Cargando…

The PAC‐SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference

BACKGROUND: The Patient Assessment of Constipation‐Symptoms (PAC‐SYM) questionnaire is frequently used in clinical trials of constipation. However, the threshold for reduction in total PAC‐SYM score used to define a clinical response on this 0‐4 point scale has not undergone formal appraisal, and it...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yiannakou, Y., Tack, J., Piessevaux, H., Dubois, D., Quigley, E. M. M., Ke, M. Y., Da Silva, S., Joseph, A., Kerstens, R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5698746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28983926
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apt.14349
_version_ 1783280818511151104
author Yiannakou, Y.
Tack, J.
Piessevaux, H.
Dubois, D.
Quigley, E. M. M.
Ke, M. Y.
Da Silva, S.
Joseph, A.
Kerstens, R.
author_facet Yiannakou, Y.
Tack, J.
Piessevaux, H.
Dubois, D.
Quigley, E. M. M.
Ke, M. Y.
Da Silva, S.
Joseph, A.
Kerstens, R.
author_sort Yiannakou, Y.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Patient Assessment of Constipation‐Symptoms (PAC‐SYM) questionnaire is frequently used in clinical trials of constipation. However, the threshold for reduction in total PAC‐SYM score used to define a clinical response on this 0‐4 point scale has not undergone formal appraisal, and its relationship with clinical benefit as perceived by patients has not been defined. AIM: To determine the minimal important difference in PAC‐SYM score, and the optimum cut‐off value for defining responders. METHODS: The minimal important difference was estimated using data from six international phase 3/4, double‐blind, randomised controlled trials of prucalopride in patients with chronic constipation (NCT01147926, NCT01424228, NCT01116206, NCT00485940, NCT00483886, NCT00488137), with anchor‐ and distribution‐based approaches. Five appropriate patient‐reported outcomes were selected as anchors. In addition, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analyses were used to investigate responder discrimination for each anchor. RESULTS: Data from 2884 patients were included. Minimal important difference estimates ranged from –0.52 to –0.63 across the five anchors. Estimates were not affected by study location but were consistently lower for rectal symptoms than for abdominal and stool symptoms. Distribution‐based estimates were considerably lower than anchor‐based estimates. ROC curve analyses showed optimum cut‐off scores for discriminating responders to be similar to anchor‐based minimal important difference estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Anchor‐based methods gave consistent results for the minimal important difference, at approximately –0.6, and this value was close to the ROC‐determined optimal cut‐off scores for responder discrimination. This value could be considered in clinical practice. A slightly more conservative threshold (eg –0.75) could be used in clinical trials to reduce the placebo response rate.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5698746
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56987462017-11-30 The PAC‐SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference Yiannakou, Y. Tack, J. Piessevaux, H. Dubois, D. Quigley, E. M. M. Ke, M. Y. Da Silva, S. Joseph, A. Kerstens, R. Aliment Pharmacol Ther Patient Assessment of Chronic Constipation BACKGROUND: The Patient Assessment of Constipation‐Symptoms (PAC‐SYM) questionnaire is frequently used in clinical trials of constipation. However, the threshold for reduction in total PAC‐SYM score used to define a clinical response on this 0‐4 point scale has not undergone formal appraisal, and its relationship with clinical benefit as perceived by patients has not been defined. AIM: To determine the minimal important difference in PAC‐SYM score, and the optimum cut‐off value for defining responders. METHODS: The minimal important difference was estimated using data from six international phase 3/4, double‐blind, randomised controlled trials of prucalopride in patients with chronic constipation (NCT01147926, NCT01424228, NCT01116206, NCT00485940, NCT00483886, NCT00488137), with anchor‐ and distribution‐based approaches. Five appropriate patient‐reported outcomes were selected as anchors. In addition, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analyses were used to investigate responder discrimination for each anchor. RESULTS: Data from 2884 patients were included. Minimal important difference estimates ranged from –0.52 to –0.63 across the five anchors. Estimates were not affected by study location but were consistently lower for rectal symptoms than for abdominal and stool symptoms. Distribution‐based estimates were considerably lower than anchor‐based estimates. ROC curve analyses showed optimum cut‐off scores for discriminating responders to be similar to anchor‐based minimal important difference estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Anchor‐based methods gave consistent results for the minimal important difference, at approximately –0.6, and this value was close to the ROC‐determined optimal cut‐off scores for responder discrimination. This value could be considered in clinical practice. A slightly more conservative threshold (eg –0.75) could be used in clinical trials to reduce the placebo response rate. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-10-06 2017-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5698746/ /pubmed/28983926 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apt.14349 Text en © 2017 Shire International GMBH. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Patient Assessment of Chronic Constipation
Yiannakou, Y.
Tack, J.
Piessevaux, H.
Dubois, D.
Quigley, E. M. M.
Ke, M. Y.
Da Silva, S.
Joseph, A.
Kerstens, R.
The PAC‐SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference
title The PAC‐SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference
title_full The PAC‐SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference
title_fullStr The PAC‐SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference
title_full_unstemmed The PAC‐SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference
title_short The PAC‐SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference
title_sort pac‐sym questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference
topic Patient Assessment of Chronic Constipation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5698746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28983926
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apt.14349
work_keys_str_mv AT yiannakouy thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT tackj thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT piessevauxh thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT duboisd thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT quigleyemm thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT kemy thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT dasilvas thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT josepha thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT kerstensr thepacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT yiannakouy pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT tackj pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT piessevauxh pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT duboisd pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT quigleyemm pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT kemy pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT dasilvas pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT josepha pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference
AT kerstensr pacsymquestionnaireforchronicconstipationdefiningtheminimalimportantdifference