Enhancing Risk Assessment in Patients Receiving Chronic Opioid Analgesic Therapy Using Natural Language Processing.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical guidelines for the use of opioids in chronic noncancer pain recommend assessing risk for aberrant drug-related behaviors prior to initiating opioid therapy. Despite recent dramatic increases in prescription opioid misuse and abuse, use of screening tools by clinicians continues to be underutilized. This research evaluated natural language processing (NLP) together with other data extraction techniques for risk assessment of patients considered for opioid therapy as a means of predicting opioid abuse. DESIGN: Using a retrospective cohort of 3,668 chronic noncancer pain patients with at least one opioid agreement between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2012, we examined the availability of electronic health record structured and unstructured data to populate the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) and other selected outcomes. Clinician-documented opioid agreement violations in the clinical notes were determined using NLP techniques followed by manual review of the notes. RESULTS: Confirmed through manual review, the NLP algorithm had 96.1% sensitivity, 92.8% specificity, and 92.6% positive predictive value in identifying opioid agreement violation. At the time of most recent opioid agreement, automated ORT identified 42.8% of patients as at low risk, 28.2% as at moderate risk, and 29.0% as at high risk for opioid abuse. During a year following the agreement, 22.5% of patients had opioid agreement violations. Patients classified as high risk were three times more likely to violate opioid agreements compared with those with low/moderate risk. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that NLP techniques have potential utility to support clinicians in screening chronic noncancer pain patients considered for long-term opioid therapy.

Efficacy of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Elderly Patients with COPD: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this pooled analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) 62.5/25 µg dual bronchodilation versus placebo in elderly symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: We conducted a post hoc pooled analysis of data from 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Change from baseline (CFB) in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), proportion of FEV1 responders (≥ 100-mL increase from baseline), and safety were analyzed in patients aged < 65, ≥ 65, and ≥ 75 years on Days 28, 56, and 84 (12-week analysis of parallel-group design studies), Days 28, 56, 84, 112, 140, 168, and 169 (24-week analysis of parallel-group design studies), and Days 2, 42, and 84 (12-week analysis of crossover design studies). RESULTS: The UMEC/VI intent-to-treat (ITT) populations comprised 2246, 1296, and 472 patients in the 12-week parallel-group, 24-week parallel-group, and 12-week crossover analysis, respectively (≥ 65 years: 36-44%; ≥ 75 years: 7-11%). The placebo ITT populations comprised 528, 280, and 505 patients, respectively (≥ 65 years: 37-41%; ≥ 75 years: 5-11%). Significant improvements in trough FEV1 and significantly greater proportions of FEV1 responders were seen with UMEC/VI compared with placebo in all analyses regardless of patient age or timepoint considered (p ≤ 0.023), except Day 84 trough FEV1 CFB in the 12-week crossover analysis in patients aged ≥ 75 years (p = 0.064). UMEC/VI safety profile was similar to placebo in all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled analysis of RCT data, once-daily UMEC/VI was well tolerated and provided clinically significant lung function benefits compared with placebo in younger and older patients with COPD. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline (study 208125).

Psychometric validation of the electronic chronic pain questions (eCPQ) in a primary care setting.

OBJECTIVE: Collecting data that helps evaluate different types of pain may improve physicians' decision-making with regard to treatment selection and on-going monitoring of patients. To date, no chronic pain assessments have been widely implemented in primary care. The aim of this study was to psychometrically validate the electronic Chronic Pain Questions (eCPQ) in a primary care setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: All men and women ≥18 years arriving at two similar primary care clinics in southeastern Michigan were invited to participate. Clinic staff verbally administered the eCPQ to patients and recorded their answers into the electronic medical record (EMR) prior to physician consultation with results available for physician review. Concurrent validity was assessed using Spearman correlations between eCPQ and patient-completed ancillary measures. Known-group validity was assessed by stratifying patients on self-reported chronic pain as well as by pain diagnosis (i.e. ICD-9 codes). To compare patients with chronic pain versus no chronic pain t-tests and chi-square tests were performed. Reproducibility was assessed between interviewer- and self-administration over time. RESULTS: A total of 534 patients were invited to participate and 455 patients consented to take part in the study (85.2% response rate); 395 patients had analyzable eCPQ data; 70.1% were Caucasian; 68.1% female; mean age was 43.4; 52.7% (n = 208) self-reported chronic pain. Correlations between eCPQ and ancillary measures supported concurrent validity. Excellent discrimination between groups was evidenced based on self-reported chronic pain and ICD-9 diagnosis. Patients with self-reported chronic pain reported significantly (p < .0001) higher pain ratings and greater interference with usual activities, sleep, and mood than those without chronic pain. Test-retest reliability between modes (interviewer- vs. self-administration) was excellent as was reproducibility based on self-administration of the eCPQ at two separate time points. Key limitations: Discriminant validity was determined by comparing participants based on ICD codes. Utilizing ICD codes to identify individuals with chronic pain may not be a reliable approach as it is dependent upon providers accurately and consistently entering chronic pain diagnoses in the EMR. CONCLUSIONS: The eCPQ has sound psychometric measurement properties, including concurrent validity, discriminant validity, and reproducibility. The eCPQ appears to be useful to identify patients with chronic pain and to assess and monitor symptoms over time.

