Clinical Burden of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Patients with Suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow.

Introduction: Many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may derive inadequate benefit from dry powder inhalers (DPIs) because of suboptimal peak inspiratory flow (sPIF). Objectives: To assess the clinical burden of COPD by characterizing the clinical characteristics of participants with sPIF against medium-low resistance DPIs versus those with optimal PIF (oPIF) from two phase 3 clinical trials. Methods: Baseline data were collected from two randomized, controlled, phase 3 trials (NCT03095456; NCT02518139) in participants with moderate-to-severe COPD. oPIF (60 L/min) against the medium-low resistance DPIs was used as the threshold for defining the PIF subgroups (<60 L/min (sPIF) vs ≥60 L/min (oPIF)). Results: Most participants included in this analysis were White (92%) and male (63%); the mean (range) age was 65 (43-87) years. Participants with sPIF had significantly greater dyspnea than those with oPIF as measured using the modified Medical Research Council scoring (mean (95% CI): 2.1 (2.0-2.2) vs 1.6 (1.4-1.7); P < 0.001) and baseline dyspnea index (mean (95% CI): 5.1 (4.9-5.4) vs 6.1 (5.8-6.3); P < 0.001). Based on COPD Assessment Test scores, participants with sPIF had a higher COPD symptom burden than those with oPIF (mean (95% CI): 21.5 (19.7-23.3) vs 19.5 (18.6-20.4); P = 0.05). Conclusion: In these trials, participants with COPD who had sPIF against the medium-low resistance DPIs had more dyspnea and worse health status than those with oPIF. These results demonstrate that sPIF is associated with a higher clinical burden as measured by patient-reported outcomes.

The Effect of Chronic Altitude Exposure on COPD Outcomes in the SPIROMICS Cohort.

RATIONALE: Individuals with COPD have airflow obstruction and maldistribution of ventilation. For those living at high altitude, any gas exchange abnormality is compounded by reduced partial pressures of inspired oxygen. OBJECTIVES: Does residence at higher-altitude exposure affect COPD outcomes, including lung function, imaging characteristics, symptoms, health status, functional exercise capacity, exacerbations, or mortality? METHODS: From the SPIROMICS cohort, we identified individuals with COPD living below 1,000 ft (305 m) elevation (n= 1,367) versus above 4,000 ft (1,219 m) elevation (n= 288). Multivariable regression models were used to evaluate associations of exposure to high altitude with COPD-related outcomes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Living at higher altitude was associated with reduced functional exercise capacity as defined by 6MWD (-32.3 m, (-55.7 to -28.6)). There were no differences in patient-reported outcomes as defined by symptoms (CAT, mMRC), or health status (SGRQ). Higher altitude was not associated with a different rate of FEV1 decline. Higher altitude was associated with lower odds of severe exacerbations (IRR 0.65, (0.46 to 0.90)). There were no differences in small airway disease, air trapping, or emphysema. In longitudinal analyses, higher altitude was associated with increased mortality (HR 1.25, (1.0 to 1.55)); however, this association was no longer significant when accounting for air pollution. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic altitude exposure is associated with reduced functional exercise capacity in individuals with COPD, but this did not translate into differences in symptoms or health status. Additionally, chronic high-altitude exposure did not affect progression of disease as defined by longitudinal changes in spirometry.

