Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International Society for Quality of Life Research commentary on the draft European Medicines Agency reflection paper on the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in oncology studies

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In 2014, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) released for comment a draft reflection paper on the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in oncology studies. A twelve-member International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) taskforce was convened to coordinate the ISOQOL response. Twenty-one ISOQOL members provided detailed comments and suggestions on the paper: 81 % from academia and 19 % from industry. Taskforce members consolidated and further refined these comments and shared the recommendations with the wider ISOQOL membership. A final response was submitted to the EMA in November 2014. The impending publication of the EMA reflection paper presents a valuable opportunity for ISOQOL to comment on the current direction of EMA PRO guidance and strategy. The EMA paper, although focused on cancer, could serve as a model for using PROs in other conditions, as it provides a useful update surrounding some of the design issues common to all trial research including PRO endpoints. However, we believe there are a number of additional areas in need of greater consideration. The purpose of this commentary is therefore to highlight the strengths of this timely and potentially useful document, but also to outline areas that may warrant further discussion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. EMA. (2014). Reflection Paper on the use of patient reported outcome (PRO) measures in oncology studies [Draft]. European Medicines Agency, Oncology Working Party; Doc. Ref. EMA/CHMP/292464/2014.

  2. EMA. (2005). Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of health-related quality of life (HRQL) measures in the evaluation of medicinal products. European Medicines Agency, Committee for medicinal products for human use (CHMP); Doc. Ref. EMEA/CHMP/EWP/139391/2004.

  3. ISOQOL. (2015). International Society for Quality of Life Research. http://www.isoqol.org/research/isoqol-publications. Accessed July 2015.

  4. Kyte, D., Ives, J., Draper, H., Keeley, T., & Calvert, M. (2013). Inconsistencies in quality of life data collection in clinical trials: A potential source of bias? Interviews with research nurses and trialists. PLoS One, 8(10), e76625.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kyte, D. G., Draper, H., Ives, J., Liles, C., Gheorghe, A., & Calvert, M. (2013). Patient reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials: is ‘in-trial’ guidance lacking? A systematic review. PLoS One, 8(4), e60684.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Basch, E. M., Abernethy, A., Mullins, C. D., Tiglao, M. R., & Tunis, S. R. (2011). Development of a guidance for including patient-reported outcomes (PROS) in post-approval clinical trials of oncology drugs for comparative effectiveness research (CER). Value in Health, 14(3), A10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. FDA. (2009). Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf

  8. Reeve, B. B., Mitchell, S. A., Dueck, A. C., Basch, E., Cella, D., & Reilly, C. M. et al. (2014). Recommended patient-reported core set of symptoms to measure in adult cancer treatment trials. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 106(7), dju129.

  9. Brundage, M., Bass, B., Davidson, J., Queenan, J., Bezjak, A., Ringash, J., et al. (2011). Patterns of reporting health-related quality of life outcomes in randomized clinical trials: Implications for clinicians and quality of life researchers. Quality of Life Research, 20, 653–664.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Calvert, M., Blazeby, J., Altman, D. G., Revicki, D., Moher, D., & Brundage, M. (2013). Reporting of patient reported outcomes in randomised trials: The CONSORT PRO extension. JAMA, 309(8), 814–822.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. International Society for Quality of Life Research. Best practices for PROs in randomized clinical trials taskforce. http://www.isoqol.org/about-isoqol/committees/best-practices-for-pros-in-randomized-clinical-trials. Accessed February 17, 2015.

  12. Taphoorn, M. J., Stupp, R., Coens, C., Osoba, D., Kortmann, R., van den Bent, M. J., et al. (2005). Health-related quality of life in patients with glioblastoma: A randomised controlled trial. The lancet Oncology, 6(12), 937–944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Marin, D., Bazeos, A., Mahon, F.-X., Eliasson, L., Milojkovic, D., Bua, M., et al. (2010). Adherence is the critical factor for achieving molecular responses in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia who achieve complete cytogenetic responses on imatinib. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28(14), 2381–2388.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Brett, J., Staniszewska, S., Mockford, C., Herron‐Marx, S., Hughes, J., & Tysall, C. et al. (2014). Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: A systematic review. Health Expectations, 17(5), 637–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gradinger, F., Britten, N., Wyatt, K., Froggatt, K., Gibson, A., & Jacoby, A. et al. (2013). Values associated with public involvement in health and social care research: A narrative review. Health Expectations. doi:10.1111/hex.12158.

  16. de Wit, M. P., Abma, T. A., Koelewijn-van Loon, M. S., Collins, S., & Kirwan, J. (2014). What has been the effect on trial outcome assessments of a decade of patient participation in OMERACT? The Journal of Rheumatology, 41(1), 177–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Staniszewska, S., Haywood, K. L., Brett, J., & Tutton, L. (2012). Patient and public involvement in patient-reported outcome measures. The Patient-Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 5(2), 79–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kirwan, J. R., Minnock, P., Adebajo, A., Bresnihan, B., Choy, E., De Wit, M., et al. (2007). Patient perspective: Fatigue as a recommended patient centered outcome measure in rheumatoid arthritis. The Journal of Rheumatology, 34(5), 1174–1177.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nicklin, J., Cramp, F., Kirwan, J., Urban, M., & Hewlett, S. (2010). Collaboration with patients in the design of patient-reported outcome measures: Capturing the experience of fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care & Research, 62(11), 1552–1558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Primary Care and Clinical Sciences, School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK

    Derek Kyte & Melanie Calvert

  2. Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

    Bryce B. Reeve

  3. Italian Group for Adult Hematologic Diseases (GIMEMA), Health Outcomes Research Unit, Rome, Italy

    Fabio Efficace

  4. Royal College of Nursing Research Institute, Warwick Medical School, Warwick University, Coventry, UK

    Kirstie Haywood

  5. Psycho-oncology Co-operative Research Group, School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber & Madeleine T. King

  6. Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber & Madeleine T. King

  7. Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp., North Wales, PA, USA

    Josephine M. Norquist

  8. Evidera, Lexington, MA, USA

    William R. Lenderking

  9. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Claire Snyder

  10. Department of Usages, Medical Products Agency, Uppsala, Sweden

    Lena Ring

  11. Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

    Galina Velikova

Authors
  1. Derek Kyte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bryce B. Reeve
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fabio Efficace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kirstie Haywood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Madeleine T. King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Josephine M. Norquist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. William R. Lenderking
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Claire Snyder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Lena Ring
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Galina Velikova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Melanie Calvert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melanie Calvert.

Additional information

Disclaimers: This paper was reviewed and endorsed by the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) Board of Directors as an ISOQOL publication and does not reflect an endorsement of the ISOQOL membership. The opinions or assertions in this article are the views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the Medical Products Agency, Sweden.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kyte, D., Reeve, B.B., Efficace, F. et al. International Society for Quality of Life Research commentary on the draft European Medicines Agency reflection paper on the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in oncology studies. Qual Life Res 25, 359–362 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1099-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1099-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation