"I couldn't carry on taking a drug like that": A qualitative study of patient perspectives on side effects from rheumatology drugs

OBJECTIVES

There is growing interest in collecting outcome information directly from patients in clinical trials. This study evaluates what patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) consider important to know about symptomatic side effects they may experience from a new prescription drug.

METHODS

Patients with inflammatory arthritis, who had one or more prescribed drugs for their disease for at least 12 months, participated in focus groups and individual interviews. Discussions were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We conducted seven focus groups with 34 participants across three continents. We found four overarching and two underpinning themes. The 'impact on life' was connected to participants 'daily life', 'family life', 'work life', and 'social life'. In 'psychological and physical aspects' participants described 'limitation to physical function', 'emotional dysregulation' and 'an overall mental state'. Extra tests, hospital visits and payment for medication were considered a 'time, energy and financial burden' of side effects. Participants explained important measurement issues to be 'severity', 'frequency', and 'duration'. Underpinning these issues, participants evaluated the 'benefit-harm-balance' which includes 'the cumulative burden' of having several side effects and the persistence of side effects over time.

CONCLUSIONS

In treatment for RMDs, there seems to be an urgent need for feasible measures of patient-reported bother (impact on life and cumulative burden) from side effects and the benefit-harm-balance. These findings contribute new evidence in support of a target domain-an outcome that represents the patient voice evaluating the symptomatic treatment-related side effects for people with RMDs enrolled in clinical trials.

Patients' perspectives on systemic sclerosis-related Raynaud's phenomenon in the feet: A qualitative study from the OMERACT Foot and Ankle Working Group

OBJECTIVE

To explore, from patients' perspectives, the symptoms and impact of Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) on the feet of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc-RP), and to identify which foot-related domains are important to patients.

METHODS

Forty participants (34 women) with SSc-RP took part in one of six focus groups held in the United Kingdom or United States. Participants were purposively sampled to ensure diversity in disease type, duration, and ethnicity. The topic guide included questions on RP impact, self-management, and treatment expectations. Qualitative content analysis was employed to identify key concepts in the data relating to foot-specific symptoms and their impact. Themes were organized by corresponding domains of potential importance.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight participants (70 %) reported experiencing RP in their feet. Five themes were identified corresponding to domains of potential importance: temperature changes, pain, cramping and stiffness, numbness, and color changes. These issues negatively affected participants' lives, impairing walking, driving, and socializing, and causing issues with footwear and hosiery.

CONCLUSIONS

This large qualitative study exploring the experiences of patients with SSc-RP in the feet identified several key domains of high importance to patients. SSc-RP is common in the feet, presents in several patterns, and impacts multiple aspects of patients' lives. These findings indicate where future foot-specific interventions for RP could be targeted. Findings from this study improve understanding of what domains are important to patients with SSc-RP affecting the feet and will contribute to the development of a core outcome set for foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

Validation of a new glucocorticoid-specific Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaire (the Steroid PRO)

OBJECTIVES

Glucocorticoids used in the treatment of inflammatory rheumatic conditions can impact on health-related quality of life. An underpinning qualitative study developed a long-list of candidate items for a treatment-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure. The objective of this paper is to determine scale structure and psychometric properties of the Steroid PRO.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of adults from the UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand, taking glucocorticoids for a rheumatic disease. Initial survey collected demographics, clinical information, 40 Steroid PRO candidate items and EuroQol-5 Dimensions- 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L). Follow-up, 3-5 days later, collected Steroid PRO candidate items and a condition-change ('transition') question. Analysis included Rasch measurement model, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and hypothesis testing for discriminative validity, convergence validity and test-retest reliability.

RESULTS

Total responses 946: UK n=743 (79%); USA n=139 (15%); Australia/New Zealand n=64 (7%); mean age 57.6 (SD=13.6); 833 (88%) women. Participants with inflammatory arthritis n=197 (21%), connective tissue disease and/or vasculitis n=402 (42%), giant cell arteritis and/or polymyalgia rheumatica n=347 (37%). Twenty-five items were removed due to lack of fit to Rasch model. Of the remaining items, EFA suggested four subscales: Social impact (4 items); Impact on appearance (3 items); Psychological impact (5 items); Treatment concerns (3 items). Rasch modelling supported a four-subscale structure and total score, confirming construct validity and reliability. Hypothesis testing confirmed discriminant and convergence validity. Intraclass correlation coefficient (total score) was 0.809 demonstrating excellent (test-retest) reliability.

CONCLUSIONS

The Steroid PRO is a 15-item, valid and reliable scale for measuring the impact of glucocorticoid therapy in people with rheumatic diseases.

Consensus of the definitions of the OMERACT glucocorticoid impact core domain set for people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

BACKGROUND

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Glucocorticoid (GC) Impact Working Group has been working to develop a core domain set to measure the impact of GCs on patients living with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. The mandatory domains previously identified for inclusion in all clinical trials measuring the GC effects include infection, bone fragility, mood disturbance, hypertension, diabetes, weight, fatigue, and mortality. Before progressing to instrument selection, the Working Group sought to establish precise definitions of all mandatory domains within the core domain set.

METHODS

OMERACT methodology was applied with the use of evidence and consensus-based decision making of all stakeholder groups (patient research partners, health care professionals, clinician researchers, industry members and methodologists) to develop detailed definitions for the broad domain, target domain and domain components, taking into consideration sources of variability that could affect measurement of the domain.  The working group synthesized prior qualitative studies, quantitative work, and results from Delphi rounds, to develop a rich definition of 'what' is to be measured.

RESULTS

Between 2021 and 2023, the OMERACT Working Group on GC Impact conducted virtual meetings to establish domain definitions. First, we mapped each domain onto an OMERACT Core Area. All domains were primarily represented within the Pathophysiological Manifestations Core Area, except from Fatigue which was primarily Life Impact and Weight which spanned both Core Areas. Sources of variability included cultural factors, age, gender, education level, socioeconomic status, personal experiences, emotional state, and language barriers. The domain definitions will form the foundation for instrument selection and the initial step of domain / concept match and content validity in the OMERACT pillar of 'truth' before moving on to feasibility and discrimination.

CONCLUSION

The OMERACT GC Impact Working Group has developed and agreed upon detailed domain definitions for core domains. Future steps of the working group are to select instruments and develop the core outcome measurement set for clinical trials measuring the impact of GC on patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

Nurse-led care for people with early rheumatoid arthritis: Interview study with thematic analysis

AIMS

To develop an understanding of what comprises nurse-led care in early rheumatoid arthritis from the perspective of rheumatology nurse specialists in England.

DESIGN

Qualitative study.

METHODS

Semi-structured telephone interviews with rheumatology nurse specialists in England were conducted in Summer 2020. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Reporting follows the appropriate elements of consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research.

RESULTS

Sixteen nurses were recruited and interviews lasted 30-60 min. Four themes with 14 subthemes were identified. A SPECIALIST SERVICE DELIVERED BY EXPERIENCED RHEUMATOLOGY NURSES: Specialist care is provided by experienced nurse specialists with a high degree of autonomy in the rheumatology multidisciplinary team context.

ADDRESSING PATIENTS' COMPLEX CARE NEEDS

Care is evidence-based and aims to start treatment, keep in treatment, educate and support. Access to psychology expertise is needed. CARE WITH COMPASSION USING PERSON-CENTRED, HOLISTIC AND EMPATHETIC APPROACHES: Nurses create patient relationships and a positive therapeutic environment. Nurse-led telephone advice lines are essential for treatment adjustment, patient support and empowerment.

CONTINUED EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SERVICE

Consultations are reviewed, and patients are asked for feedback. The COVID-19 pandemic caused disruption, but changes streamlined procedures and improved documentation and communication.

