Bronchial Thermoplasty in Patients With Severe Asthma at 5 Years: The Post-FDA Approval Clinical Trial Evaluating Bronchial Thermoplasty in Severe Persistent Asthma Study.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial thermoplasty is a device-based treatment for subjects ≥ 18 years of age with severe asthma poorly controlled with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. The Post-FDA Approval Clinical Trial Evaluating Bronchial Thermoplasty in Severe Persistent Asthma (PAS2) study collected data on patients with severe asthma undergoing this procedure. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the 5-year efficacy and safety results in patients with severe asthma who have undergone bronchial thermoplasty? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective, open-label, observational, multicenter study conducted in the United States and Canada. Subjects 18 to 65 years of age who were taking inhaled corticosteroids ≥ 1,000 µg/d (beclomethasone or equivalent) and long-acting beta-agonists ≥ 80 µg/d (salmeterol or equivalent) were included. Severe exacerbations, hospitalization, ED visits, and medication usage were evaluated for the 12 months prior to and at years 1 through 5 posttreatment. Spirometry was evaluated at baseline and at years 1 through 5 posttreatment. RESULTS: A total of 284 subjects were enrolled at 27 centers; 227 subjects (80%) completed 5 years of follow-up. By year 5 posttreatment, the proportion of subjects with severe exacerbations, ED visits, and hospitalizations was 42.7%, 7.9%, and 4.8%, respectively, compared with 77.8%, 29.4%, and 16.1% in the 12 months prior to treatment. The proportion of subjects on maintenance oral corticosteroids decreased from 19.4% at baseline to 9.7% at 5 years. Analyses of subgroups based on baseline clinical and biomarker characteristics revealed a statistically significant clinical improvement among all subgroups. INTERPRETATION: Five years after treatment, subjects experienced decreases in severe exacerbations, hospitalizations, ED visits, and corticosteroid exposure. All subgroups demonstrated clinically significant improvement, suggesting that bronchial thermoplasty improves asthma control in different asthma phenotypes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01350336; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Safety and effectiveness of bronchial thermoplasty after 10 years in patients with persistent asthma (BT10+): a follow-up of three randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial thermoplasty is an endoscopic treatment for uncontrolled asthma. Previous randomised clinical trials have shown that bronchial thermoplasty reduces severe exacerbations in people with asthma. However, the long-term efficacy and safety of bronchial thermoplasty beyond 5 years is unknown. The BT10+ study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of bronchial thermoplasty after 10 or more years of follow-up. METHODS: BT10+ was an international, multicentre, follow-up study of participants who were previously enrolled in the AIR, RISA, and AIR2 trials and who had 10 or more years of follow-up since bronchial thermoplasty treatment. Data on patient demographics, quality of life, lung function, CT scans (AIR2 participants only), severe exacerbations, and health-care use during the previous year were collected at the BT10+ 10-year outcomes study visit. The primary effectiveness endpoint was durability of the thermoplasty treatment effect, determined by comparing the proportion of participants who had severe exacerbations during the first and fifth years after bronchial thermoplasty treatment with the proportion of participants who had severe exacerbations during the 12-month period before the BT10+ visit. The primary safety endpoint was the absence of clinically significant post-treatment respiratory image changes after bronchial thermoplasty, defined as bronchiectasis or bronchial stenosis as confirmed by pulmonary volumetric high-resolution CT scan at the BT10+ visit (AIR2 participants only). All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03243292. The last patient was enrolled on Dec 11, 2018. The last patient completed follow-up on Jan 10, 2019. FINDINGS: The BT10+ study enrolled 192 (45%) of the 429 participants who were enrolled in the AIR, RISA, and AIR2 trials. The BT10+ participants comprised 136 who received bronchial thermoplasty (52% of the 260 participants who received bronchial thermoplasty in the original trials), and 56 sham or control participants (33% of 169 from the original trials). 18 (32%) sham or control participants received bronchial thermoplasty after the previous trials concluded. The participants included in BT10+ were followed for 10·8-15·6 years (median 12·1 years) post-treatment. Baseline characteristics were similar between participants enrolled in BT10+ and those not enrolled. Participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty had similar proportions of severe exacerbations at the BT10+ visit (34 [25%] of 136 participants) compared with 1 year (33 [24%] of 135 participants; difference 0·6%, 95% CI -9·7 to 10·8) and 5 years (28 [22%] of 130 participants; difference 3·5%, -6·7% to 13·6) after treatment. Quality of life measurements and spirometry were similar between year 1, year 5, and the BT10+ visit. At the BT10+ study visit, pulmonary high-resolution CT scans from AIR2 participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty showed that 13 (13%) of 97 participants had bronchiectasis. When compared with baseline high-resolution CT scans, six (7%) of 89 participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty who did not have bronchiectasis at baseline had developed bronchiectasis after treatment (5 classified as mild, 1 classified as moderate). Participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty after the original study and participants in the sham or control group also had reductions in severe exacerbations at the BT10+ visit compared with baseline. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that efficacy of bronchial thermoplasty is sustained for 10 years or more, with an acceptable safety profile. Therefore, bronchial thermoplasty is a long-acting therapeutic option for patients with asthma that remains uncontrolled despite optimised medical treatment. FUNDING: Boston Scientific.

