Explore the vast range of titles available.

The daily injection burden of recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) replacement therapy to treat growth hormone deficiency (GHD) may reduce compliance and limit treatment benefit. Research is needed to evaluate patient preferences for GHD injection regimen and device features. Quantitatively evaluate factors driving preferences for r-hGH injection regimen and device features among pediatric (3-17 years, and caregivers) and adult (≥25 years) patients with GHD using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) approach. The DCE was part of a broader, cross-sectional observational field study to develop clinical outcome assessments (COAs) that assess the experience of patients taking r-hGH injections. Following ethics approval, discrete choice data were collected through an online questionnaire from consented participants recruited from eight sites in the United States. Participants were presented with 20 choice tasks, each comprising different combinations of two profiles. Participants were then shown the same set of three hypothetical device and injection profiles (ie, storage, preparation, injection type device, maintenance, dose setting, injection schedule) and asked whether they would choose each profile over their current device and schedule. Choice-based conjoint analyses were used to estimate the marginal utilities and values for treatment attributes. Subject preferences were estimated at individual and aggregate levels. Two hundred and twenty-four participants completed the DCE (n=75 adults, n=79 adolescent/caregiver dyads, n=70 child/caregiver dyads). Injection schedule was the strongest predictor of choice for the total sample and each patient group. Less frequent injection schedules were more likely to be chosen by participants. A \"ready to use\" injection was preferred, with no preference for auto-injector versus needle-free device. Most participants would choose the hypothetical injection devices and less frequent dosing over their current daily administered device schedule. Patients prefer a less frequent injection regimen for treating GHD. Addressing patient preferences may improve compliance, adherence, and ultimately, clinical outcomes.

Objective: Overactive bladder (OAB) has substantial impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The purpose of this research was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ). Methods: The KHQ (n = 1284) was administered at baseline and 12 weeks post-treatment in a multinational, double-blind, randomized clinical trial of tolterodine for treatment of OAB. Country-specific psychometric analyses of HRQoL instruments were performed. Countries demonstrating marginal psychometric properties on the KHQ were pooled with same-language countries, re-evaluated, and aggregate analysis performed on the pooled data. Results: Internal consistency of the KHQ was high, item characteristics were good, most assumptions of summed scales were met, and it is externally valid and consistent. Few problems with the KHQ were noted although the performance of the personal relationships domain was complicated by the 'not applicable' response category. Conclusions: Psychometric testing supports the reliability and validity of the KHQ as an OAB-specific measure of HRQoL.

Purpose To examine the psychometric properties of the Injection Pen Assessment Questionnaire (IPAQ) including the following: 1) item and scale characteristics (e.g., frequencies, item distributions, and factor structure), 2) reliability, and 3) validity. Methods Focus groups and one-on-one dyad interviews guided the development of the IPAQ. The IPAQ was subsequently tested in 136 parent–child dyads in a Phase 3, 2-month, open-label, multicenter trial for a new Genotropin® disposable pen. Factor analysis was performed to inform the development of a scoring algorithm, and reliability and validity of the IPAQ were evaluated using the data from this two months study. Psychometric analyses were conducted separately for each injection pen. Results Confirmatory factor analysis provides evidence supporting a second order factor solution for four subscales and a total IPAQ score. These factor analysis results support the conceptual framework developed from previous qualitative research in patient dyads using the reusable pen. However, the IPAQ subscales did not consistently meet acceptable internal consistency reliability for some group level comparisons. Cronbach’s alphas for the total IPAQ score for both pens were 0.85, exceeding acceptable levels of reliability for group comparisons. Conclusions The total IPAQ score is a useful measure for evaluating ease of use and preference for injection pens in clinical trials among patient dyads receiving hGH. The psychometric properties of the individual subscales, mainly the lower internal consistency reliability of some of the subscales and the predictive validity findings, do not support the use of subscale scores alone as a primary endpoint.

Background Current recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) replacement therapy involves long-term daily subcutaneous injections to treat growth hormone deficiency (GHD) in children and adults. Daily r-hGH injections can be burdensome, often resulting in poor treatment compliance. Clinical outcome assessments (COAs) can capture the burden of these injections from the patient (and caregiver) perspective and may demonstrate the benefit of a less-frequent r-hGH injection regimen, which may ultimately improve treatment compliance and long-term outcomes. Objective To address this knowledge gap, qualitative research was conducted to inform the development of a new Life Interference Questionnaire for Growth Hormone Deficiency (LIQ-GHD), designed to measure the experiences of patients taking r-hGH GHD injections. A second objective was to evaluate the hypothesized factor structure and preliminary performance of the LIQ-GHD in a cross-sectional observational study. Methods An empirical literature review and expert advice meetings were conducted to inform development of the draft LIQ-GHD (pediatric and adult versions). In-person concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with GHD patients (and patient dyads including caregivers) to explore and confirm concept coverage and evaluate respondents’ ability to understand the questionnaire. The draft LIQ-GHD was then tested in a cross-sectional field study involving pediatric and adult patients receiving daily r-hGH injections for GHD. The factor structure, reliability, and validity were analyzed for the overall sample and for pediatric, adolescent, and adult subgroups. Results Results from the literature review and input from six experts were used to develop and refine the LIQ-GHD, with content covering pen ease of use; regimen convenience; life interference due to regimen; benefit/satisfaction/willingness to continue treatment; regimen choice/preference; intent to comply with regimen; injection-related signs/symptoms; and reasons for missed injections. Twenty-one patient interviews confirmed comprehensive concept coverage and patient/caregiver comprehension of the LIQ-GHD. A total of 224 patients ( n  = 70 children/caregiver dyads, n  = 79 adolescents/caregiver dyads, n  = 75 adults) participated in the field study. While most items showed floor effects, confirmatory factor analysis fit statistics were good for the overall sample (root mean square error of approximation = 0.07, comparative fit index = 0.98) and for the full pediatric sample after dropping co-dependent questions from the model. Cronbach’s alpha ( α ) ranged from 0.746 to 0.905 and intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.761 to 0.918 for the overall sample on LIQ-GHD domains. Scores correlated as predicted with an existing criterion measure in the overall sample and LIQ-GHD domain scores distinguished known groups as expected. Conclusions The LIQ-GHD is a new COA for the measurement of r-hGH injection treatment burden. This research provides evidence supporting its content validity, hypothesized factor structure, score reliability, and construct validity in pediatric and adult populations.

Purpose In this study, we explored different statistical approaches to identify the best algorithm to predict EQ-5D utility scores from the NEI-VFQ 25 in patients with agerelated macular degeneration (AMD). Methods Ordinary least squares (OLS), Tobit, and censored least absolute deviation (CLAD) approaches were compared using cross-sectional data (primary dataset, n = 151) at screening from a phase I/II clinical trial in patients with AMD. Three models were specified in this study: full (includes all 12 dimensions of the NEI-VFQ 25), short (includes only the general health dimension and the composite score), and reduced model (using stepwise regression). To evaluate the predictive accuracy of the models, the mean absolute prediction error (MAPE), mean error, and root means squared error were calculated using in-sample cross-validation (within the primary dataset) and out-of-sample validation using an independent dataset (n = 393). The model that provided the lowest prediction errors was chosen as the best model. Results In-sample cross-validation and out-of-sample validation consistently demonstrated that, compared to other approaches, heteroscedasticity-adjusted OLS produced the lowest MAPE (mean values were 0.1400, 0.1593, respectively) for the full model, while CLAD performed best for the short and reduced models (mean values were 0.1299, 0.1483, respectively). The normality and homoscedasticity assumptions of both OLS and Tobit were rejected. CLAD, however, can accommodate these particular violations. Conclusions The CLAD-short model is recommended for producing the EQ-5D utility scores when only the NEIVFQ 25 data are available.

