Patient-reported experiences with refractory or unexplained chronic cough: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic cough, defined as a cough lasting 8 or more weeks, affects up to 10% of adults. Refractory chronic cough (RCC) is a cough that is uncontrolled despite comprehensive investigation and treatment of comorbid conditions while unexplained chronic cough (UCC) is a cough with no identifiable cause despite extensive evaluation of comorbid conditions. RCC and UCC are often poorly controlled. Understanding individuals' lived experience of the symptoms and impacts of these conditions may guide therapeutic strategies. OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives of this study were to assess respondents' perceptions of the key symptoms of RCC and UCC and the impacts of RCC and UCC and their symptoms on well-being, health-related quality of life, work productivity, and social relationships. DESIGN: Qualitative study. METHODS: This study enrolled 30 adults with physician-diagnosed RCC or UCC. Two trained qualitative researchers conducted individual, in-depth telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded, and systematically analyzed to identify content themes. RESULTS: A total of 15 respondents with RCC and 15 with UCC were included in the study. Many respondents had RCC or UCC for a long duration (median 9 years, range: 0-24). Half of the respondents reported having a coughing episode at least once daily. Only 40% of respondents reported that medication had improved their symptoms. In over half of the respondents, RCC or UCC hindered communication, caused embarrassment, frustration, and worry, and lowered quality of life. Perceptions of meaningful treatment benefits in RCC or UCC varied widely across respondents. CONCLUSION: RCC and UCC remained poorly managed in many individuals and were associated with a wide range of symptoms and cough triggers that hindered daily activities and reduced emotional well-being. Understanding individuals' lived experiences may inform the development of RCC and UCC therapeutic strategies.

Patient-reported experiences with refractory or unexplained chronic cough: a qualitative analysisChronic cough, particularly refractory and unexplained chronic cough, remain poorly managed in many individuals and are associated with a wide range of symptoms and cough triggers that hinder daily activities and reduce emotional well-being. Currently there are no US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments for refractory or unexplained chronic cough. Understanding the experience and treatment preferences of individuals with these conditions may help inform the development of new therapies and clarify the potential impact of such therapies on the lives of individuals with chronic cough. Using in-depth interviews, the present study comprehensively evaluated individuals' experience with refractory or unexplained chronic cough and treatment priorities, a research area that has not been well-studied. This study detailed broad-ranging physical, behavioral, and emotional impacts of chronic cough, which hindered individuals' social well-being.

Assessing the patient experience of respiratory syncytial virus infection: development of a patient-reported outcome measure.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes significant morbidity and mortality in older adults. Despite a number of RSV vaccine candidates in clinical trials, there are no existing disease-specific, self-reported measures that assess the symptoms and severity of RSV infection from the perspective of adult patients with acute RSV. The objective of this study was to describe the initial conceptualization and development of the RSV Infection, Intensity and Impact Questionnaire (RSV-iiiQ), a new patient-reported outcome measure. METHODS: A targeted review of the literature identified relevant existing measures, symptoms, and impacts of RSV. A draft version of the RSV-iiiQ was developed based on the Influenza Intensity and Impact Questionnaire (Flu-iiQ) with expert input. Qualitative interviews (N = 20) were conducted with participants to optimize the RSV-iiiQ conceptual model and confirm the content validity of the RSV-iiiQ. Interviews included concept elicitation and a cognitive debriefing assessment. A draft conceptual framework was developed, and the electronic clinical outcome assessment was piloted. All steps of instrument development followed Food and Drug Administration guidance for patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: In-depth concept elicitation interviews followed by cognitive debriefings demonstrated that the content of the items was comprehensive, covered the breadth of RSV symptoms and impacts, and was relevant to the experiences of individuals with RSV. Both the paper and electronic versions of the RSV-iiiQ were easily completed. Minor refinements were made to some items based on participant feedback, and the draft conceptual framework was refined. CONCLUSIONS: The RSV-iiiQ was developed for use in clinical trials to measure the symptom intensity and impact of acute RSV infection from the perspective of adult patients. The tool was developed in accordance with current regulatory guidance and is useful to support patient-focused drug development.