Utility of peak inspiratory flow measurement for dry powder inhaler use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Every type of dry powder inhaler (DPI) device has its own intrinsic resistance. A patient's inspiratory effort produces a pressure drop that determines the inspiratory flow, depending on the inhaler's specific internal resistance. Optimal peak inspiratory flow (PIF) is needed for effective release of dry powder, disaggregation of drug-carrier agglomerates, and optimal deposition of respirable drug particles, particularly generation of a high fine-particle fraction to reach the small airways of the lungs. However, standardized recommendations for PIF measurements are lacking and instructions appeared vague in many instances. RECENT FINDINGS: Suboptimal PIFs are common in outpatient chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients and during acute exacerbations of COPD, and are associated with increased healthcare resource utilization. There is significant variation in the results of studies which is in part related to different definitions of optimal flow rates, and considerable variation in how PIF is measured in clinical and real-life studies. SUMMARY: Standardization of technique will facilitate comparisons among studies. Specific recommendations for PIF measurement have been proposed to standardize the process and better ensure accurate and reliable PIF values in clinical trials and clinical practice. Clinicians can then select and personalize the most appropriate inhaler for their patients and help them achieve the optimal PIF needed for effective drug dispersion.

Aerosol Plumes of Inhalers Used in COPD.

INTRODUCTION: The selection of inhaler device is of critical importance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as the interaction between a patient's inhalation profile and the aerosol characteristics of an inhaler can affect drug delivery and lung deposition. This study assessed the in vitro aerosol characteristics of inhaler devices approved for the treatment of COPD, including a soft mist inhaler (SMI), pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), and dry powder inhalers (DPIs). METHODS: High-speed video recording was used to visualize and measure aerosol velocity and spray duration for nine different inhalers (one SMI, three pMDIs, and five DPIs), each containing dual or triple fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists and long-acting ß2-agonists, with or without an inhaled corticosteroid. Measurements were taken in triplicate at experimental flow rates of 30, 60, and 90 l/min. Optimal flow rates were defined based on pharmacopoeial testing requirements: 30 l/min for pMDIs and SMIs, and the rate achieving a 4-kPa pressure drop against internal inhaler resistance for DPIs. Comparison of aerosol plumes was based on the experimental flow rates closest to the optimal flow rates. RESULTS: The Respimat SMI had the slowest plume velocity (0.99 m/s) and longest spray duration (1447 ms) compared with pMDIs (velocity: 3.65-5.09 m/s; duration: 227-270 ms) and DPIs (velocity: 1.43-4.60 m/s; duration: 60-757 ms). With increasing flow rates, SMI aerosol duration was unaffected, but velocity increased (maximum 2.63 m/s), pMDI aerosol velocity and duration were unaffected, and DPI aerosol velocity tended to increase, with a more variable impact on duration. CONCLUSIONS: Aerosol characteristics (velocity and duration of aerosol plume) vary by inhaler type. Plume velocity was lower and spray duration longer for the SMI compared with pMDIs and DPIs. Increasing experimental flow rate was associated with faster plume velocity for DPIs and the SMI, with no or variable impact on plume duration, whereas pMDI aerosol velocity and duration were unaffected by increasing flow rate.

Guidance on Mitigating the Risk of Transmitting Respiratory Infections During Nebulization by the COPD Foundation Nebulizer Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Nebulizers are used commonly for inhaled drug delivery. Because they deliver medication through aerosol generation, clarification is needed on what constitutes safe aerosol delivery in infectious respiratory disease settings. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of understanding the safety and potential risks of aerosol-generating procedures. However, evidence supporting the increased risk of disease transmission with nebulized treatments is inconclusive, and inconsistent guidelines and differing opinions have left uncertainty regarding their use. Many clinicians opt for alternative devices, but this practice could impact outcomes negatively, especially for patients who may not derive full treatment benefit from handheld inhalers. Therefore, it is prudent to develop strategies that can be used during nebulized treatment to minimize the emission of fugitive aerosols, these comprising bioaerosols exhaled by infected individuals and medical aerosols generated by the device that also may be contaminated. This is particularly relevant for patient care in the context of a highly transmissible virus. RESEARCH QUESTION: How can potential risks of infections during nebulization be mitigated? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The COPD Foundation Nebulizer Consortium (CNC) was formed in 2020 to address uncertainties surrounding administration of nebulized medication. The CNC is an international, multidisciplinary collaboration of patient advocates, pulmonary physicians, critical care physicians, respiratory therapists, clinical scientists, and pharmacists from research centers, medical centers, professional societies, industry, and government agencies. The CNC developed this expert guidance to inform the safe use of nebulized therapies for patients and providers and to answer key questions surrounding medication delivery with nebulizers during pandemics or when exposure to common respiratory pathogens is anticipated. RESULTS: CNC members reviewed literature and guidelines regarding nebulization and developed two sets of guidance statements: one for the health care setting and one for the home environment. INTERPRETATION: Future studies need to explore the risk of disease transmission with fugitive aerosols associated with different nebulizer types in real patient care situations and to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation strategies.

