A formula for predicting emphysema extent in combined idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema.

BACKGROUND: No single pulmonary function test captures the functional effect of emphysema in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Without experienced radiologists, other methods are needed to determine emphysema extent. Here, we report the development and validation of a formula to predict emphysema extent in patients with IPF and emphysema. METHODS: The development cohort included 76 patients with combined IPF and emphysema at the Royal Brompton Hospital, London, United Kingdom. The formula was derived using stepwise regression to generate the weighted combination of pulmonary function data that fitted best with emphysema extent on high-resolution computed tomography. Test cohorts included patients from two clinical trials (n = 455 [n = 174 with emphysema]; NCT00047645, NCT00075998) and a real-world cohort from the Royal Brompton Hospital (n = 191 [n = 110 with emphysema]). The formula is only applicable for patients with IPF and concomitant emphysema and accordingly was not used to detect the presence or absence of emphysema. RESULTS: The formula was: predicted emphysema extent = 12.67 + (0.92 x percent predicted forced vital capacity) - (0.65 x percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second) - (0.52 x percent predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity). A significant relationship between the formula and observed emphysema extent was found in both cohorts (R2 = 0.25, P < 0.0001; R2 = 0.47, P < 0.0001, respectively). In both, the formula better predicted observed emphysema extent versus individual pulmonary function tests. A 15% emphysema extent threshold, calculated using the formula, identified a significant difference in absolute changes from baseline in forced vital capacity at Week 48 in patients with baseline-predicted emphysema extent < 15% versus ≥ 15% (P = 0.0105). CONCLUSION: The formula, designed for use in patients with IPF and emphysema, demonstrated enhanced ability to predict emphysema extent versus individual pulmonary function tests. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00047645; NCT00075998.

A review of the challenges, learnings and future directions of home handheld spirometry in interstitial lung disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) require regular physician visits and referral to specialist ILD clinics. Difficulties or delays in accessing care can limit opportunities to monitor disease trajectory and response to treatment, and the COVID-19 pandemic has added to these challenges. Therefore, home monitoring technologies, such as home handheld spirometry, have gained increased attention as they may help to improve access to care for patients with ILD. However, while several studies have shown that home handheld spirometry in ILD is acceptable for most patients, data from clinical trials are not sufficiently robust to support its use as a primary endpoint. This review discusses the challenges that were encountered with handheld spirometry across three recent ILD studies, which included home spirometry as a primary endpoint, and highlights where further optimisation and research into home handheld spirometry in ILD is required. Rate of decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) as measured by daily home handheld spirometry versus site spirometry was of primary interest in three recently completed studies: STARLINER (NCT03261037), STARMAP and a Phase II study of pirfenidone in progressive fibrosing unclassifiable ILD (NCT03099187). Unanticipated practical and technical issues led to problems with estimating FVC decline. In all three studies, cross-sectional correlations for home handheld versus site spirometry were strong/moderate at baseline and later timepoints, but longitudinal correlations were weak. Other issues observed with the home handheld spirometry data included: high within-patient variability in home handheld FVC measurements; implausible longitudinal patterns in the home handheld spirometry data that were not reflected in site spirometry; and extreme estimated rates of FVC change. CONCLUSIONS: Home handheld spirometry in ILD requires further optimisation and research to ensure accurate and reliable FVC measurements before it can be used as an endpoint in clinical trials. Refresher training, automated alerts of problems and FVC changes, and patient support could help to overcome some practical issues. Despite the challenges, there is value in incorporating home handheld spirometry into clinical practice, and the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the potential for home monitoring technologies to help improve access to care for patients with ILD.

The 6-min walk test as a primary end-point in interstitial lung disease.

There is a need for clinical trial end-points to better assess how patients feel and function, so that interventions can be developed which alleviate symptoms and improve quality of life. Use of 6-min walk test (6MWT) outcomes as a primary end-point in interstitial lung disease (ILD) trials is growing, particularly for drugs targeting concurrent pulmonary hypertension. However, 6MWT outcomes may be influenced differentially by interstitial lung and pulmonary vascular components of ILD, making interpretation complicated. We propose that using 6MWT outcomes, including 6-min walk distance or oxygen desaturation, as primary end-points should depend upon the study population (how advanced the ILD is; whether vasculopathy is significant), the degree of disease progression, and, importantly, the effect of study treatment expected. We argue that the 6MWT as a single outcome measure is suitable as a primary end-point if the treatment goal is to improve functional performance or prevent disease progression within a study population of patients with advanced ILD or those with ILD and co-existent vasculopathy. In addition, we discuss the potential of composite primary end-points incorporating 6MWT outcomes, outlining important considerations to ensure that they are appropriate for the study population and treatment goals.

