecting an outcome measurement instrument.

METHODS

OMERACT 2023 presented and discussed interview results from 34 patients indicating that up to 171 items might be important for patients' harm-reporting.

RESULTS

Domain was defined in detail and supported by qualitative work. Participants in the Special-Interest-Group endorsed (96 %) that enough qualitative data are available to start Delphi survey(s).

CONCLUSION

We present a definition of safety/harms that represents the patient voice (i.e., patients' perception of safety) evaluating the symptomatic treatment-related adverse events for people with RMDs enrolled in clinical trials.

Benefit-risk assessment and reporting in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations

ABSTRACT

Chronic pain clinical trials have historically assessed benefit and risk outcomes separately. However, a growing body of research suggests that a composite metric that accounts for benefit and risk in relation to each other can provide valuable insights into the effects of different treatments. Researchers and regulators have developed a variety of benefit-risk composite metrics, although the extent to which these methods apply to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of chronic pain has not been evaluated in the published literature. This article was motivated by an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials consensus meeting and is based on the expert opinion of those who attended. In addition, a review of the benefit-risk assessment tools used in published chronic pain RCTs or highlighted by key professional organizations (ie, Cochrane, European Medicines Agency, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration) was completed. Overall, the review found that benefit-risk metrics are not commonly used in RCTs of chronic pain despite the availability of published methods. A primary recommendation is that composite metrics of benefit-risk should be combined at the level of the individual patient, when possible, in addition to the benefit-risk assessment at the treatment group level. Both levels of analysis (individual and group) can provide valuable insights into the relationship between benefits and risks associated with specific treatments across different patient subpopulations. The systematic assessment of benefit-risk in clinical trials has the potential to enhance the clinical meaningfulness of RCT results.

Frequency of symptomatic adverse events in rheumatoid arthritis: an exploratory online survey

Objective

To generate initial data on the frequency and impact of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) drug therapy from the patients' perspective.

Methods

We conducted an exploratory online survey asking patients with RA to indicate whether they currently or had ever experienced the 80 different symptomatic AEs included in the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of The Common Terminology Criteria For Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE™). Results were summarized to report their frequency and regression models were used to estimate their associations with RA medication use and overall bother.

Results

The 560 patients who completed the survey and reported taking at least one RA medication (DMARD, steroids, NSAIDs), had a mean disease duration of 8 years, and were on a wide range of DMARDs. The number of symptomatic AEs experienced in the past 7 days was none (6%), 1-10 (28%), 11-20 (28%), and >20 (38%). Overall, most participants reported that side effects bothered them somewhat (28%), quite a bit (24%) or very much (15%). In multivariable regression analyses, current prednisone and NSAID use were associated with the greatest number of current side effects (26 and 22 respectively). Many of the strongest associations between current symptomatic AEs and medication use aligned with known side effect profiles.

Conclusion

In this exploratory online survey, patients with RA reported frequent symptomatic AEs with their medications that are bothersome. Further work is needed to develop and validate a measure for use in patients with rheumatic disease.

Analysis of Tweets Containing Information Related to Rheumatological Diseases on Twitter

Background: Tweets often indicate the interests of Twitter users. Data from Twitter could be used to better understand the interest in and perceptions of a variety of diseases and medical conditions, including rheumatological diseases which have increased in prevalence over the past several decades. The aim of this study was to perform a content analysis of tweets referring to rheumatological diseases. Methods: The content of each tweet was rated as medical (including a reference to diagnosis, treatment, or other aspects of the disease) or non-medical (such as requesting help). The type of user and the suitability of the medical content (appropriate content or, on the contrary, fake content if it was medically inappropriate according to the current medical knowledge) were also evaluated. The number of retweets and likes generated were also investigated. Results: We analyzed a total of 1514 tweets: 1093 classified as medical and 421 as non-medical. The diseases with more tweets were the most prevalent. Within the medical tweets, the content of these varied according to the disease (some more focused on diagnosis and others on treatment). The fake content came from unidentified users and mostly referred to the treatment of diseases. Conclusions: According to our results, the analysis of content posted on Twitter in regard to rheumatological diseases may be useful for investigating the public’s prevailing areas of interest, concerns and opinions. Thus, it could facilitate communication between health care professionals and patients, and ultimately improve the doctor–patient relationship. Due to the interest shown in medical issues it seems desirable to have healthcare institutions and healthcare workers involved in Twitter.

OMERACT Filter 2.1: Elaboration of the Conceptual Framework for Outcome Measurement in Health Intervention Studies

OBJECTIVE

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.0 framework was developed in 2014 to aid core outcome set development by describing the full universe of "measurable aspects of health conditions" from which core domains can be selected. This paper provides elaborations and updated concepts (OMERACT Filter 2.1).

METHODS

At OMERACT 2018, we discussed challenges in the framework application caused by unclear or ambiguous wording and terms and incompletely developed concepts.

RESULTS

The updated OMERACT Filter 2.1 framework makes benefits and harms explicit, clarifies concepts, and improves naming of various terms.

CONCLUSION

We expect that the Filter 2.1 framework will improve the process of core set development.

Patient Perspectives on DMARD Safety Concerns in Rheumatology Trials: Results from Inflammatory Arthritis Patient Focus Groups and OMERACT Attendees Discussion

OBJECTIVE

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Safety Working Group is identifying core safety domains that matter most to patients with rheumatic disease.

METHODS

International focus groups were held with 39 patients with inflammatory arthritis to identify disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) experiences and concerns. Themes were identified by pragmatic thematic coding and discussed in small groups by meeting attendees.

RESULTS

Patients view DMARD side effects as a continuum and consider the cumulative effect on day-to-day function. Disease and drug experiences, personal factors, and life circumstances influence tolerance of side effects and treatment persistence.

CONCLUSION

Patients weigh overall adverse effects and benefits over time in relation to experiences and life circumstances.