Longitudinal Follow-Up of Participants With Tobacco Exposure and Preserved Spirometry.

Importance: People who smoked cigarettes may experience respiratory symptoms without spirometric airflow obstruction. These individuals are typically excluded from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) trials and lack evidence-based therapies. Objective: To define the natural history of persons with tobacco exposure and preserved spirometry (TEPS) and symptoms (symptomatic TEPS). Design, Setting, and Participants: SPIROMICS II was an extension of SPIROMICS I, a multicenter study of persons aged 40 to 80 years who smoked cigarettes (>20 pack-years) with or without COPD and controls without tobacco exposure or airflow obstruction. Participants were enrolled in SPIROMICS I and II from November 10, 2010, through July 31, 2015, and followed up through July 31, 2021. Exposures: Participants in SPIROMICS I underwent spirometry, 6-minute walk distance testing, assessment of respiratory symptoms, and computed tomography of the chest at yearly visits for 3 to 4 years. Participants in SPIROMICS II had 1 additional in-person visit 5 to 7 years after enrollment in SPIROMICS I. Respiratory symptoms were assessed with the COPD Assessment Test (range, 0 to 40; higher scores indicate more severe symptoms). Participants with symptomatic TEPS had normal spirometry (postbronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in the first second [FEV1] to forced vital capacity >0.70) and COPD Assessment Test scores of 10 or greater. Participants with asymptomatic TEPS had normal spirometry and COPD Assessment Test scores of less than 10. Patient-reported respiratory symptoms and exacerbations were assessed every 4 months via phone calls. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was assessment for accelerated decline in lung function (FEV1) in participants with symptomatic TEPS vs asymptomatic TEPS. Secondary outcomes included development of COPD defined by spirometry, respiratory symptoms, rates of respiratory exacerbations, and progression of computed tomographic-defined airway wall thickening or emphysema. Results: Of 1397 study participants, 226 had symptomatic TEPS (mean age, 60.1 [SD, 9.8] years; 134 were women [59%]) and 269 had asymptomatic TEPS (mean age, 63.1 [SD, 9.1] years; 134 were women [50%]). At a median follow-up of 5.76 years, the decline in FEV1 was -31.3 mL/y for participants with symptomatic TEPS vs -38.8 mL/y for those with asymptomatic TEPS (between-group difference, -7.5 mL/y [95% CI, -16.6 to 1.6 mL/y]). The cumulative incidence of COPD was 33.0% among participants with symptomatic TEPS vs 31.6% among those with asymptomatic TEPS (hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.46]). Participants with symptomatic TEPS had significantly more respiratory exacerbations than those with asymptomatic TEPS (0.23 vs 0.08 exacerbations per person-year, respectively; rate ratio, 2.38 [95% CI, 1.71 to 3.31], P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Participants with symptomatic TEPS did not have accelerated rates of decline in FEV1 or increased incidence of COPD vs those with asymptomatic TEPS, but participants with symptomatic TEPS did experience significantly more respiratory exacerbations over a median follow-up of 5.8 years.

Patterns of care in the management of high-risk COPD in the US (2011-2019): an observational study for the CONQUEST quality improvement program.

