Abstract:Abstract This guidance describes how the FDA evaluates patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used as effectiveness endpoints in clinical trials. It also describes our current thinking on how sponsors can develop and use study results measured by PRO instruments to support claims in approved product labeling (see appendix point 1). It does not address the use of PRO instruments for purposes beyond evaluation of claims made about a drug or medical product in its labeling. By explicitly addressing the review issues identified in this guidance, sponsors can increase the efficiency of their endpoint discussions with the FDA during the product development process, streamline the FDA's review of PRO endpoint adequacy, and provide optimal information about the patient's perspective of treatment benefit at the time of product approval. A PRO is a measurement of any aspect of a patient's health status that comes directly from the patient (i.e., without the interpretation of the patient's responses by a physician or anyone else). In clinical trials, a PRO instrument can be used to measure the impact of an intervention on one or more aspects of patients' health status, hereafter referred to as PRO concepts, ranging from the purely symptomatic (response of a headache) to more complex concepts (e.g., ability to carry out activities of daily living), to extremely complex concepts such as quality of life , which is widely understood to be a multidomain concept with physical, psychological, and social components. Data generated by a PRO instrument can provide evidence of a treatment benefit from the patient perspective. For this data to be meaningful, however, there should be evidence that the PRO instrument effectively measures the particular concept that is studied. Generally, findings measured by PRO instruments may be used to support claims in approved product labeling if the claims are derived from adequate and well-controlled investigations that use PRO instruments that reliably and validly measure the specific concepts at issue. The glossary defines many of the terms used in this guidance. In particular, the term instrument refers to the actual questions or items contained in a questionnaire or interview schedule along with all the additional information and documentation that supports the use of these items in producing a PRO measure (e.g., interviewer training and instructions, scoring and interpretation manual). The term conceptual framework refers to how items are grouped according to subconcepts or domains (e.g., the item walking without help may be grouped with another item, walking with difficulty , within the domain of ambulation , and ambulation may be further grouped into the concept of physical ability ). FDA's guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidance documents describe the Agency's current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word should in Agency guidance documents means that something is suggested or recommended but not required. First publication of the Draft Guidance by the Food and Drug Administration- February 2006.

Contribution of polymer microstructure to space charge, dielectric properties and electrical conduction

Do You Need To Talk About It? Prolonged Exposure for the Treatment of Chronic PTSD.

The Role of Patient-Reported Experience and Outcome Measures in Kidney Health Equity-Oriented Quality Improvement

Patient-Reported Outcomes to Achieve Person-Centered Care for Aging People With Kidney Disease

Navigating Choices in Nephrology: The Role of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Preferences in Economic Evaluations and Decisions in Health Care

Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Development and Validation: A Primer for Clinicians

Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance

Development of a preliminary conceptual model of the patient experience of chronic kidney disease: a targeted literature review and analysis

Let's talk about it: an exploration of the comparative use of three different digital platforms to gather patient-reported outcome measures

[Neuromuscular action of 3 hydrophiid venoms].

Needle aspiration cytology of low‐grade transitional cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis

Person‐reported outcomes in diabetes care: What are they and why are they so important?

Impact of Measuring Patient-Reported Outcomes in Dermatology Drug Development

Ophthalmic Drug Discovery and Development: Regulatory Aspects of Patient Focused Drug Development in Ophthalmology

Biosorption of chromium by Termitomyces clypeatus.

A framework for implementing patient-reported outcomes in clinical care: the PROTEUS-practice guide

Interviewing to develop Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) measures for clinical research: eliciting patients’ experience

Issues and challenges of involving users in medical device development

The Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Tool: Testing Usability and Feasibility of a Mobile App and Portal to Support Care for Patients With Complex Chronic Disease and Disability in Primary Care Settings

Perceived Significance of Engagement in Research Prioritization Among Chronic Kidney Disease Patients, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals: A Qualitative Study

Validating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Dermatology