CONCLUSION

Nurse-led care in early rheumatoid arthritis is a specialist service delivered with compassion, addressing complex care needs and using person-centred approaches. This study identifies key aspects of care in early disease from the nurse perspective.

Measuring the impact of steroid therapy on health-related quality of life in patients with rheumatic diseases: international development of a glucocorticoid treatment-specific patient-reported outcome measure

OBJECTIVES

Glucocorticoids (GCs) ('steroids') are used to treat rheumatic diseases but adverse effects are common. We aimed to explore the impact of GC therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), to inform the development of a treatment-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for use in clinical trials and practice.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with patients from the UK, USA and Australia, treated for a rheumatic condition with GCs in the last 2 years. Purposive sampling was used to select participants with a range of demographic and disease features. An initial conceptual framework informed interview prompts and cues. Interviews elicited GC-related physical and psychological symptoms and salient aspects of HRQoL in relation to GC therapy. Interview data were analysed inductively to develop initial individual themes and domains. Candidate questionnaire items were developed and refined.

RESULTS

Sixty semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted (UK n = 34, USA n = 10, Australia n = 16). The mean age was 58 years; 39/60 were female; and 18 rheumatic diseases were represented. Some 126 individual themes were identified and organized into six domains: physical symptoms; psychological symptoms; psychological impact of steroids; impact of steroids on participation; impact of steroids on relationships; and benefits of steroids. Candidate questionnaire items were tested and refined by piloting with patient research partners, iterative rounds of cognitive interviews and linguistic translatability assessment, informing a draft questionnaire.

CONCLUSION

We describe an international qualitative study to develop candidate items for a treatment-specific PROM for patients with rheumatic diseases. A future survey will enable the validation of a final version of the PROM.

Living with foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: A systematic review of qualitative studies to inform the work of the OMERACT Foot and Ankle Working Group

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine outcome domains of importance to patients living with foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), by exploring the symptoms and impact of these disorders reported in existing qualitative studies.

METHODS

Six databases were searched from inception to March 2022. Studies were included if they used qualitative interview or focus group methods, were published in English, and involved participants living with RMDs (inflammatory arthritis, osteoarthritis, crystal arthropathies, connective tissue diseases, and musculoskeletal conditions in the absence of systemic disease) who had experienced foot and ankle problems. Quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative tool and confidence in the findings was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. All data from the results section of included studies were extracted, coded and synthesised to develop themes.

RESULTS

Of 1,443 records screened, 34 studies were included, with a total of 503 participants. Studies included participants with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 18), osteoarthritis (n = 5), gout (n = 3), psoriatic arthritis (n = 1), lupus (n = 1), posterior tibial tendon dysfunction (n = 1), plantar heel pain (n = 1), Achilles tendonitis (n = 1), and a mixed population (n = 3), who live with foot and ankle disorders. Seven descriptive themes were generated from the thematic synthesis: pain, change in appearance, activity limitations, social isolation, work disruption, financial burden and emotional impact. Descriptive themes were inductively analysed further to construct analytical themes relating to potential outcome domains of importance to patients. Foot or ankle pain was the predominant symptom experienced by patients across all RMDs explored in this review. Based on grading of the evidence, we had moderate confidence that most of the review findings represented the experiences of patients with foot and ankle disorders in RMDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate that foot and ankle disorders impact on multiple areas of patients' lives, and patients' experiences are similar regardless of the RMD. This study will inform the development of a core domain set for future foot and ankle research and are also useful for clinicians, helping to focus clinical appointments and measurement of outcomes within clinical practice.

Developing a core outcome set for foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: A scoping review and report from the OMERACT 2022 foot and ankle special interest group session

OBJECTIVES

Foot and ankle involvement is common in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases, yet high-quality evidence assessing the effectiveness of treatments for these disorders is lacking. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Foot and Ankle Working Group is developing a core outcome set for use in clinical trials and longitudinal observational studies in this area.

METHODS

A scoping review was performed to identify outcome domains in the existing literature. Clinical trials and observational studies comparing pharmacological, conservative or surgical interventions involving adult participants with any foot or ankle disorder in the following rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) were eligible for inclusion: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), osteoarthritis (OA), spondyloarthropathies, crystal arthropathies and connective tissue diseases. Outcome domains were categorised according to the OMERACT Filter 2.1.

RESULTS

Outcome domains were extracted from 150 eligible studies. Most studies included participants with foot/ankle OA (63% of studies) or foot/ankle involvement in RA (29% of studies). Foot/ankle pain was the outcome domain most commonly measured (78% of studies), being the most frequently specified outcome domain across all RMDs. There was considerable heterogeneity in the other outcome domains measured, across core areas of manifestations (signs, symptoms, biomarkers), life impact, and societal/resource use. The group's progress to date, including findings from the scoping review, was presented and discussed during a virtual OMERACT Special Interest Group (SIG) in October 2022. During this meeting, feedback was sought amongst delegates regarding the scope of the core outcome set, and feedback was received on the next steps of the project, including focus group and Delphi methods.

CONCLUSION

Findings from the scoping review and feedback from the SIG will contribute to the development of a core outcome set for foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. The next steps are to determine which outcome domains are important to patients, followed by a Delphi exercise with key stakeholders to prioritise outcome domains.

Exploring perceptions of using preference elicitation methods to inform clinical trial design in rheumatology: A qualitative study and OMERACT collaboration

BACKGROUND

Clinical trial design requires value judgements and understanding patient preferences may help inform these judgements, for example when prioritizing treatment candidates, designing complex interventions, selecting appropriate outcomes, determining clinically important thresholds, or weighting composite outcomes. Preference elicitation methods are quantitative approaches that can estimate patients' preferences to quantify the absolute or relative importance of outcomes or other attributes relevant to the decision context. We aimed to explore stakeholder perceptions of using preference elicitation methods to inform judgements when designing clinical trials in rheumatology.

METHODS

We conducted 1-on-1 semi-structured interviews with patients with rheumatic diseases and rheumatology clinicians/researchers, recruited using purposive and snowball sampling. Participants were provided pre-interview materials, including a video and a document, to introduce the topic of preference elicitation methods and case examples of potential applications to clinical trials. Interviews were conducted via Zoom and were audio-recorded and transcribed. We used thematic analysis to analyze our data.

RESULTS

We interviewed 17 patients and 9 clinicians/researchers, until data and inductive thematic saturation were achieved within each group. Themes were grouped into overall perceptions, barriers, and facilitators. Patients and clinicians/researchers generally agreed that preference elicitation studies can improve clinical trial design, but that many considerations are required around preference heterogeneity and feasibility. A key barrier identified was the additional resources and expertise required to measure and incorporate preferences effectively in trial design. Key facilitators included developing guidance on how to use preference elicitation to inform trial design, as well as the role of external decision-makers in developing such guidance, and the need to leverage the movement towards patient engagement in research to encourage including patient preferences when designing trials.

CONCLUSION

Our findings allowed us to consider the potential applications of patient preferences in trial design according to stakeholders within rheumatology who are involved in the trial process. Future research should be conducted to develop comprehensive guidance on how to meaningfully include patient preferences when designing clinical trials in rheumatology. Doing so may have important downstream effects for shared decision-making, especially given the chronic nature of rheumatic diseases.

Developing an Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Core set of Outcome Measures for FOot and ankle disorders in RheumaTic and musculoskeletal diseases (COMFORT): core domain set study protocol

BACKGROUND

Foot and ankle involvement is common in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). High-quality evidence is lacking to determine the effectiveness of treatments for these disorders. Heterogeneity in the outcomes used across clinical trials and observational studies hinders the ability to compare findings, and some outcomes are not always meaningful to patients and end-users. The Core set of Outcome Measures for FOot and ankle disorders in RheumaTic and musculoskeletal diseases (COMFORT) study aims to develop a core outcome set (COS) for use in all trials of interventions for foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. This protocol addresses core outcome domains (what to measure) only. Future work will focus on core outcome measurement instruments (how to measure).

