BackgroundRare diseases can lead to a significant reduction in quality of life for patients and their families. Ensuring the patients voice is central to clinical decision making is key to delivering, evaluating and understanding the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to capture the patient’s views about their health status and facilitate our understanding of the impact of these diseases and their treatments on patient’s quality of life and symptoms.Main textThis review explores some of the current issues around the utilisation of PROMs in rare diseases, including small patient populations and dearth of valid PROMs. Difficulties in validating new or current PROMs for use in clinical trials and research are discussed. The review highlights potential solutions for some of the issues outlined in the review and the implementation of PROMs in research and clinical practice are discussed.ConclusionPatient input throughout the development of PROMs including qualitative research is essential to ensure that outcomes that matter to people living with rare disease are appropriately captured. Given the large number of rare diseases, small numbers of patients living with each condition and the cost of instrument development, creative and pragmatic solutions to PROM development and use may be necessary. Solutions include qualitative interviews, modern psychometrics and resources such as item banking and computer adaptive testing. Use of PROMs in rare disease research and clinical practice offers the potential to improve patient care and clinical outcomes.

In conclusion, patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis have an increased risk of preceding or concurrent malignancy.

At least some patients with FSGS (NOS) have evolved from the tip variant. The tip variant has been considered a distinct entity. Another interpretation is that it includes two conditions, one an early form of classic FSGS, and the other closely related to minimal change nephropathy (MCN), equivalent to the glomerular tip lesion as originally defined.

Given the clinical problem caused by acute rejection, comparable data are sparse, and clinically important differences in outcomes between widely used interventions have not been excluded. Standardized reproducible outcome criteria are needed.