User login
GERD with bronchiectasis: New invasive interventions show benefit
NEW YORK – Newer invasive procedures for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are associated with lower risks of postprocedural complications when performed to improve control of bronchiectasis or other serious lung diseases, according to a surgeon who addressed the 6th World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference.
“The options are not what they were 20 or 30 years ago,” according to Tanuja Damani, MD, surgical director of the Center for Esophageal and Foregut Health, NYU Langone Health, New York.
The more favorable benefit-to-risk ratio of the newer options might make them more attractive to consider earlier for control of GERD in worsening lung disease than interventions have in the past, Dr. Damani suggested.
The association between the presence of GERD and increased severity of bronchiectasis or many other lung diseases is well established, according to Dr. Damani. In the case of bronchiectasis, GERD not only impairs lung function and quality of life, but is strongly linked to greater symptom burden, more exacerbations, more hospitalizations, and even increased mortality.
Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective in reducing intragastric acid, a source of irritation and discomfort when the contents of the stomach are refluxed past the lower esophageal sphincter (LES), but Dr. Damani explained that this therapy is often inadequate. Control of intragastric acid is an oversimplification of a more complex pathophysiology.
“It is not just the lower esophageal sphincter,” she said, explaining that other factors, particularly hiatal hernias that often contribute to transient LES relaxations, can play an important role in postprandial transit of gastric contents into the esophagus.
“Any procedure aimed at reinforcing just the LES [without addressing other mechanisms of GERD] are destined to fail,” Dr. Damani said.
She backed up this assertion with examples. These include the many endoscopic procedures designed to strengthen the barrier function of the LES, such as the Stretta procedure or transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF). Neither addresses the hiatal hernia. Both typically provide immediate symptom relief, but acid in the lower esophagus and symptoms return over time. This has been shown with pH testing, which Dr. Damani called the gold standard for monitoring GERD control.
In procedures that function only by supporting the barrier function of the LES, symptoms typically recur in 6-12 months, requiring resumption of PPIs, if they were ever discontinued, Dr. Damani said. They also include the return of the complications of GERD in lung disease, which includes the damage to lung tissue associated with aspiration of acid as well as the extraesophageal symptoms, including cough, laryngitis and chest pain.
Nissen fundoplication performed with hiatal hernia repair was long regarded as the gold standard for surgical management of GERD, but this is now changing, according to Dr. Damani. She said most centers, including her own, are moving from this to the related Toupet fundoplication, which differs primarily by its use of a 270-degree rather than a 360-degree fundoplication.
By incompletely wrapping the esophagus with the gastric fundus, “the benefit is the same, but the risk of adverse events is much lower,” said Dr. Damani, referring to the bloating, flatulence, and discomfort experienced by some patients following the Nissen procedure. “It is now our operation of choice.”
This Toupet fundoplication, like the Nissen, can be performed laparoscopically or robotically, according to Dr. Damani, who said that efficacy and safety are achieved at a very high rate of consistency in high-volume centers.
However, Dr. Damani also reported that there has been progress with endoscopic approaches and reversible interventions for GERD. These expand the array of options and might be particularly attractive in patients who are poor candidates for surgery or those seeking a reversible intervention.
Of these options, Dr. Damani paid particular attention to the Linx reflux management system. This device is composed of a chain of titanium beads with a magnetic cord that are looped around the lower esophagus to add a barrier function. The level of the magnetic force allows the chain of beads to expand when food descends or gas rises but prevents transient LES relaxations. As a result of its ability to expand and contract, the device is “very dynamic,” Dr. Damani said.
Prior to placement of the device, “the hiatal hernia is dissected and closed like other effective procedures. Then the Linx device is sized and placed,” Dr. Damani explained. Importantly, this procedure can be reversed simply by removing the device.
“There is no side-by-side comparison with a Nissen, but the results have been excellent so far,” Dr. Damani said. The most significant concern is foreign body reactions, but the erosion rates have been reported as less than 0.1%, according to Dr. Damani, who noted that erosion, if it occurs, can be managed endoscopically.
She did caution that candidates for the Linx device must have normal esophageal motility and be free of metal allergies, but she has been impressed with its durable function.
Perhaps the most difficult question in assessing and treating GERD in the context of bronchiectasis is to determine when it is needed. Dr. Damani warned that many patients with lung disease exacerbated by GERD are asymptomatic, requiring a workup to determine if GERD is present. Even if present, it can be challenging to confirm that GERD is a major treatable contributor to poor lung function.
Illustrative of that point, Doreen J. Addrizzo-Harris, MD, codirector of the NYU Langone Health bronchiectasis & NTM clinical and translational program, and President of American College of Chest Physicians, described a patient with advanced bronchiectasis whose poorly controlled lung function had not been considered to be GERD related even though the patent had been inadequately responsive to multiple aggressive treatment strategies. The decision to surgically correct GERD was taken on the basis of diminishing alternative options.
“The improvement in lung function was substantial and rapid,” she said.
Dr. Addrizzo-Harris, who served as a chair of the 2023 World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference, recounted this case to support the major potential improvements in selected patients with advanced lung disease when GERD is treated. She indicated that even experts overlook this variable.
This still does not answer the question of when to consider an invasive procedure for GERD, but “there is no hard and fast answer,” according to David Kamelhar, MD, who is the other codirector of the NYU Langone Health bronchiectasis & NTM clinical and translational program.
Dr. Kamelhar admitted that he does not immediately think of GERD as a strategy to control lung disease treatable in patients without GERD-related symptoms, but he has pursued this comorbidity in cases when he has “nothing else to offer.” He suggested that multidisciplinary management is one way to consider GERD as treatment target before it becomes a last resort.
As pulmonologists, “we are not GERD experts, so we need to bring in a gastroenterologist or a surgeon who can help with this decision,” he said, referring to when and how to intervene.
From Dr. Damani’s talk, he suggested that the take-home message is that GERD treatment options have improved, and it might make more sense to consider GERD as a treatable comorbidity of lung disease in earlier rather than later stages of disease.
Dr. Damani, Dr. Addrizzo-Harris, and Dr. Kamelhar reported having no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this topic.
NEW YORK – Newer invasive procedures for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are associated with lower risks of postprocedural complications when performed to improve control of bronchiectasis or other serious lung diseases, according to a surgeon who addressed the 6th World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference.
“The options are not what they were 20 or 30 years ago,” according to Tanuja Damani, MD, surgical director of the Center for Esophageal and Foregut Health, NYU Langone Health, New York.
The more favorable benefit-to-risk ratio of the newer options might make them more attractive to consider earlier for control of GERD in worsening lung disease than interventions have in the past, Dr. Damani suggested.
The association between the presence of GERD and increased severity of bronchiectasis or many other lung diseases is well established, according to Dr. Damani. In the case of bronchiectasis, GERD not only impairs lung function and quality of life, but is strongly linked to greater symptom burden, more exacerbations, more hospitalizations, and even increased mortality.
Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective in reducing intragastric acid, a source of irritation and discomfort when the contents of the stomach are refluxed past the lower esophageal sphincter (LES), but Dr. Damani explained that this therapy is often inadequate. Control of intragastric acid is an oversimplification of a more complex pathophysiology.
“It is not just the lower esophageal sphincter,” she said, explaining that other factors, particularly hiatal hernias that often contribute to transient LES relaxations, can play an important role in postprandial transit of gastric contents into the esophagus.
“Any procedure aimed at reinforcing just the LES [without addressing other mechanisms of GERD] are destined to fail,” Dr. Damani said.
She backed up this assertion with examples. These include the many endoscopic procedures designed to strengthen the barrier function of the LES, such as the Stretta procedure or transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF). Neither addresses the hiatal hernia. Both typically provide immediate symptom relief, but acid in the lower esophagus and symptoms return over time. This has been shown with pH testing, which Dr. Damani called the gold standard for monitoring GERD control.
In procedures that function only by supporting the barrier function of the LES, symptoms typically recur in 6-12 months, requiring resumption of PPIs, if they were ever discontinued, Dr. Damani said. They also include the return of the complications of GERD in lung disease, which includes the damage to lung tissue associated with aspiration of acid as well as the extraesophageal symptoms, including cough, laryngitis and chest pain.
Nissen fundoplication performed with hiatal hernia repair was long regarded as the gold standard for surgical management of GERD, but this is now changing, according to Dr. Damani. She said most centers, including her own, are moving from this to the related Toupet fundoplication, which differs primarily by its use of a 270-degree rather than a 360-degree fundoplication.
By incompletely wrapping the esophagus with the gastric fundus, “the benefit is the same, but the risk of adverse events is much lower,” said Dr. Damani, referring to the bloating, flatulence, and discomfort experienced by some patients following the Nissen procedure. “It is now our operation of choice.”
This Toupet fundoplication, like the Nissen, can be performed laparoscopically or robotically, according to Dr. Damani, who said that efficacy and safety are achieved at a very high rate of consistency in high-volume centers.
However, Dr. Damani also reported that there has been progress with endoscopic approaches and reversible interventions for GERD. These expand the array of options and might be particularly attractive in patients who are poor candidates for surgery or those seeking a reversible intervention.
Of these options, Dr. Damani paid particular attention to the Linx reflux management system. This device is composed of a chain of titanium beads with a magnetic cord that are looped around the lower esophagus to add a barrier function. The level of the magnetic force allows the chain of beads to expand when food descends or gas rises but prevents transient LES relaxations. As a result of its ability to expand and contract, the device is “very dynamic,” Dr. Damani said.
Prior to placement of the device, “the hiatal hernia is dissected and closed like other effective procedures. Then the Linx device is sized and placed,” Dr. Damani explained. Importantly, this procedure can be reversed simply by removing the device.
“There is no side-by-side comparison with a Nissen, but the results have been excellent so far,” Dr. Damani said. The most significant concern is foreign body reactions, but the erosion rates have been reported as less than 0.1%, according to Dr. Damani, who noted that erosion, if it occurs, can be managed endoscopically.
She did caution that candidates for the Linx device must have normal esophageal motility and be free of metal allergies, but she has been impressed with its durable function.
Perhaps the most difficult question in assessing and treating GERD in the context of bronchiectasis is to determine when it is needed. Dr. Damani warned that many patients with lung disease exacerbated by GERD are asymptomatic, requiring a workup to determine if GERD is present. Even if present, it can be challenging to confirm that GERD is a major treatable contributor to poor lung function.
Illustrative of that point, Doreen J. Addrizzo-Harris, MD, codirector of the NYU Langone Health bronchiectasis & NTM clinical and translational program, and President of American College of Chest Physicians, described a patient with advanced bronchiectasis whose poorly controlled lung function had not been considered to be GERD related even though the patent had been inadequately responsive to multiple aggressive treatment strategies. The decision to surgically correct GERD was taken on the basis of diminishing alternative options.
“The improvement in lung function was substantial and rapid,” she said.
Dr. Addrizzo-Harris, who served as a chair of the 2023 World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference, recounted this case to support the major potential improvements in selected patients with advanced lung disease when GERD is treated. She indicated that even experts overlook this variable.
This still does not answer the question of when to consider an invasive procedure for GERD, but “there is no hard and fast answer,” according to David Kamelhar, MD, who is the other codirector of the NYU Langone Health bronchiectasis & NTM clinical and translational program.
Dr. Kamelhar admitted that he does not immediately think of GERD as a strategy to control lung disease treatable in patients without GERD-related symptoms, but he has pursued this comorbidity in cases when he has “nothing else to offer.” He suggested that multidisciplinary management is one way to consider GERD as treatment target before it becomes a last resort.
As pulmonologists, “we are not GERD experts, so we need to bring in a gastroenterologist or a surgeon who can help with this decision,” he said, referring to when and how to intervene.
From Dr. Damani’s talk, he suggested that the take-home message is that GERD treatment options have improved, and it might make more sense to consider GERD as a treatable comorbidity of lung disease in earlier rather than later stages of disease.
Dr. Damani, Dr. Addrizzo-Harris, and Dr. Kamelhar reported having no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this topic.
NEW YORK – Newer invasive procedures for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are associated with lower risks of postprocedural complications when performed to improve control of bronchiectasis or other serious lung diseases, according to a surgeon who addressed the 6th World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference.
“The options are not what they were 20 or 30 years ago,” according to Tanuja Damani, MD, surgical director of the Center for Esophageal and Foregut Health, NYU Langone Health, New York.
The more favorable benefit-to-risk ratio of the newer options might make them more attractive to consider earlier for control of GERD in worsening lung disease than interventions have in the past, Dr. Damani suggested.
The association between the presence of GERD and increased severity of bronchiectasis or many other lung diseases is well established, according to Dr. Damani. In the case of bronchiectasis, GERD not only impairs lung function and quality of life, but is strongly linked to greater symptom burden, more exacerbations, more hospitalizations, and even increased mortality.
Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective in reducing intragastric acid, a source of irritation and discomfort when the contents of the stomach are refluxed past the lower esophageal sphincter (LES), but Dr. Damani explained that this therapy is often inadequate. Control of intragastric acid is an oversimplification of a more complex pathophysiology.
“It is not just the lower esophageal sphincter,” she said, explaining that other factors, particularly hiatal hernias that often contribute to transient LES relaxations, can play an important role in postprandial transit of gastric contents into the esophagus.
“Any procedure aimed at reinforcing just the LES [without addressing other mechanisms of GERD] are destined to fail,” Dr. Damani said.
She backed up this assertion with examples. These include the many endoscopic procedures designed to strengthen the barrier function of the LES, such as the Stretta procedure or transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF). Neither addresses the hiatal hernia. Both typically provide immediate symptom relief, but acid in the lower esophagus and symptoms return over time. This has been shown with pH testing, which Dr. Damani called the gold standard for monitoring GERD control.
In procedures that function only by supporting the barrier function of the LES, symptoms typically recur in 6-12 months, requiring resumption of PPIs, if they were ever discontinued, Dr. Damani said. They also include the return of the complications of GERD in lung disease, which includes the damage to lung tissue associated with aspiration of acid as well as the extraesophageal symptoms, including cough, laryngitis and chest pain.
Nissen fundoplication performed with hiatal hernia repair was long regarded as the gold standard for surgical management of GERD, but this is now changing, according to Dr. Damani. She said most centers, including her own, are moving from this to the related Toupet fundoplication, which differs primarily by its use of a 270-degree rather than a 360-degree fundoplication.
By incompletely wrapping the esophagus with the gastric fundus, “the benefit is the same, but the risk of adverse events is much lower,” said Dr. Damani, referring to the bloating, flatulence, and discomfort experienced by some patients following the Nissen procedure. “It is now our operation of choice.”
This Toupet fundoplication, like the Nissen, can be performed laparoscopically or robotically, according to Dr. Damani, who said that efficacy and safety are achieved at a very high rate of consistency in high-volume centers.
However, Dr. Damani also reported that there has been progress with endoscopic approaches and reversible interventions for GERD. These expand the array of options and might be particularly attractive in patients who are poor candidates for surgery or those seeking a reversible intervention.
Of these options, Dr. Damani paid particular attention to the Linx reflux management system. This device is composed of a chain of titanium beads with a magnetic cord that are looped around the lower esophagus to add a barrier function. The level of the magnetic force allows the chain of beads to expand when food descends or gas rises but prevents transient LES relaxations. As a result of its ability to expand and contract, the device is “very dynamic,” Dr. Damani said.