Background: In this study, we compare management of patients with high-risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the United States to national and international guidelines and quality standards, including the COllaboratioN on QUality improvement initiative for achieving Excellence in STandards of COPD care (CONQUEST). Methods: Patients were identified from the DARTNet Practice Performance Registry and categorized into three high-risk cohorts in each year from 2011 to 2019: newly diagnosed (≤12 months after diagnosis), already diagnosed, and patients with potential undiagnosed COPD. Patients were considered high-risk if they had a history of exacerbations or likely exacerbations (respiratory consult with prescribed medication). Descriptive statistics for 2019 are reported, along with annual trends. Findings: In 2019, 10% (n = 16,610/167,197) of patients met high-risk criteria. Evidence of spirometry for diagnosis was low; in 2019, 81% (n = 1228/1523) of patients newly diagnosed at high-risk had no record of spirometry/peak expiratory flow in the 12 months pre- or post-diagnosis and 43% (n = 651/1523) had no record of COPD symptom review. Among those newly and already diagnosed at high-risk, 52% (n = 4830/9350) had no evidence of COPD medication. Interpretation: Findings suggest inconsistent adherence to evidence-based guidelines, and opportunities to improve identification, documentation of services, assessment, therapeutic intervention, and follow-up of patients with COPD. Funding: This study was conducted by the Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute (OPRI) Pte Ltd and was partially funded by Optimum Patient Care Global and AstraZeneca Ltd. No funding was received by the Observational & Pragmatic Research Institute Pte Ltd (OPRI) for its contribution.

Impact of Marijuana Smoking on COPD Progression in a Cohort of Middle-Aged and Older Persons.

Background: Limited data are available regarding marijuana smoking's impact on the development or progression of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in middle-aged or older adults with a variable history of tobacco cigarette smoking. Methods: We divided ever-tobacco smoking participants in the SubPopulations and InteRmediate Outcomes In COPD Study (SPIROMICS) into 3 groups based on self-reported marijuana use: current, former, or never marijuana smokers (CMSs, FMSs or NMSs, respectively). Longitudinal data were analyzed in participants with ≥2 visits over a period of ≥52 weeks. Measurements: We compared CMSs, FMSs, and NMSs, and those with varying amounts of lifetime marijuana use. Mixed effects linear regression models were used to analyze changes in spirometry, symptoms, health status, and radiographic metrics; zero-inflated negative binomial models were used for exacerbation rates. All models were adjusted for age, sex, race, baseline tobacco smoking amount, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) %predicted. Results: Most participants were followed for ≥4 years. Annual rates of change in FEV1, incident COPD, respiratory symptoms, health status, radiographic extent of emphysema or air trapping, and total or severe exacerbations were not different between CMSs or FMSs versus NMSs or between those with any lifetime amount of marijuana use versus NMSs. Conclusions: Among SPIROMICS participants with or without COPD, neither former nor current marijuana smoking of any lifetime amount was associated with evidence of COPD progression or its development. Because of our study's limitations, these findings underscore the need for further studies to better understand longer-term effects of marijuana smoking in COPD.

Improvements in health status with revefenacin, a once-daily, nebulized, long-acting muscarinic antagonist for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Replicate, 12-week, phase 3 trials (0126 and 0127) of once-daily nebulized revefenacin 175 µg vs placebo demonstrated significant bronchodilation and improvements in health status in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This post hoc analysis evaluated improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) in both women and men. METHODS: Participants were pooled from the two 12-week studies (411 [51%] women and 401 [49%] men). Changes in PROs were assessed overall and separately in men and women. RESULTS: Revefenacin improved SGRQ and CAT total scores from baseline in both studies; improvement in CCQ total score reached significance only in 0126. In pooled data, a greater proportion of patients achieved clinically meaningful response in SGRQ score (≥4-unit decrease from baseline) with revefenacin vs placebo (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.1; P = 0.012). Clinically meaningful responses were also seen in CAT (≥2-unit decrease from baseline) and CCQ (≥0.4-unit decrease from baseline) scores with revefenacin vs placebo. When stratified by sex, improvements from baseline in SGRQ, CAT, and CCQ scores following revefenacin vs placebo reached statistical significance only in women. CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance treatment with revefenacin improved health status in patients with moderate to very severe COPD; however, the effect was more pronounced for women than men. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: NCT02459080; NCT02512510.