METHODS

COMFORT: Core Domain Set is a mixed-methods study involving the following: (i) identification of important outcome domains through literature reviews, qualitative interviews and focus groups with patients and (ii) prioritisation of domains through an online, modified Delphi consensus study and subsequent consensus meeting with representation from all stakeholder groups. Findings will be disseminated widely to enhance uptake.

CONCLUSIONS

This protocol details the development process and methodology to identify and prioritise domains for a COS in the novel area of foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. Future use of this standardised set of outcome domains, developed with all key stakeholders, will help address issues with outcome variability. This will facilitate comparing and combining study findings, thus improving the evidence base for treatments of these conditions. Future work will identify suitable outcome measurement instruments for each of the core domains.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database, as of June 2022: https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2081.

POS0040-HPR PATIENT PERCEPTIONS OF IMPACT OF GLUCOCORTICOID THERAPY IN THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES: INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF A TREATMENT-SPECIFIC PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURE

Background

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are a key treatment for inflammatory rheumatic diseases, but they cause a wide range of adverse side-effects which are of concern both to patients and clinicians.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to explore the impact of GC therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) during treatment for rheumatic diseases, as a basis for development of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) to be used in clinical trials and practice.

Methods

Patients from the UK, USA and Australia who were treated with GCs in the last two years for a rheumatic condition were invited to take part in semi-structured qualitative interviews. Purposive sampling was used to include participants with a range of demographic and disease features. A steering committee of patient research partners, clinicians and methodologists devised an initial conceptual framework, which informed interview prompts and cues. Interviews were carried out by experienced qualitative researchers who encouraged participants to tell their stories and talk about the effects, both adverse and beneficial, of their experiences and perceptions of treatment with GCs, to identify salient physical and psychological symptoms and aspects of HRQoL. The interview data were organised using NVivo, and inductive analysis identified initial themes and domains. Candidate questionnaire items were developed and refined using cognitive interviewing, linguistic assessment, and input from patient research partners.

Results

Sixty semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted (UK n=34, USA n=10, Australia n=16). Mean participant age was 58 years; 39 (66.1%) were female. Purposive sampling of participants provided a broad range of demographic features, GC dosages and inflammatory rheumatic conditions, with 27% having connective tissue disease, 25% inflammatory arthritis, 30% systemic vasculitis and 16% other rheumatic conditions.

Initial domains were developed to identify key themes relating to treatment using GCs and their impact on HRQoL; see Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Steroid PRO Initial Themes

A long-list of 134 initial candidate questionnaire items was developed from the individual themes. These items were reviewed by a qualitative working group of patient research partners, researchers and clinicians to reduce duplication and ambiguity of items. The resulting 62 items were tested and refined by piloting with patient research partners, iterative rounds of cognitive interviews with patients with a range of rheumatic conditions from the UK, USA and Australia, and a linguistic translatability assessment, to define a draft questionnaire of 40 items.

Conclusion

This international qualitative study underpins the development of candidate items for a treatment-specific PROM for patients with rheumatic diseases. The draft questionnaire is currently being tested in an online large-scale survey to determine the final scale structure and measurement properties using Rasch analysis, factor analysis, test-retest, comparison with EQ5D, and known groups analysis.

Disclosure of Interests

Susan Bridgewater Grant/research support from: Vifor Pharma, Michael A Shepherd Grant/research support from: Vifor Pharma, Jill Dawson: None declared, Pamela Richards: None declared, Christine Silverthorne: None declared, Mwidimi Ndosi: None declared, Celia Almeida: None declared, Rachel J Black: None declared, Jonathan T.L. Cheah: None declared, Emma Dures: None declared, Nilasha Ghosh: None declared, Elizabeth A Hoon: None declared, Suellen Lyne: None declared, Iris Navarro-Millan Consultant of: Honorarium on Swedish Orpham Biovitrum (SOBI) advisory board 2021, Diyu Pearce-Fisher: None declared, Carlee Ruediger: None declared, Joanna Tieu: None declared, Kevin Yip: None declared, Sarah Mackie: None declared, Susan Goodman: None declared, Catherine Hill: None declared, Joanna Robson Speakers bureau: EULAR Symposium 2021 for Vifor Pharma, Consultant of: Honorarium for Vifor Pharma advisory board 2021, Grant/research support from: Vifor Pharma 2020-2022

P092 Patients’ perceptions of glucocorticoid therapy impact on health-related quality of life during treatment for rheumatic diseases: international development of a treatment-specific patient-reported outcome measure (the Steroid PRO)

Background/Aims

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are widely used to treat inflammatory rheumatic diseases. GCs carry a range of adverse effects of concern to patients and clinicians. The objective of this study was to explore the impact of GC therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) during treatment for rheumatic diseases, as a basis for development of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) to be used in clinical trials and practice.

Methods

Patients from the UK, USA and Australia who were treated with GCs in the last two years for a rheumatic condition were invited to take part in semi-structured qualitative interviews. A steering committee of patient research partners, clinicians and methodologists devised an initial conceptual framework, which informed interview prompts and cues. Interviews identified physical and psychological symptoms and salient aspects of HRQoL in relation to treatment with GCs. Purposive sampling was used to include a range of demographic and disease features. The interview data were organised using NVivo, and inductive analysis identified initial themes and domains. Candidate questionnaire items were developed and refined using cognitive interviewing, linguistic assessment, and input from patient research partners.

Results

Sixty semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted (UK n = 34, USA n = 10, Australia n = 16). Mean participant age was 58 years; 39 (66.1%) were female. Detailed demographic and GC use information is provided in Table 1.

The following initial domains were developed to identify key themes relating to treatment using GCs and their impact on HRQoL: benefits of steroids; physical symptoms; psychological symptoms; psychological impact of steroids; impact of steroids on participation and on relationships.

Forty-one candidate questionnaire items were developed from the individual themes. These were tested and refined by piloting with patient research partners, iterative rounds of cognitive interviews with patients with a range of rheumatic conditions from the UK, USA and Australia, and a linguistic translatability assessment, to define a draft questionnaire.

Conclusion

This international qualitative study underpins the development of candidate items for a treatment-specific PROM for patients with rheumatic diseases. The draft questionnaire is now ready for testing in an online large-scale survey to determine the final scale structure, possible item reduction, and measurement properties.

Disclosure

S. Bridgewater: None. M.A. Shepherd: None. J. Dawson: None. P. Richards: None. C. Silverthorne: None. M. Ndosi: None. C. Almeida: None. R.J. Black: None. J.T.L. Cheah: None. E. Dures: None. N. Ghosh: None. E.A. Hoon: None. S. Lyne: None. I. Navarro-Millan: None. D. Pearce-Fisher: None. C. Ruediger: None. J. Tieu: None. K. Yip: None. S. Mackie: None. S. Goodman: None. C. Hill: None. J.C. Robson: None.

Concurrent thyrolipomatosis and thymolipoma in a patient with myasthenia gravis: a case report and review of the literature

We present a case of a man with a background of myasthenia gravis who presented with a neck lump, which was diagnosed as thyrolipomatosis in continuity with a very large thymolipoma. Following removal of these lesions, the patient's myaesthenic symptoms improved. While thymolipomas are often seen in the context of myasthenia gravis, thyrolipomatosis is a rare entity and to our knowledge the concurrent finding of both lesions with myasthenia gravis has never been reported. We highlight the important imaging features of both entities and the clinical importance of recognising them.

Improving benefit-harm assessment of glucocorticoid therapy incorporating the patient perspective: The OMERACT glucocorticoid core domain set

OBJECTIVE

Our primary objective was to develop an Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set to capture the impact of glucocorticoids (GC), both positive and negative, on patients with Rheumatic conditions.