Prior to placement of the device, “the hiatal hernia is dissected and closed like other effective procedures. Then the Linx device is sized and placed,” Dr. Damani explained. Importantly, this procedure can be reversed simply by removing the device.
“There is no side-by-side comparison with a Nissen, but the results have been excellent so far,” Dr. Damani said. The most significant concern is foreign body reactions, but the erosion rates have been reported as less than 0.1%, according to Dr. Damani, who noted that erosion, if it occurs, can be managed endoscopically.
She did caution that candidates for the Linx device must have normal esophageal motility and be free of metal allergies, but she has been impressed with its durable function.
Perhaps the most difficult question in assessing and treating GERD in the context of bronchiectasis is to determine when it is needed. Dr. Damani warned that many patients with lung disease exacerbated by GERD are asymptomatic, requiring a workup to determine if GERD is present. Even if present, it can be challenging to confirm that GERD is a major treatable contributor to poor lung function.
Illustrative of that point, Doreen J. Addrizzo-Harris, MD, codirector of the NYU Langone Health bronchiectasis & NTM clinical and translational program, and President of American College of Chest Physicians, described a patient with advanced bronchiectasis whose poorly controlled lung function had not been considered to be GERD related even though the patent had been inadequately responsive to multiple aggressive treatment strategies. The decision to surgically correct GERD was taken on the basis of diminishing alternative options.
“The improvement in lung function was substantial and rapid,” she said.
Dr. Addrizzo-Harris, who served as a chair of the 2023 World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference, recounted this case to support the major potential improvements in selected patients with advanced lung disease when GERD is treated. She indicated that even experts overlook this variable.
This still does not answer the question of when to consider an invasive procedure for GERD, but “there is no hard and fast answer,” according to David Kamelhar, MD, who is the other codirector of the NYU Langone Health bronchiectasis & NTM clinical and translational program.
Dr. Kamelhar admitted that he does not immediately think of GERD as a strategy to control lung disease treatable in patients without GERD-related symptoms, but he has pursued this comorbidity in cases when he has “nothing else to offer.” He suggested that multidisciplinary management is one way to consider GERD as treatment target before it becomes a last resort.
As pulmonologists, “we are not GERD experts, so we need to bring in a gastroenterologist or a surgeon who can help with this decision,” he said, referring to when and how to intervene.
From Dr. Damani’s talk, he suggested that the take-home message is that GERD treatment options have improved, and it might make more sense to consider GERD as a treatable comorbidity of lung disease in earlier rather than later stages of disease.
Dr. Damani, Dr. Addrizzo-Harris, and Dr. Kamelhar reported having no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this topic.
AT WBC 2023
AI in pulmonary medicine – imaging and beyond
The utility of artificial intelligence in pulmonology has focused mainly on using image datasets to detect and diagnose lung malignancies, but now a growing number of AI models are emerging that apply machine learning to improve predictability for other pulmonary conditions, including pulmonary infections, pulmonary fibrosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
These applications are moving beyond the traditional AI model of collecting data from a multitude of images to cast a wider data net that includes electronic health records.
Also on the horizon, ChatGPT technology is poised to have an impact. But pulmonologists and their practices have a number of barriers to clear before they feel a meaningful impact from AI.
The imperative, said AI researcher Ishanu Chattopadhyay, PhD, is to create transformative models that can detect lung disease early on. Dr. Chattopadhyay, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago and its Institute for Genomics and Systems Biology, and fellow researchers developed an AI algorithm that uses comorbidity signatures in electronic health records to screen for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (Nature Med. 2022 Sep 29. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-02010-y).
“If you could do this when somebody walks into a primary care setting and they are barely suspecting something is going on with them or when they don’t have the typical risk factors, there is a certain fraction of these people who do have IPF and they will almost invariably be diagnosed late and/or misdiagnosed,” Dr. Chattopadhyay said, citing a study that found 55% of patients with IPF have had at least one misdiagnosis and 38% have two or more misdiagnoses (BMC Pulm Med. 2018 Jan 17. doi: 10.1186/s12890-017-0560-x).
Harnessing massive data sets
AI models cull data sets, whether banks of radiographic images or files in an EHR, to extract telltale signatures of a disease state. Dr. Chattopadhyay and his team’s model used three databases with almost 3 million participants and 54,247 positive cases of IPF. Hospitals in Scotland have deployed what they’ve claimed are the first AI models to predict COPD built with 55,000 patient records from a regional National Health Service database. Another AI model for staging COPD, developed by researchers in the United States and Romania, used more than 18,000 medical records from 588 patients to identify physiological signals predictive of COPD (Advanced Sci. 2023 Feb 19. doi: 10.1002/advs.202203485).
Said Dr. Chattopadhyay: “If I can bring in AI which doesn’t just look at radiological images but actually gets it back where someone walks into primary care using only the information that is available at that point in the patient files and asking for nothing more, it raises a flag reliably that gets you a pulmonary referral that will hopefully reduce the misdiagnosis and late diagnosis.”
Victor Tseng, MD, medical director for pulmonology at Ansible Health in Mountain View, Calif., who’s researching the potential of AI in pulmonology, speculated on what functions AI can perform in the clinic. “I think you will start to see much more interventional sort of clinically patient care–facing applications,” he said. That would include acting as a triage layer to direct patient queries to a nurse, physician, or another practitioner, providing patient instructions, serving as therapeutic software, coordinating care, integrating supply chain issues,” he said.
AI vs. spirometry for COPD
Researchers in the United States and Romania, led by Paul Bogdan, PhD, at the University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering, developed a model that predicted COPD with an accuracy of almost 99% (98.66%) and avoids many of the shortcomings of spirometry, Dr. Bogdan said.
The models developed by Dr. Bogdan and collaborators use a different principle than existing AI platforms, Dr. Bogdan said. They analyze the properties of the data. As he explained it, they exploit what he called the “geometry of these data” to make inferences and decisions on a patient’s risk for COPD.
“Deep learning is very good for images, for videos, but it doesn’t work that well for signals,” said Mihai Udrescu, PhD, one of the Romanian collaborators. “But if we process the data with the technique brought up by Paul [Bogdan] and his team at USC, deep learning also works well on physiological signals.”
Said Dr. Bogdan, “Nobody thought about using physiological signals to predict COPD before this work. They used spirometry, but spirometry is cumbersome and several steps have to be performed in order to have an accurate spirometry.” His team’s AI models extract and analyze risk data based on 10 minutes of monitoring.
This technology also has the potential to improve accessibility of COPD screening, Dr. Udrescu said. “It can democratize the access to the health care because you don’t need to travel for 100 or 200 miles to see a specialist,” he said. “You just send an app to the mobile phone of a patient, the person puts on a smart watch and wears it for a couple of minutes and the data is either recorded locally or is transmitted and it is analyzed.” The computations can be done locally and in a matter of minutes, he said.
In Scotland, a 12-month feasibility study is underway to evaluate an AI model to identify COPD patients at greatest risk for adverse events. A press release from Lenus, the company developing the technology, said the study will use a COPD multidisciplinary team to consider real-time AI model outputs to enable proactive patient encounters and reduce emergency care visits.
Researchers in Paris built an AI model that showed a 68% accuracy in distinguishing people with asthma from people with COPD in administrative medical databases (BMC Pulmon Med. 2022 Sep 20. doi: 10.1186/s12890-022-02144-2). They found that asthma patients were younger than those with COPD (a mean of 49.9 vs. 72.1 years) and that COPD occurred mostly in men (68% vs. 33%). And an international team of researchers reported that an AI model that used chest CT scans determined that ever-smokers with COPD who met the imaging criteria for bronchiectasis were more prone to disease exacerbations (Radiology. 2022 Dec 13. doi: 10.1148/radiol.221109).
AI in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
The AI model that Dr. Chattopadhyay and collaborators developed had an 88% accuracy in predicting IPF. The model, known as the zero-burden comorbidity risk score for IPF (ZCoR-IPF), identified IPF cases in adults age 45 and older 1-4 years sooner than in a variety of pulmonology practice settings.
The model accounted for about 700 different features of IPF, Dr. Chattopadhyay said, but it deviated from standard AI risk models in that it used a machine learning algorithm to extract disease features that aren’t well understood or even known. “We do not know what all the risk factors of IPF are,” he said. “People who don’t have all the risk factors still get IPF. So we have to step back from the raw EHR data from where the features are being generated automatically, and then you can apply standard ML tools.”
Researchers at Nagoya University in Japan also reported on an AI algorithm for predicting IPF that used 646,800 high-resolution CT images and medical records data from 1,068 patients. Their algorithm had an average diagnostic accuracy of 83.6% and, they reported, demonstrated good accuracy even in patients with signs of interstitial pneumonia or who had surgical lung biopsies (Respirology. 2022 Dec 13. doi: 10.1111/resp.14310).
Chat GPT: The next frontier in AI
Dr. Tseng last year led a group of researchers that fed questions from the United States Medical Licensing Exam to a ChatGPT model, which found it answered 60%-65% of questions correctly (PLOS Digit Health. 2023 Feb 9. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198). As Dr. Tseng pointed out, that’s good enough to get a medical license.
It may be a matter of time before ChatGPT technology finds its way into the clinic, Dr. Tseng said. A quick ChatGPT query of how it could be used in medicine yielded 12 different answers, from patient triage to providing basic first aid instructions in an emergency.
Dr. Tseng, who’s pulmonology practice places an emphasis on virtual care delivery, went deeper than the ChatGPT answer. “If you’re a respiratory therapist and you’re trying to execute a complicated medical care plan written by a physician, there’s a natural disconnect between our language and their language,” he said. “What we have found is that GPT has significantly harmonized the care plan. And that’s amazing because you end up with this single-stream understanding of the care plan, where the language is halfway between a bedside clinician, like the respiratory therapist or nurse, and is also something that a physician can understand and take the bigger sort of direction of care from.”
Barriers to AI in clinic
Numerous barriers face widespread adoption of AI tools in the clinic, Dr. Tseng said, including physician and staff anxiety about learning new technology. “AI tools, for all purposes, are supposed to allay the cognitive burden and the tedium burden on clinicians, but end up actually costing more time,” he said.
Health care organizations will also need to retool for AI, a group of medical informatics and digital health experts, led by Laurie Lovett Novak, PhD, reported (JAMIA Open. 2023 May 3. doi: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad028). But it’s coming nonetheless, Dr. Novak, an associate professor of biomedical informatics at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn., said in an interview.
“In the near future, managers in clinics and inpatient units will be overseeing care that involves numerous AI-based technologies, including predictive analytics, imaging tools, language models, and others,” she said. “Organizations need to support managers by implementing capabilities for algorithmo-vigilance.”
That would include dealing with what she called “algorithmic drift” – when the accuracy of an AI model wanes because of changes in the underlying data – and ensuring that models are unbiased and aren’t used in a way that contributes to inequities in health care. “These new organizational capabilities will demand new tools and new competencies,” she said. That would include policies and processes drawing guidance from medical societies for legal and regulatory direction for managers, staff training, and software documentation.
Dr. Tseng envisioned how AI would work in the clinic. “I personally think that, at some time in the near future, AI-driven care coordination, where the AI basically handles appointment scheduling, patient motivation, patient engagement and acts as their health navigator, will be superior to any human health navigator on the whole, only for the reason that AI is indefatigable,” Dr. Tseng said. “It doesn’t get tired, it doesn’t get burned out, and these health navigation care coordination roles are notoriously difficult.”
The physicians and researchers interviewed for this report had no relevant relationships to disclose.
The utility of artificial intelligence in pulmonology has focused mainly on using image datasets to detect and diagnose lung malignancies, but now a growing number of AI models are emerging that apply machine learning to improve predictability for other pulmonary conditions, including pulmonary infections, pulmonary fibrosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
These applications are moving beyond the traditional AI model of collecting data from a multitude of images to cast a wider data net that includes electronic health records.
Also on the horizon, ChatGPT technology is poised to have an impact. But pulmonologists and their practices have a number of barriers to clear before they feel a meaningful impact from AI.
The imperative, said AI researcher Ishanu Chattopadhyay, PhD, is to create transformative models that can detect lung disease early on. Dr. Chattopadhyay, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago and its Institute for Genomics and Systems Biology, and fellow researchers developed an AI algorithm that uses comorbidity signatures in electronic health records to screen for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (Nature Med. 2022 Sep 29. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-02010-y).
“If you could do this when somebody walks into a primary care setting and they are barely suspecting something is going on with them or when they don’t have the typical risk factors, there is a certain fraction of these people who do have IPF and they will almost invariably be diagnosed late and/or misdiagnosed,” Dr. Chattopadhyay said, citing a study that found 55% of patients with IPF have had at least one misdiagnosis and 38% have two or more misdiagnoses (BMC Pulm Med. 2018 Jan 17. doi: 10.1186/s12890-017-0560-x).
Harnessing massive data sets
AI models cull data sets, whether banks of radiographic images or files in an EHR, to extract telltale signatures of a disease state. Dr. Chattopadhyay and his team’s model used three databases with almost 3 million participants and 54,247 positive cases of IPF. Hospitals in Scotland have deployed what they’ve claimed are the first AI models to predict COPD built with 55,000 patient records from a regional National Health Service database. Another AI model for staging COPD, developed by researchers in the United States and Romania, used more than 18,000 medical records from 588 patients to identify physiological signals predictive of COPD (Advanced Sci. 2023 Feb 19. doi: 10.1002/advs.202203485).
Said Dr. Chattopadhyay: “If I can bring in AI which doesn’t just look at radiological images but actually gets it back where someone walks into primary care using only the information that is available at that point in the patient files and asking for nothing more, it raises a flag reliably that gets you a pulmonary referral that will hopefully reduce the misdiagnosis and late diagnosis.”
Victor Tseng, MD, medical director for pulmonology at Ansible Health in Mountain View, Calif., who’s researching the potential of AI in pulmonology, speculated on what functions AI can perform in the clinic. “I think you will start to see much more interventional sort of clinically patient care–facing applications,” he said. That would include acting as a triage layer to direct patient queries to a nurse, physician, or another practitioner, providing patient instructions, serving as therapeutic software, coordinating care, integrating supply chain issues,” he said.
AI vs. spirometry for COPD
Researchers in the United States and Romania, led by Paul Bogdan, PhD, at the University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering, developed a model that predicted COPD with an accuracy of almost 99% (98.66%) and avoids many of the shortcomings of spirometry, Dr. Bogdan said.
The models developed by Dr. Bogdan and collaborators use a different principle than existing AI platforms, Dr. Bogdan said. They analyze the properties of the data. As he explained it, they exploit what he called the “geometry of these data” to make inferences and decisions on a patient’s risk for COPD.
“Deep learning is very good for images, for videos, but it doesn’t work that well for signals,” said Mihai Udrescu, PhD, one of the Romanian collaborators. “But if we process the data with the technique brought up by Paul [Bogdan] and his team at USC, deep learning also works well on physiological signals.”
Said Dr. Bogdan, “Nobody thought about using physiological signals to predict COPD before this work. They used spirometry, but spirometry is cumbersome and several steps have to be performed in order to have an accurate spirometry.” His team’s AI models extract and analyze risk data based on 10 minutes of monitoring.
This technology also has the potential to improve accessibility of COPD screening, Dr. Udrescu said. “It can democratize the access to the health care because you don’t need to travel for 100 or 200 miles to see a specialist,” he said. “You just send an app to the mobile phone of a patient, the person puts on a smart watch and wears it for a couple of minutes and the data is either recorded locally or is transmitted and it is analyzed.” The computations can be done locally and in a matter of minutes, he said.