Low Peak Inspiratory Flow Rates are Common Among COPD Inpatients and are Associated with Increased Healthcare Resource Utilization: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can have low peak inspiratory flow (PIF), especially after hospitalization for acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD). Purpose: To characterize patients hospitalized for AECOPD, and to assess the prevalence of low PIF, changes in PIF after hospitalization, and the association of low PIF with healthcare resource utilization (HRU) outcomes. Patients and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using electronic health record data of hospitalized COPD patients in the Wake Forest Baptist Health system (01/01/2017 through 06/30/2020). Patients with a first eligible AECOPD hospitalization (index hospitalization) who were discharged before 05/31/2020 were included. PIF was measured using the In-Check DIAL™ at both medium-low resistance (R-2) and high resistance (R-5) during the index hospitalization. For R-2 and R-5, PIF was divided into low PIF (< 60 L/min; < 30 L/min) and high PIF (≥ 60 L/min; ≥ 30 L/min) groups. The primary outcome was the prevalence of low PIF. The stability of PIF after hospitalization was described. Adjusted regression models evaluated associations between low PIF and subsequent 30-day readmissions, 90-day readmissions, and HRU outcomes, including hospitalizations, emergency department visits, inpatient days, and intensive care unit (ICU) days. Results: In total, 743 patients with PIF measured at R-2 and R-5 during a AECOPD hospitalization were included. The prevalence of low PIF was 56.9% at R-2 and 14.7% at R-5. PIF values were relatively stable after hospitalization. Adjusted analyses showed significant increases in HRU (all-cause hospitalizations [31%], COPD hospitalizations [33%], COPD inpatient days [46%], and COPD ICU days [24%]) during the follow-up period among patients with low PIF (< 60 L/min) at R-2. The 30- and 90-day readmission risks were similar between patients with low PIF and high PIF. Conclusion: Low PIF is common among patients hospitalized for AECOPD, relatively stable after hospital discharge, and associated with increased HRU.

Respiratory Symptoms among US Adults: a Cross-Sectional Health Survey Study.

INTRODUCTION: Data collected through ongoing, state-based, cross-sectional health surveys could be used to better understand the contribution of respiratory symptoms to impaired health among the US adult population. METHODS: We used the 2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System telephone health survey in four states (Kentucky, Florida, South Carolina, Texas) to describe the relationship between symptoms, associated factors such as tobacco smoking, and health impairments. Self-reported productive cough, shortness of breath (SOB), and dyspnea on exertion (DOE) were categorized as minimal, moderate, or severe. Data were analyzed using multiple logistic regression models with age as a covariate to assess relationships of symptoms with other factors. RESULTS: Among adults ≥ 18 years, respiratory impairment [current asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or a current moderate or severe symptom] occurred in 39.1% of the population. More than half of adults reporting moderate or severe symptoms had not been diagnosed with asthma or COPD, particularly with DOE and productive cough. Subjects were at greater risk of moderate and severe SOB or productive cough with increasing age, prolonged smoking duration (≥ 20 years), being an ever-smoker, or if reporting COPD, current asthma, or any other comorbidity except cancer. Morbid obesity [body mass index (BMI) > 35 kg/m2] was associated with severe DOE at a rate similar to current asthma or COPD (25.6%, 95% CI 20.9-30.3%; 20.8%, 95% CI 16.4-25.1%; 21.3%, 95% CI 17.5-25.1%, respectively); it was the most common cause of DOE. SOB was associated with worse general health impairment and limited ambulation compared with other symptoms. Tobacco smoking prevalence and race varied among states, affecting symptom prevalence. CONCLUSION: In the largest US survey in decades, we provide a current perspective of respiratory symptoms among adults of all ages. While known risk factors were apparent, low-risk persons also frequently reported symptoms and impairments.