Efficacy of Pirfenidone vs. Placebo in Unclassifiable Interstitial Lung Disease, by Surgical Lung Biopsy Status: Data From a post-hoc Analysis.

Approximately 12-13% of patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) are diagnosed with unclassifiable ILD (uILD), often despite thorough evaluation. A recent Phase 2 study (NCT03099187) described a significant effect of pirfenidone vs. placebo on forced vital capacity (FVC) measured by site spirometry in patients with progressive fibrosing uILD (hereafter referred to as the pirfenidone in uILD study). Here, we present the results from a post-hoc analysis of this study to assess patient baseline characteristics and the efficacy of pirfenidone vs. placebo analyzed by surgical lung biopsy (SLB) status. Mean FVC (mL) change over 24 weeks was included as a post-hoc efficacy outcome. Of 253 randomized patients, 88 (34.8%) had a SLB and 165 (65.2%) did not. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between SLB subgroups; however, patients who had a SLB were slightly younger and had a higher 6-min walk distance than those without a SLB. Mean FVC change over 24 weeks for pirfenidone vs. placebo was -90.9 vs. -146.3 mL, respectively, in patients who had a SLB, and 8.2 vs. -85.3 mL, respectively, in patients without a SLB. Overall, the results from the post-hoc analysis identified that pirfenidone may be an effective treatment in progressive fibrosing uILD over 24 weeks, irrespective of SLB status; however, caution should be taken when interpreting these data due to several limitations. There are differences in the treatment effect of pirfenidone between the subgroups that require further pathological and radiological investigation. In this manuscript, we also descriptively compared baseline characteristics from the overall pirfenidone in uILD study population with other uILD populations reported in the literature, with the aim of understanding if there are any similarities or differences within these cohorts. Most baseline characteristics for patients in the pirfenidone in uILD study were within the ranges reported in the literature; however, ranges were wide, highlighting the heterogeneity of uILD populations. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03099187.

Quality of Life and Healthcare Resource Use in a Real-world Patient Population with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: The PROOF Registry.

INTRODUCTION: The PROOF registry is a prospective, observational study that aimed to monitor disease progression in a real-world cohort of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Here, longitudinal quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes, healthcare resource use (HCRU), and the association between QoL and mortality in patients enrolled in the PROOF registry are presented. METHODS: QoL outcomes (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ], EuroQoL-5 dimensions-5 levels Health Questionnaire [EQ-5D-5L], EuroQoL-5 dimensions Health Questionnaire [EQ-5D] visual analogue scale [VAS] and cough VAS) and HCRU were collected for all patients. Associations between baseline QoL and mortality were assessed using univariate and multivariate analyses. During multivariate analyses, individual QoL measures were adjusted for the following covariates: age, sex, percent predicted forced vital capacity, percent predicted diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide, smoking status, and supplementary oxygen use at registry inclusion. RESULTS: In total, 277 patients were enrolled in the PROOF registry. During the follow-up period, worsening in cough VAS score, SGRQ symptom score, and SGRQ activity score was observed, while EQ-5D VAS, SGRQ total score, and SGRQ impact score remained stable. During univariate analyses, EQ-5D VAS and all SGRQ sub-scores and total score at baseline were associated with mortality; however, during multivariate analyses, only the SGRQ total score, SGRQ impact score, and SGRQ symptom score at baseline were associated with mortality. During the follow-up period, 261 (94.2%) patients required an outpatient consultation (IPF- or non-IPF-related) and there were 182 hospitalizations in total, most of which were respiratory related (66.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The PROOF registry provided valuable, real-world data on the association between baseline QoL and mortality, and longitudinal HCRU and QoL outcomes in patients with IPF over 24 months and identified that SGRQ may be an independent prognostic factor in IPF.

Pirfenidone in Unclassifiable Interstitial Lung Disease: A Subgroup Analysis by Concomitant Mycophenolate Mofetil and/or Previous Corticosteroid Use.

