Progress in defining clinically meaningful changes for clinical trials in nonrenal manifestations of SLE disease activity

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Chan-Bum Choi ; Matthew H. Liang ; Sang-Cheol Bae
• 刊名：Arthritis Research & Therapy
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：December 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：18
• 期：1
• 全文大小：354 KB
• 参考文献：1.Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10:407–15.PubMed CrossRef
  2.Liang MH. Longitudinal construct validity: establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Med Care. 2000;38(9 Suppl):Ii84–90.PubMed
  3.Liang MH, Socher SA, Roberts WN, Esdaile JM. Measurement of systemic lupus erythematosus activity in clinical research. Arthritis Rheum. 1988;31:817–25.PubMed CrossRef
  4.The American College of Rheumatology response criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus clinical trials: measures of overall disease activity. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50:3418–26.
  5.White PD, Grover SA, Kangro HO, Thomas JM, Amess J, Clare AW. The validity and reliability of the fatigue syndrome that follows glandular fever. Psychol Med. 1995;25:917–24.PubMed CrossRef
  6.Krupp LB, LaRocca NG, Muir-Nash J, Steinberg AD. The fatigue severity scale. Application to patients with multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus. Arch Neurol. 1989;46:1121–3.PubMed CrossRef
  7.Chalder T, Berelowitz G, Pawlikowska T, Watts L, Wessely S, Wright D, et al. Development of a fatigue scale. J Psychosom Res. 1993;37:147–53.PubMed CrossRef
  8.Robb-Nicholson LC, Daltroy L, Eaton H, Gall V, Wright E, Hartley LH, et al. Effects of aerobic conditioning in lupus fatigue: a pilot study. Br J Rheumatol. 1989;28:500–5.PubMed CrossRef
  9.Piper BF, Dibble SL, Dodd MJ, Weiss MC, Slaughter RE, Paul SM. The revised Piper Fatigue Scale: psychometric evaluation in women with breast cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1998;25:677–84.PubMed
  10.Stoll T, Gordon C, Seifert B, Richardson K, Malik J, Bacon PA, et al. Consistency and validity of patient administered assessment of quality of life by the MOS SF-36; its association with disease activity and damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol. 1997;24:1608–14.PubMed
  11.Austin JS, Maisiak RS, Macrina DM, Heck LW. Health outcome improvements in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus using two telephone counseling interventions. Arthritis Care Res. 1996;9:391–9.PubMed CrossRef
  12.Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 Health survey: manual and interpretation guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1983.
  13.Tack BB. Fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis. Conditions, strategies, and consequences. Arthritis Care Res. 1990;3:65–70.PubMed
  14.Smets EM, Garssen B, Bonke B, De Haes JC. The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) psychometric qualities of an instrument to assess fatigue. J Psychosom Res. 1995;39:315–25.PubMed CrossRef
  15.Schwartz JE, Jandorf L, Krupp LB. The measurement of fatigue: a new instrument. J Psychosom Res. 1993;37:753–62.PubMed CrossRef
  16.Ad Hoc Committee on Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Response Criteria for Fatigue. Measurement of fatigue in systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:1348–57.CrossRef
  17.Cleanthous S, Tyagi M, Isenberg DA, Newman SP. What do we know about self-reported fatigue in systemic lupus erythematosus? Lupus. 2012;21:465–76.PubMed CrossRef
  18.Yellen SB, Cella DF, Webster K, Blendowski C, Kaplan E. Measuring fatigue and other anemia-related symptoms with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) measurement system. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1997;13:63–74.PubMed CrossRef
  19.Michielsen HJ, De Vries J, Van Heck GL. Psychometric qualities of a brief self-rated fatigue measure: the Fatigue Assessment Scale. J Psychosom Res. 2003;54:345–52.PubMed CrossRef
  20.Goligher EC, Pouchot J, Brant R, Kherani RB, Avina-Zubieta JA, Lacaille D, et al. Minimal clinically important difference for 7 measures of fatigue in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol. 2008;35:635–42.PubMed
  21.Colangelo KJ, Pope JE, Peschken C. The minimally important difference for patient reported outcomes in systemic lupus erythematosus including the HAQ-DI, pain, fatigue, and SF-36. J Rheumatol. 2009;36:2231–7.PubMed CrossRef
  22.Albrecht J, Taylor L, Berlin JA, Dulay S, Ang G, Fakharzadeh S, et al. The CLASI (Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index): an outcome instrument for cutaneous lupus erythematosus. J Invest Dermatol. 2005;125:889–94.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  23.Bonilla-Martinez ZL, Albrecht J, Troxel AB, Taylor L, Okawa J, Dulay S, et al. The cutaneous lupus erythematosus disease area and severity index: a responsive instrument to measure activity and damage in patients with cutaneous lupus erythematosus. Arch Dermatol. 2008;144:173–80.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  24.Klein R, Moghadam-Kia S, LoMonico J, Okawa J, Coley C, Taylor L, et al. Development of the CLASI as a tool to measure disease severity and responsiveness to therapy in cutaneous lupus erythematosus. Arch Dermatol. 2011;147:203–8.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  25.Mikdashi JA, Esdaile JM, Alarcon GS, Crofford L, Fessler BJ, Shanberg L, et al. Proposed response criteria for neurocognitive impairment in systemic lupus erythematosus clinical trials. Lupus. 2007;16:418–25.PubMed CrossRef
  26.Ad Hoc Committee on Lupus Response Criteria: Cognition Sub-committee, Mikdashi JA, Esdaile JM, Alarcon GS, Crofford L, Fessler BJ, et al. Proposed response criteria for neurocognitive impairment in systemic lupus erythematosus clinical trials. Lupus. 2007;16:418–25.CrossRef
  27.Gladman DD, Urowitz MB, Kagal A, Hallett D. Accurately describing changes in disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol. 2000;27:377–9.PubMed
  28.Yee CS, Farewell VT, Isenberg DA, Griffiths B, Teh LS, Bruce IN, et al. The use of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index-2000 to define active disease and minimal clinically meaningful change based on data from a large cohort of systemic lupus erythematosus patients. Rheumatology. 2011;50:982–8.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  29.Yee CS, Farewell V, Isenberg DA, Griffiths B, Teh LS, Bruce IN, et al. The BILAG-2004 index is sensitive to change for assessment of SLE disease activity. Rheumatology. 2009;48:691–5.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  30.Yee CS, Gordon C, Isenberg DA, Griffiths B, Teh LS, Bruce IN, et al. The BILAG-2004 systems tally—a novel way of representing the BILAG-2004 index scores longitudinally. Rheumatology. 2012;51:2099–105.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Chan-Bum Choi (1) (2) (3)
  Matthew H. Liang (2) (4)
  Sang-Cheol Bae (1)
  
  1. Department of Rheumatology, Hanyang University Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, 222-1 Wangsimni-ro, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, 04763, Republic of Korea
  2. Department of Aging, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Section of Rheumatology, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
  3. VA Healthcare System, 150 S Huntington Ave, Jamaica Plain, MA, 02130, USA
  4. Division of Rheumatology, Immunology, and Allergy, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
  
• 刊物主题：Rheumatology; Orthopedics;
• 出版者：BioMed Central
• ISSN：1478-6354

文摘

Since the 2002 Dusseldorf meeting, one new agent, Benlysta, has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for systemic lupus erythematosus. Experiences from the field in conducting trials of all the agents tested during this period have provided valuable practical insights. There has been incremental progress in defining the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of key disease manifestations and the view is largely that of the health care providers and not that of the person suffering the disease. This basic methodological work on the MCID should improve the efficiency and the clinical relevance of future trials and their design.