Use of Patient and Investigator Global Impression Scales: A Review of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Labeling, 2009 to 2019.

OBJECTIVE: Identify disease categories in which single-item global impression (GI) scales were included in product labeling of new drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in January 2009-December 2019 and review the characteristics of GIs included in product labeling of new FDA-approved drugs (January 2017-December 2019). METHODS: FDA Clinical Outcome Assessment (COA) Compendium was reviewed for drug labels that included GIs for drugs approved in 2009-2016. The indication, year of approval, ICD-10 code, and GI respondent were noted. A manual review of labels of FDA-approved drugs (2017-2019) was undertaken to identify GIs included in the labels. Corresponding drug approval packages were reviewed to identify details of any regulatory reviewer comments related to GIs. GI characteristics were noted from the drug label or the review documents, including the respondent, type of measure (static or dynamic), item wording, concept assessed, and response options. RESULTS: Product labeling containing GIs was most common in diseases related to the skin, nervous system, behavioral disorders, and the musculoskeletal system. GIs were included in 30/77 (39.0%) drug labels in the four disease categories. CONCLUSION: In the past 10 years, GIs have been included as endpoint measures in confirmatory clinical trials and have generated evidence of treatment benefit in diseases related to the skin, nervous system, behavioral disorders, and the musculoskeletal system. GIs frequently provide important insights into the patient experience. Before GIs are included in clinical trials to assess treatment benefit, it is important to ensure that they are valid, reliable, and responsive.

Psychometric evaluation of the Nocturia Sleep Quality Scale based on data from a prospective observational study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The Nocturia Sleep Quality Scale (NSQS), a novel patient-reported outcomes measure, was developed to assess the impact of sleep disturbance from nocturia. The objective of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the NSQS, including its structure, reliability, and validity. METHODS: Data were collected in the context of a web-based, prospective, longitudinal, observational study. Participants with nocturia were randomized 1:1 to either a group that received sleep hygiene instructions, including instructions to limit liquids at nighttime and empty bladder prior to bedtime, or one that did not receive sleep instructions. All participants were asked to provide responses to the web-based questionnaires from day 1 to day 10. Psychometric analyses, aligned with current regulatory guidance, were conducted to evaluate the daily scores and 3-day average scores of NSQS items and potential composites. Item-level analyses were conducted first, followed by composite-level analyses. RESULTS: The NSQS items and supporting measures demonstrated very slight improvement in patient-perceived sleep disturbance from nocturia over the course of the study. NSQS test-retest reliabilities were generally satisfactory. Correlations between NSQS items and related patient-reported measures tended to support the construct validity of the NSQS, and the known-groups analyses supplied evidence of its discriminating ability. NSQS responsiveness statistics were small. CONCLUSIONS: The NSQS is a reliable and valid measure of the impact of nocturia on patients' sleep. The present analyses lay the psychometric groundwork for the use of the NSQS in future clinical trials to support product approval and labeling claims.

Development, psychometric evaluation, and initial feasibility assessment of a symptom tracker for use by patients with heart failure (HFaST).