Stability of frozen methacholine solutions in unit-dose syringes for bronchoprovocation.

OBJECTIVE: Methacholine solutions < 0.25 mg/mL must be prepared fresh daily, while concentrations > or = 0.25 mg/mL must be prepared at 2-week intervals according to US Food and Drug Administration-required labeling. The purpose of this report was to determine whether freezing methacholine solutions in unit-dose syringes would allow less frequent preparation. DESIGN: Diluent containing 0.5% sodium chloride, 0.275% sodium bicarbonate, and 0.4% phenol was used to prepare 11 concentrations of methacholine ranging from 0.031 to 32.0 mg/mL. Three milliliters of each dilution was placed into 5-mL polypropylene syringes and immediately frozen. Methacholine concentrations were determined using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography assay after preparation (time zero) and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 months. On the day of analysis, the samples were allowed to thaw to room temperature. An additional set of each dilution was stored at room temperature for 24 h after thawing and then analyzed for methacholine. RESULTS: Samples > or = 0.062 mg/mL analyzed immediately after thawing retained > or = 90% of labeled potency for at least 6 months, while the 0.031-mg/mL sample retained 90% potency for 4 months. Most samples analyzed 24 h after thawing lost potency. CONCLUSION: If prepared and stored in unit-dose syringes frozen, methacholine solutions containing 0.062 to 32.0 mg/mL can be prepared at 6-month intervals, and solutions containing 0.031 mg/mL can be prepared at 4-month intervals. Once thawed, unused methacholine solutions should be discarded.

Methacholine challenge testing: comparison of the two American Thoracic Society-recommended methods.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Recent American Thoracic Society guidelines recommend two different methods of methacholine challenge testing: the 2-min tidal breathing method with twofold increases in concentration, and the five-breath dosimeter method with fourfold increases. Since the tidal breathing method delivers more methacholine to the mouthpiece, we hypothesized that the provocative concentration of methacholine required to decrease FEV(1) by 20% (PC(20)) would be lower than with the dosimeter method. DESIGN: Twelve subjects 18 to 45 years old with stable asthma were selected on the basis of a screening PC(20) (by tidal breathing) of < 1 mg/mL, 1 to 4 mg/mL, or 4 to 16 mg/mL (4 subjects in each concentration range). On subsequent visits within a 7-day period, methacholine challenge testing with tidal breathing or dosimeter were performed on separate days, in a randomized crossover manner. RESULTS: The geometric mean PC(20) was 1.8 mg/mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7 to 4.3) after tidal breathing and 1.6 mg/mL (95% CI, 0.7 to 3.7) after dosimeter (p = 0.2). There was no significant difference between the screening PC(20) and the PC(20) obtained by either method on randomized study days. The maximum decrease in FEV(1) from diluent baseline after the last concentration was 27.8% (range, 20 to 50%) during tidal breathing and 27.9% (range, 16 to 47%) during the dosimeter method (p = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Both methods give similar results. Fourfold increases in methacholine concentration with the dosimeter method are as safe as twofold increases with the tidal breathing method.