INTRODUCTION: There are currently no approved treatments solely for unclassifiable interstitial lung disease (uILD); however, a recent trial showed this population can benefit from pirfenidone. We report a subgroup analysis of this trial to assess the effects of immunomodulators (concomitant mycophenolate mofetil [MMF] and/or previous corticosteroids) with pirfenidone in patients with uILD. METHODS: This was a multicenter, international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase II trial of patients with progressive fibrosing uILD (NCT03099187). Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive pirfenidone 2403 mg/day or placebo. This analysis assessed forced vital capacity (FVC) change from baseline measured using site spirometry (key secondary endpoint) and safety over 24 weeks by concomitant MMF use at randomization (pre-specified analysis) and/or previous corticosteroid use (post hoc analysis). RESULTS: Overall, 253 patients were randomized, including 45 (17.8%) patients (pirfenidone, n = 23; placebo, n = 22) receiving concomitant MMF with/without previous corticosteroids (MMF subgroup); 79 (31.2%) patients (pirfenidone, n = 44; placebo, n = 35) receiving previous corticosteroids without MMF (corticosteroids/no-MMF subgroup); and 129 (51.0%) patients (pirfenidone, n = 60; placebo, n = 69) not receiving concomitant MMF or previous corticosteroids (no-corticosteroids/no-MMF subgroup). At 24 weeks, difference in mean (95% confidence interval) FVC change from baseline between pirfenidone and placebo was - 55.4 mL (- 206.7, 96.0; P = 0.4645) in the MMF subgroup; 128.4 mL (- 6.4, 263.3; P = 0.0617) in the corticosteroids/no-MMF subgroup; and 115.5 mL (35.1, 195.9; P = 0.0052) in the no-corticosteroids/no-MMF subgroup. All subgroups generally exhibited a similar pattern of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION: Although limited by design and small sample sizes, this analysis suggests pirfenidone may be less effective in patients with uILD receiving concomitant MMF, whereas a beneficial treatment effect was observed in patients not receiving concomitant MMF regardless of previous corticosteroid use. Pirfenidone was well tolerated regardless of MMF and/or corticosteroid use. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03099187.

Post hoc Analysis of Clinical Outcomes in Placebo- and Pirfenidone-Treated Patients with IPF Stratified by BMI and Weight Loss.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss is frequently reported in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and may be associated with worse outcomes in these patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between body mass index (BMI) and weight loss, and outcomes over 1 year in patients with IPF. METHODS: Data were included from placebo patients enrolled in ASCEND (NCT01366209) and CAPACITY (NCT00287716 and NCT00287729), and all patients in INSPIRE (NCT00075998) and RIFF Cohort A (NCT01872689). An additional analysis included data from pirfenidone-treated patients. Outcomes (annualized change in percent predicted forced vital capacity [%FVC], percent predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity, 6-min walk distance, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score, hospitalization, mortality, and serious adverse events) were analyzed by baseline BMI (<25 kg/m2, 25 kg/m2-<30 kg/m2, or ≥30 kg/m2) and annualized percent change in body weight (no loss, >0-<5% loss, or ≥5% loss). RESULTS: Placebo-treated patients with a baseline BMI <25 kg/m2 or annualized weight loss may experience worse outcomes versus those with a baseline BMI ≥25 kg/m2 or no weight loss. The proportion of placebo-treated patients who experienced a relative decline of ≥10% in %FVC or death up to 1 year post-randomization was highest in patients with a baseline BMI <25 kg/m2. Pirfenidone-treated patients with an annualized weight loss ≥5% may also experience worse outcomes versus those with no weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a baseline BMI <25 kg/m2 or annualized weight loss of >0-<5% or ≥5% may experience worse outcomes over 1 year versus those with a baseline BMI ≥25 kg/m2 or no weight loss.

Disease Behaviour During the Peri-Diagnostic Period in Patients with Suspected Interstitial Lung Disease: The STARLINER Study.