Currently available first-line drug therapies for treating pancreatic cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the 9th most common cancer in the United States and the 4th most common cause of cancer-related death given its poor prognosis. AREAS COVERED: The authors have performed a literature search for pertinent published clinical trials, ongoing Phase 3 clinical trials, and current treatment guidelines using PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov, and NCCN, ASCO, ESMO, and JPS websites. The review itself discusses landmark studies and ongoing research into the chemotherapy regimens recommended by each oncologic society. The authors also examine drugs that were promising but failed in Phase 3 trials and those currently being investigated. Finally, the authors provide their expert opinion on the subject and provide their future perspectives. EXPERT OPINION: While advances in chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer have been limited in comparison to other cancers, there have been improvements in survival. Combination therapy and a goal of R0 resection are key elements to extend life. Novel agents directed at the unique properties of pancreatic cancer are promising.

Drivers of Cost for Pancreatic Surgery: It's Not About Hospital Volume.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes for pancreatic resection have been studied extensively due to the high morbidity and mortality rates, with high-volume centers achieving superior outcomes. Ongoing investigations include healthcare costs, given the national focus on reducing expenditures. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the relationships between pancreatic surgery costs with perioperative outcomes and volume status. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 27,653 patients who underwent elective pancreatic resections from October 2013 to June 2017 using the Vizient database. Costs were calculated from charges using cost-charge ratios and adjusted for geographic variation. Generalized linear modeling adjusting for demographic, clinical, and operation characteristics was performed to assess the relationships between cost and length of stay, complications, in-hospital mortality, readmissions, and hospital volume. High-volume centers were defined as hospitals performing ≥ 19 operations annually. RESULTS: The unadjusted mean cost for pancreatic resection and corresponding hospitalization was $20,352. There were no differences in mean costs for pancreatectomies performed at high- and low-volume centers [- $1175, 95% confidence interval (CI) - $3254 to $904, p = 0.27]. In subgroup analysis comparing adjusted mean costs at high- and low-volume centers, there was no difference among patients without an adverse outcome (- $99, 95% CI - $1612 to 1414, p = 0.90), one or more adverse outcomes (- $1586, 95% CI - $4771 to 1599, p = 0.33), or one or more complications (- $2835, 95% CI - $7588 to 1919, p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: While high-volume hospitals have fewer adverse outcomes, there is no relationship between surgical volume and costs, which suggests that, in itself, surgical volume is not an indicator of improved healthcare efficiency reflected by lower costs. Patient referral to high-volume centers may not reduce overall healthcare expenditures for pancreatic operations.

Functional recovery of completely denervated muscle: implications for innervation of tissue-engineered muscle.

Tissue-engineered muscle has been proposed as a solution to repair volumetric muscle defects and to restore muscle function. To achieve functional recovery, engineered muscle tissue requires integration of the host nerve. In this study, we investigated whether denervated muscle, which is analogous to tissue-engineered muscle tissue, can be reinnervated and can recover muscle function using an in vivo model of denervation followed by neurotization. The outcomes of this investigation may provide insights on the ability of tissue-engineered muscle to integrate with the host nerve and acquire normal muscle function. Eighty Lewis rats were classified into three groups: a normal control group (n=16); a denervated group in which sciatic innervations to the gastrocnemius muscle were disrupted (n=32); and a transplantation group in which the denervated gastrocnemius was repaired with a common peroneal nerve graft into the muscle (n=32). Neurofunctional behavior, including extensor postural thrust (EPT), withdrawal reflex latency (WRL), and compound muscle action potential (CMAP), as well as histological evaluations using alpha-bungarotoxin and anti-NF-200 were performed at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks (n=8) after surgery. We found that EPT was improved by transplantation of the nerve grafts, but the EPT values in the transplanted animals at 12 weeks postsurgery were still significantly lower than those measured for the normal control group at 4 weeks (EPT, 155.0±38.9 vs. 26.3±13.8 g, p<0.001; WRL, 2.7±2.30 vs. 8.3±5.5 s, p=0.027). In addition, CMAP latency and amplitude significantly improved with time after surgery in the transplantation group (p<0.001, one-way analysis of variance), and at 12 weeks postsurgery, CMAP latency and amplitude were not statistically different from normal control values (latency, 0.9±0.0 vs. 1.3±0.7 ms, p=0.164; amplitude, 30.2±7.0 vs. 46.4±26.9 mV, p=0.184). Histologically, regeneration of neuromuscular junctions was seen in the transplantation group. This study indicates that transplanted nerve tissue is able to regenerate neuromuscular junctions within denervated muscle, and thus the muscle can recover partial function. However, the function of the denervated muscle remains in the subnormal range even at 12 weeks after direct nerve transplantation. These results suggest that tissue-engineered muscle, which is similarly denervated, could be innervated and become functional in vivo if it is properly integrated with the host nerve.

