Opioids in patients with COPD and refractory dyspnea: literature review and design of a multicenter double blind study of low dosed morphine and fentanyl (MoreFoRCOPD).

BACKGROUND: Refractory dyspnea or breathlessness is a common symptom in patients with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with a high negative impact on quality of life (QoL). Low dosed opioids have been investigated for refractory dyspnea in COPD and other life-limiting conditions, and some positive effects were demonstrated. However, upon first assessment of the literature, the quality of evidence in COPD seemed low or inconclusive, and focused mainly on morphine which may have more side effects than other opioids such as fentanyl. For the current publication we performed a systematic literature search. We searched for placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials investigating opioids for refractory dyspnea caused by COPD. We included trials reporting on dyspnea, health status and/or QoL. Three of fifteen trials demonstrated a significant positive effect of opioids on dyspnea. Only one of four trials reporting on QoL or health status, demonstrated a significant positive effect. Two-thirds of included trials investigated morphine. We found no placebo-controlled RCT on transdermal fentanyl. Subsequently, we hypothesized that both fentanyl and morphine provide a greater reduction of dyspnea than placebo, and that fentanyl has less side effects than morphine. METHODS: We describe the design of a robust, multi-center, double blind, double-dummy, cross-over, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial with three study arms investigating transdermal fentanyl 12 mcg/h and morphine sustained-release 10 mg b.i.d. The primary endpoint is change in daily mean dyspnea sensation measured on a numeric rating scale. Secondary endpoints are change in daily worst dyspnea, QoL, anxiety, sleep quality, hypercapnia, side effects, patient preference, and continued opioid use. Sixty patients with severe stable COPD and refractory dyspnea (FEV1 < 50%, mMRC ≥ 3, on optimal standard therapy) will be included. DISCUSSION: Evidence for opioids for refractory dyspnea in COPD is not as robust as usually appreciated. We designed a study comparing both the more commonly used opioid morphine, and transdermal fentanyl to placebo. The cross-over design will help to get a better impression of patient preferences. We believe our study design to investigate both sustained-release morphine and transdermal fentanyl for refractory dyspnea will provide valuable information for better treatment of refractory dyspnea in COPD. Trial registration NCT03834363 (ClinicalTrials.gov), registred at 7 Feb 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03834363 .

