Bali Vishal, Kardos Peter, Page Clive, Rogliani Paola, Calzetta Luigino, Adriano Ada, Byrne Aidan, Adeyemi Adekemi, Frederickson Andrew, Schelfhout Jonathan
Center for Observational and Real-World Evidence, Merck and Co. Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Red Cross Hospital, Department for Respiratory, Allergy, and Sleep, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Ann Thorac Med. 2024 Jan-Mar;19(1):56-73. doi: 10.4103/atm.atm_105_23. Epub 2024 Jan 25.
Refractory or unexplained chronic cough (RCC or UCC) is difficult to manage and is usually treated by the off-label use of drugs approved for other indications.
The objectives of this systematic literature review (SLR) were to identify and characterize the current published body of evidence for the efficacy and safety of treatments for RCC or UCC.
The SLR was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The SLRs pre-defined population included patients ≥18 years of age who were diagnosed with chronic cough. The review was not restricted to any intervention type or study comparator, nor by timeframe.
A total of 20 eligible publications from 19 unique trials were included. Seventeen of these trials were randomized controlled trials and most (14/17) were placebo-controlled. There was considerable variability between trials in the definition of RCC or UCC, participant exclusion and inclusion criteria, outcome measurement timepoints, and the safety and efficacy outcomes assessed. Several trials identified significant improvements in cough frequency, severity, or health-related quality of life measures while participants were on treatment, although these improvements did not persist in any of the studies that included a post-treatment follow-up timepoint.
In the absence of an approved therapy, placebo remains the most common comparator in trials of potential RCC or UCC treatments. The between-study comparability of the published evidence is limited by heterogeneity of study design, study populations, and outcomes measures, as well as by concerns regarding study size and risk of bias.
难治性或不明原因的慢性咳嗽(RCC或UCC)难以处理,通常采用获批用于其他适应症的药物的超说明书用药进行治疗。
本系统文献综述(SLR)的目的是识别和描述目前已发表的关于RCC或UCC治疗的疗效和安全性的证据。
SLR按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目指南进行。SLR预先定义的人群包括年龄≥18岁且被诊断为慢性咳嗽的患者。该综述不限于任何干预类型或研究对照,也不受时间框架限制。
共纳入了来自19项独特试验的20篇符合条件的出版物。其中17项试验为随机对照试验,且大多数(14/17)为安慰剂对照试验。在RCC或UCC的定义、参与者排除和纳入标准、结局测量时间点以及评估的安全性和疗效结局方面,各试验之间存在相当大的差异。几项试验发现,参与者在接受治疗时咳嗽频率、严重程度或健康相关生活质量指标有显著改善,尽管在任何包括治疗后随访时间点的研究中,这些改善都没有持续存在。
在缺乏获批疗法的情况下,安慰剂仍然是潜在的RCC或UCC治疗试验中最常见的对照。已发表证据在研究间的可比性受到研究设计、研究人群和结局测量的异质性以及对研究规模和偏倚风险的担忧的限制。