In vitro performance characteristics of valved holding chamber and spacer devices with a fluticasone metered-dose inhaler.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the in vitro aerosol deposition characteristics of several commercially available valved holding chamber (VHC) and spacer devices used with a fluticasone metered-dose inhaler (MDI). DESIGN: In vitro aerosol deposition study SETTING: University-affiliated research center. DEVICES: Seven VHC devices: BreatheRite, E-Z Spacer, EasiVent, AeroChamber, InspirEase, OptiChamber, and Space Chamber. Six spacer devices: OptiHaler, Aerosol Cloud Enhancer (ACE), Gentle-Haler, MediSpacer, Ellipse, and a 6-inch tube (1-inch inside diameter). INTERVENTION: The respirable dose (aerosol particles 1-5 microm) of fluticasone was determined by sampling 10 220-microg actuations from five runs with each spacer or VHC plus MDI combination, by using a well-established in vitro cascade impactor method. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fluticasone aerosol was washed from the impactor with methanol and quantified by means of high-performance liquid chromatography. Differences among outcomes were determined with analysis-of-variance testing. Among spacers, Ellipse had the highest respirable dose (104 microg, p < 0.01). Respirable doses for the 6-inch tube (74.3 microg), Gentle-Haler (81.7 microg), and MediSpacer (82.6 microg) were no different from that of the MDI (p > 0.05), whereas respirable doses of OptiHaler (44.6 microg) and ACE (47.2 microg) were less than those of all other spacers (p < 0.001). Among VHC devices, respirable doses from EasiVent (35.6 microg), AeroChamber (47.0 microg), InspirEase (52.7 microg), OptiChamber (53.1 microg), and Space Chamber (58.3 microg) were not different (p > 0.05), whereas BreatheRite (13.1 microg) and E-Z Spacer (27.3 microg) respirable doses were less than those of the other VHC devices (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Spacers and VHC devices available in the United States do not demonstrate equivalent in vitro performance with the fluticasone MDI. The difference between highest and lowest respirable doses in each device category would likely lead to clinically relevant differences in the quantity of fluticasone delivered to a patient.

Differences in inhaled fluticasone bioavailability between holding chambers in children with asthma.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine if differences between holding chambers in previous in vitro aerosol studies would agree with the bioavailability of inhaled fluticasone propionate between the same holding chambers in children with asthma. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, crossover study SETTING: University of Florida Clinical Research Center. PATIENTS: Eight children (aged 5-9 yrs) with stable asthma. INTERVENTION: Under observation, the children inhaled two 110-microg puffs of fluticasone twice/day through the InspirEase or E-Z Spacer holding chamber. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood samples were collected at baseline and then at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, and 6 hours after the last dose of fluticasone. Primary outcome measures were peak fluticasone steady-state plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the fluticasone plasma concentration-time curve from 0-6 hours (AUC0-6). The fluticasone plasma concentrations were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometric assay. Mean +/- SD Cmax from InspirEase (245 +/- 77 pg/ml) was 18% higher than that after E-Z Spacer (199 +/- 58 pg/ml, p < 0.05). Mean +/- SD AUC0-6 from InspirEase (1103 +/- 305 pg x hr(-1) x ml(-1) was 22% higher than that delivered from E-Z Spacer (863 +/- 258 pg x hr(-1) x ml(-1), p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Differences in inhaled fluticasone bioavailability between these holding chambers in children with asthma corroborate differences reported in earlier in vitro aerosol studies.

In vitro performance of two common valved holding chambers with a chlorofluorocarbon-free beclomethasone metered-dose inhaler.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare in vitro aerosol deposition from a beclomethasone dipropionate metered-dose inhaler (MDI) containing hydrofluoroalkane propellant with that of the MDI in combination with two common valved holding chambers (VHCs) to evaluate how these VHCs affect the respirable dose of beclomethasone dipropionate. DESIGN: In vitro aerosol deposition study. SETTING: University research center. DEVICES: Beclomethasone dipropionate hydrofluoroalkane MDI alone, the MDI with OptiChamber VHC, and the MDI with AeroChamber-Plus VHC. INTERVENTION: The respirable dose (1-5-microm aerosol particles) of beclomethasone dipropionate was determined by sampling 10 80-microg actuations from five runs with each configuration (MDI alone, MDI with OptiChamber, and MDI with AeroChamber-Plus), using a well-established in vitro cascade impactor method. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Beclomethasone dipropionate aerosol was washed from the impactor with 50% methanol and quantified by means of high-performance liquid chromatography. Differences among outcomes were determined by using analysis of variance. Mean beclomethasone dipropionate respirable dose from AeroChamber-Plus (27.2 +/- 10.0 microg/actuation) was not significantly different (p>0.05) from that of the MDI alone (29.0 +/- 7.0 microg/actuation). OptiChamber respirable dose (12.8 +/- 6.0 microg/actuation) was less than half that produced by either the AeroChamber-Plus or the MDI alone (p=0.013). CONCLUSIONS: The OptiChamber and AeroChamber-Plus VHCs do not demonstrate equivalent in vitro performance when used with a beclomethasone dipropionate MDI that contains hydrofluoroalkane propellant. The respirable dose of beclomethasone dipropionate aerosol from the hydrofluoroalkane MDI was decreased by only 6% when the MDI was mated to an AeroChamber-Plus VHC and by 56% when used with an OptiChamber VHC.

