» Articles » PMID: 39976863

The Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes Assessments and Digital Health Technologies in Clinical Trials for Obesity

Overview
Specialty Health Services
Date 2025 Feb 20
PMID 39976863
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Clinical trials for obesity have traditionally focused on weight loss and resolution of comorbidities as primary outcomes. However, secondary outcomes, such as the impact of weight reduction on patient experience, like health-related quality of life (HRQoL), have increasingly been recognized as important. Therefore, a review was conducted to determine the Clinical Outcome Assessments (COAs) and Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) used in clinical trials for obesity to assess the patient experience.

Methods: Two clinical trial databases (United States & European Union) were reviewed to identify Phase 2-4 clinical trials for obesity (2018-2023). A targeted literature review was also conducted using the OVID database to identify clinical trial for obesity publications which included COAs/DHTs (2010-2023).

Result: Trials from the databases (n = 53) and publications (n = 42) were included in data extraction (N = 73). This resulted in identification of 108 COAs, the majority being patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (n = 83), but also 24 performance outcomes (PerfO) measures, and 1 composite PRO-clinician-reported outcomes (ClinRO) measure, as well as 2 DHTs. The most frequently identified PRO measures were the Short Form 36 and the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life Lite Clinical Trials. Twenty-four PerfO measures were also identified, with the 6-minute walk test being most common. These measures were most often used to construct secondary endpoints, with physical function (PF) being the most frequently specified domain. PRO measures assessing eating-related thoughts/behaviours, physical activity, and disordered eating were also frequently included, although individual measures varied widely across trials.

Conclusion: Review of COAs and DHTs in registered clinical trials and publications for obesity found that PRO measures were the most common type of COA used to develop endpoints with current use of DHTs limited. Specifically, the physical function domain of multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures assessing health-related quality of life were often used to construct secondary endpoints. Further work is warranted to assess how the COAs and DHT data collected in clinical trials are viewed by regulators and payers.

References
1.
Izci B, Ardic S, Firat H, Sahin A, Altinors M, Karacan I . Reliability and validity studies of the Turkish version of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale. Sleep Breath. 2007; 12(2):161-8. DOI: 10.1007/s11325-007-0145-7. View

2.
ONeil P, Rubino D . Exploring the wider benefits of semaglutide treatment in obesity: insight from the STEP program. Postgrad Med. 2023; 134(sup1):28-36. DOI: 10.1080/00325481.2022.2150006. View

3.
Heller G, Manuguerra M, Chow R . How to analyze the Visual Analogue Scale: Myths, truths and clinical relevance. Scand J Pain. 2017; 13:67-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2016.06.012. View

4.
Fontaine K, Barofsky I . Obesity and health-related quality of life. Obes Rev. 2002; 2(3):173-82. DOI: 10.1046/j.1467-789x.2001.00032.x. View

5.
Rose J, Vaewsorn A, Rosselli-Navarra F, Wilson G, Weissman R . Test-retest reliability of the eating disorder examination-questionnaire (EDE-Q) in a college sample. J Eat Disord. 2014; 1:42. PMC: 4081765. DOI: 10.1186/2050-2974-1-42. View