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop and provide a psychometric and feasibility pilot evaluation of the Heart Failure (HF) Symptom Tracker (HFaST), a new patient-reported tool designed to facilitate communication between patients and health care providers (HCPs) in routine clinical care. The HFaST enables patients to identify worsening HF symptoms, with a long-term goal of preventing hospitalizations or emergency room visits. METHODS: The HFaST was developed drawing on evidence from the literature, qualitatively with cognitive interviews (12 patient/caregiver and 8 HCPs), and evaluated quantitatively (psychometric, feasibility assessment). The HFaST was administered for 7 consecutive days to 100 individuals diagnosed with HF during a multisite, non-interventional US pilot study. Health care providers then completed a survey assessing the feasibility and importance of the HFaST in clinical practice. Qualitative development included a literature review and cognitive interviews with patients, caregivers, and HCPs. The psychometric properties of the HFaST were evaluated using classical test theory methods. Descriptive statistics provided insight into HCPs' perceptions of the feasibility of using the HFaST in clinical practice. RESULTS: A preliminary set of 40 items was developed for the symptom tracker and iteratively reduced to 10 items based on the qualitative phase. Test-retest reliability (weighted kappa 0.71-0.97), discriminating validity, and construct validity of the HFaST were acceptable. HCPs rated the HFaST as a good (70%) or excellent (30%) means of tracking HF symptoms. Six HFaST items were ultimately retained, covering concepts of fatigue, shortness of breath (3 items), swelling, and rapid weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: The 6-item HFaST is an easy-to-use tool designed to raise patients' awareness of HF symptoms and facilitate communication with HCPs. Future research should evaluate HFaST implementation in clinical practice and effectiveness as an intervention to potentially prevent hospitalizations and emergency room visits.

Development of the Nocturia Sleep Quality Scale: a patient-reported outcome measure of sleep impact related to nocturia.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Nocturia's impact on sleep causes significant burden for patients. This study aimed to develop a novel patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure, the Nocturia Sleep Quality Scale (NSQS), for the assessment of the impact of nocturia (defined as ≥2 nocturnal voids/night) on sleep. METHODS: Sleep-related concepts were identified through a targeted literature review, after which in-depth concept elicitation interviews with patients with a clinical diagnosis of nocturia were conducted. Draft items were generated to address concepts identified as important, meaningful, and relevant. Items were further refined through three iterative sets of cognitive debriefing interviews to optimize instructions, question wording, and response options. Two sleep research experts also provided input. RESULTS: The literature review and data from 18 concept elicitation interviews provided the basis for a comprehensive set of concepts. Constant comparative analysis was used to identify themes and support item development. The draft questionnaire consisted of 14 items with item-specific response scales. Wording and scaling of the items was optimized based on feedback from the 22 cognitive debriefing interviews and expert input. The results confirmed the completeness and relevance of the NSQS, providing support for the content validity and ability of items to reflect patient perception of nocturia-related sleep impacts. CONCLUSIONS: The 6-item NSQS assesses the impact of nocturia on sleep by evaluating nighttime awakenings, sleep quantity, and sleep quality. The NSQS is self-administered and is intended to assess change in nocturia's impact on sleep after treatment in a standardized manner. Psychometric evaluation is under way to describe key measurement properties.

A Review of Patient-Reported Outcomes Labeling for Oncology Drugs Approved by the FDA and the EMA (2012-2016).

OBJECTIVES: To compare US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) labeling for evidence based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of new oncology treatments approved by both agencies. METHODS: Oncology drugs and indications approved between 2012 and 2016 by both the FDA and the EMA were identified. PRO-related language and analysis reported in US product labels and drug approval packages and EMA summaries of product characteristics were compared for each indication. RESULTS: In total, 49 oncology drugs were approved for a total of 64 indications. Of the 64 indications, 45 (70.3%) included PRO data in either regulatory submission. No FDA PRO labeling was identified. PRO language was included in the summary of product characteristics for 21 (46.7%) of 45 indications. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy measures were used frequently in submissions. FDA's comments suggest that aspects of study design (eg, open labels) or the validity of PRO measures was the primary reason for the lack of labeling based on PRO endpoints. Both agencies identified missing PRO data as problematic for interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: During this time period, the FDA and the EMA used different evidentiary standards to assess PRO data from oncology studies, with the EMA more likely to accept data from open-label studies and broad concepts such as health-related quality of life. An understanding of the key differences between the agencies may guide sponsor PRO strategy when pursuing labeling. Patient-focused proximal concepts are more likely than distal concepts to receive positive reviews.