Measuring Peak Inspiratory Flow in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are breath actuated, and patients using DPIs need to generate an optimal inspiratory flow during the inhalation maneuver for effective drug delivery to the lungs. However, practical and standardized recommendations for measuring peak inspiratory flow (PIF)-a potential indicator for effective DPI use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)-are lacking. To evaluate recommended PIF assessment approaches, we reviewed the Instructions for Use of the In-Check™ DIAL and the prescribing information for eight DPIs approved for use in the treatment of COPD in the United States. To evaluate applied PIF assessment approaches, we conducted a PubMed search from inception to August 31, 2021, for reports of clinical and real-life studies where PIF was measured using the In-Check™ DIAL or through a DPI in patients with COPD. Evaluation of collective sources, including 47 applicable studies, showed that instructions related to the positioning of the patient with their DPI, instructions for exhalation before the inhalation maneuver, the inhalation maneuver itself, and post-inhalation breath-hold times varied, and in many instances, appeared vague and/or incomplete. We observed considerable variation in how PIF was measured in clinical and real-life studies, underscoring the need for a standardized method of PIF measurement. Standardization of technique will facilitate comparisons among studies. Based on these findings and our clinical and research experience, we propose specific recommendations for PIF measurement to standardize the process and better ensure accurate and reliable PIF values in clinical trials and in daily clinical practice.

Will Remotely Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation Water Down Its Effectiveness?

Despite numerous benefits, traditional Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) as a resource remains underutilized in chronic lung disease. Less than 3% of eligible candidates for PR attend one or more sessions after hospitalization due to many barriers, including the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging alternative models of PR delivery such as home-based PR, tele-rehabilitation, web-based PR, or hybrid models could help address these barriers. Numerous studies have tested the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of these methods, but there is wide variability across studies and methods. We conducted a literature review to help determine if these alternative delivery methods watered down the effectiveness of PR. To evaluate the effectiveness of remotely based PR, the authors performed a literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case series using PubMed, CINAHL, and Medline to identify relevant articles through 1 May 2021. Twenty-six applicable studies were found in which 11 compared tele-rehabilitation to conventional clinic-based PR; 11 evaluated tele-rehabilitation using the patient's baseline status as control; and four compared tele-rehabilitation to no rehabilitation. Despite the different technologies used across studies, tele-rehabilitation was found to be both a feasible and an efficacious option for select patients with lung disease. Outcomes across these studies demonstrated similar benefits to traditional PR programs. Thus the existing data does not show that remotely based PR waters down the effectiveness of conventional PR. Use of remotely based PR is a feasible and effective option to deliver PR, especially for patients with significant barriers to conventional clinic-based PR. Additional, well-conducted RCTs are needed to answer the questions regarding its efficacy, safety, cost-effectiveness and who, among patients with COPD and other lung diseases, will derive the maximum benefit.

Novel LRRK2 mutations and other rare, non-BAP1-related candidate tumor predisposition gene variants in high-risk cancer families with mesothelioma and other tumors.