INTRODUCTION: Disease behaviour may guide diagnosis and treatment decisions in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD). STARLINER aimed to characterise disease behaviour in patients with suspected ILD during the peri-diagnostic period using real-time home-based assessments. METHODS: STARLINER (NCT03261037) was an international, multicentre study. Patients ≥ 50 years old with suspected ILD were followed throughout the peri-diagnostic period, consisting of a pre-diagnostic period (from enrolment to diagnosis) and a post-diagnostic period (from diagnosis to treatment initiation). Study length was variable (≤ 18 months). The primary endpoint was time-adjusted semi-annual forced vital capacity (FVC) change measured during the peri-diagnostic period using daily home spirometry in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Secondary outcomes included changes in FVC (home spirometry) in patients with non-IPF ILD, changes in FVC (site spirometry), changes in physical functional capacity measured by daily home accelerometry and site 6-min walk distance (6MWD), and changes in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in IPF or non-IPF ILD. RESULTS: Of the 178 patients enrolled in the study, 68 patients were diagnosed with IPF, 62 patients were diagnosed with non-IPF ILD, 9 patients received a non-ILD diagnosis and 39 patients did not receive a diagnosis. Technical and analytical issues led to problems in applying the prespecified linear regression model to analyse the home FVC data. Time-adjusted median (quartile [Q]1, Q3) semi-annual FVC change during the peri-diagnostic period measured using home and site spirometry, respectively, was - 147.7 (- 723.8, 376.2) ml and - 149.0 (- 314.6, 163.9) ml for IPF and 19.1 (- 194.9, 519.0) ml and - 23.4 (- 117.9, 133.5) ml in non-IPF ILD. A greater decline in steps per day was observed for IPF versus non-IPF ILD, whereas an increase in 6MWD was observed for patients with IPF versus a decline in 6MWD for patients with non-IPF ILD. No clear patterns of disease behaviour were observed for IPF versus non-IPF ILD for PROs. CONCLUSIONS: Despite home spirometry being feasible for most patients and centres, technical and analytical challenges in the home-based assessments prevented firm conclusions regarding disease behaviour. This highlights that further optimisation of the technology and analysis methods is required before widespread implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03261037.

Monocyte Count as a Prognostic Biomarker in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.

Rationale: There is an urgent need for simple, cost-effective prognostic biomarkers for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF); biomarkers that show potential include monocyte count. Objectives: We used pooled data from pirfenidone and IFNγ-1b trials to explore the association between monocyte count and prognosis in patients with IPF. Methods: This retrospective pooled analysis included patients (active and placebo arms) from the following four phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trials: ASCEND (NCT01366209), CAPACITY (NCT00287729 and NCT00287716), and INSPIRE (NCT00075998). Outcomes included IPF progression (≥10% absolute decline in FVC% predicted, ≥50 m decline in 6-minute-walk distance, or death), all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause mortality over 1 year. The relationship between monocyte count (defined as time-dependent) and outcomes was assessed using bivariate and multivariable models. Measurements and Main Results: This analysis included 2,067 patients stratified by monocyte count (at baseline: <0.60 × 109 cells/L [n = 1,609], 0.60 to <0.95 × 109 cells/L [n = 408], and ≥0.95 × 109 cells/L [n = 50]). In adjusted analyses, a higher proportion of patients with monocyte counts of 0.60 to <0.95 × 109 cells/L or ≥0.95 × 109 cells/L versus <0.60 × 109 cells/L experienced IPF progression (P = 0.016 and P = 0.002, respectively), all-cause hospitalization (P = 0.030 and P = 0.003, respectively), and all-cause mortality (P = 0.005 and P < 0.001, respectively) over 1 year. Change in monocyte count from baseline was not associated with any of the outcomes over 1 year and did not appear to be affected by study treatment. Conclusions: In patients with IPF, elevated monocyte count was associated with increased risks of IPF progression, hospitalization, and mortality. Monocyte count may provide a simple and inexpensive prognostic biomarker in IPF.