In Scotland, a 12-month feasibility study is underway to evaluate an AI model to identify COPD patients at greatest risk for adverse events. A press release from Lenus, the company developing the technology, said the study will use a COPD multidisciplinary team to consider real-time AI model outputs to enable proactive patient encounters and reduce emergency care visits.
Researchers in Paris built an AI model that showed a 68% accuracy in distinguishing people with asthma from people with COPD in administrative medical databases (BMC Pulmon Med. 2022 Sep 20. doi: 10.1186/s12890-022-02144-2). They found that asthma patients were younger than those with COPD (a mean of 49.9 vs. 72.1 years) and that COPD occurred mostly in men (68% vs. 33%). And an international team of researchers reported that an AI model that used chest CT scans determined that ever-smokers with COPD who met the imaging criteria for bronchiectasis were more prone to disease exacerbations (Radiology. 2022 Dec 13. doi: 10.1148/radiol.221109).
AI in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
The AI model that Dr. Chattopadhyay and collaborators developed had an 88% accuracy in predicting IPF. The model, known as the zero-burden comorbidity risk score for IPF (ZCoR-IPF), identified IPF cases in adults age 45 and older 1-4 years sooner than in a variety of pulmonology practice settings.
The model accounted for about 700 different features of IPF, Dr. Chattopadhyay said, but it deviated from standard AI risk models in that it used a machine learning algorithm to extract disease features that aren’t well understood or even known. “We do not know what all the risk factors of IPF are,” he said. “People who don’t have all the risk factors still get IPF. So we have to step back from the raw EHR data from where the features are being generated automatically, and then you can apply standard ML tools.”
Researchers at Nagoya University in Japan also reported on an AI algorithm for predicting IPF that used 646,800 high-resolution CT images and medical records data from 1,068 patients. Their algorithm had an average diagnostic accuracy of 83.6% and, they reported, demonstrated good accuracy even in patients with signs of interstitial pneumonia or who had surgical lung biopsies (Respirology. 2022 Dec 13. doi: 10.1111/resp.14310).
Chat GPT: The next frontier in AI
Dr. Tseng last year led a group of researchers that fed questions from the United States Medical Licensing Exam to a ChatGPT model, which found it answered 60%-65% of questions correctly (PLOS Digit Health. 2023 Feb 9. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198). As Dr. Tseng pointed out, that’s good enough to get a medical license.
It may be a matter of time before ChatGPT technology finds its way into the clinic, Dr. Tseng said. A quick ChatGPT query of how it could be used in medicine yielded 12 different answers, from patient triage to providing basic first aid instructions in an emergency.
Dr. Tseng, who’s pulmonology practice places an emphasis on virtual care delivery, went deeper than the ChatGPT answer. “If you’re a respiratory therapist and you’re trying to execute a complicated medical care plan written by a physician, there’s a natural disconnect between our language and their language,” he said. “What we have found is that GPT has significantly harmonized the care plan. And that’s amazing because you end up with this single-stream understanding of the care plan, where the language is halfway between a bedside clinician, like the respiratory therapist or nurse, and is also something that a physician can understand and take the bigger sort of direction of care from.”
Barriers to AI in clinic
Numerous barriers face widespread adoption of AI tools in the clinic, Dr. Tseng said, including physician and staff anxiety about learning new technology. “AI tools, for all purposes, are supposed to allay the cognitive burden and the tedium burden on clinicians, but end up actually costing more time,” he said.
Health care organizations will also need to retool for AI, a group of medical informatics and digital health experts, led by Laurie Lovett Novak, PhD, reported (JAMIA Open. 2023 May 3. doi: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad028). But it’s coming nonetheless, Dr. Novak, an associate professor of biomedical informatics at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn., said in an interview.
“In the near future, managers in clinics and inpatient units will be overseeing care that involves numerous AI-based technologies, including predictive analytics, imaging tools, language models, and others,” she said. “Organizations need to support managers by implementing capabilities for algorithmo-vigilance.”
That would include dealing with what she called “algorithmic drift” – when the accuracy of an AI model wanes because of changes in the underlying data – and ensuring that models are unbiased and aren’t used in a way that contributes to inequities in health care. “These new organizational capabilities will demand new tools and new competencies,” she said. That would include policies and processes drawing guidance from medical societies for legal and regulatory direction for managers, staff training, and software documentation.
Dr. Tseng envisioned how AI would work in the clinic. “I personally think that, at some time in the near future, AI-driven care coordination, where the AI basically handles appointment scheduling, patient motivation, patient engagement and acts as their health navigator, will be superior to any human health navigator on the whole, only for the reason that AI is indefatigable,” Dr. Tseng said. “It doesn’t get tired, it doesn’t get burned out, and these health navigation care coordination roles are notoriously difficult.”
The physicians and researchers interviewed for this report had no relevant relationships to disclose.
The utility of artificial intelligence in pulmonology has focused mainly on using image datasets to detect and diagnose lung malignancies, but now a growing number of AI models are emerging that apply machine learning to improve predictability for other pulmonary conditions, including pulmonary infections, pulmonary fibrosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
These applications are moving beyond the traditional AI model of collecting data from a multitude of images to cast a wider data net that includes electronic health records.
Also on the horizon, ChatGPT technology is poised to have an impact. But pulmonologists and their practices have a number of barriers to clear before they feel a meaningful impact from AI.
The imperative, said AI researcher Ishanu Chattopadhyay, PhD, is to create transformative models that can detect lung disease early on. Dr. Chattopadhyay, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago and its Institute for Genomics and Systems Biology, and fellow researchers developed an AI algorithm that uses comorbidity signatures in electronic health records to screen for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (Nature Med. 2022 Sep 29. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-02010-y).
“If you could do this when somebody walks into a primary care setting and they are barely suspecting something is going on with them or when they don’t have the typical risk factors, there is a certain fraction of these people who do have IPF and they will almost invariably be diagnosed late and/or misdiagnosed,” Dr. Chattopadhyay said, citing a study that found 55% of patients with IPF have had at least one misdiagnosis and 38% have two or more misdiagnoses (BMC Pulm Med. 2018 Jan 17. doi: 10.1186/s12890-017-0560-x).
Harnessing massive data sets
AI models cull data sets, whether banks of radiographic images or files in an EHR, to extract telltale signatures of a disease state. Dr. Chattopadhyay and his team’s model used three databases with almost 3 million participants and 54,247 positive cases of IPF. Hospitals in Scotland have deployed what they’ve claimed are the first AI models to predict COPD built with 55,000 patient records from a regional National Health Service database. Another AI model for staging COPD, developed by researchers in the United States and Romania, used more than 18,000 medical records from 588 patients to identify physiological signals predictive of COPD (Advanced Sci. 2023 Feb 19. doi: 10.1002/advs.202203485).
Said Dr. Chattopadhyay: “If I can bring in AI which doesn’t just look at radiological images but actually gets it back where someone walks into primary care using only the information that is available at that point in the patient files and asking for nothing more, it raises a flag reliably that gets you a pulmonary referral that will hopefully reduce the misdiagnosis and late diagnosis.”
Victor Tseng, MD, medical director for pulmonology at Ansible Health in Mountain View, Calif., who’s researching the potential of AI in pulmonology, speculated on what functions AI can perform in the clinic. “I think you will start to see much more interventional sort of clinically patient care–facing applications,” he said. That would include acting as a triage layer to direct patient queries to a nurse, physician, or another practitioner, providing patient instructions, serving as therapeutic software, coordinating care, integrating supply chain issues,” he said.
AI vs. spirometry for COPD
Researchers in the United States and Romania, led by Paul Bogdan, PhD, at the University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering, developed a model that predicted COPD with an accuracy of almost 99% (98.66%) and avoids many of the shortcomings of spirometry, Dr. Bogdan said.
The models developed by Dr. Bogdan and collaborators use a different principle than existing AI platforms, Dr. Bogdan said. They analyze the properties of the data. As he explained it, they exploit what he called the “geometry of these data” to make inferences and decisions on a patient’s risk for COPD.
“Deep learning is very good for images, for videos, but it doesn’t work that well for signals,” said Mihai Udrescu, PhD, one of the Romanian collaborators. “But if we process the data with the technique brought up by Paul [Bogdan] and his team at USC, deep learning also works well on physiological signals.”
Said Dr. Bogdan, “Nobody thought about using physiological signals to predict COPD before this work. They used spirometry, but spirometry is cumbersome and several steps have to be performed in order to have an accurate spirometry.” His team’s AI models extract and analyze risk data based on 10 minutes of monitoring.
This technology also has the potential to improve accessibility of COPD screening, Dr. Udrescu said. “It can democratize the access to the health care because you don’t need to travel for 100 or 200 miles to see a specialist,” he said. “You just send an app to the mobile phone of a patient, the person puts on a smart watch and wears it for a couple of minutes and the data is either recorded locally or is transmitted and it is analyzed.” The computations can be done locally and in a matter of minutes, he said.
In Scotland, a 12-month feasibility study is underway to evaluate an AI model to identify COPD patients at greatest risk for adverse events. A press release from Lenus, the company developing the technology, said the study will use a COPD multidisciplinary team to consider real-time AI model outputs to enable proactive patient encounters and reduce emergency care visits.
Researchers in Paris built an AI model that showed a 68% accuracy in distinguishing people with asthma from people with COPD in administrative medical databases (BMC Pulmon Med. 2022 Sep 20. doi: 10.1186/s12890-022-02144-2). They found that asthma patients were younger than those with COPD (a mean of 49.9 vs. 72.1 years) and that COPD occurred mostly in men (68% vs. 33%). And an international team of researchers reported that an AI model that used chest CT scans determined that ever-smokers with COPD who met the imaging criteria for bronchiectasis were more prone to disease exacerbations (Radiology. 2022 Dec 13. doi: 10.1148/radiol.221109).
AI in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
The AI model that Dr. Chattopadhyay and collaborators developed had an 88% accuracy in predicting IPF. The model, known as the zero-burden comorbidity risk score for IPF (ZCoR-IPF), identified IPF cases in adults age 45 and older 1-4 years sooner than in a variety of pulmonology practice settings.
The model accounted for about 700 different features of IPF, Dr. Chattopadhyay said, but it deviated from standard AI risk models in that it used a machine learning algorithm to extract disease features that aren’t well understood or even known. “We do not know what all the risk factors of IPF are,” he said. “People who don’t have all the risk factors still get IPF. So we have to step back from the raw EHR data from where the features are being generated automatically, and then you can apply standard ML tools.”
Researchers at Nagoya University in Japan also reported on an AI algorithm for predicting IPF that used 646,800 high-resolution CT images and medical records data from 1,068 patients. Their algorithm had an average diagnostic accuracy of 83.6% and, they reported, demonstrated good accuracy even in patients with signs of interstitial pneumonia or who had surgical lung biopsies (Respirology. 2022 Dec 13. doi: 10.1111/resp.14310).
Chat GPT: The next frontier in AI
Dr. Tseng last year led a group of researchers that fed questions from the United States Medical Licensing Exam to a ChatGPT model, which found it answered 60%-65% of questions correctly (PLOS Digit Health. 2023 Feb 9. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198). As Dr. Tseng pointed out, that’s good enough to get a medical license.
It may be a matter of time before ChatGPT technology finds its way into the clinic, Dr. Tseng said. A quick ChatGPT query of how it could be used in medicine yielded 12 different answers, from patient triage to providing basic first aid instructions in an emergency.
Dr. Tseng, who’s pulmonology practice places an emphasis on virtual care delivery, went deeper than the ChatGPT answer. “If you’re a respiratory therapist and you’re trying to execute a complicated medical care plan written by a physician, there’s a natural disconnect between our language and their language,” he said. “What we have found is that GPT has significantly harmonized the care plan. And that’s amazing because you end up with this single-stream understanding of the care plan, where the language is halfway between a bedside clinician, like the respiratory therapist or nurse, and is also something that a physician can understand and take the bigger sort of direction of care from.”
Barriers to AI in clinic
Numerous barriers face widespread adoption of AI tools in the clinic, Dr. Tseng said, including physician and staff anxiety about learning new technology. “AI tools, for all purposes, are supposed to allay the cognitive burden and the tedium burden on clinicians, but end up actually costing more time,” he said.
Health care organizations will also need to retool for AI, a group of medical informatics and digital health experts, led by Laurie Lovett Novak, PhD, reported (JAMIA Open. 2023 May 3. doi: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad028). But it’s coming nonetheless, Dr. Novak, an associate professor of biomedical informatics at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn., said in an interview.
“In the near future, managers in clinics and inpatient units will be overseeing care that involves numerous AI-based technologies, including predictive analytics, imaging tools, language models, and others,” she said. “Organizations need to support managers by implementing capabilities for algorithmo-vigilance.”
That would include dealing with what she called “algorithmic drift” – when the accuracy of an AI model wanes because of changes in the underlying data – and ensuring that models are unbiased and aren’t used in a way that contributes to inequities in health care. “These new organizational capabilities will demand new tools and new competencies,” she said. That would include policies and processes drawing guidance from medical societies for legal and regulatory direction for managers, staff training, and software documentation.
Dr. Tseng envisioned how AI would work in the clinic. “I personally think that, at some time in the near future, AI-driven care coordination, where the AI basically handles appointment scheduling, patient motivation, patient engagement and acts as their health navigator, will be superior to any human health navigator on the whole, only for the reason that AI is indefatigable,” Dr. Tseng said. “It doesn’t get tired, it doesn’t get burned out, and these health navigation care coordination roles are notoriously difficult.”
The physicians and researchers interviewed for this report had no relevant relationships to disclose.
DPP1 a promising target for bronchiectasis
Airway Disorders Network
Bronchiectasis Section
and persistent inflammation. In bronchiectasis, excessive neutrophil accumulation in the airways leads to release of neutrophil serine proteases (NSPs), which contributes to tissue damage and perpetuates the inflammatory process in the lungs. The three main NSPs include neutrophil elastase (NE), proteinase3, and cathepsin G. Elevations in NE activity in sputum in NCFBE are associated with increased exacerbations and declines in lung function. Dipeptidyl peptidase 1 (DPP1), an enzyme primarily found in neutrophils, is responsible for activating NSPs during neutrophil maturation. In bronchiectasis, increased DPP1 activity results in an augmented production of active NSPs, exacerbating lung damage and inflammation.
Brensocatib, an oral, reversible inhibitor of DPP1 is currently being developed as a novel approach to managing bronchiectasis. Brensocatib was evaluated in a phase 2 clinical trial (WILLOW), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving adults with non–cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis (NCFBE). Treatment with brensocatib for 24 weeks significantly prolonged the time to the first exacerbation at both the 10 mg and 25 mg doses and lowered the risk of exacerbation by 40% relative to placebo. The treatment was well tolerated, with no significant safety concerns. Results of a recent post hoc analysis from the WILLOW study show that brensocatib effectively reduces exacerbations and slows lung function decline across different severities of bronchiectasis. These findings suggest that brensocatib holds potential as the 1st new therapeutic option for patients with NCFBE, with currently no FDA-approved drugs. Results of a larger-scale phase 3 trial are awaited later this year, which will hopefully confirm these results and ascertain the long-term safety.
Shyamsunder Subramanian, MD, MBBS, FCCP
Section Chair
Airway Disorders Network
Bronchiectasis Section
and persistent inflammation. In bronchiectasis, excessive neutrophil accumulation in the airways leads to release of neutrophil serine proteases (NSPs), which contributes to tissue damage and perpetuates the inflammatory process in the lungs. The three main NSPs include neutrophil elastase (NE), proteinase3, and cathepsin G. Elevations in NE activity in sputum in NCFBE are associated with increased exacerbations and declines in lung function. Dipeptidyl peptidase 1 (DPP1), an enzyme primarily found in neutrophils, is responsible for activating NSPs during neutrophil maturation. In bronchiectasis, increased DPP1 activity results in an augmented production of active NSPs, exacerbating lung damage and inflammation.
Brensocatib, an oral, reversible inhibitor of DPP1 is currently being developed as a novel approach to managing bronchiectasis. Brensocatib was evaluated in a phase 2 clinical trial (WILLOW), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving adults with non–cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis (NCFBE). Treatment with brensocatib for 24 weeks significantly prolonged the time to the first exacerbation at both the 10 mg and 25 mg doses and lowered the risk of exacerbation by 40% relative to placebo. The treatment was well tolerated, with no significant safety concerns. Results of a recent post hoc analysis from the WILLOW study show that brensocatib effectively reduces exacerbations and slows lung function decline across different severities of bronchiectasis. These findings suggest that brensocatib holds potential as the 1st new therapeutic option for patients with NCFBE, with currently no FDA-approved drugs. Results of a larger-scale phase 3 trial are awaited later this year, which will hopefully confirm these results and ascertain the long-term safety.
Shyamsunder Subramanian, MD, MBBS, FCCP
Section Chair
Airway Disorders Network
Bronchiectasis Section
and persistent inflammation. In bronchiectasis, excessive neutrophil accumulation in the airways leads to release of neutrophil serine proteases (NSPs), which contributes to tissue damage and perpetuates the inflammatory process in the lungs. The three main NSPs include neutrophil elastase (NE), proteinase3, and cathepsin G. Elevations in NE activity in sputum in NCFBE are associated with increased exacerbations and declines in lung function. Dipeptidyl peptidase 1 (DPP1), an enzyme primarily found in neutrophils, is responsible for activating NSPs during neutrophil maturation. In bronchiectasis, increased DPP1 activity results in an augmented production of active NSPs, exacerbating lung damage and inflammation.
Brensocatib, an oral, reversible inhibitor of DPP1 is currently being developed as a novel approach to managing bronchiectasis. Brensocatib was evaluated in a phase 2 clinical trial (WILLOW), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving adults with non–cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis (NCFBE). Treatment with brensocatib for 24 weeks significantly prolonged the time to the first exacerbation at both the 10 mg and 25 mg doses and lowered the risk of exacerbation by 40% relative to placebo. The treatment was well tolerated, with no significant safety concerns. Results of a recent post hoc analysis from the WILLOW study show that brensocatib effectively reduces exacerbations and slows lung function decline across different severities of bronchiectasis. These findings suggest that brensocatib holds potential as the 1st new therapeutic option for patients with NCFBE, with currently no FDA-approved drugs. Results of a larger-scale phase 3 trial are awaited later this year, which will hopefully confirm these results and ascertain the long-term safety.
Shyamsunder Subramanian, MD, MBBS, FCCP
Section Chair
Which biologic therapy should I use in patients who have moderate to severe asthma with associated comorbidities?
Dr. Hossri and Dr. Ivashchuk are with UTHealth Houston –Texas Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine; Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine.
As new treatments for specific moderate to severe asthma phenotypes have been developed, management decisions have grown more complicated. The treatment indications for asthma are clear; however, there is overlap with certain therapeutics that target the same pathway with similar end results. because it is not a one-size-fits-all approach that follows a rigid algorithm. Instead, it is a customized treatment plan that accounts for patient-specific risk factors and comorbidities.
Comorbidities commonly associated with asthma include atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, bronchiectasis and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis. While we lack consensus or a universally accepted treatment algorithm for treating asthma when these comorbidities are present, recent evidence helps guide us to which therapies work best.
Atopic dermatitis
There is a higher prevalence of asthma in patients with atopic dermatitis. A concept called the “atopic march” refers to the progression of childhood atopic dermatitis to manifestations such as asthma, food allergies, and hay fever. The more severe the atopic dermatitis is in childhood, the higher the risk for asthma later on in life. The data on the biologic pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis point to the involvement of interleukins – interleukin (IL)-4 and IL 13 (Silverberg JI. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2019;123[2]:144-51).
These same interleukins are active in what is called “Th2-high” asthma. The activation of Th2 cells in the inflammatory pathway occurs in atopic dermatitis and asthma irrespective of immunoglobulin E levels. Preliminary data show therapies that target IL-13 alone are effective for treating asthma with comorbid atopic dermatitis but those blocking both IL-4 and IL-13, like dupilumab, are superior. Both interleukins are considered pivotal in the Th-2 pathway. This suggests that dual inhibition is an integral component in the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis with asthma. Analysis of other Th2 mediators, such as mepolizumab (IL-5 antagonist) and omalizumab (anti-IgE) have shown minimal efficacy, further supporting the use of dupilumab (Guttman-Yassky E, et al. J Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2019 Jan;143[1]:155-72).
Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis
The “unified airway” concept holds that because the upper airways (nasal mucosa, pharynx, and larynx) are in direct communication with the lower airways (bronchi and bronchioles). This would explain the correlation between chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) and asthma. Many studies also show the severity of one disease increases the severity of the other.
Patients with both CRSwNP and asthma typically experience a more treatment-resistant course characterized by higher rates of corticosteroid dependence and nasal polyposis recurrences when compared with asthma alone (Laidlaw TM, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2021 Mar;9[3]:1133-41). They typically have Th2-high asthma and are usually eosinophilic. The optimal treatment approach is mindful of the unified airway concept. Large-scale studies demonstrate significant benefit when targeting IL-5, especially in those with bilateral nasal polyps, need for systemic steroids in the past 2 years, significant impairment in quality of life, loss of smell, and a concomitant diagnosis of asthma (Fokkens WJ, et al. Allergy. 2019 Dec;74[12]:2312). Although data are inconsistent, there is enough evidence to suggest dupilumab be considered for those with eosinophilic asthma and CRSwNP along with atopy, atopic dermatitis, and/or high FeNO levels. In those without atopic symptoms, an anti-IL5/anti-IL5R (mainly mepolizumab and benralizumab) is preferred. Having said this, direct comparative analyses between biologics are lacking, and the above approach relies on an indirect assessment of existing data coupled with clinical experience. The approach may change as new data become available.
Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis
Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is a vasculitis characterized by disseminated necrotizing eosinophilic granulomas. EGPA is driven by a response similar to that seen in Th2-high asthma. Adult-onset asthma with sinusitis and allergic rhinitis is the most common EGPA presentation. Of all the biologics, mepolizumab has been best studied as treatment for those with EGPA and asthma symptoms. One small study demonstrated disease remission in 8 of 10 cases (Moosig F, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Sep 6;155[5]:341-3). However, many of these patients relapsed after discontinuing therapy.
Eosinophilic esophagitis
Recent reports demonstrated a large portion of adults with a
diagnosis of eosinophilic
esophagitis (EoE) also have a history of asthma. Currently, standard treatment is proton pump
inhibitors and diet modifications. The prevalence of EoE has increased with growing awareness of the disease. Unrecognized and untreated EoE can lead to devastating complications such as esophageal fibrosis, strictures, and food impaction. Similar to some of the above-mentioned syndromes,
EoE is also driven by a Th2 response and eosinophilic inflammation. A recent study in 2022 showed that 31% to 38% of
people with EoE had concomitant asthma (Dellon ES, et al. N Engl J Med. 2022 Dec 22;387 [25]:2317-30). In this population, a weekly dose of dupilumab, 300 mg, led
to a significant improvement in dysphagia symptoms and
histology when compared with placebo.
Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis
Despite its low prevalence worldwide, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) is frequently encountered when managing severe asthma. Current treatment is long-term, relatively high dose systemic corticosteroids. In light of their unfavorable side effect profile, steroid-sparing approaches are being sought. Dupilumab, omalizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab have all been tested for their effects on ABPA. Thus far, mepolizumab has the most convincing evidence to support its use for asthma with concomitant ABPA, mainly because it has the most rapid onset of action. Up to 90% of patients with ABPA were able to stop systemic steroids between 2 and 14 months after starting mepolizumab (Schleich F, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020 Jul-Aug;8[7]:2412-3.e2).
Bronchiectasis
Asthma and bronchiectasis can coexist in up to 77% of patients. Typically, the pathophysiology behind bronchiectasis is focused around neutrophilic inflammation. New evidence suggests some patients with bronchiectasis, usually in the setting of comorbid adult-onset asthma, demonstrate an eosinophilic Th-2 response. The association is seen more commonly in female patients, the elderly, and nonsmokers. A small prospective study with four patients with severe asthma and bronchiectasis showed significant improvement with less exacerbations, increased pre-bronchodilator FEV1, and a reduction of serum and sputum eosinophils after starting mepolizumab treatment (Carpagnano GE, et al. J Asthma Allergy. 2019 Mar 5;12:83-90). Clinical trials designed to clarify the role for biologics for asthma with co-morbid bronchiectasis are currently underway.
Dr. Hossri and Dr. Ivashchuk are with UTHealth Houston –Texas Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine; Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine.
As new treatments for specific moderate to severe asthma phenotypes have been developed, management decisions have grown more complicated. The treatment indications for asthma are clear; however, there is overlap with certain therapeutics that target the same pathway with similar end results. because it is not a one-size-fits-all approach that follows a rigid algorithm. Instead, it is a customized treatment plan that accounts for patient-specific risk factors and comorbidities.
Comorbidities commonly associated with asthma include atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, bronchiectasis and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis. While we lack consensus or a universally accepted treatment algorithm for treating asthma when these comorbidities are present, recent evidence helps guide us to which therapies work best.
Atopic dermatitis
There is a higher prevalence of asthma in patients with atopic dermatitis. A concept called the “atopic march” refers to the progression of childhood atopic dermatitis to manifestations such as asthma, food allergies, and hay fever. The more severe the atopic dermatitis is in childhood, the higher the risk for asthma later on in life. The data on the biologic pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis point to the involvement of interleukins – interleukin (IL)-4 and IL 13 (Silverberg JI. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2019;123[2]:144-51).
These same interleukins are active in what is called “Th2-high” asthma. The activation of Th2 cells in the inflammatory pathway occurs in atopic dermatitis and asthma irrespective of immunoglobulin E levels. Preliminary data show therapies that target IL-13 alone are effective for treating asthma with comorbid atopic dermatitis but those blocking both IL-4 and IL-13, like dupilumab, are superior. Both interleukins are considered pivotal in the Th-2 pathway. This suggests that dual inhibition is an integral component in the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis with asthma. Analysis of other Th2 mediators, such as mepolizumab (IL-5 antagonist) and omalizumab (anti-IgE) have shown minimal efficacy, further supporting the use of dupilumab (Guttman-Yassky E, et al. J Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2019 Jan;143[1]:155-72).
Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis
The “unified airway” concept holds that because the upper airways (nasal mucosa, pharynx, and larynx) are in direct communication with the lower airways (bronchi and bronchioles). This would explain the correlation between chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) and asthma. Many studies also show the severity of one disease increases the severity of the other.
Patients with both CRSwNP and asthma typically experience a more treatment-resistant course characterized by higher rates of corticosteroid dependence and nasal polyposis recurrences when compared with asthma alone (Laidlaw TM, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2021 Mar;9[3]:1133-41). They typically have Th2-high asthma and are usually eosinophilic. The optimal treatment approach is mindful of the unified airway concept. Large-scale studies demonstrate significant benefit when targeting IL-5, especially in those with bilateral nasal polyps, need for systemic steroids in the past 2 years, significant impairment in quality of life, loss of smell, and a concomitant diagnosis of asthma (Fokkens WJ, et al. Allergy. 2019 Dec;74[12]:2312). Although data are inconsistent, there is enough evidence to suggest dupilumab be considered for those with eosinophilic asthma and CRSwNP along with atopy, atopic dermatitis, and/or high FeNO levels. In those without atopic symptoms, an anti-IL5/anti-IL5R (mainly mepolizumab and benralizumab) is preferred. Having said this, direct comparative analyses between biologics are lacking, and the above approach relies on an indirect assessment of existing data coupled with clinical experience. The approach may change as new data become available.
Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis
Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is a vasculitis characterized by disseminated necrotizing eosinophilic granulomas. EGPA is driven by a response similar to that seen in Th2-high asthma. Adult-onset asthma with sinusitis and allergic rhinitis is the most common EGPA presentation. Of all the biologics, mepolizumab has been best studied as treatment for those with EGPA and asthma symptoms. One small study demonstrated disease remission in 8 of 10 cases (Moosig F, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Sep 6;155[5]:341-3). However, many of these patients relapsed after discontinuing therapy.
Eosinophilic esophagitis
Recent reports demonstrated a large portion of adults with a
diagnosis of eosinophilic
esophagitis (EoE) also have a history of asthma. Currently, standard treatment is proton pump
inhibitors and diet modifications. The prevalence of EoE has increased with growing awareness of the disease. Unrecognized and untreated EoE can lead to devastating complications such as esophageal fibrosis, strictures, and food impaction. Similar to some of the above-mentioned syndromes,
EoE is also driven by a Th2 response and eosinophilic inflammation. A recent study in 2022 showed that 31% to 38% of
people with EoE had concomitant asthma (Dellon ES, et al. N Engl J Med. 2022 Dec 22;387 [25]:2317-30). In this population, a weekly dose of dupilumab, 300 mg, led
to a significant improvement in dysphagia symptoms and
histology when compared with placebo.
Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis
Despite its low prevalence worldwide, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) is frequently encountered when managing severe asthma. Current treatment is long-term, relatively high dose systemic corticosteroids. In light of their unfavorable side effect profile, steroid-sparing approaches are being sought. Dupilumab, omalizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab have all been tested for their effects on ABPA. Thus far, mepolizumab has the most convincing evidence to support its use for asthma with concomitant ABPA, mainly because it has the most rapid onset of action. Up to 90% of patients with ABPA were able to stop systemic steroids between 2 and 14 months after starting mepolizumab (Schleich F, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020 Jul-Aug;8[7]:2412-3.e2).
Bronchiectasis
Asthma and bronchiectasis can coexist in up to 77% of patients. Typically, the pathophysiology behind bronchiectasis is focused around neutrophilic inflammation. New evidence suggests some patients with bronchiectasis, usually in the setting of comorbid adult-onset asthma, demonstrate an eosinophilic Th-2 response. The association is seen more commonly in female patients, the elderly, and nonsmokers. A small prospective study with four patients with severe asthma and bronchiectasis showed significant improvement with less exacerbations, increased pre-bronchodilator FEV1, and a reduction of serum and sputum eosinophils after starting mepolizumab treatment (Carpagnano GE, et al. J Asthma Allergy. 2019 Mar 5;12:83-90). Clinical trials designed to clarify the role for biologics for asthma with co-morbid bronchiectasis are currently underway.
Dr. Hossri and Dr. Ivashchuk are with UTHealth Houston –Texas Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine; Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine.
As new treatments for specific moderate to severe asthma phenotypes have been developed, management decisions have grown more complicated. The treatment indications for asthma are clear; however, there is overlap with certain therapeutics that target the same pathway with similar end results. because it is not a one-size-fits-all approach that follows a rigid algorithm. Instead, it is a customized treatment plan that accounts for patient-specific risk factors and comorbidities.
Comorbidities commonly associated with asthma include atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, bronchiectasis and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis. While we lack consensus or a universally accepted treatment algorithm for treating asthma when these comorbidities are present, recent evidence helps guide us to which therapies work best.
Atopic dermatitis
There is a higher prevalence of asthma in patients with atopic dermatitis. A concept called the “atopic march” refers to the progression of childhood atopic dermatitis to manifestations such as asthma, food allergies, and hay fever. The more severe the atopic dermatitis is in childhood, the higher the risk for asthma later on in life. The data on the biologic pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis point to the involvement of interleukins – interleukin (IL)-4 and IL 13 (Silverberg JI. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2019;123[2]:144-51).
These same interleukins are active in what is called “Th2-high” asthma. The activation of Th2 cells in the inflammatory pathway occurs in atopic dermatitis and asthma irrespective of immunoglobulin E levels. Preliminary data show therapies that target IL-13 alone are effective for treating asthma with comorbid atopic dermatitis but those blocking both IL-4 and IL-13, like dupilumab, are superior. Both interleukins are considered pivotal in the Th-2 pathway. This suggests that dual inhibition is an integral component in the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis with asthma. Analysis of other Th2 mediators, such as mepolizumab (IL-5 antagonist) and omalizumab (anti-IgE) have shown minimal efficacy, further supporting the use of dupilumab (Guttman-Yassky E, et al. J Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2019 Jan;143[1]:155-72).
Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis
The “unified airway” concept holds that because the upper airways (nasal mucosa, pharynx, and larynx) are in direct communication with the lower airways (bronchi and bronchioles). This would explain the correlation between chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) and asthma. Many studies also show the severity of one disease increases the severity of the other.
Patients with both CRSwNP and asthma typically experience a more treatment-resistant course characterized by higher rates of corticosteroid dependence and nasal polyposis recurrences when compared with asthma alone (Laidlaw TM, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2021 Mar;9[3]:1133-41). They typically have Th2-high asthma and are usually eosinophilic. The optimal treatment approach is mindful of the unified airway concept. Large-scale studies demonstrate significant benefit when targeting IL-5, especially in those with bilateral nasal polyps, need for systemic steroids in the past 2 years, significant impairment in quality of life, loss of smell, and a concomitant diagnosis of asthma (Fokkens WJ, et al. Allergy. 2019 Dec;74[12]:2312). Although data are inconsistent, there is enough evidence to suggest dupilumab be considered for those with eosinophilic asthma and CRSwNP along with atopy, atopic dermatitis, and/or high FeNO levels. In those without atopic symptoms, an anti-IL5/anti-IL5R (mainly mepolizumab and benralizumab) is preferred. Having said this, direct comparative analyses between biologics are lacking, and the above approach relies on an indirect assessment of existing data coupled with clinical experience. The approach may change as new data become available.
Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis
Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is a vasculitis characterized by disseminated necrotizing eosinophilic granulomas. EGPA is driven by a response similar to that seen in Th2-high asthma. Adult-onset asthma with sinusitis and allergic rhinitis is the most common EGPA presentation. Of all the biologics, mepolizumab has been best studied as treatment for those with EGPA and asthma symptoms. One small study demonstrated disease remission in 8 of 10 cases (Moosig F, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Sep 6;155[5]:341-3). However, many of these patients relapsed after discontinuing therapy.
Eosinophilic esophagitis
Recent reports demonstrated a large portion of adults with a
diagnosis of eosinophilic
esophagitis (EoE) also have a history of asthma. Currently, standard treatment is proton pump
inhibitors and diet modifications. The prevalence of EoE has increased with growing awareness of the disease. Unrecognized and untreated EoE can lead to devastating complications such as esophageal fibrosis, strictures, and food impaction. Similar to some of the above-mentioned syndromes,
EoE is also driven by a Th2 response and eosinophilic inflammation. A recent study in 2022 showed that 31% to 38% of
people with EoE had concomitant asthma (Dellon ES, et al. N Engl J Med. 2022 Dec 22;387 [25]:2317-30). In this population, a weekly dose of dupilumab, 300 mg, led
to a significant improvement in dysphagia symptoms and
histology when compared with placebo.
Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis
Despite its low prevalence worldwide, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) is frequently encountered when managing severe asthma. Current treatment is long-term, relatively high dose systemic corticosteroids. In light of their unfavorable side effect profile, steroid-sparing approaches are being sought. Dupilumab, omalizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab have all been tested for their effects on ABPA. Thus far, mepolizumab has the most convincing evidence to support its use for asthma with concomitant ABPA, mainly because it has the most rapid onset of action. Up to 90% of patients with ABPA were able to stop systemic steroids between 2 and 14 months after starting mepolizumab (Schleich F, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020 Jul-Aug;8[7]:2412-3.e2).
Bronchiectasis
Asthma and bronchiectasis can coexist in up to 77% of patients. Typically, the pathophysiology behind bronchiectasis is focused around neutrophilic inflammation. New evidence suggests some patients with bronchiectasis, usually in the setting of comorbid adult-onset asthma, demonstrate an eosinophilic Th-2 response. The association is seen more commonly in female patients, the elderly, and nonsmokers. A small prospective study with four patients with severe asthma and bronchiectasis showed significant improvement with less exacerbations, increased pre-bronchodilator FEV1, and a reduction of serum and sputum eosinophils after starting mepolizumab treatment (Carpagnano GE, et al. J Asthma Allergy. 2019 Mar 5;12:83-90). Clinical trials designed to clarify the role for biologics for asthma with co-morbid bronchiectasis are currently underway.
Generic inhalers for COPD support hold their own
Sometimes we get what we pay for. Other times we pay too much.
That’s the message of a study published in Annals of Internal Medicine, which finds that a generic maintenance inhaler is as effective at managing symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) as a pricier branded alternative.
In 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved Wixela Inhub (the combination corticosteroid/long-acting beta2 adrenergic agonist fluticasone-salmeterol; Viatris) as a generic dry powder inhaler for managing symptoms of COPD. This approval was based on evidence of the generic’s effectiveness against asthma, although COPD also was on the product label. The study authors compared Wixela’s effectiveness in controlling symptoms of COPD with that of the brand name inhaler Advair Diskus (fluticasone-salmeterol; GlaxoSmithKline), which uses the same active ingredients.
The result: “The generic looks to be as safe and effective as the brand name. I don’t see a clinical reason why one would ever need to get the brand name over the generic version,” said study author William Feldman, MD, DPhil, MPH, a health services researcher and pulmonologist at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, both in Boston.
Same types of patients, different inhalers, same outcomes
Dr. Feldman and colleagues compared the medical records of 10,000 patients with COPD who began using the branded inhaler to the records of another 10,000 patients with COPD who opted for the generic alternative. Participants in the two groups were evenly matched by age, sex, race, and ethnicity, region, severity of COPD, and presence of other comorbidities, according to the researchers. Participants were all older than age 40, and the average age in both groups was 72 years.
The researchers looked for a difference in a first episode of a moderate exacerbation of COPD, defined as requiring a course of prednisone for 5-14 days. They also looked for cases of severe COPD exacerbation requiring hospitalization in the year after people began using either the generic or brand name inhaler. And they looked for differences across 1 year in rates of hospitalization for pneumonia.
For none of those outcomes, however, did the type of inhaler appear to matter. Compared with the brand-name drug, using the generic was associated with nearly identical rates of moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.04. The same was true for the proportion of people who went to the hospital for pneumonia at least once (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.86-1.15).
“To get through the FDA as an interchangeable generic, the generic firms have to show that their product can be used in just the same way as the brand-name version,” Dr. Feldman said, which may explain why the generic and brand-name versions of the inhaler performed so similarly.
Dr. Feldman cautioned that the price savings for patients who opt for the generic over the branded product are hard to determine, given the vagaries of different insurance plans and potential rebates when using the branded project. As a general matter, having a single generic competitor will not lower costs much, Dr. Feldman noted, pointing to 2017 research from Harvard that found a profusion of generic competitors is needed to significantly lower health care costs.
“I don’t want to in any way underestimate the importance of getting that first generic onto the market, because it sets the stage for future generics,” Dr. Feldman said.
“There are very few generic options for patients with COPD,” said Surya Bhatt, MD, director of the Pulmonary Function and Exercise Physiology Lab at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Even the rescue inhalers that people with COPD use to manage acute episodes of the condition are usually branded at this time, Dr. Bhatt noted, with few generic options.*
“The results are quite compelling,” said Dr. Bhatt, who was not involved in the research. Although the trial was not randomized, he commended the researchers for stratifying participants in the two groups to be as comparable as possible.
Dr. Bhatt noted that the FDA’s 2019 approval – given that the agency requires bioequivalence studies between branded and generic products – was enough to cause him to begin prescribing the generic inhaler. The fact that this approval was based on asthma but not also COPD is not a concern.
“There are so many similarities between asthma, COPD, and some obstructive lung diseases,” Dr. Bhatt noted.
In his experience, the only time someone with COPD continues using the branded inhaler – now that a potentially cheaper generic is available – is when their insurance plan makes their out-of-pocket cost minimal. Otherwise, brand loyalty does not exist.
“Patients are generally okay with being on a generic for inhalers, just because of the high cost,” Dr. Bhatt said.
The study was primarily supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Feldman reported funding from Arnold Ventures, the Commonwealth Fund, and the FDA, and consulting relationships with Alosa Health and Aetion. Dr. Bhatt reported no relevant financial relationships.
*Correction, 8/16/23: An earlier version of this article mischaracterized Dr. Bhatt's comments on the availability of generic options.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Sometimes we get what we pay for. Other times we pay too much.
That’s the message of a study published in Annals of Internal Medicine, which finds that a generic maintenance inhaler is as effective at managing symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) as a pricier branded alternative.
In 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved Wixela Inhub (the combination corticosteroid/long-acting beta2 adrenergic agonist fluticasone-salmeterol; Viatris) as a generic dry powder inhaler for managing symptoms of COPD. This approval was based on evidence of the generic’s effectiveness against asthma, although COPD also was on the product label. The study authors compared Wixela’s effectiveness in controlling symptoms of COPD with that of the brand name inhaler Advair Diskus (fluticasone-salmeterol; GlaxoSmithKline), which uses the same active ingredients.
The result: “The generic looks to be as safe and effective as the brand name. I don’t see a clinical reason why one would ever need to get the brand name over the generic version,” said study author William Feldman, MD, DPhil, MPH, a health services researcher and pulmonologist at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, both in Boston.
Same types of patients, different inhalers, same outcomes
Dr. Feldman and colleagues compared the medical records of 10,000 patients with COPD who began using the branded inhaler to the records of another 10,000 patients with COPD who opted for the generic alternative. Participants in the two groups were evenly matched by age, sex, race, and ethnicity, region, severity of COPD, and presence of other comorbidities, according to the researchers. Participants were all older than age 40, and the average age in both groups was 72 years.
The researchers looked for a difference in a first episode of a moderate exacerbation of COPD, defined as requiring a course of prednisone for 5-14 days. They also looked for cases of severe COPD exacerbation requiring hospitalization in the year after people began using either the generic or brand name inhaler. And they looked for differences across 1 year in rates of hospitalization for pneumonia.
For none of those outcomes, however, did the type of inhaler appear to matter. Compared with the brand-name drug, using the generic was associated with nearly identical rates of moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.04. The same was true for the proportion of people who went to the hospital for pneumonia at least once (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.86-1.15).
“To get through the FDA as an interchangeable generic, the generic firms have to show that their product can be used in just the same way as the brand-name version,” Dr. Feldman said, which may explain why the generic and brand-name versions of the inhaler performed so similarly.
Dr. Feldman cautioned that the price savings for patients who opt for the generic over the branded product are hard to determine, given the vagaries of different insurance plans and potential rebates when using the branded project. As a general matter, having a single generic competitor will not lower costs much, Dr. Feldman noted, pointing to 2017 research from Harvard that found a profusion of generic competitors is needed to significantly lower health care costs.
“I don’t want to in any way underestimate the importance of getting that first generic onto the market, because it sets the stage for future generics,” Dr. Feldman said.
“There are very few generic options for patients with COPD,” said Surya Bhatt, MD, director of the Pulmonary Function and Exercise Physiology Lab at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Even the rescue inhalers that people with COPD use to manage acute episodes of the condition are usually branded at this time, Dr. Bhatt noted, with few generic options.*
“The results are quite compelling,” said Dr. Bhatt, who was not involved in the research. Although the trial was not randomized, he commended the researchers for stratifying participants in the two groups to be as comparable as possible.
Dr. Bhatt noted that the FDA’s 2019 approval – given that the agency requires bioequivalence studies between branded and generic products – was enough to cause him to begin prescribing the generic inhaler. The fact that this approval was based on asthma but not also COPD is not a concern.
“There are so many similarities between asthma, COPD, and some obstructive lung diseases,” Dr. Bhatt noted.
In his experience, the only time someone with COPD continues using the branded inhaler – now that a potentially cheaper generic is available – is when their insurance plan makes their out-of-pocket cost minimal. Otherwise, brand loyalty does not exist.
“Patients are generally okay with being on a generic for inhalers, just because of the high cost,” Dr. Bhatt said.
The study was primarily supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Feldman reported funding from Arnold Ventures, the Commonwealth Fund, and the FDA, and consulting relationships with Alosa Health and Aetion. Dr. Bhatt reported no relevant financial relationships.
*Correction, 8/16/23: An earlier version of this article mischaracterized Dr. Bhatt's comments on the availability of generic options.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Sometimes we get what we pay for. Other times we pay too much.
That’s the message of a study published in Annals of Internal Medicine, which finds that a generic maintenance inhaler is as effective at managing symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) as a pricier branded alternative.
In 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved Wixela Inhub (the combination corticosteroid/long-acting beta2 adrenergic agonist fluticasone-salmeterol; Viatris) as a generic dry powder inhaler for managing symptoms of COPD. This approval was based on evidence of the generic’s effectiveness against asthma, although COPD also was on the product label. The study authors compared Wixela’s effectiveness in controlling symptoms of COPD with that of the brand name inhaler Advair Diskus (fluticasone-salmeterol; GlaxoSmithKline), which uses the same active ingredients.
The result: “The generic looks to be as safe and effective as the brand name. I don’t see a clinical reason why one would ever need to get the brand name over the generic version,” said study author William Feldman, MD, DPhil, MPH, a health services researcher and pulmonologist at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, both in Boston.
Same types of patients, different inhalers, same outcomes
Dr. Feldman and colleagues compared the medical records of 10,000 patients with COPD who began using the branded inhaler to the records of another 10,000 patients with COPD who opted for the generic alternative. Participants in the two groups were evenly matched by age, sex, race, and ethnicity, region, severity of COPD, and presence of other comorbidities, according to the researchers. Participants were all older than age 40, and the average age in both groups was 72 years.
The researchers looked for a difference in a first episode of a moderate exacerbation of COPD, defined as requiring a course of prednisone for 5-14 days. They also looked for cases of severe COPD exacerbation requiring hospitalization in the year after people began using either the generic or brand name inhaler. And they looked for differences across 1 year in rates of hospitalization for pneumonia.
For none of those outcomes, however, did the type of inhaler appear to matter. Compared with the brand-name drug, using the generic was associated with nearly identical rates of moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.04. The same was true for the proportion of people who went to the hospital for pneumonia at least once (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.86-1.15).
