Are Patient Self-Reported Outcome Measures Sensitive Enough to Be Used as End Points in Clinical Trials?: Evidence from the United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study.
Aged
Antihypertensive Agents
/ administration & dosage
Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
Female
Glaucoma, Open-Angle
/ diagnosis
Humans
Intraocular Pressure
/ physiology
Latanoprost
/ administration & dosage
Male
Ophthalmic Solutions
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Quality of Life
Treatment Outcome
United Kingdom
Visual Acuity
Visual Fields
/ physiology
Journal
Ophthalmology
ISSN: 1549-4713
Titre abrégé: Ophthalmology
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7802443
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2019
05 2019
Historique:
received:
20
06
2018
revised:
21
09
2018
accepted:
24
09
2018
pubmed:
3
10
2018
medline:
31
1
2020
entrez:
2
10
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study (UKGTS) demonstrated the effectiveness of an intraocular pressure-lowering drug in patients with glaucoma using visual field progression as a primary outcome. The present study tested the hypothesis that responses on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; secondary outcome measure) differ between patients receiving a topical prostaglandin analog (latanoprost) or placebo eye drops in UKGTS. Multicenter, randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled trial. Newly diagnosed glaucoma patients in the UKGTS with baseline and exit PROMs (n = 182 and n = 168 patients from the treatment and placebo groups, respectively). In the UKGTS (trial registration number, ISRCTN96423140), patients with open-angle glaucoma were allocated to receive latanoprost (treatment) or placebo; the observation period was 24 months. Patients completed general health PROMs (European Quality of Life in 5 Dimensions [EQ-5D] and 36-item Short Form [SF-36]) and PROMs specific to glaucoma (15-item Glaucoma Quality of Life [GQL-15] and 9-item Glaucoma Activity Limitation [GAL-9]) at baseline and exit from the trial. Percentage changes between measurement on PROMs were calculated for each patient and compared between treatment arms. In addition, differences between stable patients (n = 272) and those with glaucomatous progression (n = 78), as determined by visual field change (primary outcome), were assessed. PROMs on health-related and vision-related quality of life. Average percentage change on PROMs was similar for patients in both arms of the trial, with no statistically significant differences between treatment and placebo groups (EQ-5D, P = 0.98; EQ-5D visual analog scale, P = 0.88; SF-36, P = 0.94, GQL-15, P = 0.66; GAL-9, P = 0.87). There were statistically significant differences between stable and progressing patients on glaucoma-specific PROMs (GQL-15, P = 0.02; GAL-9, P = 0.02), but not on general health PROMs (EQ-5D, P = 0.62; EQ-5D visual analog scale, P = 0.23; SF-36, P = 0.65). Average change in PROMs on health-related and vision-related quality of life was similar for the treatment and placebo groups in the UKGTS. The PROMs used may not be sensitive enough to function as primary end points in clinical trials when participants have newly diagnosed early-stage glaucoma.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30273622
pii: S0161-6420(18)31643-9
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.09.034
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antihypertensive Agents
0
Ophthalmic Solutions
0
Latanoprost
6Z5B6HVF6O
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
682-689Investigateurs
David F Garway-Heath
(DF)
David P Crabb
(DP)
Catey Bunce
(C)
Gerassimos Lascaratos
(G)
Francesca Amalfitano
(F)
Nitin Anand
(N)
Augusto Azuara-Blanco
(A)
Rupert R Bourne
(RR)
David C Broadway
(DC)
Ian A Cunliffe
(IA)
Jeremy P Diamond
(JP)
Scott G Fraser
(SG)
Tuan A Ho
(TA)
Keith R Martin
(KR)
Andrew I McNaught
(AI)
Anil Negi
(A)
Krishna Patel
(K)
Richard A Russell
(RA)
Ameet Shah
(A)
Paul G Spry
(PG)
Katsuyoshi Suzuki
(K)
Edward T White
(ET)
Richard P Wormald
(RP)
Wen Xing
(W)
Thierry G Zeyen
(TG)
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.