Efficacy and safety of sildenafil added to pirfenidone in patients with advanced idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and risk of pulmonary hypertension: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of sildenafil in patients with advanced idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) at risk of poor outcomes from pulmonary hypertension, whether already present or likely to develop, is uncertain. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil added to pirfenidone versus placebo added to pirfenidone for 52 weeks in patients with advanced IPF and at risk of group 3 pulmonary hypertension. METHODS: We did a multicentre, international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2b study at 56 university clinics, research hospitals, and tertiary sites in Canada, Europe (Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and Turkey), Israel, and Africa (Egypt and South Africa). Eligible patients (aged 40-80 years) had advanced IPF (carbon monoxide diffusing capacity ≤40% predicted at screening), and were at risk of group 3 pulmonary hypertension (mean pulmonary artery pressure of ≥20 mm Hg with pulmonary artery wedge pressure of ≤15 mm Hg on previous right-heart catheterisation, or intermediate or high probability of group 3 pulmonary hypertension on echocardiography as defined by the 2015 European Society of Cardiology and European Respiratory Society guidelines). Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to oral sildenafil tablets (20 mg three times daily) or placebo, both in addition to oral pirfenidone capsules (801 mg three times daily), using a validated interactive voice-based or web-based response system with permuted block randomisation, stratified by previous right-heart catheterisation (yes or no) and forced expiratory volume in 1 s to forced vital capacity ratio (<0·8 or ≥0·8). The composite primary endpoint was disease progression, defined as either a relevant decline in 6-min walk distance, respiratory-related admission to hospital, or all-cause mortality, after 52 weeks and was assessed in the intention-to-treat population; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02951429, and is no longer recruiting. The 11-month safety follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and Aug 30, 2018, 247 patients were screened for eligibility, 177 of whom were randomly assigned to a treatment group (n=88 sildenafil; n=89 placebo) and were assessed for the primary outcome. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with disease progression over 52 weeks between the sildenafil (64 [73%] of 88 patients) and placebo groups (62 [70%] of 89 patients; between-group difference 3·06% [95% CI -11·30 to 17·97]; p=0·65). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 54 (61%) patients in the sildenafil group and 55 (62%) patients in the placebo group. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to mortality occurred in 22 (25%) patients in the sildenafil group and 26 (29%) in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Addition of sildenafil to pirfenidone did not provide a treatment benefit versus pirfenidone plus placebo up to 52 weeks in patients with advanced IPF and risk of pulmonary hypertension. No new safety signals were identified with either treatment. Although the absence of a beneficial treatment effect suggests that sildenafil is not an appropriate treatment in the overall population, further research is required to establish if specific subgroups of patients with IPF might benefit from sildenafil. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Patients' and Healthcare Professionals' Experiences of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Treatment with the Pirfenidone 801 mg Tablet Formulation: A Multinational Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive, debilitating interstitial lung disease. Two antifibrotics, pirfenidone and nintedanib, are available for IPF treatment. Pirfenidone is available as 267 mg capsules and, more recently, as 267 mg and 801 mg tablets. The aim of this study was to examine the perceived benefits of the 801 mg formulation on patient quality of life (QoL), IPF management and pill burden. METHODS: Forty-seven patients with IPF and 170 healthcare professionals (HCPs; 150 physicians in France, Germany, Spain and the USA and 20 nurses in the USA) completed online questionnaires comprising 67 and 61 questions, respectively. Eligible patients had experience switching from the 267 mg pirfenidone tablet or capsule formulations to the 801 mg tablet formulation, and eligible HCPs were experienced in managing this switch. Questions included single and multiple responses and scalar questions with responses on a 7-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Patients received the 267 mg formulation for a median (range) of 6.0 (2.0-40.0) months prior to switching to the 801 mg formulation. Higher percentages of patients reported satisfaction with the 801 mg versus the 267 mg formulation for its convenience (64 vs. 17%) and number of dosage units (70 vs. 2%). More patients reported good emotional well-being on the 801 mg versus the 267 mg formulation (51 vs. 21%), and fewer patients reported missing a dose of pirfenidone (21 vs. 30%). More HCPs perceived high patient adherence with the 801 mg versus the 267 mg formulation (57 vs. 37%). Overall, 33% of physicians had experienced switching patients back to the 267 mg formulation. CONCLUSION: Patients and HCPs consistently favoured the 801 mg formulation across multiple domains, including convenience, patient QoL and adherence. The 801 mg formulation may provide an alternative to the 267 mg formulation in patients established on the recommended daily dose of pirfenidone.