Tobramycin as a pharmacologic tracer to compare airway deposition from nebulizers.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of inhaled tobramycin as a pharmacologic tracer for comparing lung deposition from a prototypic breath-actuated jet nebulizer connected to an electronic pressure sensor designed to coordinate nebulization with inspiration with that from a continuously operating standard jet nebulizer. DESIGN: Prospective open-label study. SETTING: University-affiliated research center. SUBJECTS: Six healthy adult volunteers. INTERVENTION: All subjects received inhaled tobramycin 80, 160, and 320 mg from each nebulizer during six visits, as well as oral tobramycin 32 mg at a seventh visit to confirm the absence of significant gastrointestinal absorption. During each visit, urine was collected before drug administration and in 12-hour segments throughout the first 48 hours after administration. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Lung deposition of tracer after each of the seven treatments was quantified by measuring urinary tobramycin excretion over 48 hours with use of an enzyme-multiplied immunoassay technique. The ratio of tobramycin excreted after breath-actuated nebulization to that after standard nebulization, normalized for dose, was used to compare lung deposition by the two devices. Urinary excretion of tobramycin was linear and proportional to dose for both nebulizers. For every 1 mg of tobramycin that the standard nebulizer deposited into the lungs, the breath-actuated nebulizer deposited 1.22 mg (95% confidence interval 1.04-1.43). CONCLUSIONS: Tobramycin can be used as a pharmacologic tracer for comparison of relative airway deposition by nebulizers.

Pregabalin in patients with inadequately treated painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a randomized withdrawal trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study used a randomized withdrawal design to evaluate the efficacy of pregabalin versus placebo for pain relief in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy inadequately treated by other therapies. METHODS: A total of 665 patients received pregabalin in a 6-week single-blind phase. Two hundred ninety-four patients who achieved a ≥ 30% pain response were randomized to receive pregabalin or placebo in a double-blind phase for a further 13 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in mean pain score from single-blind baseline to double-blind endpoint for pregabalin versus placebo (last observation carried forward [LOCF]). Secondary endpoints included a baseline observation carried forward (BOCF) analysis of mean pain score; time to loss of pain response; and other assessments of pain, sleep, function, and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: Pregabalin numerically improved all measures assessed during the single-blind phase. At the end of the double-blind withdrawal phase, there was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of mean pain score (LOCF) between pregabalin and placebo (least squares mean difference, -0.32), although there was a significant difference in the BOCF analysis (least squares mean difference, -0.51). Pregabalin was associated with a significantly longer time to loss of pain response versus placebo during double-blind treatment, and some aspects of sleep and QOL also showed significant improvements with pregabalin. DISCUSSION: This is the first reported placebo-controlled trial of pregabalin in patients with inadequately treated painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Although the primary endpoint was not met, pregabalin was associated with clinically relevant improvements versus placebo in this difficult-to-treat population.

A 500-ml plastic bottle: an effective spacer for children with asthma.

Inhaled therapy using a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with attached spacer has been increasingly recognized as the optimal method for delivering asthma medication for acute attacks and chronic prophylaxis. However, in developing countries the cost and availability of commercially produced spacers limit the use of MDI-spacer delivery systems. A 500-ml plastic bottle has been recently adapted to function as a spacer. This article reviews the current data on the efficacy of this bottle-spacer and discusses its advantages and limitations. It is concluded that a modified 500-ml plastic bottle is an effective spacer; modification and use of this device should be incorporated into international guidelines for the management of children with asthma.

Management of exercise-induced bronchospasm in children.