METHODS

The OMERACT Filter 2.1 was used to guide core domain selection. Systematic literature reviews, qualitative studies and quantitative surveys were conducted by the OMERACT GC Impact working group to identify candidate domains for a core domain set. A summary of prior work and Delphi exercise were presented at the OMERACT 2020 virtual GC workshop. A proposed GC Impact core domain set derived from this work was presented for discussion in facilitated breakout groups. Participants voted on the proposed GC Impact core domain set.

RESULTS

113 people, including 23 patient research partners, participated in two virtual workshops conducted at different times on the same day. The proposed mandatory domains to be evaluated in clinical trials involving GCs were: infection, bone fragility, hypertension, diabetes, weight, fatigue, mood disturbance and death. In addition, collection of disease specific outcomes was included in the core domain set as "mandatory in specific circumstances". The proposed core domain set was endorsed by 100% (23/23) of the patient research partners and 92% (83/90) of the remaining participants, including clinicians, researchers and industry stakeholders.

CONCLUSION

A GC Impact core domain set was endorsed at the OMERACT 2020 virtual workshop. The OMERACT GC Impact working group will now progress to identify, develop and validate measurement tools to best address these domains in clinical trials.

POS0158-HPR UNDERSTANDING NURSE-LED CARE IN EARLY RA: INTERVIEW STUDY WITH RHEUMATOLOGY NURSE SPECIALISTS

Background:

Nurse-led care in early RA is not well defined in the literature and the current recommendations.

Objectives:

This study aimed to develop an understanding of what comprises nurse-led care in early RA from the perspective of rheumatology nurse specialists.

Methods:

This was a qualitative study using semi-structured telephone interviews with rheumatology nurse specialists in England (Summer 2020). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.[1]

Results:

Sixteen nurses were recruited and interviews lasted between 30 to 60 minutes. Seven themes were identified.

Early disease management

Care was characterised by evidence-based RA management provided by experienced nurse specialists with a high degree of autonomy, in the context of a rheumatology multidisciplinary team. The aims of care were to: start treatment, keep in treatment, educate and support.

’So treat to target...escalating treatment as necessary, and addressing any concerns that the patients might have’ (CNS14)

Addressing psychosocial needs

Patients with early RA experience shock, fear, anger, grief and denial while feeling unwell with pain and fatigue. Nurses use a holistic, person-centred and empathetic approach to address psychosocial needs, building a working relationship, listening and creating trust.

’Because it all relates, and if they’re stressed because they’re not coping at work, then their arthritis isn’t going to be so good. So everything relates to one another really’ (CNS06)

Monitoring treatment, disease impact and patient outcomes

Nurses monitor disease activity and disease impact using validated outcome measures and by asking questions during the consultation. Good outcomes are disease control, managing disease impact, medication and side effects, wellbeing and keeping in work.

’When you get them stable, when you get them into remission, when they’re happy, when they’re feeling well, I think there’s lots of ways you can measure that’… (CNS13)

Coordinating care, referring and signposting

Nurses coordinate care, refer to other health professionals and signpost patients to relevant services and charities. Lack of access to psychology expertise was highlighted.

‘And whilst most of us have got some degree of understanding of…self management, or psychology…we’re not psychologists’ (CNS02)

Providing a ‘lifeline’

Nurse-led telephone advice services provide a ‘lifeline’ for patients. If patients struggle, they can call and speak with a specialist who knows them and their RA well.

’The advice line has been a lifeline to them, to be able to speak to someone, to be able to get a response quickly to their questions, they feel very well supported, they know that they can always call us’ (CNS16)

Service evaluation and auditing

The individual clinics are reviewed regularly. Patients are asked for feedback on their experience of appointments, if their needs were met and about changes to the service.

...‘It’s really important to ask them initially what they expect to have from the consultation...We’ve always had really good feedback in general’… (CNS02)

COVID-19 challenges and opportunities

The pandemic caused major disruptions to the services, prohibiting most face-to-face consultations which was an essential aspect of clinical assessments. Despite the challenges imposed by the pandemic, the services adapted fast, using telephone, video clinics and digital solutions, which streamlined procedures and improved documentation and communication.

‘I do have to rely on them telling me what’s going on, because I can’t see it at the moment’ (CNS14)

’With Covid we’re doing it over the telephone, and we’re getting them to watch the video [injection tutorial] before we have the appointment with them’ (CNS04)

Conclusion:

Nurse-led care in early arthritis is a specialist service, addressing complex needs of patients, using evidence based and person-centred approaches. Innovation and service improvement are seen as part of the role.

References:

[1]Braun V, Clarke V. Successful Qualitative Research. First edition. London: SAGE 2013.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

Patient preferences to value health outcomes in rheumatology clinical trials: Report from the OMERACT special interest group✰

OBJECTIVE

To inform a research plan for future studies by obtaining stakeholder input on the application of preference-based methods to clinical trial design.

METHODS

We conducted a virtual OMERACT session to encourage stakeholder engagement. We developed materials for the session to facilitate discussion based on identified case examples and feedback sessions.

RESULTS

Participants prioritized incorporating patient preferences in all aspects of trial design with an emphasis on outcome selection. Participants highlighted the need for careful consideration around preference heterogeneity and equity factors.

CONCLUSION

Including patient preferences in trial design was considered a priority requiring further exploration to develop comprehensive guidance.

AB0834 DEVELOPMENT OF A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR A PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURE TO CAPTURE PATIENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF GLUCOCORTICOID THERAPY DURING TREATMENT FOR RHEUMATIC DISEASES

Background:

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are a key treatment for the autoimmune rheumatic diseases; however, they produce numerous physical and psychological side effects.1 The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Glucocorticoid Working Group have identified that there are no Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for assessing the impact of systemic GC therapy across multiple rheumatic diseases from the patient’s perspective.2,3

Objectives:

The aim is to explore the impact of GCs on the symptoms and health-related quality of life of adults with rheumatic inflammatory diseases, to inform items for inclusion in a PROM. Key considerations will include patient perceptions of GC therapy at diagnosis and over the course of treatment, for use in future randomised controlled trials or in clinical practice.

Methods:

An international steering committee comprising researchers, rheumatology clinicians, methodologists and patient partners in the UK, Australia and USA developed an initial conceptual framework informed by a review of the literature. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in each country with patients who had an autoimmune rheumatic disease and had received GC therapy. The interviews explored salient aspects of health-related quality of life associated with being treated with GCs.

Results:

Interviews have been completed in three continents with patients who had a range of demographic features, rheumatological conditions and duration and dosage of GC therapy. Figure 1 shows the initial conceptual framework for developing the GC PROM (Steroid PRO).

Figure 1.

Conclusion:

This conceptual framework will act as an evolving guide in the development of a PROM for assessing patients’ perspectives of systemic glucocorticoid therapy. Future work will include inductive analysis of qualitative transcripts to inform candidate questionnaire items, cognitive interviewing, linguistic translatability assessment, and an international validation survey to define the final PROM questionnaire and its measurement properties.

References:

[1]Cheah JTL, Robson JC, Black RJ, et al. The patient’s perspective of the adverse effects of glucocorticoid use: A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. From an OMERACT working group. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2020 Oct; 50(5):996-1005.

[2]Black RJ, Robson JC, Goodman SM, et al. A Patient-reported Outcome Measure for Effect of Glucocorticoid Therapy in Adults with Inflammatory Diseases Is Needed: Report from the OMERACT 2016 Special Interest Group. J Rheumatol. 2017; 44(11):1754-8.

[3]Cheah JTL, Black RJ, Robson JC, et al. Toward a Core Domain Set for Glucocorticoid Impact in Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases: The OMERACT 2018 Glucocorticoid Impact Working Group. J Rheumatol. 2019; 46(9):1179-1182.