Pirfenidone in patients with unclassifiable progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: At present, no approved pharmacotherapies are available for unclassifiable interstitial lung disease (ILD), which is characterised by progressive fibrosis of the lung. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pirfenidone in patients with progressive fibrosing unclassifiable ILD. METHODS: We did a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial at 70 centres in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and the UK. Eligible patients (aged ≥18-85 years) had progressive fibrosing unclassifiable ILD, a percent predicted forced vital capacity (FVC) of 45% or higher and percent predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DLco) of 30% or higher, more than 10% fibrosis on high-resolution CT, and a high-resolution CT from the previous 12 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to 2403 mg oral pirfenidone daily or placebo using a central validated interactive voice or web-based response system, stratified by concomitant mycophenolate mofetil use and presence or absence of interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features. Investigators, site personnel, and patients were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was mean predicted change in FVC from baseline over 24 weeks, measured by daily home spirometry. Secondary endpoints were change in FVC measured by site spirometry, proportion of patients who had a more than 5% or more than 10% absolute or relative decline in percent predicted FVC measured by clinic-based spirometry, change in percent predicted DLco, change in 6-min walk distance (6MWD), change in University of California San Diego-Shortness of Breath Questionnaire (UCSD-SOBQ) score, change in Leicester Cough Questionnaire score, change in cough visual analogue scale, and changes in total and subscores of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), all of which were compared with baseline. Additional secondary endpoints included proportion of patients who had non-elective hospitalisation (respiratory and all-cause) and acute exacerbations, and progression-free survival. Efficacy was analysed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, which included all randomly assigned patients. Safety was assessed in the safety analysis set, which included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03099187, and is no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between May 15, 2017, and June 5, 2018, 253 patients were randomly assigned to receive 2403 mg pirfenidone (n=127) or placebo (n=126) and were included in the ITT analysis set. Analysis of the primary endpoint was affected by intraindividual variability in home spirometry values, which prevented application of the prespecified statistical model. Over 24 weeks, predicted median change in FVC measured by home spirometry was -87·7 mL (Q1-Q3 -338·1 to 148·6) in the pirfenidone group versus -157·1 mL (-370·9 to 70·1) in the placebo group. Over 24 weeks, predicted mean change in FVC measured by site spirometry was lower in patients given pirfenidone than placebo (treatment difference 95·3 mL [95% CI 35·9 to 154·6], p=0·002). Compared with the placebo group, patients in the pirfenidone group were less likely to have a decline in FVC of more than 5% (odds ratio [OR] 0·42 [95% CI 0·25 to 0·69], p=0·001) or more than 10% (OR 0·44 [0·23 to 0·84], p=0·011). At week 24, mean change in DLco from baseline was -0·7% (SD 7·1) for the pirfenidone group and -2·5% (8·8) for the placebo group, and mean change in 6MWD from baseline was -2·0 m (68·1) for the pirfenidone group and -26·7 m (79·3) for the placebo group. Changes from baseline in UCSD-SOBQ, Leicester Cough Questionnaire score, cough visual analogue scale, and SGRQ scores were similar between the pirfenidone and placebo groups at week 24. Analysis of acute exacerbations, hospital admissions, and time to death from respiratory causes during the study yielded no meaningful results due to a small number of events. No differences in progression-free survival were identified between the pirfenidone and placebo groups, irrespective of the definition of progression-free survival used. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 120 (94%) of 127 patients in the pirfenidone group and 101 (81%) of 124 patients in the placebo group. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 18 (14%) patients in the pirfenidone group and 20 (16%) patients in the placebo group. The most common treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders (60 [47%] in the pirfenidone group vs 32 [26%] in the placebo group), fatigue (16 [13%] vs 12 [10%]), and rash (13 [10%] vs nine [7%]). INTERPRETATION: Although the planned statistical model could not be applied to the primary endpoint data, analysis of key secondary endpoints suggests that patients with progressive fibrosing unclassifiable ILD could benefit from pirfenidone treatment, which has an acceptable safety and tolerability profile. These findings support further investigation of pirfenidone as an effective treatment for patients with progressive fibrotic unclassifiable ILD. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Longitudinal clinical outcomes in a real-world population of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: the PROOF registry.