“To get through the FDA as an interchangeable generic, the generic firms have to show that their product can be used in just the same way as the brand-name version,” Dr. Feldman said, which may explain why the generic and brand-name versions of the inhaler performed so similarly.
Dr. Feldman cautioned that the price savings for patients who opt for the generic over the branded product are hard to determine, given the vagaries of different insurance plans and potential rebates when using the branded project. As a general matter, having a single generic competitor will not lower costs much, Dr. Feldman noted, pointing to 2017 research from Harvard that found a profusion of generic competitors is needed to significantly lower health care costs.
“I don’t want to in any way underestimate the importance of getting that first generic onto the market, because it sets the stage for future generics,” Dr. Feldman said.
“There are very few generic options for patients with COPD,” said Surya Bhatt, MD, director of the Pulmonary Function and Exercise Physiology Lab at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Even the rescue inhalers that people with COPD use to manage acute episodes of the condition are usually branded at this time, Dr. Bhatt noted, with few generic options.*
“The results are quite compelling,” said Dr. Bhatt, who was not involved in the research. Although the trial was not randomized, he commended the researchers for stratifying participants in the two groups to be as comparable as possible.
Dr. Bhatt noted that the FDA’s 2019 approval – given that the agency requires bioequivalence studies between branded and generic products – was enough to cause him to begin prescribing the generic inhaler. The fact that this approval was based on asthma but not also COPD is not a concern.
“There are so many similarities between asthma, COPD, and some obstructive lung diseases,” Dr. Bhatt noted.
In his experience, the only time someone with COPD continues using the branded inhaler – now that a potentially cheaper generic is available – is when their insurance plan makes their out-of-pocket cost minimal. Otherwise, brand loyalty does not exist.
“Patients are generally okay with being on a generic for inhalers, just because of the high cost,” Dr. Bhatt said.
The study was primarily supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Feldman reported funding from Arnold Ventures, the Commonwealth Fund, and the FDA, and consulting relationships with Alosa Health and Aetion. Dr. Bhatt reported no relevant financial relationships.
*Correction, 8/16/23: An earlier version of this article mischaracterized Dr. Bhatt's comments on the availability of generic options.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
COPD plus PRISm may promote frailty progression
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and a new phenotype of lung function impairment predicted progression of frailty in older adults, based on data from more than 5,000 individuals.
COPD has been associated with frailty, but longitudinal data on the association of COPD with progression of frailty are limited, as are data on the potential association of preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm) with frailty progression, wrote Di He, BS, of Zhejiang University, China, and colleagues.
PRISm has been defined in recent studies as “proportional impairments in FEV1 and FVC, resulting in the normal ratio of FEV1 and FVC.” Individuals with PRISm may transition to normal spirometry or COPD over time, the researchers wrote.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers reviewed data from 5,901 adults aged 50 years and older who were participating on the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), a prospective cohort study. Of these, 3,765 were included in an additional analysis of the association between transitions from normal spirometry to PRISm and the progression of frailty. The mean age of the participants was 65.5 years; 54.9% were women.
The median follow-up period for analysis with frailty progression was 9.5 years for PRISm and COPD and 5.8 years for PRISm transitions. Lung function data were collected at baseline. Based on spirometry data, participants were divided into three lung function groups – normal spirometry, PRISm, and COPD – and each of these was classified based on severity. Frailty was assessed using the frailty index (FI) during the follow-up period.
with additional annual increases of 0.301 and 0.172, respectively (P < .001 for both).
When stratified by severity, individuals with more severe PRISm and with more COPD had higher baseline FI and faster FI progression, compared with those with mild PRISm and COPD.
PRISm transitions were assessed over a 4-year interval at the start of the ELSA. Individuals with normal spirometry who transitioned to PRISm during the study had accelerated progression of frailty, as did those with COPD who transitioned to PRISm. However, no significant frailty progression occurred in those who changed from PRISm to normal spirometry.
The mechanisms behind the associations of PRISm and COPD with frailty remain unclear, but the results were consistent after controlling for multiple confounders, “suggesting PRISm and COPD had independent pathophysiological mechanisms for frailty,” the researchers write in their discussion. Other recent studies have identified sarcopenia as a complication for individuals with lung function impairment, they noted. “Therefore, another plausible explanation could be that PRISm and COPD caused sarcopenia, which accelerated frailty progression,” they say.
The findings were limited by several factors, including the observational design and the potential underestimation of lung function in participants with reversible airflow obstruction because of the use of prebronchodilator spirometry in the cohort study, the researchers noted.
However, the results were strengthened by the large sample size and high-quality data from the ELSA, as well as by the repeat measures of FI and lung function. The results were consistent after controlling for multiple confounders, and support the need for more research to explore the causality behind the association of PRISm and COPD with frailty, the researchers concluded.
The study was supported by the Zhejiang Provincial Basic Public Welfare Research Project, the Zhoushan Science and Technology Project, and the Key Laboratory of Intelligent Preventive Medicine of Zhejiang Province. The researchers report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and a new phenotype of lung function impairment predicted progression of frailty in older adults, based on data from more than 5,000 individuals.
COPD has been associated with frailty, but longitudinal data on the association of COPD with progression of frailty are limited, as are data on the potential association of preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm) with frailty progression, wrote Di He, BS, of Zhejiang University, China, and colleagues.
PRISm has been defined in recent studies as “proportional impairments in FEV1 and FVC, resulting in the normal ratio of FEV1 and FVC.” Individuals with PRISm may transition to normal spirometry or COPD over time, the researchers wrote.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers reviewed data from 5,901 adults aged 50 years and older who were participating on the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), a prospective cohort study. Of these, 3,765 were included in an additional analysis of the association between transitions from normal spirometry to PRISm and the progression of frailty. The mean age of the participants was 65.5 years; 54.9% were women.
The median follow-up period for analysis with frailty progression was 9.5 years for PRISm and COPD and 5.8 years for PRISm transitions. Lung function data were collected at baseline. Based on spirometry data, participants were divided into three lung function groups – normal spirometry, PRISm, and COPD – and each of these was classified based on severity. Frailty was assessed using the frailty index (FI) during the follow-up period.
with additional annual increases of 0.301 and 0.172, respectively (P < .001 for both).
When stratified by severity, individuals with more severe PRISm and with more COPD had higher baseline FI and faster FI progression, compared with those with mild PRISm and COPD.
PRISm transitions were assessed over a 4-year interval at the start of the ELSA. Individuals with normal spirometry who transitioned to PRISm during the study had accelerated progression of frailty, as did those with COPD who transitioned to PRISm. However, no significant frailty progression occurred in those who changed from PRISm to normal spirometry.
The mechanisms behind the associations of PRISm and COPD with frailty remain unclear, but the results were consistent after controlling for multiple confounders, “suggesting PRISm and COPD had independent pathophysiological mechanisms for frailty,” the researchers write in their discussion. Other recent studies have identified sarcopenia as a complication for individuals with lung function impairment, they noted. “Therefore, another plausible explanation could be that PRISm and COPD caused sarcopenia, which accelerated frailty progression,” they say.
The findings were limited by several factors, including the observational design and the potential underestimation of lung function in participants with reversible airflow obstruction because of the use of prebronchodilator spirometry in the cohort study, the researchers noted.
However, the results were strengthened by the large sample size and high-quality data from the ELSA, as well as by the repeat measures of FI and lung function. The results were consistent after controlling for multiple confounders, and support the need for more research to explore the causality behind the association of PRISm and COPD with frailty, the researchers concluded.
The study was supported by the Zhejiang Provincial Basic Public Welfare Research Project, the Zhoushan Science and Technology Project, and the Key Laboratory of Intelligent Preventive Medicine of Zhejiang Province. The researchers report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and a new phenotype of lung function impairment predicted progression of frailty in older adults, based on data from more than 5,000 individuals.
COPD has been associated with frailty, but longitudinal data on the association of COPD with progression of frailty are limited, as are data on the potential association of preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm) with frailty progression, wrote Di He, BS, of Zhejiang University, China, and colleagues.
PRISm has been defined in recent studies as “proportional impairments in FEV1 and FVC, resulting in the normal ratio of FEV1 and FVC.” Individuals with PRISm may transition to normal spirometry or COPD over time, the researchers wrote.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers reviewed data from 5,901 adults aged 50 years and older who were participating on the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), a prospective cohort study. Of these, 3,765 were included in an additional analysis of the association between transitions from normal spirometry to PRISm and the progression of frailty. The mean age of the participants was 65.5 years; 54.9% were women.
The median follow-up period for analysis with frailty progression was 9.5 years for PRISm and COPD and 5.8 years for PRISm transitions. Lung function data were collected at baseline. Based on spirometry data, participants were divided into three lung function groups – normal spirometry, PRISm, and COPD – and each of these was classified based on severity. Frailty was assessed using the frailty index (FI) during the follow-up period.
with additional annual increases of 0.301 and 0.172, respectively (P < .001 for both).
When stratified by severity, individuals with more severe PRISm and with more COPD had higher baseline FI and faster FI progression, compared with those with mild PRISm and COPD.
PRISm transitions were assessed over a 4-year interval at the start of the ELSA. Individuals with normal spirometry who transitioned to PRISm during the study had accelerated progression of frailty, as did those with COPD who transitioned to PRISm. However, no significant frailty progression occurred in those who changed from PRISm to normal spirometry.
The mechanisms behind the associations of PRISm and COPD with frailty remain unclear, but the results were consistent after controlling for multiple confounders, “suggesting PRISm and COPD had independent pathophysiological mechanisms for frailty,” the researchers write in their discussion. Other recent studies have identified sarcopenia as a complication for individuals with lung function impairment, they noted. “Therefore, another plausible explanation could be that PRISm and COPD caused sarcopenia, which accelerated frailty progression,” they say.
The findings were limited by several factors, including the observational design and the potential underestimation of lung function in participants with reversible airflow obstruction because of the use of prebronchodilator spirometry in the cohort study, the researchers noted.
However, the results were strengthened by the large sample size and high-quality data from the ELSA, as well as by the repeat measures of FI and lung function. The results were consistent after controlling for multiple confounders, and support the need for more research to explore the causality behind the association of PRISm and COPD with frailty, the researchers concluded.
The study was supported by the Zhejiang Provincial Basic Public Welfare Research Project, the Zhoushan Science and Technology Project, and the Key Laboratory of Intelligent Preventive Medicine of Zhejiang Province. The researchers report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM THE JOURNAL CHEST
Classification of COPD exacerbation predicts prognosis
Adults with exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ECOPD) whose condition was classified as severe using the Rome criteria had a higher risk of death at 1 year than those who were classified as having moderate or mild disease, as determined from data from more than 300 individuals.
Patients hospitalized with severe exacerbations of ECOPD are at increased risk for worse clinical outcomes and death, so early identification is important, Ernesto Crisafulli, MD, of the University of Verona (Italy) and Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata of Verona, and colleagues wrote.
which grades ECOPD as mild, moderate, or severe on the basis of more objective and disease-related aspects. However, data on the clinical usefulness of the Rome criteria are limited.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers retrospectively categorized 347 adults hospitalized with ECOPD using the Rome severity classifications of mild, moderate, and severe.
Classifications were made using baseline, clinical and microbiological factors, as well as gas analysis and laboratory variables. The researchers also reviewed data on the length of hospital stay and mortality (in-hospital and over a follow-up of 6 months to 3 years).
Approximately one-third of the patients (39%) were classified as having mild disease, 31% as having moderate disease, and 30% as having severe illness. Overall, hospital stay was significantly longer for the patients with severe disease, although in-hospital mortality was similar across all three groups.
Patients classified as having severe disease also had a worse prognosis at all follow-up time points, and severe classification was significantly associated with worse cumulative survival at 1 year and 3 years (Gehan-Breslow-Wilson test, P = .032 and P = .004, respectively).
In a multivariate analysis, the risk of death at 1 year was significantly higher among patients classified as severe or moderate (hazard ratio, 1.99 and 1.47, respectively), compared with those classified as mild.
Mortality risk also was higher among patients aged 80 years and older and among those requiring long-term oxygen therapy or with a history of ECOPD episodes, the researchers noted. Body mass index in the range of 25-29 kg/m2 was associated with lower risk.
The study was limited by several factors, including the replacement of dyspnea perception in the Rome classification with other objective measures, the researchers wrote. Other limitations include the retrospective design, small sample size, use of data from a single center, and lack of data on causes of mortality. Women were underrepresented in the study, and so additional research involving women is needed.
The results suggest that the Rome classification allows for the effective identification of patients with ECOPD who have a worse prognosis. The Rome classification may help guide disease management through targeted interventions and personalized care programs for this population, the researchers concluded.
The study received no outside funding. The researchers disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Adults with exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ECOPD) whose condition was classified as severe using the Rome criteria had a higher risk of death at 1 year than those who were classified as having moderate or mild disease, as determined from data from more than 300 individuals.
Patients hospitalized with severe exacerbations of ECOPD are at increased risk for worse clinical outcomes and death, so early identification is important, Ernesto Crisafulli, MD, of the University of Verona (Italy) and Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata of Verona, and colleagues wrote.
which grades ECOPD as mild, moderate, or severe on the basis of more objective and disease-related aspects. However, data on the clinical usefulness of the Rome criteria are limited.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers retrospectively categorized 347 adults hospitalized with ECOPD using the Rome severity classifications of mild, moderate, and severe.
Classifications were made using baseline, clinical and microbiological factors, as well as gas analysis and laboratory variables. The researchers also reviewed data on the length of hospital stay and mortality (in-hospital and over a follow-up of 6 months to 3 years).
Approximately one-third of the patients (39%) were classified as having mild disease, 31% as having moderate disease, and 30% as having severe illness. Overall, hospital stay was significantly longer for the patients with severe disease, although in-hospital mortality was similar across all three groups.
Patients classified as having severe disease also had a worse prognosis at all follow-up time points, and severe classification was significantly associated with worse cumulative survival at 1 year and 3 years (Gehan-Breslow-Wilson test, P = .032 and P = .004, respectively).
In a multivariate analysis, the risk of death at 1 year was significantly higher among patients classified as severe or moderate (hazard ratio, 1.99 and 1.47, respectively), compared with those classified as mild.
Mortality risk also was higher among patients aged 80 years and older and among those requiring long-term oxygen therapy or with a history of ECOPD episodes, the researchers noted. Body mass index in the range of 25-29 kg/m2 was associated with lower risk.
The study was limited by several factors, including the replacement of dyspnea perception in the Rome classification with other objective measures, the researchers wrote. Other limitations include the retrospective design, small sample size, use of data from a single center, and lack of data on causes of mortality. Women were underrepresented in the study, and so additional research involving women is needed.
The results suggest that the Rome classification allows for the effective identification of patients with ECOPD who have a worse prognosis. The Rome classification may help guide disease management through targeted interventions and personalized care programs for this population, the researchers concluded.
The study received no outside funding. The researchers disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Adults with exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ECOPD) whose condition was classified as severe using the Rome criteria had a higher risk of death at 1 year than those who were classified as having moderate or mild disease, as determined from data from more than 300 individuals.
Patients hospitalized with severe exacerbations of ECOPD are at increased risk for worse clinical outcomes and death, so early identification is important, Ernesto Crisafulli, MD, of the University of Verona (Italy) and Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata of Verona, and colleagues wrote.
which grades ECOPD as mild, moderate, or severe on the basis of more objective and disease-related aspects. However, data on the clinical usefulness of the Rome criteria are limited.