Disclosure of Interests:

Susan Bridgewater Grant/research support from: Grant from Vifor Pharma for an independent investigator-led study to develop a PRO for steroids, Jill Dawson: None declared, Mwidimi Ndosi: None declared, Rachel J Black: None declared, Jonathan T.L. Cheah: None declared, Emma Dures: None declared, Nilasha Ghosh: None declared, Elizabeth A Hoon: None declared, Iris Navarro-Millan Consultant of: Received consultant fees from SOBI, Diyu Pearce-Fisher: None declared, Pamela Richards: None declared, Carlee Ruediger: None declared, Christine Silverthorne: None declared, Joanna Tieu Grant/research support from: Vifor Pharma, Sarah Mackie Consultant of: Consultancy on behalf of institution for Roche/Chugai, Sanofi, AbbVie and AstraZeneca, Grant/research support from: Educational grant from Roche to attend EULAR2019, Susan Goodman: None declared, Catherine Hill: None declared, Joanna Robson Speakers bureau: Vifor Pharma for educational webinar, Grant/research support from: Grant from Vifor Pharma for an independent investigator-led study to develop a PRO for steroids

Bridging the age gap in breast cancer: cluster randomized trial of two decision support interventions for older women with operable breast cancer on quality of life, survival, decision quality, and treatment choices

BACKGROUND

Rates of surgery and adjuvant therapy for breast cancer vary widely between breast units. This may contribute to differences in survival. This cluster RCT evaluated the impact of decision support interventions (DESIs) for older women with breast cancer, to ascertain whether DESIs influenced quality of life, survival, decision quality, and treatment choice.

METHODS

A multicentre cluster RCT compared the use of two DESIs against usual care in treatment decision-making in older women (aged at least ≥70 years) with breast cancer. Each DESI comprised an online algorithm, booklet, and brief decision aid to inform choices between surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy versus primary endocrine therapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy. The primary outcome was quality of life. Secondary outcomes included decision quality measures, survival, and treatment choice.

RESULTS

A total of 46 breast units were randomized (21 intervention, 25 usual care), recruiting 1339 women (670 intervention, 669 usual care). There was no significant difference in global quality of life at 6 months after the baseline assessment on intention-to-treat analysis (difference -0.20, 95 per cent confidence interval (C.I.) -2.69 to 2.29; P = 0.900). In women offered a choice of primary endocrine therapy versus surgery plus endocrine therapy, knowledge about treatments was greater in the intervention arm (94 versus 74 per cent; P = 0.003). Treatment choice was altered, with a primary endocrine therapy rate among women with oestrogen receptor-positive disease of 21.0 per cent in the intervention versus 15.4 per cent in usual-care sites (difference 5.5 (95 per cent C.I. 1.1 to 10.0) per cent; P = 0.029). The chemotherapy rate was 10.3 per cent at intervention versus 14.8 per cent at usual-care sites (difference -4.5 (C.I. -8.0 to 0) per cent; P = 0.013). Survival was similar in both arms.

CONCLUSION

The use of DESIs in older women increases knowledge of breast cancer treatment options, facilitates shared decision-making, and alters treatment selection. Trial registration numbers: EudraCT 2015-004220-61 (https://eudract.ema.europa.eu/), ISRCTN46099296 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

The dysbiosis of ovine foot microbiome during the development and treatment of contagious ovine digital dermatitis

Background

Contagious Ovine Digital Dermatitis (CODD) is an emerging and common infectious foot disease of sheep which causes severe welfare and economic problems for the sheep industry. The aetiology of the disease is not fully understood and control of the disease is problematic. The aim of this study was to investigate the polybacterial aetiopathogenesis of CODD and the effects of antibiotic treatment, in a longitudinal study of an experimentally induced disease outbreak using a 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing approach.

Results

CODD was induced in 15/30 experimental sheep. During the development of CODD three distinct phenotypic lesion stages were observed. These were an initial interdigital dermatitis (ID) lesion, followed by a footrot (FR) lesion, then finally a CODD lesion. Distinct microbiota were observed for each lesion in terms of microbial diversity, clustering and composition. Porphyromonadaceae, Family XI, Veillonellaceae and Fusobacteriaceae were significantly associated with the diseased feet. Veillonellaceae and Fusobacteriaceae were most associated with the earlier stages of ID and footrot rather than CODD. Following antibiotic treatment of the sheep, the foot microbiota showed a strong tendency to return to the composition of the healthy state. The microbiota composition of CODD lesions collected by swab and biopsy methods were different. In particular, the Spirochaetaceae family were more abundant in samples collected by the biopsy method, suggesting that these bacteria are present in deeper tissues of the diseased foot.

Conclusion

In this study, CODD presented as part of a spectrum of poly-bacterial foot disease strongly associated with bacterial families Porphyromonadaceae, Family XI (a family in Clostridiales also known as Clostridium cluster XI), Veillonellaceae and Fusobacteriaceae which are predominately Gram-negative anaerobes. Following antibiotic treatment, the microbiome showed a strong tendency to return to the composition of the healthy state. The composition of the healthy foot microbiome does not influence susceptibility to CODD.

Based on the data presented here and that CODD appears to be the severest end stage of sheep infectious foot disease lesions, better control of the initial ID and FR lesions would enable better control of CODD and enable better animal welfare.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s42523-021-00078-4.

The patient perspective of nurse-led care in early rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review of qualitative studies with thematic analysis

INTRODUCTION

Management of rheumatoid arthritis has changed dramatically over the last decade and is characterised by early start of intensive treatment and tight monitoring of disease activity until remission. The role of nurse-led care at early stage of disease is not well understood.

AIMS

To develop an understanding of rheumatology nurse-led care from the perspective of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

A systematic review of qualitative studies, reported in line with PRISMA checklist. In March 2019, the following databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and OpenGrey. Studies were included if they: included adults with rheumatoid arthritis; were qualitative studies with data on patients' perspectives of nurse-led care; and published in peer-reviewed journals, in English, between 2010-2019. Due to few studies in early rheumatoid arthritis, inclusion was extended to adults with established rheumatoid arthritis. Two reviewers screened abstracts and full texts. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool was used for quality assessment. Thematic synthesis was conducted according to the framework of Thomas and Harden (2008).

RESULTS

The search identified 1034 records. After screening and assessing for eligibility, eight qualitative studies were included in the review (133 patients). Three themes were identified from the synthesis. Nurse-led care was seen to provide professional expertise in planning and delivery of care. A person-centred approach was used combined with good communication skills, thus creating a positive therapeutic environment. Nurse-led care was described as providing a sense of empowerment and psychological support.

CONCLUSION

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis are supportive of nurse-led care. They value its professionalism and person-centred approach which provide a sense of security and confidence.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The findings outline ingredients of nurse-led care that are important to patients. These can inform nurses' professional development plans, service improvement and the competence framework for rheumatology nursing.

SAT0643-HPR NURSE-LED CARE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF PEOPLE WITH EARLY RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: A QUALITATIVE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Background:

Nurse-led care has been shown to be clinically effective and cost effective in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but the role of the nurse in early RA is not well defined. Evidence for processes of care in RA is limited and it is not known how well rheumatology nurse-led clinics meet care needs of people with early RA.

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to develop an understanding of rheumatology nurse-led care from the perspective of people with early RA.

Methods:

A qualitative systematic review was conducted. The review protocol is published in the International prospective register of systematic reviews.

