Adaptive multi-interventional trial platform to improve patient care for fibrotic interstitial lung diseases.

BACKGROUND: Fibrotic interstitial lung diseases (fILDs) are a heterogeneous group of lung diseases associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite a large increase in the number of clinical trials in the last 10 years, current regulatory-approved management approaches are limited to two therapies that prevent the progression of fibrosis. The drug development pipeline is long and there is an urgent need to accelerate this process. This manuscript introduces the concept and design of an innovative research approach to drug development in fILD: a global Randomised Embedded Multifactorial Adaptive Platform in fILD (REMAP-ILD). METHODS: Description of the REMAP-ILD concept and design: the specific terminology, design characteristics (multifactorial, adaptive features, statistical approach), target population, interventions, outcomes, mission and values, and organisational structure. RESULTS: The target population will be adult patients with fILD, and the primary outcome will be a disease progression model incorporating forced vital capacity and mortality over 12 months. Responsive adaptive randomisation, prespecified thresholds for success and futility will be used to assess the effectiveness and safety of interventions. REMAP-ILD embraces the core values of diversity, equity, and inclusion for patients and researchers, and prioritises an open-science approach to data sharing and dissemination of results. CONCLUSION: By using an innovative and efficient adaptive multi-interventional trial platform design, we aim to accelerate and improve care for patients with fILD. Through worldwide collaboration, novel analytical methodology and pragmatic trial delivery, REMAP-ILD aims to overcome major limitations associated with conventional randomised controlled trial approaches to rapidly improve the care of people living with fILD.

Treatment patterns and patient journey in progressive pulmonary fibrosis: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: For patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) presenting with a progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF) phenotype, current knowledge of disease characteristics at diagnosis, patient journey, and treatment is limited. This study aimed to describe demographics and clinical experiences of patients presenting with PPF in a European real-world setting. METHODS: Data were analysed from the Adelphi Real World PPF-ILD Disease Specific Programme™, a cross-sectional survey of pulmonologists and rheumatologists in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, United Kingdom) and internal medicine specialists (France) from April to October 2022. Physicians provided data for up to 12 consecutive patients with physician-confirmed ILD with a progressive phenotype other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: Overall, 265 physicians reported on 1,335 patients. Mean (standard deviation) age at survey date was 60.4 (11.6) years, 91.2% were white, 58.1% female, 44.0% non-smokers. Most patients (63.3%) first consulted a primary care physician. There was a mean delay of 7.8 (22.7) months between first ILD symptom and healthcare professional visit, and another 7.7 (12.8) months to ILD diagnosis. At survey date, 47.7% of patients had physician-reported moderate ILD, 42.3% had mild ILD and 10.0% had severe ILD. Disease progression was reported in the 12 months prior to the survey for 19.5% of patients; of these, progression was based on worsening symptom in 27.3% and lung function decline in 25.8%. For patients experiencing symptoms prior to ILD diagnosis (72.8%), the most common symptoms were dyspnoea on exertion (80.5%) and cough (57.8%). Overall, 17.4% of patients were misdiagnosed prior to ILD diagnosis, with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease suspected in 39.2% of them. The most frequent comorbidities were anxiety (16.9%) and gastroesophageal reflux (15.5%). Although 77.8% of patients were receiving treatment for ILD at survey date, 15.6% of patients had never been prescribed treatment for ILD. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study expands our understanding of patients, diagnostic delays and treatment gaps experienced by patients diagnosed with PPF in Europe. There was a mean delay of 15.5 months between first ILD symptoms and ILD diagnosis. Given the progressive nature of PPF, diagnostic delay may lead to poor outcomes, including shorter survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: N/a.

Inhaled pirfenidone solution (AP01) for IPF: a randomised, open-label, dose-response trial.

INTRODUCTION: Oral pirfenidone reduces lung function decline and mortality in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Systemic exposure can have significant side effects, including nausea, rash, photosensitivity, weight loss and fatigue. Reduced doses may be suboptimal in slowing disease progression. METHODS: This phase 1b, randomised, open-label, dose-response trial at 25 sites in six countries (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) registration number ACTRN12618001838202) assessed safety, tolerability and efficacy of inhaled pirfenidone (AP01) in IPF. Patients diagnosed within 5 years, with forced vital capacity (FVC) 40%-90% predicted, and intolerant, unwilling or ineligible for oral pirfenidone or nintedanib were randomly assigned 1:1 to nebulised AP01 50 mg once per day or 100 mg two times per day for up to 72 weeks. RESULTS: We present results for week 24, the primary endpoint and week 48 for comparability with published trials of antifibrotics. Week 72 data will be reported as a separate analysis pooled with the ongoing open-label extension study. Ninety-one patients (50 mg once per day: n=46, 100 mg two times per day: n=45) were enrolled from May 2019 to April 2020. The most common treatment-related adverse events (frequency, % of patients) were all mild or moderate and included cough (14, 15.4%), rash (11, 12.1%), nausea (8, 8.8%), throat irritation (5, 5.5%), fatigue (4, 4.4%) and taste disorder, dizziness and dyspnoea (three each, 3.3%). Changes in FVC % predicted over 24 and 48 weeks, respectively, were -2.5 (95% CI -5.3 to 0.4, -88 mL) and -4.9 (-7.5 to -2.3,-188 mL) in the 50 mg once per day and 0.6 (-2.2 to 3.4, 10 mL) and -0.4 (-3.2 to 2.3, -34 mL) in the 100 mg two times per day group. DISCUSSION: Side effects commonly associated with oral pirfenidone in other clinical trials were less frequent with AP01. Mean FVC % predicted remained stable in the 100 mg two times per day group. Further study of AP01 is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618001838202 Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry.

Treatment of fibrotic interstitial lung disease: current approaches and future directions.

Fibrotic interstitial lung disease (ILD) represents a large group of pulmonary disorders that are often progressive and associated with high morbidity and early mortality. Important advancements in the past 10 years have enabled a better understanding, characterisation, and treatment of these diseases. This Series paper summarises the current approach to treatment of fibrotic ILDs, both pharmacological and non-pharmacological, including recent discoveries and practice-changing clinical trials. We further outline controversies and challenges, with discussion of evolving concepts and future research directions.

Pulmonary adverse events following immune checkpoint inhibitors.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have rapidly become a mainstay of cancer treatment. However, immune modulation resulting from checkpoint inhibition can cause inflammation in any organ system, with pneumonitis being one of the most severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Here, we review the most recent literature on pulmonary adverse events following ICIs. RECENT FINDINGS: Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses of data from trials of antiprogrammed death-1 (PD-1; nivolumab, pembrolizumab), anti-PD-ligand-1 (PD-L1; atezolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab) and anticytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4; ipilimumab or tremelimumab) in patients with advanced cancer have explored the relative risk and incidence of lung toxicity among different tumor types and therapeutic regimens. They have showed that the incidence of all-grade (1-4) and high-grade (3-4) pneumonitis is significantly higher in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) compared with other tumor types. In addition, they have demonstrated that immunotherapy, especially monoimmunotherapy, has a significantly lower risk of irAEs compared to immune-chemotherapy. Treatment for lung cancer, preexisting interstitial lung disease, smoking history and male sex appear to increase the risk for ICI-related pneumonitis. SUMMARY: Lung toxicity is an uncommon but potentially severe and even fatal complication of ICIs. Timely recognition is critically important but challenging, particularly in patients with lung cancer wherein drug toxicity can mimic disease progression or recurrence.

Home spirometry in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: data from the INMARK trial.

BACKGROUND: Data from the INMARK trial were used to investigate the feasibility and validity of home spirometry as a measure of lung function decline in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). METHODS: Subjects with IPF and preserved forced vital capacity (FVC) were randomised to receive nintedanib or placebo for 12 weeks followed by open-label nintedanib for 40 weeks. Clinic spirometry was conducted at baseline and weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36 and 52. Subjects were asked to perform home spirometry at least once a week and ideally daily. Correlations between home- and clinic-measured FVC and rates of change in FVC were assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients. RESULTS: In total, 346 subjects were treated. Mean adherence to weekly home spirometry decreased over time but remained above 75% in every 4-week period. Over 52 weeks, mean adherence was 86%. Variability in change from baseline in FVC was greater when measured by home rather than clinic spirometry. Strong correlations were observed between home- and clinic-measured FVC at all time-points (r=0.72-0.84), but correlations between home- and clinic-measured rates of change in FVC were weak (r=0.26 for rate of decline in FVC over 52 weeks). CONCLUSION: Home spirometry was a feasible and valid measure of lung function in patients with IPF and preserved FVC, but estimates of the rate of FVC decline obtained using home spirometry were poorly correlated with those based on clinic spirometry.

Outcome of Hospitalization for COVID-19 in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease. An International Multicenter Study.

Rationale: The impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) has not been established.Objectives: To assess outcomes in patients with ILD hospitalized for COVID-19 versus those without ILD in a contemporaneous age-, sex-, and comorbidity-matched population.Methods: An international multicenter audit of patients with a prior diagnosis of ILD admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 between March 1 and May 1, 2020, was undertaken and compared with patients without ILD, obtained from the ISARIC4C (International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium) cohort, admitted with COVID-19 over the same period. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary analysis distinguished idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis from non-idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis ILD and used lung function to determine the greatest risks of death.Measurements and Main Results: Data from 349 patients with ILD across Europe were included, of whom 161 were admitted to the hospital with laboratory or clinical evidence of COVID-19 and eligible for propensity score matching. Overall mortality was 49% (79/161) in patients with ILD with COVID-19. After matching, patients with ILD with COVID-19 had significantly poorer survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; confidence interval, 1.17-2.18; P = 0.003) than age-, sex-, and comorbidity-matched controls without ILD. Patients with an FVC of <80% had an increased risk of death versus patients with FVC ≥80% (HR, 1.72; 1.05-2.83). Furthermore, obese patients with ILD had an elevated risk of death (HR, 2.27; 1.39-3.71).Conclusions: Patients with ILD are at increased risk of death from COVID-19, particularly those with poor lung function and obesity. Stringent precautions should be taken to avoid COVID-19 in patients with ILD.

Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: international survey and call for harmonisation.

Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF) is an often deadly complication of IPF. No focussed international guidelines for the management of AE-IPF exist. The aim of this international survey was to assess the global variability in prevention, diagnostic and treatment strategies for AE-IPF.Pulmonologists with ILD expertise were invited to participate in a survey designed by an international expert panel.509 pulmonologists from 66 countries responded. Significant geographical variability in approaches to manage AE-IPF was found. Common preventive measures included antifibrotic drugs and vaccination. Diagnostic differences were most pronounced regarding use of Krebs von den Lungen-6 and viral testing, while high-resolution computed tomography, brain natriuretic peptide and D-dimer are generally applied. High-dose steroids are widely administered (94%); the use of other immunosuppressant and treatment strategies is highly variable. Very few (4%) responders never use immunosuppression. Antifibrotic treatments are initiated during AE-IPF by 67%. Invasive ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation are mainly used as a bridge to transplantation. Most physicians educate patients comprehensively on the severity of AE-IPF (82%) and consider palliative care (64%).Approaches to the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of AE-IPF vary worldwide. Global trials and guidelines to improve the prognosis of AE-IPF are needed.

No relevant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between nintedanib and pirfenidone.

Nintedanib and pirfenidone are approved treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). This open-label, two-group trial investigated the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between these two drugs in patients with IPF.Subjects not treated with antifibrotics at screening (group 1, n=20) received a single nintedanib dose (150 mg) followed by pirfenidone (titrated to 801 mg thrice daily) for 3 weeks, with a further single nintedanib dose (150 mg) on the last day (day 23). Subjects treated with pirfenidone at screening (group 2, n=17) continued to receive pirfenidone alone (801 mg thrice daily) for 7 days, then co-administered with nintedanib (150 mg twice daily) for a further 7 days, before single doses of both treatments on day 16.In group 1, adjusted geometric mean (gMean) ratios (with/without pirfenidone) were 88.6% and 80.6% for nintedanib area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), respectively. In group 2, gMean ratios (with/without nintedanib) were 97.2% and 99.5% for pirfenidone AUC and Cmax, respectively. For all parameters, the 90% confidence intervals included 100%, suggesting similar exposure for administration alone and when co-administered. Both treatments were well tolerated.These data indicate there is no relevant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between nintedanib and pirfenidone when co-administered in IPF patients.

Breath biomarkers in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Exhaled biomarkers may be related to disease processes in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) however their clinical role remains unclear. We performed a systematic review to investigate whether breath biomarkers discriminate between patients with IPF and healthy controls. We also assessed correlation with lung function, ability to distinguish diagnostic subgroups and change in response to treatment. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were searched. Study selection was limited to adults with a diagnosis of IPF as per international guidelines. RESULTS: Of 1014 studies screened, fourteen fulfilled selection criteria and included 257 IPF patients. Twenty individual biomarkers discriminated between IPF and controls and four showed correlation with lung function. Meta-analysis of three studies indicated mean (± SD) alveolar nitric oxide (CalvNO) levels were significantly higher in IPF (8.5 ± 5.5 ppb) than controls (4.4 ± 2.2 ppb). Markers of oxidative stress in exhaled breath condensate, such as hydrogen peroxide and 8-isoprostane, were also discriminatory. Two breathomic studies have isolated discriminative compounds using mass spectrometry. There was a lack of studies assessing relevant treatment and none assessed differences in diagnostic subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests CalvNO is higher in IPF, although studies were limited by small sample size. Further breathomic work may identify biomarkers with diagnostic and prognostic potential.

Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: Practical Management Recommendations for Potential Adverse Events.

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a fatal lung disease with a dismal survival rate of only 3 years and no curative pharmacological therapy. The recent approval of 2 anti-fibrotic drugs (nintedanib and pirfenidone) that slow disease progression has provided some hope for patients. However, effectively managing anti-fibrotic treatment can be a challenge due to tolerability issues, the presence of pulmonary and extra-pulmonary comorbidities, and the need for concomitant medications in many patients. In general, making clear evidence-based decisions can be difficult for physicians because patients with comorbidities are often excluded from clinical trials. Since currently anti-fibrotic drugs are the only effective therapeutics capable of slowing disease progression, it is imperative that all treatment options are thoroughly evaluated and exhausted in each individual, irrespective of complicating factors, to permit the best outcome for the patient. In this review, we present data from clinical trials, post hoc analyses, post-marketing surveillance, and real-world studies that are relevant to the management of nintedanib treatment. In addition, we also provide practical recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary panel of experts for the management of nintedanib treatment in patients with IPF associated complications and those experiencing gastrointestinal side effects.

Antifibrotic therapy in progressive pulmonary fibrosis: a review of recent advances.

INTRODUCTION: Progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF) is a manifestation of a heterogenous group of underlying interstitial lung disease (ILD) diagnoses, defined as non-idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) progressive fibrotic ILD meeting at least two of the following criteria in the previous 12 months: worsening respiratory symptoms, absolute decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) more than or equal to 5% and/or absolute decline in diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) more than or equal to 10% and/or radiological progression. AREAS COVERED: The authors subjectively reviewed a synthesis of literature from PubMed to identify recent advances in the diagnosis and characterisation of PPF, treatment recommendations, and management challenges. This review provides a comprehensive summary of recent advances and highlights future directions for the diagnosis, management, and treatment of PPF. EXPERT OPINION: Recent advances in defining the criteria for PPF diagnosis and licensing of treatment are likely to support further characterisation of the PPF patient population and improve our understanding of prevalence. The diagnosis of PPF remains challenging with the need for a specialised ILD multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach. The evidence base supports the use of immunomodulatory therapy to treat inflammatory ILDs and antifibrotic therapy where PPF develops. Treatment needs to be tailored to the specific underlying disease and determined on a case-by-case basis.

Assessment of the impact of social deprivation, distance to hospital and time to diagnosis on survival in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive condition associated with a variable prognosis. The relationship between socioeconomic status or distance travelled to respiratory clinics and prognosis is unclear. RESEARCH QUESTION: To determine whether socioeconomic status, distance to hospital and time to referral affects survival in patients with IPF. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we used data collected from the British Thoracic Society Interstitial Lung Diseases Registry, between 2013 and 2021 (n = 2359) and calculated the quintile of Index of Multiple Deprivation 2019 score, time from initial symptoms to hospital attendance and distance as the linear distance between hospital and home post codes. Survival was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: There was a significant association between increasing quintile of deprivation and duration of symptoms prior to hospital presentation, Gender Age Physiology (GAP) index and receipt of supplemental oxygen and antifibrotic therapies at presentation. The most deprived patients had worse overall survival compared to least deprived after adjusting for smoking status, GAP index, distance to hospital and time to referral (HR = 1.39 [1.11, 1.73]; p = 0.003). Patients living furthest from a respiratory clinic also had worse survival compared to those living closest (HR = 1.29 [1.01, 1.64]; p = 0.041). INTERPRETATION: The most deprived patients with IPF have more severe disease at presentation and worse outcomes. Living far from hospital was also associated with poor outcomes. This suggests inequalities in access to healthcare and requires consideration in delivering effective and equitable care to patients with IPF.

Research priorities for progressive pulmonary fibrosis in the UK.

INTRODUCTION: Health research bodies recommend patient involvement and engagement in research and healthcare planning, although their implementation is not yet widespread. This deficiency extends to progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF), where crucial aspects remain unknown, including causal mechanisms, curative treatments and optimal symptom management. This study addresses these gaps by seeking stakeholders' perspectives to guide research and treatment directions. METHOD: A priority-setting partnership was established to explore stakeholders' priorities in the diagnosis, treatment, management and care of PPF, including idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis which is the archetypal PPF. Stakeholders included people living with PPF, their carers, relatives and healthcare professionals involved in their management. RESULTS: Through an online open-ended survey, 2542 responses were collected from 638 stakeholders. Thematic analysis identified 48 specific research questions, which were then cross-referenced with academic literature to pinpoint research gaps. Following the evidence check, 44 unanswered questions were shortlisted by 834 stakeholders in a second online survey. Ultimately, a top 10 priority list was established through consensus.The prioritised research questions include (1) improved diagnosis accuracy and timing, (2) development of new treatments, (3) enhanced accuracy in primary care, (4) optimal timing for drug and non-drug interventions, (5) effective cough treatment, (6) early intervention for PPF, (7) improved survival rates, (8) symptom reduction, (9) impact of interventions on life expectancy and (10) new treatments with reduced side effects. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders' priorities can be summarised into five areas: early diagnosis, drug and non-drug treatments, survival and symptom management. Ideally, these topics should guide funding bodies and health policies.