Psychometric Evaluation of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Irritable Bowel Syndrome Randomized Controlled Trials: A Rome Foundation Report
Background & Aims
There is debate about how best to measure patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We pooled data to measure the psychometric properties of IBS end points, including binary responses (eg, “adequate relief”) and 50% improvement in symptom severity.
Methods
We pooled data from 12 IBS drug trials involving 10,066 participants. We tested the properties of binary response and 50% improvement end points, including the impact of baseline severity on performance, and measured construct validity using clinical anchors.
Results
There were 9044 evaluable subjects (age, 44 years; 85% female; 58% IBS constipation-prominent [IBS-C]; 31% IBS diarrhea-prominent [IBS-D]). Using the binary end point, the proportion responding in the mild, moderate, and severe groups was 42%, 40%, and 38%, respectively (P = .0008). There was no effect of baseline severity on binary response (odds ratio [OR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99–1.0; P = .07). The proportions reaching 50% improvement in pain were 45%, 41%, and 41%, respectively; there was a small, yet significant, impact of baseline severity (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03–1.05; P < .0001) that did not meet clinical relevance criteria. Both end points revealed strong construct validity and detected “minimally clinically important differences” in symptoms. Both provided better discriminant spread in IBS-D than IBS-C.
Conclusions
Both the traditional binary and 50% improvement end points are equivalent in their psychometric properties. Neither is impacted by baseline severity, and both demonstrate excellent construct validity. They are optimized for the IBS-D population but also appear valid in IBS-C.
Abbreviations used in this paper: AR, adequate relief, C, constipation prominent, CI, confidence interval, D, diarrhea prominent, HRQOL, health-related quality of life, IBS, irritable bowel syndrome, IBS-SSS, IBS severity symptom score, LOCF, last observation carried forward, MCID, minimal clinically important difference, OR, odds ratio, PRO, patient reported outcome
Conflicts of interest The authors disclose the following: Dr Spiegel has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca, McNeail Consumer, Novartis, Prometheus, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, and TAP Pharmaceuticals and has received grant support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Salix, and Takeda. Dr Camilleri has served as a consult for GlaxoSmithKline and has received research support from Ironwood Pharmaceuticals and Novartis. Drs Fehnel and Mangel are employees of RTI Health Solutions. Dr Chey is a consultant for Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Solvay, and Ironwood and is on the speaker's bureau of Novartis. Dr Talley is a consultant for Astellas Pharma Inc US, AstraZeneca, Centocor, Eisai, Elsevier, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Focus, Gilead, In2MedEd, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, McNeil Consumer, Medscape, Meritage Pharma, Metabolic Pharma, Microbia Inc, Novartis, Optum HC, Salix, SK Life Sciences, Steigerwald, The Journal of Medicine, Therevance, and Wyeth and received grant support from GlaxoSmithKline, Dynogen, and Tioga. The remaining authors disclose no conflicts.
Funding Supported by the Rome Foundation and by a Veteran's Affairs Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) Career Development Transition Award (RCD 03-179-2; to B.S.), the CURE Digestive Disease Research Center (NIH 2P30 DK 041301-17; to B.S.), and NIH Center Grant 1 R24 AT002681-NCCAM (to B.S.).
PII: S0016-5085(09)01481-4
doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2009.08.047
© 2009 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Refers to article:
-
Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
, 14 July 2009