There is irrefutable evidence that germline BRCA1-associated protein 1 gene (BAP1) mutations contribute to malignant mesothelioma (MM) susceptibility. However, BAP1 mutations are not found in all cases with evidence of familial MM or in other high-risk cancer families affected by various cancers, including MM. The goal of this study was to use whole genome sequencing (WGS) to determine the frequency and types of germline gene variants occurring in 12 MM patients who were selected from a series of 141 asbestos-exposed MM patients with a family history of cancer but without a germline BAP1 mutation. WGS was also performed on two MM cases, a proband and sibling, from a previously reported family with multiple cases of MM without the inheritance of a predisposing BAP1 mutation. Altogether, germline DNA sequencing variants were identified in 21 cancer-related genes in 10 of the 13 probands. Germline indel, splice site and missense mutations and two large deletions were identified. Among the 13 MM index cases, 6 (46%) exhibited one or more predicted pathogenic mutations. Affected genes encode proteins involved in DNA repair (ATM, ATR, BRCA2, BRIP1, CHEK2, MLH3, MUTYH, POLE, POLE4, POLQ and XRCC1), chromatin modification (ARID1B, DNMT3A, JARID2 and SETD1B) or other cellular pathways: leucine-rich repeat kinase 2 gene (LRRK2) (two cases) and MSH4. Notably, somatic truncating mutation or deletions of LRRK2 were occasionally found in MMs in The Cancer Genome Atlas, and the expression of LRRK2 was undetectable or downregulated in a majority of primary MMs and MM cell lines we examined, implying that loss of LRRK2 expression is a newly recognized tumor suppressor alteration in MM.

The Role of ICS/LABA Fixed-Dose Combinations in the Treatment of Asthma and COPD: Bioequivalence of a Generic Fluticasone Propionate-Salmeterol Device.

Both asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are inflammatory chronic respiratory conditions with high rates of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The objectives of this review are to briefly describe the pathophysiology and epidemiology of asthma and COPD, discuss guideline recommendations for uncontrolled disease, and review a new generic option for the treatment of asthma and COPD. Although mild forms of these diseases may be controlled with as-needed pharmacotherapy, uncontrolled or persistent asthma and moderate or severe COPD uncontrolled by bronchodilators with elevated eosinophilia or frequent exacerbations may require intervention with combination therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta agonists (LABAs), according to international guidelines. Fixed-dose combinations of ICS/LABA are commonly prescribed for both conditions, with fluticasone propionate (FP) and salmeterol forming a cornerstone of many treatment plans. An oral inhalation powder containing the combination of FP and salmeterol has been available as Advair Diskus® in the United States for almost 20 years, and the first and only substitutable generic version of this product has recently been approved for use: Wixela™ Inhub™. Bioequivalence of Wixela Inhub and Advair Diskus has been established. Furthermore, the Inhub inhaler was shown to be robust and easy to use, suggesting that Wixela Inhub may provide an alternative option to Advair Diskus for patients with asthma or COPD requiring intervention with an ICS/LABA.

Long-Term Noninvasive Ventilation in Chronic Stable Hypercapnic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline.

Background: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is used for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic hypercapnia. However, evidence for clinical efficacy and optimal management of therapy is limited.Target Audience: Patients with COPD, clinicians who care for them, and policy makers.Methods: We summarized evidence addressing five PICO (patients, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach was used to evaluate the certainty in evidence and generate actionable recommendations. Recommendations were formulated by a panel of pulmonary and sleep physicians, respiratory therapists, and methodologists using the Evidence-to-Decision framework.Recommendations:1) We suggest the use of nocturnal NIV in addition to usual care for patients with chronic stable hypercapnic COPD (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty); 2) we suggest that patients with chronic stable hypercapnic COPD undergo screening for obstructive sleep apnea before initiation of long-term NIV (conditional recommendation, very low certainty); 3) we suggest not initiating long-term NIV during an admission for acute-on-chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure, favoring instead reassessment for NIV at 2-4 weeks after resolution (conditional recommendation, low certainty); 4) we suggest not using an in-laboratory overnight polysomnogram to titrate NIV in patients with chronic stable hypercapnic COPD who are initiating NIV (conditional recommendation, very low certainty); and 5) we suggest NIV with targeted normalization of PaCO2 in patients with hypercapnic COPD on long-term NIV (conditional recommendation, low certainty).Conclusions: This expert panel provides evidence-based recommendations addressing the use of NIV in patients with COPD and chronic stable hypercapnic respiratory failure.