Tissue engineering: current strategies and future directions.

Novel therapies resulting from regenerative medicine and tissue engineering technology may offer new hope for patients with injuries, end-stage organ failure, or other clinical issues. Currently, patients with diseased and injured organs are often treated with transplanted organs. However, there is a shortage of donor organs that is worsening yearly as the population ages and as the number of new cases of organ failure increases. Scientists in the field of regenerative medicine and tissue engineering are now applying the principles of cell transplantation, material science, and bioengineering to construct biological substitutes that can restore and maintain normal function in diseased and injured tissues. In addition, the stem cell field is a rapidly advancing part of regenerative medicine, and new discoveries in this field create new options for this type of therapy. For example, new types of stem cells, such as amniotic fluid and placental stem cells that can circumvent the ethical issues associated with embryonic stem cells, have been discovered. The process of therapeutic cloning and the creation of induced pluripotent cells provide still other potential sources of stem cells for cell-based tissue engineering applications. Although stem cells are still in the research phase, some therapies arising from tissue engineering endeavors that make use of autologous, adult cells have already entered the clinical setting, indicating that regenerative medicine holds much promise for the future.

Elder abuse and oppression: voices of marginalized elders.

The voices of elderly people from marginalized groups are rarely solicited, and the relationship between elder maltreatment and belonging to an oppressed group has not been adequately investigated. This article reviews the literature on oppression and elder abuse and describes findings from the secondary analysis of data from focus group discussions on elder abuse held with marginalized older adults and (quasi)professionals caring for them in two Canadian cities. Participants identified that increased vulnerability to elder abuse was related to oppression experienced as a consequence of ageism, sexism, ableism/disability, racism, heterosexism/homophobia, classism, and various intersecting types of oppression.

Poly(beta-aminosulfonamides) as gene delivery vectors: synthesis and in vitro screening.

A series of poly(beta-aminosulfonamides) was synthesized and demonstrated to be efficient in vitro transfection reagents.

A sense of danger from radiation.

Tissue damage caused by exposure to pathogens, chemicals and physical agents such as ionizing radiation triggers production of generic "danger" signals that mobilize the innate and acquired immune system to deal with the intrusion and effect tissue repair with the goal of maintaining the integrity of the tissue and the body. Ionizing radiation appears to do the same, but less is known about the role of "danger" signals in tissue responses to this agent. This review deals with the nature of putative "danger" signals that may be generated by exposure to ionizing radiation and their significance. There are a number of potential consequences of "danger" signaling in response to radiation exposure. "Danger" signals could mediate the pathogenesis of, or recovery from, radiation damage. They could alter intrinsic cellular radiosensitivity or initiate radioadaptive responses to subsequent exposure. They may spread outside the locally damaged site and mediate bystander or "out-of-field" radiation effects. Finally, an important aspect of classical "danger" signals is that they link initial nonspecific immune responses in a pathological site to the development of specific adaptive immunity. Interestingly, in the case of radiation, there is little evidence that "danger" signals efficiently translate radiation-induced tumor cell death into the generation of tumor-specific immunity or normal tissue damage into autoimmunity. The suggestion is that radiation-induced "danger" signals may be inadequate in this respect or that radiation interferes with the generation of specific immunity. There are many issues that need to be resolved regarding "danger" signaling after exposure to ionizing radiation. Evidence of their importance is, in some areas, scant, but the issues are worthy of consideration, if for no other reason than that manipulation of these pathways has the potential to improve the therapeutic benefit of radiation therapy. This article focuses on how normal tissues and tumors sense and respond to danger from ionizing radiation, on the nature of the signals that are sent, and on the impact on the eventual consequences of exposure.