REGULATORY/HTA FRAMING PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME INSTRUMENTS IN ULCERATIVE COLITIS CLINICAL TRIALS: FREQUENCY OF USE AND PSYCHOMETRIC EVIDENCE

Author(s)

Kevin Kallmes, MA, JD1, Devendra Patil, MS2, Chong H Kim, MPH, MS, PhD3.
1Nested Knowledge, St. Paul, MN, USA, 2Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston, MA, USA, 3Gilead, Foster City, CA, USA.
OBJECTIVES: This targeted literature review (TLR) aimed to identify patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used in ulcerative colitis (UC) clinical trials (2021-2026) and to evaluate psychometric validation evidence for newly identified PRO instruments.
METHODS: A TLR was conducted on the Nested Knowledge platform across two streams. Stream 1 searched ClinicalTrials.gov for interventional UC clinical trials (all phases, 2021-2026). Studies included if they enrolled adults with UC, evaluated a pharmacological intervention, and reported at least one PRO endpoint; 51 studies met final inclusion criteria. Stream 2 conducted targeted PubMed searches for psychometric validation studies for each newly identified PRO instrument; 17 studies were included. Data extraction covered study design, phase, drug class, UC severity, sample size, demographics, and PRO instruments. Validation data captured content validity, construct validity, reliability, responsiveness, and MCID/MID.
RESULTS: Twenty-four unique PRO instruments were identified across 51 UC clinical trials. The most frequently used were PRO-2/Mayo PRO sub-scores (n=32, 63%), IBDQ (n=18, 35%), Abdominal Pain NRS (n=7, 14%), U-NRS (n=6, 12%), and FACIT-Fatigue (n=5, 10%). Bowel urgency emerged as a key patient-centric endpoint, assessed via U-NRS and BUF across multiple Phase 3 trials. Five novel UC-specific PROs were identified: U-NRS, UC-PROSS, TUMMY-UC, PRO-UC Diary, and BUF. The U-NRS was the most comprehensively validated new instrument (5 studies; ICC=0.768-0.877; MCID ≥3 points). PROMIS-Fatigue SF-7a demonstrated full psychometric evidence including MCID ≥7 points. Critical evidence gaps were identified for Abdominal Pain NRS (7 trials; no UC-specific validation) and BUF (no formal psychometric studies).
CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-four unique PROs were identified across 51 UC clinical trials from 2021-2026. PRO-2 and IBDQ remain the most widely used instruments. Bowel urgency has emerged as a priority outcome domain, with the U-NRS now comprehensively validated. Important validation gaps remain for Abdominal Pain NRS and BUF, representing priority areas for future PRO qualification work in UC.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria

Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S

Code

HTA330

Topic

Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Technology Assessment, Patient-Centered Research

Topic Subcategory

Decision & Deliberative Processes

Disease

Biologics & Biosimilars, Gastrointestinal Disorders, Rare & Orphan Diseases, Systemic Disorders/Conditions (Anesthesia, Auto-Immune Disorders (n.e.c.), Hematological Disorders (non-oncologic), Pain)

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×