A Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Imipenem/Cilastatin/Relebactam Versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam in Adults With Hospital-acquired or Ventilator-associated Bacterial Pneumonia (RESTORE-IMI 2 Study).

BACKGROUND: Imipenem combined with the ß-lactamase inhibitor relebactam has broad antibacterial activity, including against carbapenem-resistant gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated efficacy and safety of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam in treating hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP). METHODS: This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial. Adults with HABP/VABP were randomized 1:1 to imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam 500 mg/500 mg/250 mg or piperacillin/tazobactam 4 g/500 mg, intravenously every 6 hours for 7-14 days. The primary endpoint was day 28 all-cause mortality in the modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population (patients who received study therapy, excluding those with only gram-positive cocci at baseline). The key secondary endpoint was clinical response 7-14 days after completing therapy in the MITT population. RESULTS: Of 537 randomized patients (from 113 hospitals in 27 countries), the MITT population comprised 264 imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam and 267 piperacillin/tazobactam patients; 48.6% had ventilated HABP/VABP, 47.5% APACHE II score ≥15, 24.7% moderate/severe renal impairment, 42.9% were ≥65 years old, and 66.1% were in the intensive care unit. The most common baseline pathogens were Klebsiella pneumoniae (25.6%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (18.9%). Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam was noninferior (P < .001) to piperacillin/tazobactam for both endpoints: day 28 all-cause mortality was 15.9% with imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam and 21.3% with piperacillin/tazobactam (difference, -5.3% [95% confidence interval {CI}, -11.9% to 1.2%]), and favorable clinical response at early follow-up was 61.0% and 55.8%, respectively (difference, 5.0% [95% CI, -3.2% to 13.2%]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 26.7% of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam and 32.0% of piperacillin/tazobactam patients; AEs leading to treatment discontinuation in 5.6% and 8.2%, respectively; and drug-related AEs (none fatal) in 11.7% and 9.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam is an appropriate treatment option for gram-negative HABP/VABP, including in critically ill, high-risk patients. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02493764.

Asthma in Asia: Physician perspectives on control, inhaler use and patient communications.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the physician perspectives on asthma management in Asia. METHODS: An online/face-to-face, questionnaire-based survey of respiratory specialists and primary care physicians from eight Asian countries/region was carried out. The survey explored asthma control, inhaler selection, technique and use; physician-patient communications and asthma education. Inclusion criteria were >50% of practice time spent on direct patient care; and treated >30 patients with asthma per month, of which >60% were aged >12 years. RESULTS: REALISE Asia (Phase 2) involved 375 physicians with average 15.9(±6.8) years of clinical experience. 89.1% of physicians reporting use of guidelines estimated that 53.2% of their patients have well-controlled (GINA-defined) asthma. Top consideration for inhaler choice was asthma severity (82.4%) and lowest, socio-economic status (32.5%). Then 54.7% of physicians checked their patients' inhaler techniques during consultations but 28.2(±19.1)% of patients were using their inhalers incorrectly; 21.1-57.9% of physicians could spot improper inhaler techniques in video demonstrations. And 79.6% of physicians believed combination inhalers could increase adherence because of convenience (53.7%), efficacy (52.7%) and usability (18.9%). Initial and follow-up consultations took 16.8(±8.4) and 9.2(±5.3) minutes, respectively. Most (85.1%) physicians used verbal conversations and least (24.5%), video demonstrations of inhaler use; 56.8% agreed that patient attitudes influenced their treatment approach. CONCLUSION: Physicians and patients have different views of 'well-controlled' asthma. Although physicians informed patients about asthma and inhaler usage, they overestimated actual usage and patients' knowledge was sub-optimal. Physician-patient interactions can be augmented with understanding of patient attitudes, visual aids and ancillary support to perform physical demonstrations to improve treatment outcomes.

