ObjectivesThe aim was to develop a clinical outcome assessment (COA) for itching in children with cholestatic pruritus.MethodsThis prospective study aimed to enroll patients aged 4–30 years with Alagille syndrome (ALGS) or progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis type 1 and caregivers of patients aged 5 months to 14 years. Eligible patients experienced itching during ≥3 of the 7 days before enrollment and had not undergone liver transplant or surgical interruption of the enterohepatic circulation. Open-ended qualitative interviews confirmed that itching was a primary concern for patients and caregivers. Diaries were modified and then evaluated by participants during cognitive debriefing. Interview results were reviewed by clinical, COA and statistical experts. Diary questions were revised following an interim analysis before finalizing the Itch Reported Outcome (ItchRO).ResultsThirty-six interviews were analyzed, representing 25 families of patients with ALGS. Itching was reported spontaneously (without prompting by the interviewer) by ten of 12 patients with ALGS and 19 of 20 caregivers. Consequences of itching included skin damage (78%), mood changes (59%), and difficulties staying asleep (59%) or falling asleep (53%). Two versions of the ItchRO were developed: ItchRO(Patient) for self-completion by patients and ItchRO(Observer) for caregivers. The ItchRO diaries comprise a single scorable item to assess itch and are to be completed twice daily (morning and evening).ConclusionsItching was the most bothersome ALGS symptom reported by study participants. We have developed the ItchRO(Patient) and ItchRO(Observer) to assess itching in children with ALGS and other cholestatic liver diseases. These diaries are being validated for use in clinical trials.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40271-017-0266-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Rationale: Several new drugs for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) are in development. Tools are needed to assess whether these drugs benefit patients on outcomes that matter most to them. Health-related quality of life (HRQL) is one such outcome. It is influenced by many factors, but symptoms and their impacts are two strong drivers. Objectives: To develop a questionnaire to assess symptoms, disease impacts, and HRQL specifically for patients with IPF. Methods: Working with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration through the Drug Development Tool Qualification process, focus groups, concept elicitation, and cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted to inform the development of a 44-item pilot questionnaire. The pilot paper-and-pen questionnaire was migrated to an equivalent electronic version and field-tested in a 14-day study. Response data were subjected to psychometric testing, including exploratory factor analysis, item calibration using item response theory models, test-retest reliability, and validity testing. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 125 patients with IPF (62.4% men) completed the longitudinal study. The mean ± SD age of the cohort was 69 ± 7.60 years, and the mean FVC% predicted was 71 ± 20.0. After factor and item analyses, 35 items were retained, and these comprise the two modules (symptoms and impacts) of the Living with IPF (L-IPF) questionnaire. The L-IPF yields five scales demonstrating good psychometric properties, including correlation with concurrently collected FVC% predicted and the ability to discriminate between patients with differing levels of IPF severity. Conclusions: The L-IPF is a new questionnaire that assesses symptoms, disease impacts, and HRQL in patients with IPF.

No abstract

No abstract

SIGNIFICANCE: Presbyopia typically occurs around 40 years of age and affects approximately one-quarter of the global population. Up to October 2021, there were no approved pharmacotherapies for presbyopia, and common treatments, such as glasses, can have disadvantages for individuals' health-related quality of life. PURPOSE:This study aimed to document the experience of living with and managing presbyopia, identify perspectives on treatment options, and determine whether there is an unmet need in the treatment landscape.METHODS: Coded transcripts of concept elicitation (CE; n = 20) and cognitive debriefing (n = 20) interviews with presbyopic individuals, originally conducted for development of patient-reported outcome instruments, were reanalyzed to identify salient concepts describing participants' experiences with presbyopia treatments. Qualitative ranking exercises assessed participants' preferences for a potential pharmacotherapy vs. existing treatments.RESULTS: Because most concepts were identified with the CE interviews, data reflect CE findings unless otherwise noted. Average age across CE/cognitive debriefing interviews was 49.4 years; a vast majority of participants used glasses for presbyopia treatment. Four themes related to treatment with glasses were identified with the interviews: inconvenience during daily activities, negative physical sensations around the eyes/head, limitations, and undesirable impacts on daily life (e.g., psychosocial). Most commonly, participants reported inconveniences related to forgetting glasses and psychosocial impacts (e.g., feeling/looking older). Strained/tired eyes and limited ability to see at varying distances were also reported. Among participants with near-vision glasses who provided data, two-thirds expressed interest in alternative treatments. In addition, almost three-quarters of the participants ranked hypothetical eye drops as their first or second preferred option, vs. reading glasses, contact lenses, magnifying glasses, and surgery.CONCLUSIONS: This study explored the experience of living with and managing presbyopia and identified limitations and negative impacts of current treatments. Pharmacological development (e.g., eye drops) may fulfill an unmet need in the presbyopia treatment landscape.