In Vitro Effect of Different Airflow Rates on the Aerosol Properties of Nebulized Glycopyrrolate in the eFlow® Closed System and Tiotropium Delivered in the HandiHaler®.

INTRODUCTION: Personalized therapy for patients with COPD requires appropriate choice of drug and delivery device. Inhalers and nebulizers vary in their drug delivery characteristics, particularly the need for passive or active patient inhalation for appropriate drug dispersal and delivery. In this in vitro analysis, we assessed the aerosol performance and drug delivery of two long-acting muscarinic antagonists, glycopyrrolate (GLY; 25 µg solution; 1 ml) and tiotropium (TIO; 18 µg powder) through their respective delivery systems: the eFlow® Closed System (CS) vibrating membrane nebulizer and the HandiHaler® dry-powder inhaler (DPI). METHODS: The aerosol performances of the eFlow® CS nebulizer and the HandiHaler® were determined using the Next Generation cascade Impactor. The delivered dose of GLY and TIO was determined using different breathing patterns, which varied in tidal volume and peak inspiratory flow rate, respectively, to simulate breathing conditions ranging from normal to severe obstruction. RESULTS: Aerodynamic particle analysis showed generally similar mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD, range, 3.6-4.6 µm) and fine particle fraction (FPF, range, 48.2%-63.7%) with GLY delivered using the eFlow® CS nebulizer under all breathing patterns tested. TIO, delivered via the HandiHaler®, showed variations in MMAD (range, 3.8-5.8 µm) and FPF (range, 16.1%-32.4%) under different inspiratory flow rates. The majority of GLY was deposited in stages 2-5 of the impactor, which corresponds with particle sizes in the respirable range (< 5 µm), whereas a large proportion of TIO was deposited in the throat/mouthpiece pre-separator, irrespective of test conditions. The median residual dose of GLY with eFlow® CS was notably lower compared to that of TIO with HandiHaler® (2.4%-4.4% vs. 40%-67%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These simulation results highlight the different deposition patterns generated by a DPI device and a vibrating membrane nebulizer, which may help inform device selection and treatment decision in COPD management.

Effect of Gender on Lung Function and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients with COPD Receiving Nebulized Glycopyrrolate.

Purpose: The clinical manifestation of COPD can differ by gender, with women experiencing worse lung function and health-related quality of life than men. Additionally, women tend to report more symptoms given the same disease severity. Accordingly, the impact of gender on efficacy and safety in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD was examined following 12 weeks of nebulized glycopyrrolate (GLY) 25 µg twice daily (BID) or placebo. Patients and Methods: GLY and placebo pooled data from the replicate 12-week GOLDEN 3 and 4 studies (n=861) were grouped by gender. Endpoints reported were change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and EXAcerbations of COPD Tool-Respiratory Symptoms (EXACT-RS) total scores. Safety was evaluated by reviewing the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs. Results: Men (placebo: 54.7%; GLY: 56.1%) were generally older with a greater proportion of high cardiovascular risk and use of background long-acting ß2-agonists or inhaled corticosteroids. GLY treatment resulted in significant, clinically important improvements in trough FEV1, regardless of gender. Patients treated with GLY reported significant improvements in SGRQ total score, irrespective of gender; however, the improvement was numerically higher in women. Although EXACT-RS improved in both genders, only women experienced a significant improvement. Overall, GLY was well tolerated with a numerically lower incidence of AEs in men than women. Conclusion: Treatment with nebulized GLY resulted in lung function, SGRQ total score, and EXACT-RS total score improvements regardless of gender. However, only EXACT-RS showed significantly greater improvements in women compared with men. Treatment with GLY was generally well tolerated across genders. These data support the efficacy and safety of GLY 25 µg BID in patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD, independent of gender. Gender similarities in airflow improvement and differences in symptom-reporting augment the evidence supporting the consideration of individualized treatment plans for COPD patients.