Scholarlink

Background <p>This study uses clinical trial exit interviews to understand patients’ experience of meaningful change with respect to patient-reported outcomes and in order to confirm the content validity of some items from selected trial patient-reported outcomes (Urticaria Control Test [UCT], Cold Urticaria Activity Score [ColdUAS], Patient Global Impression of Severity [PGIS], Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]). Clinical trial exit interviews are an effective way to generate qualitative meaningful change insights. However, there is lack of data to provide an understanding of meaningful improvement from the chronic inducible cold urticaria patient perspective.</p> Methods <p>We conducted a cross-sectional, double-blind, stand-alone exit interview study intended to recruit participants aged 12–80 years with cold urticaria across centers in Argentina, Canada, USA, and Germany participating in LIBERTY-CINDU CUrIADS (EudraCT: 2020-003756-33), which analyzed the efficacy of dupilumab versus placebo. Exit interviews were conducted within 2&#xa0;weeks of the end of treatment.</p> Results <p>Participants (<i>N</i>&#xa0;=&#xa0;15) reported symptoms including rash/redness, itch, hives, swelling, burning, and pain. The study established patient-defined thresholds for meaningful improvement: approximately two response options for UCT items, slightly fewer than two response options for ColdUAS items, and 1–2 category changes on PGIS/PGIC. Most participants reporting symptom improvement found it meaningful, with satisfaction being related to the degree of symptom relief. Notably, patients distinguished between a general symptom change and clinically meaningful change.</p> Conclusions <p>Exit interviews revealed key insights into patients’ experiences with cold urticaria. Despite some limitations, including recruitment challenges and an all-female adult participant pool, the study provided valuable evidence for understanding meaningful improvement in cold urticaria treatment from the patient perspective.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Exit Interviews to Understand Meaningful Change from the Patient Perspective in a Clinical Study of Dupilumab for the Treatment of Chronic Inducible Cold Urticaria

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月22日

查看全文
  • Ella Brookes,
  • Ufuk Coşkun,
  • Christina O’Donnell,
  • Efstathios Zikos,
  • Renata Martincova,
  • Jingdong Chao,
  • Mohana Giruparajah,
  • Beverly Romero

摘要

Background

This study uses clinical trial exit interviews to understand patients’ experience of meaningful change with respect to patient-reported outcomes and in order to confirm the content validity of some items from selected trial patient-reported outcomes (Urticaria Control Test [UCT], Cold Urticaria Activity Score [ColdUAS], Patient Global Impression of Severity [PGIS], Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]). Clinical trial exit interviews are an effective way to generate qualitative meaningful change insights. However, there is lack of data to provide an understanding of meaningful improvement from the chronic inducible cold urticaria patient perspective.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional, double-blind, stand-alone exit interview study intended to recruit participants aged 12–80 years with cold urticaria across centers in Argentina, Canada, USA, and Germany participating in LIBERTY-CINDU CUrIADS (EudraCT: 2020-003756-33), which analyzed the efficacy of dupilumab versus placebo. Exit interviews were conducted within 2 weeks of the end of treatment.

Results

Participants (N = 15) reported symptoms including rash/redness, itch, hives, swelling, burning, and pain. The study established patient-defined thresholds for meaningful improvement: approximately two response options for UCT items, slightly fewer than two response options for ColdUAS items, and 1–2 category changes on PGIS/PGIC. Most participants reporting symptom improvement found it meaningful, with satisfaction being related to the degree of symptom relief. Notably, patients distinguished between a general symptom change and clinically meaningful change.

Conclusions

Exit interviews revealed key insights into patients’ experiences with cold urticaria. Despite some limitations, including recruitment challenges and an all-female adult participant pool, the study provided valuable evidence for understanding meaningful improvement in cold urticaria treatment from the patient perspective.