Search

Background: In support of UCB pharmaceutical research programs, the aim of this research was to implement a novel process for patient involvement in a multidisciplinary research group to co-create a clinical outcome assessment strategy to accurately reflect the experience of people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Patient experts were an integral part of the decision-making process for patient-reported outcome (PRO) research and instrument development. Methods: In partnership with two patient organizations (Parkinson's UK and the Parkinson's Foundation), 6 patient experts were recruited into a multidisciplinary research group alongside clinical, patient engagement and involvement, regulatory science, and outcome measurement experts. The group was involved across two phases of research; the first phase identified what symptoms are cardinal to the experience of living with early-stage Parkinson's and the second phase involved the development of PRO instruments to better assess the symptoms that are important to people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Patient experts were important in performing a variety of roles, in particular, qualitative study protocol design, conceptual model development, and subsequent co-creation of two PRO instruments. Results: Involving people with Parkinson's in PRO research ensured that the expertise of these representatives from the Parkinson's community shaped and drove the research; as such, PRO instruments were being developed with the patient at the forefront. Working with patient experts required considerable resource and time allocation for planning, communication, document development, and organizing meetings; however, their input enriched the development of PRO instruments and was vital in developing PRO instruments that are more meaningful for people with Parkinson's and clinicians. Conclusions: Conducting PRO research, in the context of clinical development involving pharmaceutical companies, requires balancing regulatory and scientific rigor with tight time constraints. Incorporating a multi-stakeholder perspective, which included patient experts as joint investigators, had a strong positive impact on our research, despite the logistical complexities of their involvement. Due to the input of patient experts, the innovative clinical outcome assessment strategy and the co-created novel PRO instruments were more relevant and holistic to the patient experience of early-stage Parkinson's. Plain English summary: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments allow people living with a disease and participating in a clinical study to describe the symptoms and experiences that they consider meaningful. PRO instruments use tools such as questionnaires and scales to capture patient perspectives on a treatment that might not be captured by a clinical measurement. It is recommended that the patient community and patient experts are included in the development of PRO instruments to accurately capture information that is important to them. Building on the experience of a recent PRO research project in support of UCB pharmaceutical programs, this article provides recommendations on how pharmaceutical companies can partner with patient organizations and involve patient experts as joint investigators in the co creation of PRO instruments. Despite the additional resource and time required, involving patient experts and patient organizations into the research collaboration had a strong positive impact and ensured that the PROs were meaningful to patients (in this instance, people living with early-stage Parkinson's). Patient organizations facilitated patient engagement and recruitment in research activities, maintained communication with the pharmaceutical company's research team, and built trust between collaborators by implementing patient engagement tools and best practices. Patient experts contributed to several parts of the PRO instrument development process: study design, identifying key symptoms and experiences, and developing individual PRO questions. Co-creation between the pharmaceutical company, patient experts, and patient organizations resulted in considerable improvements to typical PRO instrument development for use in clinical trials and is thus recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Qualitative research on patient experiences in early-stage Parkinson's disease (PD) is limited. It is increasingly acknowledged that clinical outcome assessments used in trials do not fully capture the range of symptoms/impacts that are meaningful to people with early-stage PD. We aimed to conceptualize the patient experience in early-stage PD and identify, from the patient perspective, those cardinal symptoms/impacts which might be more useful to measure in clinical trials. Methods: In a mixed-methods analysis, 50 people with early-stage PD and nine relatives were interviewed. Study design and results interpretation were led by a multidisciplinary group of patient, clinical, regulatory, and outcome measurements experts, and patient organization representatives. Identification of the cardinal concepts was informed by the relative frequency of reported concepts combined with insights from patient experts and movement disorder specialists. Results: A conceptual model of the patient experience of early-stage PD was developed. Concept elicitation generated 145 unique concepts mapped across motor and non-motor symptoms, function, and impacts. Bradykinesia/slowness (notably in the form of "functional slowness"), tremor, rigidity/stiffness, mobility (particularly fine motor dexterity and subtle gait abnormalities), fatigue, depression, sleep/dreams, and pain were identified as cardinal in early-stage PD. "Functional slowness" (related to discrete tasks involving the upper limbs, complex mobility tasks, and general activities) was deemed to be more relevant than "difficulty" to patients with early-stage PD, who report being slower at completing tasks rather than encountering significant impairment with task completion. Conclusion: Patient experiences in early-stage PD are complex and wide-ranging, and the currently available patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments do not evaluate many early-stage PD concepts such as functional slowness, fine motor skills, and subtle gait abnormalities. The development of a new PRO instrument, created in conjunction with people with PD, that fully assesses symptoms and the experience of living with early-stage PD, is required. Plain Language Summary: We conducted research to find out about the experiences and symptoms that have the greatest impact on everyday living for people with early-stage Parkinson's disease. This research also looked at which symptoms patients think are important to be tracked in clinical trials. The research team running this study included people living with Parkinson's disease (called "patient experts"). The team also included technical experts and representatives of patient organizations. To begin with, people living with early-stage Parkinson's disease and relatives were interviewed. The interviews collected their thoughts on the impact of early-stage Parkinson's disease on their daily lives. These insights revealed which experiences and symptoms were most important. The research team analyzed ideas and quotes from the interviews to create a picture of early-stage Parkinson's disease. The symptoms that mattered the most to people living with early-stage Parkinson's disease were tremor, rigidity/stiffness, fatigue, depression, sleep/dreams, and pain. Another important symptom was slowness of movement (which is called "bradykinesia/slowness"), and in particular "functional slowness," which included tasks involving the upper limbs, complicated movement tasks, and general activities. Effects on mobility were also important, particularly fine motor skills and subtle walking abnormalities. This research shows the wide-ranging effects that early-stage Parkinson's disease has on patients from their perspective. It also shows which effects are important to capture in trials of therapies aimed at this patient group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is a correction notice for an article titled "The value of co-creating a clinical outcome assessment strategy for clinical trial research: process and lessons learnt." The authors of the article reported errors in reference 13 and provided the correct link. The correction has been made to the original article, and the changes requested have been implemented. The publisher, Springer Nature, remains neutral in terms of jurisdictional claims and institutional affiliations. The authors of the article are Thomas Morel, Karlin Schroeder, Sophie Cleanthous, John Andrejack, Geraldine Blavat, William Brooks, Lesley Gosden, Carroll Siu, Natasha Ratcliffe, and Ashley F. Slagle. [Extracted from the article]