In a study published in the journal Chest, the researchers retrospectively categorized 347 adults hospitalized with ECOPD using the Rome severity classifications of mild, moderate, and severe.
Classifications were made using baseline, clinical and microbiological factors, as well as gas analysis and laboratory variables. The researchers also reviewed data on the length of hospital stay and mortality (in-hospital and over a follow-up of 6 months to 3 years).
Approximately one-third of the patients (39%) were classified as having mild disease, 31% as having moderate disease, and 30% as having severe illness. Overall, hospital stay was significantly longer for the patients with severe disease, although in-hospital mortality was similar across all three groups.
Patients classified as having severe disease also had a worse prognosis at all follow-up time points, and severe classification was significantly associated with worse cumulative survival at 1 year and 3 years (Gehan-Breslow-Wilson test, P = .032 and P = .004, respectively).
In a multivariate analysis, the risk of death at 1 year was significantly higher among patients classified as severe or moderate (hazard ratio, 1.99 and 1.47, respectively), compared with those classified as mild.
Mortality risk also was higher among patients aged 80 years and older and among those requiring long-term oxygen therapy or with a history of ECOPD episodes, the researchers noted. Body mass index in the range of 25-29 kg/m2 was associated with lower risk.
The study was limited by several factors, including the replacement of dyspnea perception in the Rome classification with other objective measures, the researchers wrote. Other limitations include the retrospective design, small sample size, use of data from a single center, and lack of data on causes of mortality. Women were underrepresented in the study, and so additional research involving women is needed.
The results suggest that the Rome classification allows for the effective identification of patients with ECOPD who have a worse prognosis. The Rome classification may help guide disease management through targeted interventions and personalized care programs for this population, the researchers concluded.
The study received no outside funding. The researchers disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM THE JOURNAL CHEST
U.S. has new dominant COVID variant called EG.5
Called “Eris” among avid COVID trackers, the strain EG.5 now accounts for 17% of all U.S. COVID infections, according to the latest Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates. That’s up from 12% the week prior.
EG.5 has been rising worldwide, just weeks after the World Health Organization added the strain to its official monitoring list. In the United Kingdom, it now accounts for 1 in 10 COVID cases, The Independent reported.
EG.5 is a descendant of the XBB strains that have dominated tracking lists in recent months. It has the same makeup as XBB.1.9.2 but carries an extra spike mutation, according to a summary published by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. The spike protein is the part of the virus that allows it to enter human cells. But there’s no indication so far that EG.5 is more contagious or severe than other recent variants, according to the CIDRAP summary and a recent podcast from the American Medical Association. The CDC said that current vaccines protect against the variant.
U.S. hospitals saw a 12% increase in COVID admissions during the week ending on July 22, with 8,047 people being admitted because of the virus, up from an all-time low of 6,306 the week of June 24. In 17 states, the past-week increase in hospitalizations was 20% or greater. In Minnesota, the rate jumped by 50%, and in West Virginia, it jumped by 63%. Meanwhile, deaths reached their lowest weekly rate ever for the week of data ending July 29, with just 176 deaths reported by the CDC.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Called “Eris” among avid COVID trackers, the strain EG.5 now accounts for 17% of all U.S. COVID infections, according to the latest Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates. That’s up from 12% the week prior.
EG.5 has been rising worldwide, just weeks after the World Health Organization added the strain to its official monitoring list. In the United Kingdom, it now accounts for 1 in 10 COVID cases, The Independent reported.
EG.5 is a descendant of the XBB strains that have dominated tracking lists in recent months. It has the same makeup as XBB.1.9.2 but carries an extra spike mutation, according to a summary published by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. The spike protein is the part of the virus that allows it to enter human cells. But there’s no indication so far that EG.5 is more contagious or severe than other recent variants, according to the CIDRAP summary and a recent podcast from the American Medical Association. The CDC said that current vaccines protect against the variant.
U.S. hospitals saw a 12% increase in COVID admissions during the week ending on July 22, with 8,047 people being admitted because of the virus, up from an all-time low of 6,306 the week of June 24. In 17 states, the past-week increase in hospitalizations was 20% or greater. In Minnesota, the rate jumped by 50%, and in West Virginia, it jumped by 63%. Meanwhile, deaths reached their lowest weekly rate ever for the week of data ending July 29, with just 176 deaths reported by the CDC.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Called “Eris” among avid COVID trackers, the strain EG.5 now accounts for 17% of all U.S. COVID infections, according to the latest Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates. That’s up from 12% the week prior.
EG.5 has been rising worldwide, just weeks after the World Health Organization added the strain to its official monitoring list. In the United Kingdom, it now accounts for 1 in 10 COVID cases, The Independent reported.
EG.5 is a descendant of the XBB strains that have dominated tracking lists in recent months. It has the same makeup as XBB.1.9.2 but carries an extra spike mutation, according to a summary published by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. The spike protein is the part of the virus that allows it to enter human cells. But there’s no indication so far that EG.5 is more contagious or severe than other recent variants, according to the CIDRAP summary and a recent podcast from the American Medical Association. The CDC said that current vaccines protect against the variant.
U.S. hospitals saw a 12% increase in COVID admissions during the week ending on July 22, with 8,047 people being admitted because of the virus, up from an all-time low of 6,306 the week of June 24. In 17 states, the past-week increase in hospitalizations was 20% or greater. In Minnesota, the rate jumped by 50%, and in West Virginia, it jumped by 63%. Meanwhile, deaths reached their lowest weekly rate ever for the week of data ending July 29, with just 176 deaths reported by the CDC.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
PRISm and nonspecific pattern: New insights in lung testing interpretation
The recent statement on interpretive strategies for lung testing uses the acronym PRISm for preserved ratio impaired spirometry. PRISm identifies patients with a normal forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity ratio but abnormal FEV1 and/or FVC (usually both). Most medical students are taught to call this a “restrictive pattern,” and every first-year pulmonary fellow orders full lung volumes when they see it. If total lung capacity (TLC) is normal, PRISm becomes the nonspecific pattern. If TLC is low, then the patient has “true” restriction, and if it’s elevated, then hyperinflation may be present.
The traditional classification scheme for basic spirometry interpretation (normal, restricted, obstructed, or mixed) is simple and conceptually clear. It turns out that many with this pattern won’t have an abnormal TLC, so the name is, in some ways, a misnomer and can be misleading. Enter PRISm, a more descriptive and inclusive term. The phrase also lends itself to a phonetic acronym that is fun to say, easy to remember, and likely to catch on with learners.
Information on occurrence and clinical behavior comes from large cohorts with basic spirometry, but without full lung volumes because PRISm no longer applies once TLC is determined. As may be expected, prevalence varies by the population studied. Estimates for general populations have been in the 7%-12% range; however, one study examining a database of patients with clinical spirometry referrals found a prevalence of 22.3%. Rates may be far higher in low- and middle-income countries. Identified risk factors include sex, tobacco use, and body mass index; the presence of PRISm is associated with respiratory symptoms and mortality. Thus, PRISm is common and it matters.
Along with PRISm, the nonspecific pattern is a new addition, if not a new concept, to the 2022 interpretative strategies statement. As with PRISm, the title is necessarily broad, though far less imaginative. Defined by reductions in FEV1 and FVC and a normal TLC, the nonspecific pattern has classically been considered a marker of early airway disease. The idea is that early, heterogeneous closure of distal segments of the bronchial tree can reduce total volume during a forced expiration before affecting the FEV1/FVC. The fact that the TLC is not a forced maneuver means there is proportionately less effect from more collapsible/susceptible smaller units. More recent data suggest that there are additional causes.
Because the nonspecific pattern requires full lung volumes, we have less population-level data than for PRISm. Estimated prevalence is approximately 9.5% in patients with complete test results. The two most common causes are obesity and airway obstruction, and the pattern is relatively stable over time. Notably, an increase in specific airway resistance or TLC minus alveolar volume difference predicts progression to frank obstruction on spirometry.
The physiologic changes that obesity inflicts on the lung have been well described. Patients with obesity breathe at lower lung volumes and are therefore susceptible to small airway closure at rest and during forced expiration. There is no doubt that the increased recognition of PRISm and the nonspecific pattern is in part related to the worldwide rise in obesity rates.
Key takeaways
In summary, PRISm and the nonspecific pattern are now part of the classification scheme we use for spirometry and full lung volumes, respectively. They should be included in interpretations given their diagnostic and predictive value. Airway disease and obesity are common causes and often coexist with either pattern. Many will not have a true, restrictive lung deficit, and a reductionist approach to interpretation is likely to lead to erroneous diagnoses. There were many important updates included in the 2022 iteration on lung testing interpretation that should not fly under the radar.
Dr. Holley is professor of medicine at Uniformed Services University in Bethesda, Md., and a pulmonary/sleep and critical care medicine physician at MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington. He disclosed ties with CHEST College, Metapharm, and WebMD.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The recent statement on interpretive strategies for lung testing uses the acronym PRISm for preserved ratio impaired spirometry. PRISm identifies patients with a normal forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity ratio but abnormal FEV1 and/or FVC (usually both). Most medical students are taught to call this a “restrictive pattern,” and every first-year pulmonary fellow orders full lung volumes when they see it. If total lung capacity (TLC) is normal, PRISm becomes the nonspecific pattern. If TLC is low, then the patient has “true” restriction, and if it’s elevated, then hyperinflation may be present.
The traditional classification scheme for basic spirometry interpretation (normal, restricted, obstructed, or mixed) is simple and conceptually clear. It turns out that many with this pattern won’t have an abnormal TLC, so the name is, in some ways, a misnomer and can be misleading. Enter PRISm, a more descriptive and inclusive term. The phrase also lends itself to a phonetic acronym that is fun to say, easy to remember, and likely to catch on with learners.
Information on occurrence and clinical behavior comes from large cohorts with basic spirometry, but without full lung volumes because PRISm no longer applies once TLC is determined. As may be expected, prevalence varies by the population studied. Estimates for general populations have been in the 7%-12% range; however, one study examining a database of patients with clinical spirometry referrals found a prevalence of 22.3%. Rates may be far higher in low- and middle-income countries. Identified risk factors include sex, tobacco use, and body mass index; the presence of PRISm is associated with respiratory symptoms and mortality. Thus, PRISm is common and it matters.
Along with PRISm, the nonspecific pattern is a new addition, if not a new concept, to the 2022 interpretative strategies statement. As with PRISm, the title is necessarily broad, though far less imaginative. Defined by reductions in FEV1 and FVC and a normal TLC, the nonspecific pattern has classically been considered a marker of early airway disease. The idea is that early, heterogeneous closure of distal segments of the bronchial tree can reduce total volume during a forced expiration before affecting the FEV1/FVC. The fact that the TLC is not a forced maneuver means there is proportionately less effect from more collapsible/susceptible smaller units. More recent data suggest that there are additional causes.
Because the nonspecific pattern requires full lung volumes, we have less population-level data than for PRISm. Estimated prevalence is approximately 9.5% in patients with complete test results. The two most common causes are obesity and airway obstruction, and the pattern is relatively stable over time. Notably, an increase in specific airway resistance or TLC minus alveolar volume difference predicts progression to frank obstruction on spirometry.
The physiologic changes that obesity inflicts on the lung have been well described. Patients with obesity breathe at lower lung volumes and are therefore susceptible to small airway closure at rest and during forced expiration. There is no doubt that the increased recognition of PRISm and the nonspecific pattern is in part related to the worldwide rise in obesity rates.
Key takeaways
In summary, PRISm and the nonspecific pattern are now part of the classification scheme we use for spirometry and full lung volumes, respectively. They should be included in interpretations given their diagnostic and predictive value. Airway disease and obesity are common causes and often coexist with either pattern. Many will not have a true, restrictive lung deficit, and a reductionist approach to interpretation is likely to lead to erroneous diagnoses. There were many important updates included in the 2022 iteration on lung testing interpretation that should not fly under the radar.
Dr. Holley is professor of medicine at Uniformed Services University in Bethesda, Md., and a pulmonary/sleep and critical care medicine physician at MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington. He disclosed ties with CHEST College, Metapharm, and WebMD.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The recent statement on interpretive strategies for lung testing uses the acronym PRISm for preserved ratio impaired spirometry. PRISm identifies patients with a normal forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity ratio but abnormal FEV1 and/or FVC (usually both). Most medical students are taught to call this a “restrictive pattern,” and every first-year pulmonary fellow orders full lung volumes when they see it. If total lung capacity (TLC) is normal, PRISm becomes the nonspecific pattern. If TLC is low, then the patient has “true” restriction, and if it’s elevated, then hyperinflation may be present.
The traditional classification scheme for basic spirometry interpretation (normal, restricted, obstructed, or mixed) is simple and conceptually clear. It turns out that many with this pattern won’t have an abnormal TLC, so the name is, in some ways, a misnomer and can be misleading. Enter PRISm, a more descriptive and inclusive term. The phrase also lends itself to a phonetic acronym that is fun to say, easy to remember, and likely to catch on with learners.
Information on occurrence and clinical behavior comes from large cohorts with basic spirometry, but without full lung volumes because PRISm no longer applies once TLC is determined. As may be expected, prevalence varies by the population studied. Estimates for general populations have been in the 7%-12% range; however, one study examining a database of patients with clinical spirometry referrals found a prevalence of 22.3%. Rates may be far higher in low- and middle-income countries. Identified risk factors include sex, tobacco use, and body mass index; the presence of PRISm is associated with respiratory symptoms and mortality. Thus, PRISm is common and it matters.
Along with PRISm, the nonspecific pattern is a new addition, if not a new concept, to the 2022 interpretative strategies statement. As with PRISm, the title is necessarily broad, though far less imaginative. Defined by reductions in FEV1 and FVC and a normal TLC, the nonspecific pattern has classically been considered a marker of early airway disease. The idea is that early, heterogeneous closure of distal segments of the bronchial tree can reduce total volume during a forced expiration before affecting the FEV1/FVC. The fact that the TLC is not a forced maneuver means there is proportionately less effect from more collapsible/susceptible smaller units. More recent data suggest that there are additional causes.
Because the nonspecific pattern requires full lung volumes, we have less population-level data than for PRISm. Estimated prevalence is approximately 9.5% in patients with complete test results. The two most common causes are obesity and airway obstruction, and the pattern is relatively stable over time. Notably, an increase in specific airway resistance or TLC minus alveolar volume difference predicts progression to frank obstruction on spirometry.
The physiologic changes that obesity inflicts on the lung have been well described. Patients with obesity breathe at lower lung volumes and are therefore susceptible to small airway closure at rest and during forced expiration. There is no doubt that the increased recognition of PRISm and the nonspecific pattern is in part related to the worldwide rise in obesity rates.
Key takeaways
In summary, PRISm and the nonspecific pattern are now part of the classification scheme we use for spirometry and full lung volumes, respectively. They should be included in interpretations given their diagnostic and predictive value. Airway disease and obesity are common causes and often coexist with either pattern. Many will not have a true, restrictive lung deficit, and a reductionist approach to interpretation is likely to lead to erroneous diagnoses. There were many important updates included in the 2022 iteration on lung testing interpretation that should not fly under the radar.
Dr. Holley is professor of medicine at Uniformed Services University in Bethesda, Md., and a pulmonary/sleep and critical care medicine physician at MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington. He disclosed ties with CHEST College, Metapharm, and WebMD.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Pandemic blamed for failed trial of inhaled antibiotic
NEW YORK – When data were combined from two parallel phase 3 bronchiectasis treatment trials, inhaled colistimethate sodium failed to significantly reduce the rate of exacerbations associated with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection, but the disparity in the findings from the two trials, presented at the 6th World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference (WBC) 2023, strongly suggests that this therapy is effective after all.
