Crofford, Leslie J.

Abstract Background The NIH Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory supports the design and conduct of 31 embedded pragmatic clinical trials, and many of these trials use patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to provide valuable information about the patients' health and wellness. Often these trials enroll medically underserved patients, including people with incomes below the federal poverty threshold, racial or ethnic minority groups, or rural or frontier communities. Objectives In this series of trial case reports, we provide lessons learned about collecting PROMs in these populations. Unbiased collection of PROM data is critical to increase the generalizability of trial outcomes and to address health inequities. Use of electronic health records (EHRs) and other digital modes of PROM administration has gained traction. However, engagement with these modes is often low among populations prone to disparity due to lower digital proficiency, device access, and uptake of EHR portals and web interfaces. Methods To maximize the completeness and representativeness of their trial outcome data, study teams tested a range of strategies to improve PROM response rates with emphasis on disparities prone and underserved patient groups. This manuscript describes the approaches, their implementation, and the targeted populations. Conclusion Optimized PROM collection required hybrid approaches with multiple outreach modes, high-touch methods, creativity in promoting digital uptake, multimodal participant engagement, and text messaging.

Objective To assess the efficacy and tolerability of tocilizumab in a multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial in refractory adult patients with dermatomyositis (DM) and polymyositis (PM). Methods Thirty‐six subjects with probable or definite DM/PM were enrolled in a 6‐month phase 2B clinical trial and randomized 1:1 to receive tocilizumab (8 mg/kg intravenously) or placebo every 4 weeks for 24 weeks. Eligible subjects had either a DM rash, a myositis‐associated autoantibody or an adjudicated PM diagnosis. Active disease was defined by at least three of six abnormal core set measures (CSMs), including a manual muscle testing (MMT)‐8 score of less than 136/150. If the MMT‐8 score was greater than 136, then a cutaneous score of 3 or more (10 cm visual analogue scale) was required along with three additional abnormal CSMs indicating disease activity. The primary endpoint compared the Total Improvement Score (TIS) between both arms from week 4 to 24. Secondary outcomes included time to meeting minimal TIS improvement, changes in CSMs, time to worsening, steroid‐sparing effect, proportion of subjects meeting more stringent improvement criteria, and safety outcomes. Results There was no significant difference ( P = 0.86) in the TIS over 24 weeks between tocilizumab and placebo arms. The secondary endpoints of time to improvement (minimal, moderate, or major), time to worsening, CSM changes, safety outcomes, and steroid‐sparing effect were also not significantly different between arms. Conclusion Tocilizumab was safe and well tolerated but did not meet the primary or secondary efficacy outcomes in refractory DM and PM in this 24‐week phase 2B study.