Bronchospasm precipitated by exercise is often indistinguishable from bronchospasm produced by other stimuli. Symptoms result from airflow limitation and include wheezing, cough, chest tightness, dyspnea and sometimes hypoxemia. The prevalence of exercise-induced bronchospasm varies from 30%-90%, but virtually all patients with current asthma will experience a decrease in lung function if the exercise is sufficiently vigorous, especially in cold, dry environmental conditions. Exercise-induced bronchospasm is more prevalent in children than in adults, probably because children are physically more active. It is also more prevalent among elite winter sports athletes. The pathogenesis of exercise-induced bronchospasm involves a defect in respiratory heat exchange that probably triggers mast cell and eosinophil release of bronchoconstricting mediators. The goal of therapy is prevention of symptoms. This may be accomplished by pre-treating patients with isolated exercise-induced bronchospasm using an inhaled rapid-onset ß2-adrenergic agonist before a scheduled activity or by treating the underlying inflammation when exercise-induced bronchospasm is part of the clinical syndrome of persistent asthma. In the later instance, either an inhaled corticosteroid, an oral leukotriene modifier, or a combination of both, depending on severity, may be required to prevent exercise-induced bronchospasm associated with activities of daily living. In addition, some of these patients may still require pre-treatment with a short-acting inhaled ß2-agonist before a scheduled vigorous activity, especially in very cold ambient temperatures. Because the duration of bronchoprotection decreases with daily use (tachyphylaxis), long acting ß2-adrenergic agonists (e.g., formoterol, salmeterol) have a limited role in treating exercise-induced bronchospasm.

Performance of a corticosteroid inhaler with a spacer fashioned from a plastic cold-drink bottle: effects of changing bottle volume.

Some clinicians advocate using metered-dose inhaler (MDI) spacers prepared from common household bottles. We evaluated the in vitro aerosol characteristics of fluticasone from the MDI alone and through spacers fashioned from 237-, 500-, 1000-, and 1500-mL polyethylene terephlate plastic cold drink bottles using a cascade impactor. Ten 110-microg actuations of fluticasone were sampled into the impactor during each of five runs with each configuration. The primary outcomes were the respirable dose (i.e., quantity aerosol 1.1-4.7 microm in size) and the quantity trapped in the oropharynx. The mean fluticasone respirable dose from the MDI alone (46.2 microg/actuation) was no different (p > 0.05) compared with the same MDI mated to any of the bottle spacers, regardless of volume. The mean quantity of fluticasone trapped in the oropharynx from the MDI alone (39.2 microg/actuation) was greater (p < 0.001) than the same MDI mated with any bottle spacer (range 1.5-3.5 microg/actuation). These data suggest that any of the bottle spacers tested would be an acceptable method to decrease the quantity of fluticasone that would deposit onto the oropharynx and thereby diminish the risk of topical adverse effects. Among the range of volumes tested, there was no relationship between spacer volume and respirable dose of fluticasone.

In vitro deposition of fluticasone aerosol from a metered-dose inhaler with and without two common valved holding chambers.

BACKGROUND: Previous in vitro aerosol deposition experiments indicate that the corticosteroid respirable dose from a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) can vary by threefold depending on the specific valved holding chamber (VHC) MDI combination. OBJECTIVE: We compared in vitro aerosol deposition from a fluticasone propionate MDI (Flovent, GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC) to that of the same MDI used in combination with two VHCs (EasiVent, Dey, Napa, Ca; and AeroChamber-Plus, Monaghan Medical Corp, Plattsburgh, NY) to evaluate how these VHCs affect the respirable dose of fluticasone. METHODS: The respirable dose (aerosol particles 1 to 5 microm in size) of fluticasone was determined by sampling 5 x 110-microg actuations from each configuration (MDI alone, MDI plus AeroChamber-Plus, and MDI plus EasiVent) in multiples of ten using a well established, in vitro cascade impactor method. Fluticasone aerosol was washed from individual impactor stages with 50% methanol and quantified via ultraviolet high-pressure liquid chromatography. Differences among outcomes were determined using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Mean respirable dose from AeroChamber-Plus (47.9 +/- 6.9 microg/actuation) was not different (P > 0.05) from that produced by the MDI alone (50.3 +/- 2.2 microg/actuation). EasiVent respirable dose (27.0 +/- 3.6 microg/actuation) was less than that produced by either the AeroChamber-Plus or the MDI alone (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: VHCs do not display equivalent in vitro performance with a fluticasone MDI. If a patient needs a VHC, clinicians should use available in vitro performance information to aid in selecting the best device.