“The totality of the evidence supports a consistent and clinically meaningful benefit [of this therapy] outside of pandemic conditions,” reported Charles Haworth, MD, director, Cambridge Centre for Lung Infection, Royal Papworth Hospital, Cambridge, England.
The key phrase is “outside of pandemic conditions.” PROMIS I, which was fully enrolled before the COVID-19 pandemic descended, associated the inhaled therapy with highly significant benefits. PROMIS II, which was initiated later and enrolled 40% of its participants during the pandemic, did not.
The difference between these two trials, which were essentially identical, was the timing, according to Dr. Haworth. By starting later, PROMIS II caught the onset of the pandemic, which he believes introduced numerous problems that defeated the opportunity to show an advantage for the inhaled antibiotic.
Injectable colistimethate sodium, a decades-old formulation of colistin, is already approved in the United States for gram-negative infections and is considered helpful even in challenging diseases, such as cystic fibrosis. Positive results from a phase 2 trial with inhaled colistimethate sodium in bronchiectasis patients with P. aeruginosa infection provided the rationale for the phase 3 PROMIS program.
The key entry criterion of PROMIS I and PROMIS II, each with nearly 90 participating study sites, was a history of bronchiectasis and ≥ two P. aeruginosa infections requiring oral therapy or ≥ 1 infection requiring intravenous therapy in the prior 12 months. Patients were randomly assigned to receive colistimethate sodium delivered in the proprietary I-neb nebulizer (CMS I-neb) or a matching placebo.
On the primary endpoint of annualized rate of exacerbations, the figures per year were 0.58 for CMS I-neb and 0.95 for placebo in the PROMIS I trial. This produced a rate ratio of 0.65, signaling a significant 35% (P = .00101) reduction in risk. In PROMIS II, the annualized rates of exacerbation were essentially identical in the experimental and control arms (0.089 vs. 0.088; P = .97).
With “no signal of benefit” in the PROMIS II trial, the numerical advantage of CMS I-neb for the combined data did not reach statistical significance, Dr. Haworth reported.
Other endpoints told the same story. For example, the time to first exacerbation was reduced by 41% in PROMIS I (HR, 0.59; P = .0074) but was not reduced significantly (P = .603) in PROMIS II. In PROMIS I, there was a nearly 60% reduction in the risk of severe exacerbations associated with CMS I-neb, but the risk ratio of severe infections was slightly but not significantly higher on CMS I-neb in PROMIS II.
There were signals of benefit in PROMIS II. For example, the reductions in P. aeruginosa density were similar in the two studies (P < .00001 in both), and assessment with the Severe Exacerbations and Quality of Life (SQOL) tool associated CMS I-neb with end-of-study improvement in QOL for the experimental arm in both studies.
While Dr. Haworth acknowledged that he recognizes the “issues of post hoc analysis with any data,” obscuring a benefit that would have been otherwise shown.
Besides the dramatic reduction in rates of hospitalization during the pandemic, an obstacle for showing differences in exacerbations, and other COVID-related factors with the potential to skew results, Dr. Haworth also provided several sets of objective data to make his point.
Most importantly, Dr. Haworth and his coinvestigators conducted a meta-analysis that combined data from the phase 2 trial, data from PROMIS I, and data from the patients enrolled in PROMIS II prior to the COVID pandemic. In this analysis the rate ratio for annualized exacerbations was a “pretty impressive” 0.65 favoring CMS I-neb. Moreover, in contrast to data from the PROMIS II patients enrolled during the COVID pandemic, the other three sets of data were “remarkably consistent.”
If PROMIS II data collected from patients enrolled during COVID are compared with the other sets of data, they are “the clear outlier,” he asserted.
Many guidelines in Europe, including those from the European Respiratory Society and the British Thoracic Society, already recommend inhaled colistin in patients with bronchiectasis for the treatment of P. aeruginosa. Although Dr. Haworth believes that the preponderance of controlled data now argue that CMS I-neb is effective as well as safe (adverse events in the experimental and placebo arms of PROMIS I and II were similar), he is not sure what steps will be taken to confirm a benefit to regulatory authorities. According to Dr. Haworth, there are no approved inhaled antibiotics in the United States.
Referring to Zambon, which funded the trials and is developing CMS I-neb, Dr. Haworth said, “This will be a company decision. There are some logistical hurdles to doing another trial.”
Not least of these hurdles is that clinicians and patients already consider inhalational antibiotics in general and inhaled colistin specifically to be effective for several types of infections, including P. aeruginosa, according to Eva Polverino, MD, PhD, a pulmonologist associated with the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona. She said that these drugs are already a standard of care in her own country as well as in many other countries in Europe.
“There has been a loss of equipoise needed to conduct a randomized placebo-controlled trial,” Dr. Polverino said. In her opinion, the U.S. FDA “should start thinking of other pathways to approval.” She thinks that enrollment in a placebo-controlled trial is no longer appropriate.
Dr. Haworth and Dr. Polverino have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
NEW YORK – When data were combined from two parallel phase 3 bronchiectasis treatment trials, inhaled colistimethate sodium failed to significantly reduce the rate of exacerbations associated with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection, but the disparity in the findings from the two trials, presented at the 6th World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference (WBC) 2023, strongly suggests that this therapy is effective after all.
“The totality of the evidence supports a consistent and clinically meaningful benefit [of this therapy] outside of pandemic conditions,” reported Charles Haworth, MD, director, Cambridge Centre for Lung Infection, Royal Papworth Hospital, Cambridge, England.
The key phrase is “outside of pandemic conditions.” PROMIS I, which was fully enrolled before the COVID-19 pandemic descended, associated the inhaled therapy with highly significant benefits. PROMIS II, which was initiated later and enrolled 40% of its participants during the pandemic, did not.
The difference between these two trials, which were essentially identical, was the timing, according to Dr. Haworth. By starting later, PROMIS II caught the onset of the pandemic, which he believes introduced numerous problems that defeated the opportunity to show an advantage for the inhaled antibiotic.
Injectable colistimethate sodium, a decades-old formulation of colistin, is already approved in the United States for gram-negative infections and is considered helpful even in challenging diseases, such as cystic fibrosis. Positive results from a phase 2 trial with inhaled colistimethate sodium in bronchiectasis patients with P. aeruginosa infection provided the rationale for the phase 3 PROMIS program.
The key entry criterion of PROMIS I and PROMIS II, each with nearly 90 participating study sites, was a history of bronchiectasis and ≥ two P. aeruginosa infections requiring oral therapy or ≥ 1 infection requiring intravenous therapy in the prior 12 months. Patients were randomly assigned to receive colistimethate sodium delivered in the proprietary I-neb nebulizer (CMS I-neb) or a matching placebo.
On the primary endpoint of annualized rate of exacerbations, the figures per year were 0.58 for CMS I-neb and 0.95 for placebo in the PROMIS I trial. This produced a rate ratio of 0.65, signaling a significant 35% (P = .00101) reduction in risk. In PROMIS II, the annualized rates of exacerbation were essentially identical in the experimental and control arms (0.089 vs. 0.088; P = .97).
With “no signal of benefit” in the PROMIS II trial, the numerical advantage of CMS I-neb for the combined data did not reach statistical significance, Dr. Haworth reported.
Other endpoints told the same story. For example, the time to first exacerbation was reduced by 41% in PROMIS I (HR, 0.59; P = .0074) but was not reduced significantly (P = .603) in PROMIS II. In PROMIS I, there was a nearly 60% reduction in the risk of severe exacerbations associated with CMS I-neb, but the risk ratio of severe infections was slightly but not significantly higher on CMS I-neb in PROMIS II.
There were signals of benefit in PROMIS II. For example, the reductions in P. aeruginosa density were similar in the two studies (P < .00001 in both), and assessment with the Severe Exacerbations and Quality of Life (SQOL) tool associated CMS I-neb with end-of-study improvement in QOL for the experimental arm in both studies.
While Dr. Haworth acknowledged that he recognizes the “issues of post hoc analysis with any data,” obscuring a benefit that would have been otherwise shown.
Besides the dramatic reduction in rates of hospitalization during the pandemic, an obstacle for showing differences in exacerbations, and other COVID-related factors with the potential to skew results, Dr. Haworth also provided several sets of objective data to make his point.
Most importantly, Dr. Haworth and his coinvestigators conducted a meta-analysis that combined data from the phase 2 trial, data from PROMIS I, and data from the patients enrolled in PROMIS II prior to the COVID pandemic. In this analysis the rate ratio for annualized exacerbations was a “pretty impressive” 0.65 favoring CMS I-neb. Moreover, in contrast to data from the PROMIS II patients enrolled during the COVID pandemic, the other three sets of data were “remarkably consistent.”
If PROMIS II data collected from patients enrolled during COVID are compared with the other sets of data, they are “the clear outlier,” he asserted.
Many guidelines in Europe, including those from the European Respiratory Society and the British Thoracic Society, already recommend inhaled colistin in patients with bronchiectasis for the treatment of P. aeruginosa. Although Dr. Haworth believes that the preponderance of controlled data now argue that CMS I-neb is effective as well as safe (adverse events in the experimental and placebo arms of PROMIS I and II were similar), he is not sure what steps will be taken to confirm a benefit to regulatory authorities. According to Dr. Haworth, there are no approved inhaled antibiotics in the United States.
Referring to Zambon, which funded the trials and is developing CMS I-neb, Dr. Haworth said, “This will be a company decision. There are some logistical hurdles to doing another trial.”
Not least of these hurdles is that clinicians and patients already consider inhalational antibiotics in general and inhaled colistin specifically to be effective for several types of infections, including P. aeruginosa, according to Eva Polverino, MD, PhD, a pulmonologist associated with the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona. She said that these drugs are already a standard of care in her own country as well as in many other countries in Europe.
“There has been a loss of equipoise needed to conduct a randomized placebo-controlled trial,” Dr. Polverino said. In her opinion, the U.S. FDA “should start thinking of other pathways to approval.” She thinks that enrollment in a placebo-controlled trial is no longer appropriate.
Dr. Haworth and Dr. Polverino have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
NEW YORK – When data were combined from two parallel phase 3 bronchiectasis treatment trials, inhaled colistimethate sodium failed to significantly reduce the rate of exacerbations associated with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection, but the disparity in the findings from the two trials, presented at the 6th World Bronchiectasis & NTM Conference (WBC) 2023, strongly suggests that this therapy is effective after all.
“The totality of the evidence supports a consistent and clinically meaningful benefit [of this therapy] outside of pandemic conditions,” reported Charles Haworth, MD, director, Cambridge Centre for Lung Infection, Royal Papworth Hospital, Cambridge, England.
The key phrase is “outside of pandemic conditions.” PROMIS I, which was fully enrolled before the COVID-19 pandemic descended, associated the inhaled therapy with highly significant benefits. PROMIS II, which was initiated later and enrolled 40% of its participants during the pandemic, did not.
The difference between these two trials, which were essentially identical, was the timing, according to Dr. Haworth. By starting later, PROMIS II caught the onset of the pandemic, which he believes introduced numerous problems that defeated the opportunity to show an advantage for the inhaled antibiotic.
Injectable colistimethate sodium, a decades-old formulation of colistin, is already approved in the United States for gram-negative infections and is considered helpful even in challenging diseases, such as cystic fibrosis. Positive results from a phase 2 trial with inhaled colistimethate sodium in bronchiectasis patients with P. aeruginosa infection provided the rationale for the phase 3 PROMIS program.
The key entry criterion of PROMIS I and PROMIS II, each with nearly 90 participating study sites, was a history of bronchiectasis and ≥ two P. aeruginosa infections requiring oral therapy or ≥ 1 infection requiring intravenous therapy in the prior 12 months. Patients were randomly assigned to receive colistimethate sodium delivered in the proprietary I-neb nebulizer (CMS I-neb) or a matching placebo.
On the primary endpoint of annualized rate of exacerbations, the figures per year were 0.58 for CMS I-neb and 0.95 for placebo in the PROMIS I trial. This produced a rate ratio of 0.65, signaling a significant 35% (P = .00101) reduction in risk. In PROMIS II, the annualized rates of exacerbation were essentially identical in the experimental and control arms (0.089 vs. 0.088; P = .97).
With “no signal of benefit” in the PROMIS II trial, the numerical advantage of CMS I-neb for the combined data did not reach statistical significance, Dr. Haworth reported.
Other endpoints told the same story. For example, the time to first exacerbation was reduced by 41% in PROMIS I (HR, 0.59; P = .0074) but was not reduced significantly (P = .603) in PROMIS II. In PROMIS I, there was a nearly 60% reduction in the risk of severe exacerbations associated with CMS I-neb, but the risk ratio of severe infections was slightly but not significantly higher on CMS I-neb in PROMIS II.
There were signals of benefit in PROMIS II. For example, the reductions in P. aeruginosa density were similar in the two studies (P < .00001 in both), and assessment with the Severe Exacerbations and Quality of Life (SQOL) tool associated CMS I-neb with end-of-study improvement in QOL for the experimental arm in both studies.
While Dr. Haworth acknowledged that he recognizes the “issues of post hoc analysis with any data,” obscuring a benefit that would have been otherwise shown.
Besides the dramatic reduction in rates of hospitalization during the pandemic, an obstacle for showing differences in exacerbations, and other COVID-related factors with the potential to skew results, Dr. Haworth also provided several sets of objective data to make his point.
Most importantly, Dr. Haworth and his coinvestigators conducted a meta-analysis that combined data from the phase 2 trial, data from PROMIS I, and data from the patients enrolled in PROMIS II prior to the COVID pandemic. In this analysis the rate ratio for annualized exacerbations was a “pretty impressive” 0.65 favoring CMS I-neb. Moreover, in contrast to data from the PROMIS II patients enrolled during the COVID pandemic, the other three sets of data were “remarkably consistent.”
If PROMIS II data collected from patients enrolled during COVID are compared with the other sets of data, they are “the clear outlier,” he asserted.
Many guidelines in Europe, including those from the European Respiratory Society and the British Thoracic Society, already recommend inhaled colistin in patients with bronchiectasis for the treatment of P. aeruginosa. Although Dr. Haworth believes that the preponderance of controlled data now argue that CMS I-neb is effective as well as safe (adverse events in the experimental and placebo arms of PROMIS I and II were similar), he is not sure what steps will be taken to confirm a benefit to regulatory authorities. According to Dr. Haworth, there are no approved inhaled antibiotics in the United States.
Referring to Zambon, which funded the trials and is developing CMS I-neb, Dr. Haworth said, “This will be a company decision. There are some logistical hurdles to doing another trial.”
Not least of these hurdles is that clinicians and patients already consider inhalational antibiotics in general and inhaled colistin specifically to be effective for several types of infections, including P. aeruginosa, according to Eva Polverino, MD, PhD, a pulmonologist associated with the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona. She said that these drugs are already a standard of care in her own country as well as in many other countries in Europe.
“There has been a loss of equipoise needed to conduct a randomized placebo-controlled trial,” Dr. Polverino said. In her opinion, the U.S. FDA “should start thinking of other pathways to approval.” She thinks that enrollment in a placebo-controlled trial is no longer appropriate.
Dr. Haworth and Dr. Polverino have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM WBC 2023