BACKGROUND: The PROOF registry is an observational study initiated in October 2013 with the aim to monitor disease progression in a real-world population of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Here, we present longitudinal clinical outcomes from the PROOF registry. METHODS: Patients with IPF were enrolled across eight centers in Belgium and Luxembourg. For all patients, clinical outcomes data were collected, including mortality, lung transplant, acute exacerbations, and pulmonary hypertension. For patients treated with pirfenidone at any time during follow-up (2013-2017), for any duration of treatment (the pirfenidone-treated population): pirfenidone treatment patterns were collected; changes in pulmonary function (forced vital capacity [FVC] and carbon monoxide diffusing capacity [DLco]) were reviewed up to 24 months post-inclusion; and time-to-event analyses from the time of registry inclusion were performed. RESULTS: The PROOF registry enrolled a total of 277 patients. During follow-up, 23.1% of patients died, 5.1% received a lung transplant, 5.4% experienced an acute exacerbation, and 6.1% had comorbid pulmonary hypertension. In the pirfenidone-treated population (N = 233, 84.1%), 12.9% of patients had a temporary dose discontinuation and 31.8% had a temporary dose reduction; 4.3% of patients permanently discontinued pirfenidone due to an adverse drug reaction. Mean percent predicted FVC was 81.2% (standard deviation [SD] 19.0) at Month 0 and 78.3% (SD 25.0) at Month 24, and mean percent predicted DLco was 47.0% (SD 13.2) and 45.0% (SD 16.5), respectively. Rates of ≥ 10% absolute decline in percent predicted FVC and ≥ 15% absolute decline in percent predicted DLco over 24 months were 31.0% and 23.2%, respectively. Mean times from registry inclusion to categorical absolute decline in percent predicted FVC and percent predicted DLco were 20.1 (standard error [SE] 0.6) months and 23.4 (SE 0.5) months, respectively; mean time from registry inclusion to death was 31.0 (SE 0.9) months. CONCLUSIONS: The PROOF registry is a source of European data characterizing longitudinal clinical outcomes of patients with IPF. Over 12 months of follow-up, pulmonary function remained largely stable in patients with IPF who received pirfenidone for any duration of treatment. Pulmonary function remained similar at 24 months of follow-up, although patient numbers were lower. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROOF is registered with the relevant authorities in Belgium and Luxembourg, with registration to Comité National d'Éthique et de Recherche (CNER) N201309/03-12 September 2013 and a notification to Comité National de Protection des Données (CNDP) for Luxembourg.

Pirfenidone in real life: A retrospective observational multicentre study in Italian patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

RATIONALE: Real-world data on pirfenidone treatment of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) are limited. This study assessed the effectiveness of pirfenidone in a large real-life Italian IPF cohort. METHODS: IRENE was an observational, retrospective study of patients with IPF treated with pirfenidone in routine clinical practice (18 centres). At Month 6, a mandatory re-evaluation of forced vital capacity (FVC) decline (absolute change < 10%) was required to continue pirfenidone. The primary effectiveness outcomes were absolute change from baseline in FVC and the percentage of patients with ≥ 10% absolute decline in % predicted FVC at Month 12. Safety was described by adverse event (AE) occurrence. Prespecified subgroups included sex, age, presence/absence of emphysema, usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern on high-resolution computed tomography, and baseline lung function. RESULTS: The study included 379 patients (mean age, 67.6 years; 78.1% male). Mean change from baseline in FVC and the percentage of patients with ≥ 10% absolute decline in % predicted FVC at Month 12 were -81.8 mL (SD, 419.6 mL; P = 0.002) and 16.0% (95% CI, 12.2-20.9%), respectively. Disease progression was similar across prespecified subgroups, including patients with definite vs possible UIP. Overall, 211 AEs occurred in 149 patients (39.3%), with serious AEs in 31 patients (8.2%) and 9 discontinuations due to AEs. Skin and gastrointestinal AEs were most frequent. Fifteen patients (4.0%) died. CONCLUSIONS: The decline in FVC and the safety profile observed in this real-world IPF cohort were consistent with the findings of the Phase III pirfenidone trials.

Patient journey and treatment patterns in adults with IPF based on health care data in Sweden from 2001 to 2015.