Intravenous Tocilizumab versus Standard of Care in the Treatment of Severe and Critical COVID-19-related Pneumonia: A Single-center, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase 3 Trial.

Background: Severe and critical COVID-19 disease is characterized by hyperinflammation involving pro-inflammatory cytokines, particularly IL-6. Tocilizumab is a monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-6 receptors. Objectives: This study evaluated the efficacy of tocilizumab in Filipino patients with severe to critical COVID-19 disease. Methods: This phase 3 randomized double-blind trial, included patients hospitalized for severe or critical COVID-19 in a 1:1 ratio to receive either tocilizumab plus local standard of care or placebo plus standard of care. Patients were eligible for a repeat IV infusion within 24-48 hours if they deteriorated or did not improve. Treatment success or clinical improvement was defined as at least two categories of improvement from baseline in the WHO 7-point Ordinal Scale of patient status, in an intention-to-treat manner. Results: Forty-nine (49) patients were randomized in the tocilizumab arm and 49 in the placebo arm. There was no significant difference in age, comorbidities, COVID-19 severity, need for mechanical ventilation, presence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, or biomarker levels between groups. Use of adjunctive therapy was similar between groups, with corticosteroid used in 91.8% in tocilizumab group and 81.6% in the placebo group, while remdesivir was used in 98% of participants in both groups.There was no significant difference between groups in terms of treatment success in both the intention-to-treat analysis (relative risk=1.05, 95% CI: 0.85-1.30) and per-protocol analysis (relative risk=0.98, 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.21). There was no significant difference in time to improvement of at least two categories relative to baseline on the 7-point Ordinal Scale of clinical status. Conclusion: The use of tocilizumab on top of standard of care in the management of patients with severe to critical COVID-19 did not result in significant improvement as defined by the WHO 7-point Ordinal Scale of patient status, nor in significant improvement in incidence of mechanical ventilation, incidence of ICU admission, length of ICU stay, and mortality rate.

Utility of laboratory and immune biomarkers in predicting disease progression and mortality among patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease at a Philippine tertiary hospital.

Purpose: This study was performed to determine the clinical biomarkers and cytokines that may be associated with disease progression and in-hospital mortality in a cohort of hospitalized patients with RT-PCR confirmed moderate to severe COVID-19 infection from October 2020 to September 2021, during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic before the advent of vaccination. Patients and methods: Clinical profile was obtained from the medical records. Laboratory parameters (complete blood count [CBC], albumin, LDH, CRP, ferritin, D-dimer, and procalcitonin) and serum concentrations of cytokines (IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-18, IFN-γ, IP-10, TNF-α) were measured on Days 0-3, 4-10, 11-14 and beyond Day 14 from the onset of illness. Regression analysis was done to determine the association of the clinical laboratory biomarkers and cytokines with the primary outcomes of disease progression and mortality. ROC curves were generated to determine the predictive performance of the cytokines. Results: We included 400 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection, 69% had severe to critical COVID-19 on admission. Disease progression occurred in 139 (35%) patients, while 18% of the total cohort died (73 out of 400). High D-dimer >1 µg/mL (RR 3.5 95%CI 1.83-6.69), elevated LDH >359.5 U/L (RR 1.85 95%CI 1.05-3.25), lymphopenia (RR 1.91 95%CI 1.14-3.19), and hypoalbuminemia (RR 2.67, 95%CI 1.05-6.78) were significantly associated with disease progression. High D-dimer (RR 3.95, 95%CI 1.62-9.61) and high LDH (RR 5.43, 95%CI 2.39-12.37) were also significantly associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Nonsurvivors had significantly higher IP-10 levels at 0 to 3, 4 to 10, and 11 to 14 days from illness onset (p<0.01), IL-6 levels at 0 to 3 days of illness (p=0.03) and IL-18 levels at days 11-14 of illness (p<0.001) compared to survivors. IP-10 had the best predictive performance for disease progression at days 0-3 (AUC 0.81, 95%CI: 0.68-0.95), followed by IL-6 at 11-14 days of illness (AUC 0.67, 95%CI: 0.61-0.73). IP-10 predicted mortality at 11-14 days of illness (AUC 0.77, 95%CI: 0.70-0.84), and IL-6 beyond 14 days of illness (AUC 0.75, 95%CI: 0.68-0.82). Conclusion: Elevated D-dimer, elevated LDH, lymphopenia and hypoalbuminemia are prognostic markers of disease progression. High IP-10 and IL-6 within the 14 days of illness herald disease progression. Additionally, elevated D-dimer and LDH, high IP-10, IL-6 and IL-18 were also associated with mortality. Timely utilization of these biomarkers can guide clinical monitoring and management decisions for COVID-19 patients in the Philippines.

