TY - JOUR
T1 - Symptom Variability and Early Symptom Regression in the MAPP Study
T2 - A Prospective Study of Urological Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome
AU - MAPP Research Network
AU - MAPP Research Network
AU - Stephens-Shields, Alisa J.
AU - Clemens, J. Quentin
AU - Jemielita, Thomas
AU - Farrar, John
AU - Sutcliffe, Siobhan
AU - Hou, Xiaoling
AU - Landis, J. Richard
AU - Hanno, Philip
AU - Kirkali, Ziya
AU - Kusek, John W.
AU - Lucia, M. Scott
AU - Moldwin, Robert M.
AU - Mullins, Chris
AU - Pontari, Michel A.
AU - Klumpp, David J.
AU - Schaeffer, Anthony J.
AU - Apkarian, Apkar (Vania)
AU - Cella, David
AU - Farmer, Melissa A.
AU - Fitzgerald, Colleen
AU - Gershon, Richard
AU - Griffith, James W.
AU - Heckman, Charles J.
AU - Jiang, Mingchen
AU - Keefer, Laurie
AU - Marko, Darlene S.
AU - Michniewicz, Jean
AU - Parrish, Todd
AU - Tu, Frank
AU - Mayer, Emeran A.
AU - Rodríguez, Larissa V.
AU - Alger, Jeffry
AU - Ashe-McNalley, Cody P.
AU - Ellingson, Ben
AU - Heendeniya, Nuwanthi
AU - Kilpatrick, Lisa
AU - Kulbacki, Cara
AU - Kutch, Jason
AU - Labus, Jennifer S.
AU - Naliboff, Bruce D.
AU - Randal, Fornessa
AU - Smith, Suzanne R.
AU - Kreder, Karl J.
AU - Bradley, Catherine S.
AU - Eno, Mary
AU - Greiner, Kris
AU - Luo, Yi
AU - Lutgendorf, Susan K.
AU - O'Donnell, Michael A.
AU - Ziegler, Barbara
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.
PY - 2016/11/1
Y1 - 2016/11/1
N2 - Purpose We examined symptom variability in men and women with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome. We describe symptom fluctuations as related to early symptom regression and its effect on estimated 1-year symptom change. We also describe a method to quantify patient specific symptom variability. Materials and Methods Symptoms were assessed biweekly in 424 subjects with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome during 1 year. To evaluate the impact of early symptom regression subjects were classified as improved, no change or worse according to the rate of change using 1) all data, 2) excluding week 0 and 3) excluding weeks 0 and 2. Patient specific, time varying variability was calculated at each interval using a sliding window approach. Patients were classified as high, medium or low variability at each time and ultimately as high or low variability overall based on the variability for the majority of contacts. Results Prior to excluding early weeks to adjust for early symptom regression 25% to 38% and 5% to 6% of patients were classified as improved and worse, respectively. After adjustment the percent of patients who were improved or worse ranged from 15% to 25% and 6% to 9%, respectively. High and low variability phenotypes were each identified in 25% to 30% of participants. Conclusions Patients with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome show symptom variability. At study enrollment patients had worse symptoms on average, resulting in a regression effect that influenced the estimated proportion of those who were improved or worse. Prospective studies should include a run-in period to account for regression to the mean and other causes of early symptom regression. Further, symptom variability may be quantified and used to characterize longitudinal symptom profiles of urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome.
AB - Purpose We examined symptom variability in men and women with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome. We describe symptom fluctuations as related to early symptom regression and its effect on estimated 1-year symptom change. We also describe a method to quantify patient specific symptom variability. Materials and Methods Symptoms were assessed biweekly in 424 subjects with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome during 1 year. To evaluate the impact of early symptom regression subjects were classified as improved, no change or worse according to the rate of change using 1) all data, 2) excluding week 0 and 3) excluding weeks 0 and 2. Patient specific, time varying variability was calculated at each interval using a sliding window approach. Patients were classified as high, medium or low variability at each time and ultimately as high or low variability overall based on the variability for the majority of contacts. Results Prior to excluding early weeks to adjust for early symptom regression 25% to 38% and 5% to 6% of patients were classified as improved and worse, respectively. After adjustment the percent of patients who were improved or worse ranged from 15% to 25% and 6% to 9%, respectively. High and low variability phenotypes were each identified in 25% to 30% of participants. Conclusions Patients with urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome show symptom variability. At study enrollment patients had worse symptoms on average, resulting in a regression effect that influenced the estimated proportion of those who were improved or worse. Prospective studies should include a run-in period to account for regression to the mean and other causes of early symptom regression. Further, symptom variability may be quantified and used to characterize longitudinal symptom profiles of urological chronic pelvic pain syndrome.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992365837&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992365837&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.070
DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.070
M3 - Article
C2 - 27131464
AN - SCOPUS:84992365837
SN - 0022-5347
VL - 196
SP - 1450
EP - 1455
JO - Journal of Urology
JF - Journal of Urology
IS - 5
ER -