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.

Evaluating Medical Devices in Nephrology Using Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures

Pivotal Clinical Trials with Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Premarket Approval Applications for High-Risk Medical Devices from 2005 to 2018: Review, Examples, and Regulatory Considerations.

Patient-Reported Experience Measures to Evaluate and Improve the Quality of Care in Nephrology

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

[The use of PROMs (patient-reported outcome measures) and PREMs (patient-reported experience measures) in Cardiology: current state and applications to improve patient care]

Critical Comments by Food and Drug Administration Reviewers on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Food and Drug Administration Regulatory Submissions (2018-2021)

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

A mixed methods evaluation of patient perspectives on the implementation of an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom and needs monitoring program in cancer care

The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) within comparative effectiveness research: implications for clinical practice and health care policy

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

Improving an electronic system for measuring PROs in routine oncology practice

A Practical Guide on Incorporating and Evaluating Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials

Incorporating the patient's perspective into drug development and communication: an ad hoc task force report of the Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Harmonization Group meeting …