Signet-ring cell adenocarcinoma of unknown primary presenting with superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome: rare type of cancer.

A 53-year-old man presented with a 3-month history of progressive, non-productive cough followed by occasional swelling of the face and upper extremities. Physical examination on admission revealed prominent superficial vessels at the neck and upper extremity swelling. Bronchoscopy revealed the superior segment of the right lower lobe was narrow but without visible mass; cell block and biopsy done revealed signet-ring cell carcinoma with an immunohistochemistry pattern favouring the primary site of malignancy as either gastric or of the pancreaticobiliary tree. However, CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis with triple contrast revealed only slight gastric wall thickening; the pancreas was unremarkable. The patient underwent radiotherapy with noted improvement of symptoms. He was then discharged with plans for further work-up on an outpatient basis. This work highlights the importance of a comprehensive histopathological and immunohistochemical work-up which can help predict a site of origin to be able to provide the appropriate management.

Association of Metabolic Syndrome with the Severity of Airflow Obstruction in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) is common in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients but their association is still an unsettled issue. The aim of this study was to determine the association of MetS with the severity of airflow obstruction. METHODOLOGY: This was a cross-sectional analytic study of 157 patients with COPD. They were classified using the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Diseases (GOLD). MetS was assessed using two well-recognized criteria. Demographics, clinical data, lifestyle-related characteristics, fasting blood sugar (FBS) and lipid profile were obtained. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine the association of MetS with the severity of airflow obstruction. RESULTS: 40.13% and 17.20% of patients had MetS using the NCEP/ATP III-AHA/NHBLI and IDF criteria, respectively. MetS was not associated with severity of airflow obstruction. Of the MetS components, only elevated blood pressure (BP) was significantly associated with severity of airflow obstruction (GOLD II: OR=3.28, p<0.001; GOLD III: OR=4.04, p=0.2; GOLD IV: OR=6.21, p=0.04). Elevated FBS was also associated with GOLD IV (OR=16.09, p=0.02). Significant factors associated with MetS in COPD patients were body mass index, inhaled steroid, number of pack-years, and GOLD II. CONCLUSION: MetS is not associated with severity of airflow obstruction. Only certain components of MetS showed significant associations such as elevated BP with GOLD II-IV and elevated FBS with GOLD IV.

Development and Validation of an Attitudinal-Profiling Tool for Patients With Asthma.

PURPOSE: To develop a profiling tool which accurately assigns a patient to the appropriate attitudinal cluster for the management of asthma. METHODS: Attitudinal data from an online survey of 2,467 patients with asthma from 8 Asian countries/region, aged 18-50 years, having had ≥2 prescriptions in the previous 2 years and access to social media was used in a discriminant function analysis to identify a minimal set of questions for the Profiling Tool. A split-sample procedure based on 100 sets of randomly selected estimation and validation sub-samples from the original sample was used to cross-validate the Tool and assess the robustness of its predictive accuracy. RESULTS: Our Profiling Tool contained 10 attitudinal questions for the patient and 1 GINA-based level of asthma control question for the physician. It achieved a predictive accuracy of 76.2%. The estimation and validation sub-sample accuracies of 76.7% and 75.3%, respectively, were consistent with the tool's predictive accuracy at 95% confidence level; and their 1.4 percentage-points difference set upper-bound estimate for the degree of over-fitting. CONCLUSIONS: The Profiling Tool is highly predictive (>75%) of the attitudinal clusters that best describe patients with asthma in the Asian population. By identifying the attitudinal profile of the patient, the physician can make the appropriate asthma management decisions in practice. The challenge is to integrate its use into the consultation workflow and apply to areas where Internet resources are not available or patients who are not comfortable with the use of such technology.

Personalising care of adults with asthma from Asia: a modified e-Dephi consensus study to inform management tailored to attitude and control profiles.

REALISE Asia-an online questionnaire-based study of Asian asthma patients-identified five patient clusters defined in terms of their control status and attitude towards their asthma (categorised as: 'Well-adjusted and at least partly controlled'; 'In denial about symptoms'; 'Tolerating with poor control'; 'Adrift and poorly controlled'; 'Worried with multiple symptoms'). We developed consensus recommendations for tailoring management of these attitudinal-control clusters. An expert panel undertook a three-round electronic Delphi (e-Delphi): Round 1: panellists received descriptions of the attitudinal-control clusters and provided free text recommendations for their assessment and management. Round 2: panellists prioritised Round 1 recommendations and met (or joined a teleconference) to consolidate the recommendations. Round 3: panellists voted and prioritised the remaining recommendations. Consensus was defined as Round 3 recommendations endorsed by >50% of panellists. Highest priority recommendations were those receiving the highest score. The multidisciplinary panellists (9 clinicians, 1 pharmacist and 1 health social scientist; 7 from Asia) identified consensus recommendations for all clusters. Recommended pharmacological (e.g., step-up/down; self-management; simplified regimen) and non-pharmacological approaches (e.g., trigger management, education, social support; inhaler technique) varied substantially according to each cluster's attitude to asthma and associated psychosocial drivers of behaviour. The attitudinal-control clusters defined by REALISE Asia resonated with the international panel. Consensus was reached on appropriate tailored management approaches for all clusters. Summarised and incorporated into a structured management pathway, these recommendations could facilitate personalised care. Generalisability of these patient clusters should be assessed in other socio-economic, cultural and literacy groups and nationalities in Asia.

Time for a new language for asthma control: results from REALISE Asia.

PURPOSE: Asthma is a global health problem, and asthma prevalence in Asia is increasing. The REcognise Asthma and LInk to Symptoms and Experience Asia study assessed patients' perception of asthma control and attitudes toward treatment in an accessible, real-life adult Asian population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An online survey of 2,467 patients with asthma from eight Asian countries/regions, aged 18-50 years, showed greater than or equal to two prescriptions in previous 2 years and access to social media. Patients were asked about their asthma symptoms, exacerbations and treatment type, views and perceptions of asthma control, attitudes toward asthma management, and sources of asthma information. RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 34.2 (±7.4) years and were diagnosed with asthma for 12.5 (±9.7) years. Half had the Global Initiative for Asthma-defined uncontrolled asthma. During the previous year, 38% of patients visited the emergency department, 33% were hospitalized, and 73% had greater than or equal to one course of oral corticosteroids. About 90% of patients felt that their asthma was under control, 82% considered their condition as not serious, and 59% were concerned about their condition. In all, 66% of patients viewed asthma control as managing attacks and 24% saw it as an absence of or minimal symptoms. About 14% of patients who correctly identified their controller inhalers had controlled asthma compared to 6% who could not. CONCLUSION: Patients consistently overestimated their level of asthma control contrary to what their symptoms suggest. They perceived control as management of exacerbations, reflective of a crisis-oriented mind-set. Interventions can leverage on patients' trust in health care providers and desire for self-management via a new language to generate a paradigm shift toward symptom control and preventive care.