External validation of NTCP-models for radiation pneumonitis in lung cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models can be used to estimate the risk of radiation pneumonitis (RP). The aim of this study was to externally validate the most frequently used prediction models for RP, i.e., the QUANTEC and APPELT models, in a large cohort of lung cancer patients treated with IMRT or VMAT. [1-2] METHODS AND MATERIALS: This prospective cohort study, included lung cancer patients treated between 2013 and 2018. A closed testing procedure was performed to test the need for model updating. To improve model performance, modification or removal of variables was considered. Performance measures included tests for goodness of fit, discrimination, and calibration. RESULTS: In this cohort of 612 patients, the incidence of RP ≥ grade 2 was 14.5%. For the QUANTEC-model, recalibration was recommended which resulted in a revised intercept and adjusted regression coefficient (from 0.126 to 0.224) of the mean lung dose (MLD),. The APPELT-model needed revision including model updating with modification and elimination of variables. After revision, the New RP-model included the following predictors (and regression coefficients): MLD (B = 0.250), age (B = 0.049, and smoking status (B = 0.902). The discrimination of the updated APPELT-model was higher compared to the recalibrated QUANTEC-model (AUC: 0.79 vs. 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that both the QUANTEC- and APPELT-model needed revision. Next to changes of the intercept and regression coefficients, the APPELT model improved further by model updating and performed better than the recalibrated QUANTEC model. This New RP-model is widely applicable containing non-tumour site specific variables, which can easily be collected.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Erlotinib versus Docetaxel in Patients with Advanced Squamous Cell Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Failing First-Line Platinum-Based Doublet Chemotherapy Stratified by VeriStrat Good versus VeriStrat Poor. The European Thoracic Oncology Platform (ETOP) EMPHASIS-lung Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Docetaxel and erlotinib are registered second-line treatments for wild-type EGFR NSCLC. Previous studies suggested a predictive value of the VeriStrat test in second-line therapy of NSCLC, classifying patients as either VeriStrat good or VeriStrat poor. EMPHASIS-lung aimed at exploring this predictive effect in patients with squamous cell NSCLC. The trial closed prematurely because of low accrual and results from other trials. Our analysis includes an exploratory combined analysis with results from the PROSE trial. METHODS: EMPHASIS-lung was a randomized phase III multicenter trial exploring the differential effect of second-line erlotinib versus docetaxel on progression-free survival (PFS) in VeriStrat good versus VeriStrat poor patients with squamous cell NSCLC. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were randomized, with 72.5% categorized as VeriStrat good. Patient characteristics were balanced between VeriStrat status and treatment groups. The median PFS times with docetaxel and erlotinib treatment in the VeriStrat good cohort were 4.1 and 1.6 months, respectively, versus 1.9 and 2.1 months, respectively, in the VeriStrat poor cohort. The median overall survival (OS) times with docetaxel and erlotinib treatment in the VeriStrat good cohort were 7.8 and 8.4 months, respectively, and 4.4 and 5.2 months, respectively, in the VeriStrat poor cohort. An additional exploratory analysis was performed; in it, 47 patients from the squamous cell subgroup of PROSE were included in a combined analysis, contributing with 45 PFS and 41 OS events. CONCLUSIONS: The final analysis of EMPHASIS-lung did not show a differential effect on PFS for erlotinib versus docetaxel stratified by VeriStrat status. Similarly, in the combined analysis, no significant treatment by VeriStrat status interaction was observed (interaction p = 0.24 for PFS and 0.45 for OS, stratified by study).

An instrument dedicated for modelling of pulmonary radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiotherapy plays a pivotal role in lung cancer treatment. Selection of patients for new (radio)therapeutic options aiming at improving outcomes requires reliable and validated prediction models. We present the implementation of a prospective platform for evaluation and development of lung radiotherapy (proPED-LUNG) as an instrument enabling multidimensional predictive modelling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ProPED-LUNG was designed to comprise relevant baseline and follow up data of patients receiving pulmonary radiotherapy with curative intent. Patient characteristics, diagnostic and staging information, treatment parameters including full dose-volume-histograms, tumour control, survival, and toxicity are scored. Besides physician-rated data, a range of patient-rated data regarding symptoms and health-related quality-of-life are collected. RESULTS: After 18 months of accrual, 315 patients have been included (accrual rate, 18 per month). Of the first hundred patients included, 70 received conformal (chemo)radiotherapy and 30 underwent stereotactic radiotherapy. Compliance at 3 and 6 months follow-up was 96-100% for patient-rated, and 81-94% for physician-rated assessments. For data collection, 0.4 FTE were allocated in a 183 FTE department (0.2%). CONCLUSIONS: ProPED-LUNG is feasible with high compliance rates and yields a large amount of high quality prospective disease-related, treatment-related, patient- and physician-rated data which can be used to evaluate new developments in pulmonary radiotherapy.

[Metal fume fever, often unrecognized]. / Metaaldampkoorts, vaak niet herkend.

BACKGROUND: Metal fume fever is an occupational disease caused by inhalation of volatile metal oxides. Clinically there is a strong resemblance to influenza. It is thought that metal fume fever occurs much more frequently than it is reported. The symptoms are self-limiting without treatment, disappearing within 24-48 hours without residual symptoms. CASE DESCRIPTION: A male 35-year-old construction worker had cut galvanized steel plates in a closed environment. He had a flu-like illness with fever, leucocytosis and hypoxemia. The symptoms resolved completely without treatment within 18 hours. CONCLUSION: Metal fume fever is a frequently occurring disease but is often overlooked. It is important to ask about exposure to metal fumes in certain occupational groups in order to make the correct diagnosis. In this way measures can be taken to avoid exposure to metal oxides and to prevent recurrence of the disease.