Strategic Science & Technologies (United States)

Efficacy assessments in clinical trials of treatments for female sexual arousal disorder (FSAD) and other female sexual dysfunction (FSD) diagnoses rely on various patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We sought to compare 1-month recall PRO measures among participants enrolled in a clinical trial who provided these data without (test population) vs with (control population) use of an at-home, 24-hour recall electronic diary (eDiary), capturing similar data. Preplanned subset analysis as performed during a phase 2b, exploratory, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of sildenafil cream, 3.6% (sildenafil cream) among healthy premenopausal women with FSAD. Preliminary product efficacy was assessed via 1-month recall and 24-hour recall questionnaires. A subset of the participants, the Evaluation of Recall Subset [ERS] provided PROs via the 1-month recall instruments but did not provide data via the 24-hour recall eDiary. Responses to the 1-month recall instruments were compared among ERS (test) vs non-ERS (control) participants. Among the non-ERS population, correlations between 1-month and 24-hour recall endpoints were calculated. There were no significant differences in the study co-primary 1-month recall efficacy endpoints, the Arousal Sensation (AS) domain of the 28-item Sexual Function Questionnaire (SFQ28) and the Female Sexual Distress Scale - Desire, Arousal, Orgasm question 14, among ERS vs non-ERS participants during the initial 1-month no-drug run-in period or the 1-month single-blind placebo run-in period (P values > .47). Scores on these 1-month recall PROs continued to be similar after randomization for sildenafil cream (P values > .30) and placebo cream (P values > .20) assigned ERS and non-ERS participants during the 3-month double-blind dosing period. There were strong correlations between the SFQ28 AS and eDiary AS scores during the no-drug run-in (R= 0.79, P< .01) and the single-blind run-in (R= 0.73 P< .001). During the double-blind dosing period, the SFQ28 AS score continued to be highly correlated with the eDiary AS score among sildenafil cream users (R= 0.83; P< .001) and placebo cream users (R= 0.8; 2 P< .001). There was no evidence that 1-month recall PRO instruments introduce recall bias; assessing arousal sensations with 24-hour vs 1-month PRO instruments is similar and either method could be used to assess efficacy depending on study objectives. This preplanned subset analysis compared efficacy of PROs based on recall duration. While the subset was preplanned, the study was powered to detect significant differences in the primary efficacy objectives, not among this subset analyses. These data will be used in planning future efficacy assessments of sildenafil cream for FSAD. This clinical trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04948151.

To determine the extent to which instruments that measure core outcome domains in acute gout fulfill the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) filter requirements of truth, discrimination, and feasibility. Patient-level data from 4 randomized controlled trials of agents designed to treat acute gout and 1 observational study of acute gout were analyzed. For each available measure, construct validity, test-retest reliability, within-group change using effect size, between-group change using the Kruskall-Wallis statistic, and repeated measures generalized estimating equations were assessed. Floor and ceiling effects were also assessed and minimal clinically important difference was estimated. These analyses were presented to participants at OMERACT 11 to help inform voting for possible endorsement. There was evidence for construct validity and discriminative ability for 3 measures of pain [0 to 4 Likert, 0 to 10 numeric rating scale (NRS), 0 to 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS)]. Likewise, there appears to be sufficient evidence for a 4-point Likert scale to possess construct validity and discriminative ability for physician assessment of joint swelling and joint tenderness. There was some evidence for construct validity and within-group discriminative ability for the Health Assessment Questionnaire as a measure of activity limitations, but not for discrimination between groups allocated to different treatment. There is sufficient evidence to support measures of pain (using Likert, NRS, or VAS), joint tenderness, and swelling (using Likert scale) as fulfilling the requirements of the OMERACT filter. Further research on a measure of activity limitations in acute gout clinical trials is required.