In March 2019, the following databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and OpenGrey. Due to lack of studies in early RA this review included adults with early and established inflammatory arthritis, qualitative studies with data on patients’ perspectives of nurse-led care, published in peer-reviewed journals in English between 2010 and 2019. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Data were extracted and managed in tables. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist was used for quality assessment of the included studies. A thematic synthesis was undertaken using the framework of Thomas and Harden.1

Results:

The search identified 1034 records. After screening and assessing for eligibility, 8 qualitative studies were included in the review (133 patients), 2 studies included people with early RA. Three main themes were identified (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Themes of nurse-led care from the perspective of people with RA

Providing knowledge and skill. This theme delineated rheumatology nursing as providing professional expertise in the planning and delivery of care. The rheumatology nurse-led service included easy access via telephone helpline, consultations with the clinical nurse specialist for assessment of disease activity and care needs, planning of care, disease information and education, supporting self-management, and referral to rheumatologist and the multi-disciplinary team. People with RA highly valued the nurse expertise and specialist knowledge provided at nurse-led clinics.‘She was very good at informing me, so I have only praise for this ... because I have never had it like this before’. (Person with early RA).

Using a person-centred approach.This theme showed nurse-led care using a person-centred approach combined with empathy and good communication skills, which created a good therapeutic environment. People with RA appreciated the person-centeredness, empathy and involvement of the nurse. ‘She is very sensitive. She can see if I am feeling bad and comes straight to me and asks: “How are you today?” ...You are treated and taken seriously’. (Person with early RA).

Meeting patients‘ care needs. This theme presented nurse-led care as creating a sense of being empowered and psychologically supported in the management of RA and its impact. Nurse-led care made people with RA feel cared for, secure and confident. It added value to rheumatology care and made care complete.‘The thought of sticking a needle into my own stomach... it felt a bit like I would never manage to do that. However, they have been absolutely wonderful here ... and now I can do it myself’. (Person with early RA).

Conclusion:

Nurse-led care for people with RA is characterised by provision of rheumatology expertise using a person-centred approach, and patients‘ holistic care needs are being met. This study found a dearth of literature on perceptions of nurse-led care in people with early RA, which highlights the need for further research in this population.

References:

[1]Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews.BMC Med Res Methodol2008; 8: 45.

Disclosure of Interests:

Anne-Marie Tetsche Sweeney: None declared, Candy McCabe: None declared, Caroline Flurey: None declared, Joanna Robson: None declared, Alice Berry: None declared, Pamela Richards: None declared, Mwidimi Ndosi Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers Squibb, Consultant of: Janssen, Pfizer

Analysis of Milk-Based Infant Formula. Phase IV. Iodide, Linoleic Acid, and Vitamins D and K: U.S. Food and Drug Administration-Infant Formula Council: Collaborative Study

In 1982, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Infant Formula Council and its member companies, contract laboratories, and other government laboratories began a study of analytical methods for the nutrients listed in the Infant Formula Act of 1980. Phases I, II, III, and V have been completed. The present report provides data on Phase IV, in which 13 laboratories collaboratively studied an ion-selective electrode method for analyzing iodide, a gas chromatographic method for linoleic acid, and 2 liquid chromatographic (LC) methods each for vitamins D and K. Data were insufficient to evaluate one each of the LC methods studied for vitamins K and D. The relative standard deviations (RSD) are sufficient for the nutrient levels found in infant formula. RSDs (%) for repeatability (RSDr) and reproducibility (RSDR), respectively, were as follows: iodide, 4.0-11.4 and 13.5-18.2; linoleic acid, 1.0-1.6 and 3.5-5.1; vitamin K1, 3.2-16.0 and 6.2-19.4; and vitamin D3,4.2 and 35.0. The recommendation to adopt the method for vitamin D was supported by the results of a ministudy. All laboratories were capable of using these methods with little training. The methods for determination of iodide, linoleic acid, and vitamins D and K in ready-to-feed milkbased infant formula have been adopted first action by AOAC International.

Toward a Core Domain Set for Glucocorticoid Impact in Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases: The OMERACT 2018 Glucocorticoid Impact Working Group

OBJECTIVE

To understand the effects of glucocorticoids (GC), which are of importance to patients.

METHODS

The results of 2 literature reviews, a patient survey, and a qualitative study were presented.

RESULTS

No validated instrument exists to evaluate GC effect on patients. Survey data revealed skin thinning/bruising, sleep disturbance, and weight gain as the most frequent adverse effects. The qualitative research yielded rich data covering rapid benefits and physical and emotional consequences of GC.

CONCLUSION

It was agreed that a patient-reported outcome to measure GC effect was required and a research agenda was developed for this goal.

Rheumatoid arthritis patients' oral health and disease activity

AIM

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and periodontal diseases (PD) are common chronic, inflammatory, destructive and progressive diseases that may have similar pathophysiological mechanisms and risk factors. RA affects more than 1.5% of the world's population, with a higher percentage of females than males. PD is present in around 20% of the population and has multifactorial etiology. The purpose of this study is to describe patients' self-reported oral health and the association with RA disease activity.

METHOD

Three hundred patients under treatment for RA from the Division of Rheumatology, Clinical Medicine, North Jutland Region Hospital, Hjørring, Denmark and were eligible for the study. Questionnaires were emailed to the patients and 164 completed answers were received.

RESULTS

The mean age of the group of 164 patients (61% female) was 65 ± 11 years. The average value of Disease Activity Score of 28 joints was 2.31 ± 0.83. Only 12% of responders were active smokers. Patients estimated their status of their teeth and gingiva respectively as poor in 13% and 11% of cases, good, in 46% and 49%, and excellent, both as 40%. Spontaneous and/or provoked gingival bleeding were experienced by 15% and 49% of patients. Only 14% of patients declared feelings of loose or movable teeth and 10% declared difficulties in biting or chewing.

CONCLUSIONS

The status of oral cavity reported by Danish patients indicates a significant proportion with symptoms of gingival/periodontal disease, which may negatively influence RA activity and disease management. Cooperation between rheumatologists and dentists is important in oral health management in periodontal inflammation.

Patients' experience of shoulder disorders: a systematic review of qualitative studies for the OMERACT Shoulder Core Domain Set

OBJECTIVES

To describe the experiences (including symptoms and perceived impacts on daily living) of people with a shoulder disorder.

METHODS

Systematic review of qualitative studies. We searched for eligible qualitative studies indexed in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CINAHL (EBSCO), SportDiscus (EBSCO) and Ovid PsycINFO up until November 2017. Two authors independently screened studies for inclusion, appraised their methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist, used thematic synthesis methods to generate themes describing the experiences reported by participants and assessed the confidence in the findings using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) approach.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by eight studies, which included 133 participants (49 females and 84 males) with either rotator cuff disease, adhesive capsulitis, proximal humeral fracture, shoulder instability or unspecified shoulder pain. We generated seven themes to describe what people in the included studies reported experiencing: pain; physical function/activity limitations; participation restriction; sleep disruption; cognitive dysfunction; emotional distress; and other pathophysiological manifestations (other than pain). There were interactions between the themes, with particular experiences impacting on others (e.g. pain leading to reduced activities and sleep disruption). Following grading of the evidence, we considered it likely that most of the review findings were a reasonable representation of the experiences of people with shoulder disorders.

CONCLUSION

Patients with shoulder disorders contend with considerable disruption to their life. The experiences described should be considered by researchers seeking to select the most appropriate outcomes to measure in clinical trials and other research studies in people with shoulder disorders.

Advancing Stiffness Measurement in Rheumatic Disease: Report from the Stiffness Special Interest Group at OMERACT 2018

OBJECTIVE

To improve measurement of stiffness in rheumatic disease.

METHODS

Data presented included (1) 2 qualitative projects, (2) the rheumatoid arthritis (RA) stiffness patient-reported outcome measure (RAST), and (3) 3 items assessing stiffness severity, duration, and interference.

RESULTS

Stiffness is multidimensional and includes aspects of stiffness experience such as duration, severity, and effect. Stiffness items showed construct validity in RA. Further efforts are required to develop an instrument that will be taken through the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 for instrument selection.

CONCLUSION

The research agenda for the group includes domain content voting for individual diseases, and development of stiffness item banks and disease-specific short forms.