The Quality of Life in Short Stature Youth (QoLISSY) questionnaire measures health-related quality of life (HrQoL) in short statured children (8–18 years) from patient and parent perspectives. To minimize respondent burden when assessing HrQoL in clinical practice, a brief version of the currently available 22-item QoLISSY is needed. The dataset of the European QoLISSY study ( N  = 268) was divided into two subdatasets at random, one to identify the items of the brief questionnaire and the other to test the operating characteristics (reliability and validity). Concept-based construction involved the selection of three items per Quality of Life (QoL)-dimension (physical, social, emotional) according to the highest corrected item-scale correlation. Psychometric properties were inspected in terms of reliability and validity supplemented by testing item fit statistics to examine item response theory (IRT) compliance. Cronbach’s alpha for the 9-item version was 0.89 for the patient- and the parent report. Pearson’s correlations with the generic KIDSCREEN questionnaire were low to moderate (children: r  = 0.17–0.58; parents: r  = 0.12–0.56). Shorter children reported significantly poorer QoL (mean difference 15.39 points; p  < 0.001) than taller children, indicating known-groups validity. Results from IRT analysis showed an acceptable fit to Masters’ Partial Credit Model. The 9-item QoLISSY brief version has satisfactory operating characteristics and is an efficient alternative for use in research and practice.

Previous research has reported that ease of use of and preference for a delivery device are associated with greater patient compliance - an important factor in achieving optimal therapeutic results. The objective of this study was to assess the ease-of-use of a new disposable pen (GoQuick(®), Pfizer, Inc.) versus the current reusable pen (GENOTROPIN Pen(®), Pfizer, Inc.) to inject a daily dose of recombinant DNA origin human growth hormone, Genotropin(®) (somatropin) in standard practice. In this randomized, crossover, multicenter, multinational, open-label study, ease-of-use of and preference for the two pens were assessed in three treatment-naïve populations: 1) parents of very young children; 2) parent-child dyads; and 3) adults via use of a validated self-report Injection Pen Assessment Questionnaire (IPAQ) after 2 months of at-home-use experience. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who reported the new disposable pen to be no different from or easier to use than the current reusable pen. Safety was also assessed and reported according to local legal requirements. Of the 120 screened patients, 119 were included in the ease-of-use analysis and all were included in the safety analyses. In all, 67.2% found the new somatropin disposable pen to be no different from or easier to use than the reusable pen (95% confidence interval: 58.8-75.7). Most adverse events were mild or moderate. No deaths or device- or treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. These results suggest that improvements made to the reusable somatropin pen are tangible and recognizable to treatment-naïve patients and their caregivers, child-caregiver dyads, and adults, and may positively impact continued compliance with therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01112865.

Accounting for patient preferences may be especially important in diabetes mellitus, given the challenge in identifying factors associated with treatment adherence. Although preference studies have been performed in diabetes, none have examined treatments used in diabetic retinopathy (DR). The objective of this study was to elicit patient preferences for attributes associated with antivascular endothelial growth factor, focal and panretinal laser, and steroid therapy used in DR management. A cross-sectional conjoint survey was administered to DR patients at three Canadian eye centers. The survey involved making tradeoffs among 11 DR treatment attributes, including the chance of improving vision and risks of adverse events over a 1-year treatment period. Attribute utilities were summed for each product profile to determine the most preferred treatment. Based on the results from 161 patients, attributes affecting visual functioning, including improving visual acuity and reducing adverse events (eg, chance of cataracts), were more important than those not directly affecting vision (eg, administration). Overall, 52%, 20%, 17%, and 11% preferred the product profiles matching to the antivascular endothelial growth factor, steroid, focal laser, and panretinal laser therapies. Preferences did not vary substantially by previous treatment experience, age, or type of DR (macular edema, proliferative DR, both or neither), with the exception that more macular edema only patients preferred focal laser over steroid treatment (19% versus 14%, respectively). When considering the potential effects of treatment over a 1-year period, treatment preferences in DR are most influenced by those that may positively or negatively affect visual functioning.