BACKGROUND: For patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), there is limited real-world data on patient journey and treatment patterns. AIM: To explore predictors of early diagnosis and treatment initiation, and treatment patterns in IPF patients using linked data from Swedish registers and electronic medical records (EMRs). POPULATION: A national cohort (C1) of 17,247 pulmonary fibrosis patients (ICD-10 code J84.1; no competing diagnosis) diagnosed between 2001 and 2015, and an EMR-based regional subset (C2) comprising 1755 IPF patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2017. The time from early disease symptoms to diagnosis, use of anti-fibrotic medications, time from diagnosis to initiation of anti-fibrotic treatment, and adherence, persistence and treatment length with pirfenidone were explored in these patients. RESULTS: In C1, the median time to diagnosis from the first symptoms dyspnoea, cough and fatigue were 307, 563 and 639 days, respectively. Glucocorticoids were the most frequently prescribed medication. Less than 10% of patients undergoing or initiating treatment, used pirfenidone or nintedanib. Males had a higher probability of initiating anti-fibrotic treatment than females within a year of diagnosis. One-year persistence in pirfenidone patients was 42% in C1 and 25% in C2. CONCLUSION: Diagnosis of pulmonary fibrosis was delayed in patients with cough and fatigue, which are early symptoms of IPF. This, and lower than expected utilisation of anti-fibrotic medications, suggests missed opportunities for early disease diagnosis and treatment. The high rate of treatment discontinuation underscores the importance of supporting and guiding patients to persist with their medications to ensure an accrual benefit of treatment.

Pirfenidone in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and more advanced lung function impairment.

BACKGROUND: Patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) demonstrate a range of lung function impairment. However, the efficacy of antifibrotics compared with placebo has not been assessed in patients with more advanced disease. This post-hoc analysis investigated the efficacy and safety of pirfenidone versus placebo in patients with IPF and more advanced lung function impairment, defined as percent predicted forced vital capacity (%FVC) < 50% and/or percent predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity <35%. METHODS: Patients randomised to pirfenidone 2,403 mg/day or placebo in the ASCEND (NCT01366209) and CAPACITY (NCT00287716; NCT00287729) trials with more advanced baseline lung function impairment (pirfenidone, n = 90; placebo, n = 80) were included. Mortality, lung function, hospitalisation, exercise capacity and dyspnoea were investigated over 52 weeks. RESULTS: At Week 52 versus placebo, pirfenidone was associated with significantly lower risks of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.86; p=0.0180), ≥10% absolute %FVC decline or all-cause mortality (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.23-0.69; p=0.0006) and ≥10% absolute %FVC decline or respiratory-related hospitalisation or all-cause mortality (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.28-0.76; p=0.0018). At Week 52, median treatment differences favouring pirfenidone were 36.7 m for 6-min walk distance and -8.0 points for the University of California-San Diego Shortness of Breath Questionnaire total score. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) led to discontinuation in 14.4% and 21.3% of patients with pirfenidone and placebo, respectively. CONCLUSION: Pirfenidone demonstrated clinically relevant benefits across multiple domains in patients with IPF and more advanced disease without an increased risk of discontinuation due to TEAEs. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials. gov (ASCEND: NCT01366209; CAPACITY: NCT00287716; NCT00287729).

Association of Angiotensin Modulators With the Course of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin peptides have been implicated in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) pathogenesis. Angiotensin modulators are used to treat arterial hypertension, a frequent comorbidity of IPF. This post hoc analysis evaluated associations of antihypertensive treatments with disease-related outcomes in IPF. METHODS: All patients randomized to placebo (n = 624) in the CAPACITY and ASCEND studies were categorized by antihypertensive treatment at baseline. Outcomes of disease progression (first occurrence of ≥ 10% absolute decline in % predicted FVC, ≥ 50-m decline in 6-min walk distance, or death) and all-cause mortality were assessed over 52 weeks. RESULTS: At baseline, 111 and 121 patients were receiving an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), respectively; 392 were receiving neither. In multivariable analyses adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics compared with the non-ACEi/ARB group, ACEi treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-0.9]; P = .026), but not ARB (HR, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.6-1.2]; P = .413), was associated with slower disease progression. Furthermore, the increase in all-cause mortality associated with cardiovascular disease was not observed in the ACEi group (HR, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.5-2.9]; P = .782), which presented a similar percentage of IPF-related mortality as the non-ACEi/ARB group (3.6% vs 3.6%). In contrast, patients in the ARB group had greater risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 2.5 [95% CI, 1.2-5.2]). These observations were validated in a pooled analysis that included patients from the INSPIRE trial. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective clinical trials are needed to evaluate whether angiotensin modulators may be beneficial to clinical outcomes in IPF. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; Nos.: NCT01366209, NCT00287716, NCT00287729, NCT00075998; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov).