Clinical utility of a standardized chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis exposure questionnaire.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Identification of an exposure is integral to the diagnosis, management, and prognostication of chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (CHP). Standardized questionnaires may aid in the identification of exposures, however, there currently are no evidence-based patient-validated questionnaires available. Key qualifiers (including duration and frequency) which indicate exposure relevance are also poorly defined. This study assessed the use of a standardized CHP exposure questionnaire in the identification of exposures and diagnostic confidence of CHP. METHODS: People with a multi-disciplinary meeting (MDM) diagnosis from five Australian interstitial lung disease (ILD) expert centres who provided informed consent were included. Participants completed a previously developed standardized CHP Exposure Questionnaire. Responses were collected with the participant's MDM data, including diagnosis, diagnostic confidence, and clinician-elicited exposures. RESULTS: One hundred thirty participants (IPF = 58, CHP = 24, CTD-ILD = 17, unclassifiable = 19, other = 12) were included. In 33% of CHP participants, a standardized questionnaire elicited an exposure where the clinician did not. 63% of these had provisional low confidence CHP; and an exposure history would have increased the diagnostic confidence in these cases. Using the standardized questionnaire, 96% of CHP participants reporting any exposure, compared with 75% of non-HP ILD participants. CHP participants were 3.5 times more likely (p = 0.004) to report their symptoms improved on avoidance, and 2.3 times more likely (p = 0.018) to report daily frequent exposure, compared with non-HP ILDs. CONCLUSION: A standardized questionnaire which elicits exposure characteristics in addition to presence or absence of relevant exposures can increase the diagnostic confidence of CHP and reduce the proportion of antigen-indeterminate CHP.

Allowing ad libitum sleep during overnight polysomnography impacts Multiple Sleep Latency Test results in patients being assessed for hypersomnolence.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) is a key diagnostic component in the diagnosis of central disorders of hypersomnolence. Due to time constraints, it is common practice to wake patients at a standard time from overnight polysomnography (PSG) prior to the MSLT. This has the potential to influence MSLT results due to sleep deprivation. We describe the impact of allowing ad libitum sleep on the night prior to the MSLT in patients being assessed for hypersomnolence. METHODS: 580 consecutive patients undergoing PSG/MSLT for assessment of hypersomnolence were analyzed: 290 either side of a change in laboratory protocol which allowed patients ad libitum sleep during the PSG, rather than being woken at a pre-specified time. Baseline characteristics, PSG and MSLT results were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Groups were similar at baseline, other than there being more females in the ad libitum group. After adjusting for confounding variables, ad libitum patients had later sleep offset time (+58.7 minutes; p<0.001), longer PSG total sleep time (+47.8 minutes; p<0.001), longer MSLT mean sleep latency (+1.3 minutes; p=0.002) and 23% fewer MSLT with mean sleep latency less than 8 minutes (p=0.004) when compared with patients who were woken at a standard time. CONCLUSIONS: The common practice of waking patients from their PSG at a standard time has the potential to curtail sleep and impact MSLT results by reducing mean sleep latency. Patients being assessed for hypersomnolence should be allowed ad libitum sleep during the PSG on the night prior to their MSLT.

Temazepam or Melatonin Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Insomnia in Advanced Cancer: A Three-Arm, Double-Blind, Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Sleep disturbance has a prevalence of 30-78% in patients with advanced cancer. While pharmacotherapy is common, randomized controlled studies (RCTs) investigating available agents are limited. This study examines the efficacy and safety of temazepam or melatonin versus placebo for sleep in advanced cancer. Methods: This is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of temazepam, melatonin prolonged release (PR) or placebo for insomnia in patients with advanced cancer, and an insomnia severity index (ISI) score of >11. Results: Twenty-one participants were randomized: nine to temazepam, eight to melatonin, and four to placebo. Baseline characteristics between groups were similar. The adjusted mean difference in day 8 ISI score versus placebo was -9.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] -17.5, 0.7, p = 0.04) for temazepam and -9.6 (95% CI -18,-1.2, p = 0.03) for melatonin PR. There was no improvement in global quality of life. Both agents were well tolerated. Conclusion: Temazepam and melatonin PR were associated with a clinically significant improvement in patient-reported insomnia severity compared with placebo. Findings need confirmation with larger patient numbers.

Narcolepsy: Comorbidities, complexities and future directions.

Patients with narcolepsy live with a lifelong sleep-wake disorder, impairing their quality of life, productivity, educational and employment outcomes. Clinicians are becoming aware that a significant aspect of the burden of this disease relates to frequent comorbid conditions, including aspects of the patient's emotional, metabolic, sleep and immune health. This review explores the literature describing the comorbidities seen in patients with narcolepsy, to enhance understanding of these often complex presentations. It hopes to encourage a multidisciplinary approach, to collaborate with patients and a broad clinical team, and to maximise clinical and quality of life outcomes, for those living with narcolepsy.