PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME INSTRUMENTS IN (IDIOPATHIC) CHRONIC COUGH
Author(s)
Alleman CJM1;Lasch K2;Hensen M1;McQuire SG*3, Tabberer M3 1Pharmerit International, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2Pharmerit International, Cambridge, MA, USA, 3GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: In the USA, chronic cough (CC) is the most common complaint for which patients seek medical attention (McGarvey, 2007). When assessing new treatments for CC in clinical trials, patient reported outcomes (PROs) are important methodologies for evaluating effectiveness. The objective of this literature review was to identify validated PRO instruments that can assess patients’ experience of (new) cough therapies in idiopathic chronic cough (ICC) and CC in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and lung cancer. METHODS: Literature search according to pre-defined strategy and review criteria was performed in multiple databases. This search resulted in 33 included full-texts from which 9 relevant PROs were identified. RESULTS: The main questionnaires investigated in the included publications were the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ), the Chronic Cough Impact Questionnaire (CCIQ), and the Cough Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Other cough specific PROs reviewed were the Cough Quality of Life Questionnaire (CQLQ), the Cough Symptom Diary (CSD) and the Adverse Cough Outcome Survey (ACOS). Some cough relevant items were included in the Breathlessness Cough and Sputum Scale (BCSS), the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASAQ). All instruments are relatively new and need further content validity, responsiveness and interpretability testing. Overall, the LCQ was the most psychometrically sound. The CSD has potential to be a high quality measure; it is the only PRO that provided a conceptual framework and measures cough severity; however, some major aspects still need to be validated. No questionnaire has been developed specifically for the population of interest; and few have been validated within this population. CONCLUSIONS: Several relevant instruments for ICC and CC trials exist, but they are relatively new and need further validation. The two most promising PROs are the LCQ for disease-specific quality-of-life and the CSD for cough severity.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2013-05, ISPOR 2013, New Orleans, LA, USA
Value in Health, Vol. 16, No. 3 (May 2013)
Code
PRS45
Topic
Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
Disease
Respiratory-Related Disorders