The OMERACT Core Domain Set for Clinical Trials of Shoulder Disorders

OBJECTIVE

To reach consensus on the core domains to be included in a core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 Core Domain Set process.

METHODS

At OMERACT 2018, the OMERACT Shoulder Working Group conducted a workshop that presented the OMERACT 2016 preliminary core domain set and its rationale based upon a systematic review of domains measured in shoulder trials and international Delphi sessions involving patients, clinicians, and researchers, as well as a new systematic review of qualitative studies on the experiences of people with shoulder disorders. After discussions in breakout groups, the OMERACT core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders was presented for endorsement by OMERACT 2018 participants.

RESULTS

The qualitative review (n = 8) identified all domains included in the preliminary core set. An additional domain, cognitive dysfunction, was also identified, but confidence that this represents a core domain was very low. The core domain set that was endorsed by the OMERACT participants, with 71% agreement, includes 4 "mandatory" trial domains: pain, function, patient global - shoulder, and adverse events including death; and 4 "important but optional" domains: participation (recreation/work), sleep, emotional well-being, and condition-specific pathophysiological manifestations. Cognitive dysfunction was voted out of the core domain set.

CONCLUSION

OMERACT 2018 delegates endorsed a core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders. The next step includes identification of a core outcome measurement set that passes the OMERACT 2.1 Filter for measuring each domain.

Instant 99mTc Compounds

The full potential use of technetium has not been achieved despite its ideal physical properties, dosimetry and availability because of the complex preparations required for 99mTc radiopharmaceuticals. One of the goals of our work is to develop techniques for the preparation of high-purity 99mTc compounds which can be easily prepared, ideally by adding pertechnetate to a prepared solution.

The use of stannous ion as reducing agent for technetium makes it possible to obtain such one-step, high-purity products. All non-radioactive components can be premixed in a single vial before addition of the radioactive pertechnetate. No final pH adjustment, further chemical manipulation or purification is required.

Procedures for two instantly labeled compounds have been developed to date: 99mTc DTPA and 99mTc HSA. The 99mTc DTPA is prepared by adding pertechnetate to a previously prepared solution of stannous ion and CaNa3 DTPA which has been stored at pH 4. The 99mTc HSA is prepared by adding pertechnetate to a solution of stannous ion and HSA. The parametric variations and analytical techniques involved in formulating these procedures are described. It appears that development of kits for other biologically interesting compounds may be possible using similar procedures.

A Comparison of the Cyclic Anhydride and Mixed Anhydride Methods for 111In-DTPA Chelation to Monoclonal Antibodies

The cyclic anhydride (CA) and the mixed anhydride (MA) of DTPA were synthesized and used to chelate 111In to an antimelanoma monoclonal antibody. The CA and MA methods showed mean labeling efficiencies of 25.7 and 20.5%, respectively (p = NS). The binding efficiency of labeled antibody to human melanoma cells in tissue culture also was similar (x̄ = 52 and 50%, respectively, p = NS), as was tumor uptake in nude mice at 96 hrs post-injection (16%-CA vs 12%-MA). The method required less complicated chemical syntheses, much less preparation time, and the product was stable over a much longer period. The results suggest that the CA method is preferable for bifunctional chelate labeling of monoclonal antibodies with 111In-DTPA.

Successful Stepwise Development of Patient Research Partnership: 14 Years' Experience of Actions and Consequences in Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT)

There is increasing interest in making patient participation an integral component of medical research. However, practical guidance on optimizing this engagement in healthcare is scarce. Since 2002, patient involvement has been one of the key features of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) international consensus effort. Based on a review of cumulative data from qualitative studies and internal surveys among OMERACT participants, we explored the potential benefits and challenges of involving patient research partners in conferences and working group activities. We supplemented our review with personal experiences and reflections regarding patient participation in the OMERACT process. We found that between 2002 and 2016, 67 patients have attended OMERACT conferences, of whom 28 had sustained involvement; many other patients contributed to OMERACT working groups. Their participation provided face validity to the OMERACT process and expanded the research agenda. Essential facilitators have been the financial commitment to guarantee sustainable involvement of patients at these conferences, procedures for recruitment, selection and support, and dedicated time allocated in the program for patient issues. Current challenges include the representativeness of the patient panel, risk of pseudo-professionalization, and disparity in patients’ and researchers’ perception of involvement. In conclusion, OMERACT has embedded long-term patient involvement in the consensus-building process on the measurement of core health outcomes. This integrative process continues to evolve iteratively. We believe that the practical points raised here can improve participatory research implementation.

Abstract P4-22-04: A randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study of ruxolitinib (RUX) or placebo (PBO) in combination with capecitabine (CAPE) in patients (pts) with advanced HER2-negative breast cancer (ABC) and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), a marker of systemic inflammation

Background: Systemic inflammation is associated with poor prognosis in pts with ABC. The JAK/STAT pathway is a key regulator of inflammatory signaling, associated with tumorigenesis, cell survival, and progression. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of RUX, a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, plus CAPE in pts with HER2-negative ABC and high systemic inflammation defined by the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS). Methods: In this double-blind phase 2 trial, pts were randomized 1:1 to 21 day cycles of RUX+CAPE or PBO+CAPE: RUX 15 mg or PBO PO BID for 21 d; CAPE 1000 mg/m2 PO BID for 14 d. Key inclusion criteria were systemic inflammation by mGPS of 1 or 2 (ie, CRP >10 mg/L), ECOG performance status ≤2, ≤2 prior chemotherapy regimens, and no prior CAPE. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); key secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR; complete [CR] + partial response [PR]) per RECIST v1.1, clinical benefit rate (CBR; CR + PR + stable disease for ≥6 mo), duration of response, and safety. Treatment differences in OS and PFS were analyzed by the log-rank test; HRs and CIs were analyzed by the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between pts randomized to RUX+CAPE (n=76) vs PBO+CAPE (n=73): mGPS status (1, 82.9% vs 83.6%), hormone receptor (HR) status (positive, 67.1% vs 63.0%), and number of prior chemotherapy regimens for ABC (0, 50.0% vs 50.7%; 1, 38.2% vs 34.2%; 2, 9.2% vs 13.7%). Median treatment durations were 85 d with RUX in the RUX+CAPE group and 65 d with PBO in the PBO+CAPE group. Median OS was 11.2 mo with RUX+CAPE vs 10.9 mo with PBO+CAPE (HR, 0.932; 95% CI, 0.59–1.46; P=0.762). Median OS was 6.1 mo with RUX+CAPE vs 5.5 mo with PBO+CAPE in HR-negative pts and 11.7 mo and 12.2 mo in HR-positive pts. Median PFS was 4.5 mo with RUX+CAPE and 2.5 mo with PBO+CAPE (HR, 0.737; 95% CI, 0.49–1.12; P=0.151). Median PFS was 2.1 mo with RUX+CAPE vs 2.2 mo with PBO+CAPE in HR-negative pts and 6.1 mo and 4.1 mo in HR-positive pts. ORRs were 28.9% and 13.7% (P=0.024) in the RUX+CAPE and PBO+CAPE arms, respectively. The CBRs were 13.2% and 6.8%, respectively (P=0.278). Worsening of hematologic toxicity was higher and rates of grade 3/4 palmar-plantar erythrodysethesia (PPE) were lower (1.4% vs 12.7%, respectively) with RUX+CAPE (Table).

Safety RUX+CAPE (n=71)PBO+CAPE (n=71)%All-GradeGrade 3/4All-GradeGrade 3/4Nonhematologic Adverse Event*Fatigue56.35.643.74.2Nausea54.98.549.35.6Diarrhea47.98.526.82.8PPE46.51.438.012.7Vomiting38.05.629.64.2Hypokalemia15.58.57.02.8Worsening of Hematologic Toxicity†Anemia80.323.956.37.0Lymphopenia40.815.545.112.7Neutropenia39.411.322.52.8Thrombocytopenia39.411.315.51.4*Most common all-grade (≥35%) or grade 3/4 (≥5%) events in the RUX+CAPE arm (safety group). †Laboratory abnormalities.

Conclusion: These data support the prognostic capabilities of the mGPS. The addition of RUX to CAPE for pts with ABC and high systemic inflammation was associated with an improved ORR compared with PBO+CAPE, but did not improve OS or PFS.

Citation Format: O'Shaughnessy J, DeMichele A, Ma C, Richards P, Yardley DA, Wright G, Kalinsky K, Steis R, Diab S, Kennealey G, Geschwindt R, Jiang W, Rugo H. A randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study of ruxolitinib (RUX) or placebo (PBO) in combination with capecitabine (CAPE) in patients (pts) with advanced HER2-negative breast cancer (ABC) and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), a marker of systemic inflammation [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-22-04.

A Preliminary Core Domain Set for Clinical Trials of Shoulder Disorders: A Report from the OMERACT 2016 Shoulder Core Outcome Set Special Interest Group

Objective.

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Shoulder Core Outcome Set Special Interest Group (SIG) was established to develop a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials of shoulder disorders.

Methods.

In preparation for OMERACT 2016, we systematically examined all outcome domains and measurement instruments reported in 409 randomized trials of interventions for shoulder disorders published between 1954 and 2015. Informed by these data, we conducted an international Delphi consensus study including shoulder trial experts, clinicians, and patients to identify key domains that should be included in a shoulder disorder COS. Findings were discussed at a stakeholder premeeting of OMERACT. At OMERACT 2016, we sought consensus on a preliminary core domain set and input into next steps.

Results.

There were 13 and 15 participants at the premeeting and the OMERACT 2016 SIG meeting, respectively (9 attended both meetings). Consensus was reached on a preliminary core domain set consisting of an inner core of 4 domains: pain, physical function/activity, global perceived effect, and adverse events including death. A middle core consisted of 3 domains: emotional well-being, sleep, and participation (recreation and work). An outer core of research required to inform the final COS was also formulated.

Conclusion.

Our next steps are to (1) analyze whether participation (recreation and work) should be in the inner core, (2) conduct a third Delphi round to finalize definitions and wording of domains and reach final endorsement for the domains, and (3) determine which instruments fulfill the OMERACT criteria for measuring each domain.

Mass production of functional human pancreatic β-cells: why and how?

Diabetes (either type 1 or type 2) is due to insufficient functional β-cell mass. Research has, therefore, aimed to discover new ways to maintain or increase either β-cell mass or function. For this purpose, rodents have mainly been used as model systems and a large number of discoveries have been made. Meanwhile, although we have learned that rodent models represent powerful systems to model β-cell development, function and destruction, we realize that there are limitations when attempting to transfer the data to what is occurring in humans. Indeed, while human β-cells share many similarities with rodent β-cells, they also differ on a number of important parameters. In this context, developing ways to study human β-cell development, function and death represents an important challenge. This review will describe recent data on the development and use of convenient sources of human β-cells that should be useful tools to discover new ways to modulate functional β-cell mass in humans.

The Spirit of OMERACT: Q Methodology Analysis of Conference Characteristics Valued by Delegates

OBJECTIVE

To identify the major features of OMERACT meetings as valued by frequent participants and to explore whether there are groups of participants with different opinions.

METHODS

Using Q methodology (a qualitative and quantitative approach to grouping people according to subjective opinion), participants (who attended more than 1 OMERACT conference) sorted 66 statements relating to the "spirit of OMERACT" according to level of agreement across a normal distribution grid. Data were examined using Q factor analysis.

RESULTS

Of 226 potential participants, 105 responded (46%). All participants highly ranked the focus on global standardization of methods, outcome measures, data-driven research, methodological discussion, and international collaboration. Four factors describing the "spirit of OMERACT" were identified: "Evidence not eminence" (n = 31) valued the data- and evidence-driven research above personality and status; "Collaboration and collegiality" (n = 19) valued the international and cross-stakeholder collaboration, interaction, and collegiality; "Equal voices, equal votes, common goals" (n = 12) valued equality in discussion and voting, with everyone striving toward the same goal; "principles and product, not process" (n = 8) valued the principles of focusing on outcome measures and the product of guiding clinical trials, but were unsure whether the process is necessary to reach this. The factors did not segregate different stakeholder groups.

CONCLUSION

Delegates value different elements of OMERACT, and thus the "spirit of OMERACT" encompasses evidence-based research, collaboration, and equality, although a small group are unsure whether the process is necessary to achieve the end result. Q methodology may prove useful for conference organizers to identify their delegates' different needs to tailor conference content.

Case-mix analysis and variation in rates of non-surgical treatment of older women with operable breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Non-surgical management of older women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive operable breast cancer is common in the UK, with up to 40 per cent of women aged over 70 years receiving primary endocrine therapy. Although this may be appropriate for frailer patients, for some it may result in treatment failure, contributing to the poor outcomes seen in this age group. Wide variation in the rates of non-operative management of breast cancer in older women exists across the UK. Case mix may explain some of this variation in practice.

METHODS

Data from two UK regional cancer registries were analysed to determine whether variation in treatment observed between 2002 and 2010 at hospital and clinician level persisted after adjustment for case mix. Expected case mix-adjusted surgery rates were derived by logistic regression using the variables age, proxy Charlson co-morbidity score, deprivation quintile, method of cancer detection, tumour size, stage, grade and node status.

RESULTS

Data on 17,129 women aged 70 years or more with ER-positive operable breast cancer were analysed. There was considerable variation in rates of surgery at both hospital and clinician level. Despite adjusting for case mix, this variation persisted at hospital level, although not at clinician level.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates variation in selection criteria for older women for operative treatment of early breast cancer, indicating that some older women may be undertreated or overtreated, and may partly explain the inferior disease outcomes in this age group. It emphasizes the urgent need for evidence-based guidelines for treatment selection criteria in older women with breast cancer.

A Q-methodology study of flare help-seeking behaviours and different experiences of daily life in rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have not addressed rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients' help-seeking behaviours for RA flares, and only one small qualitative study has addressed how patients experience daily life on current treatment regimes. Thus, this study aims to identify clusters of opinion related to RA patients' experiences of daily life on current treatments, and their help-seeking behaviours for RA flares.

METHODS

Using Q-methodology (a methodology using qualitative and quantitative methods to sort people according to subjective experience), two separate studies were conducted with the same sample of RA patients (mean age 55, 73% female). Thirty participants sorted 39 statements about daily life (Q-study 1) and 29 participants separately sorted 23 statements about flare help-seeking (Q-study 2). Data were examined using Q-factor analysis.

RESULTS

Daily life with RA (Q-study 1): Three factors relating to the experience of living with RA were extracted and explained. Patients belonging to Factor A (mean age 62, 86% female) use effective self-management techniques to control the daily impact of RA. Those in Factor B (mean age 55, 75% male) struggle to self-manage and cope. Whilst patients in Factor C (mean age 42, 100% female) prioritise life responsibilities over their RA, reporting less impact.Flare help-seeking (Q-study 2): Two factors explaining the experience of flare help-seeking (unrelated to the factors from Q-study 1) were extracted and explained. Factor X (68.8% on biologics) reported seeking help quickly, believing the medical team is there to help. Factor Y (0% on biologics) delay help-seeking, concerned about wasting the rheumatologist's time, believing they should manage alone. All participants agreed they sought help due to intense pain and persistent, unmanageable symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with different characteristics appear to manage RA life in different ways and men may struggle more than women. Whilst all patients are prompted to seek help by persistent, unmanageable symptoms, some delay help-seeking. Further research is needed to quantify the severity of daily symptoms, the level of symptoms needed for patients to define themselves as in flare and to understand the support needs of RA men.