Clinical Trial of Losartan for Pulmonary Emphysema: Pulmonary Trials Cooperative Losartan Effects on Emphysema Progression Clinical Trial.

Rationale: There are no pharmacologic agents that modify emphysema progression in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of losartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker, to reduce emphysema progression. Methods: The trial was a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted between May 2017 and January 2021. Eligible participants were aged ⩾40 years, had moderate to severe airflow obstruction, ⩾10 pack-years of smoking, mild-moderate emphysema on high-resolution computed tomography, and no medical indication for or intolerance of angiotensin receptor blockers. Treatment with losartan 100 mg daily or matching placebo (1:1) was randomly assigned. The primary outcome was emphysema progression on high-resolution computed tomography over 48 weeks. Secondary outcomes included the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, the COPD Assessment Test, and the Physical Function-Short Form 20a. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 220 participants were enrolled; 58% were men, 19% were African American, and 24% were current smokers. The medians (interquartile ranges) for age were 65 (61-73) years and 48 (36-59) for percent predicted FEV1 after bronchodilator use. The mean (95% confidence interval) percentage emphysema progression was 1.35% (0.67-2.03) in the losartan group versus 0.66% (0.09-1.23) in the placebo group (P = NS). Conclusions: Losartan did not prevent emphysema progression in people with COPD with mild-moderate emphysema. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02696564).

The Pediatric Optic Neuritis Prospective Outcomes Study: Two-Year Results.

PURPOSE: Pediatric optic neuritis (ON) is a rare disease that has not been well characterized. The Pediatric ON Prospective Outcomes Study (PON1) was the first prospective study to our knowledge aiming to evaluate visual acuity (VA) outcomes, including VA, recurrence risk, and final diagnosis 2 years after enrollment. DESIGN: Nonrandomized observational study at 23 pediatric ophthalmology or neuro-ophthalmology clinics in the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 28 (64%) of 44 children initially enrolled in PON1 (age 3-<16 years) who completed their 2-year study visit. METHODS: Participants were treated at the investigator's discretion. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Age-normal monocular high-contrast VA (HCVA). Secondary outcomes included low-contrast VA (LCVA), neuroimaging findings, and final diagnoses. RESULTS: A total of 28 participants completed the 2-year outcome with a median enrollment age of 10.3 years (range, 5-15); 46% were female, and 68% had unilateral ON at presentation. Final 2-year diagnoses included isolated ON (n = 11, 39%), myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein-associated demyelination (n = 8, 29%), multiple sclerosis (MS) (n = 4,14%), neuromyelitis optica spectrum disease (NMOSD) (n = 3, 11%), and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (n = 2, 7%). Two participants (7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-24) had subsequent recurrent ON (plus 1 participant who did not complete the 2-year visit); all had MS. Two other participants (7%) had a new episode in their unaffected eye. Mean presenting HCVA was 0.81 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (∼20/125), improving to 0.14 logMAR (∼20/25-2) at 6 months, 0.12 logMAR (∼20/25-2) at 1 year, and 0.11 logMAR (20/25-1) at 2 years (95% CI, -0.08 to 0.3 [20/20+1-20/40-1]). Twenty-four participants (79%) had age-normal VA at 2 years (95% CI, 60-90); 21 participants (66%) had 20/20 vision or better. The 6 participants without age-normal VA had 2-year diagnoses of NMOSD (n = 2 participants, 3 eyes), MS (n = 2 participants, 2 eyes), and isolated ON (n = 2 participants, 3 eyes). Mean presenting LCVA was 1.45 logMAR (∼20/500-2), improving to 0.78 logMAR (∼20/125+2) at 6 months, 0.69 logMAR (∼20/100+1) at 1 year, and 0.68 logMAR (∼20/100+2) at 2 years (95% CI, 0.48-0.88 [20/50+1-20/150-1]). CONCLUSIONS: Despite poor VA at presentation, most children had marked improvement in VA by 6 months that was maintained over 2 years. Associated neurologic autoimmune diagnoses were common. Additional episodes of ON occurred in 5 (18%) of the participants (3 relapses and 2 new episodes).

Validity of the Asthma Control Test Questionnaire Among Smoking Asthmatics.

BACKGROUND: Smoking asthmatics respond worse to existing asthma therapies and have more asthma symptoms and exacerbations. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the Asthma Control Test (ACT) for assessing asthma control among smokers. METHODS: Adults with asthma who smoked were enrolled and followed for 6 weeks. The statistical properties, validity, and responsiveness of the ACT were evaluated. Physician global assessment (GS) of asthma was the "gold standard." RESULTS: A total of 151 participants were enrolled: 52% female and 48% male. The median (interquartile ranges) was 35 (27, 43) years for age, 11 (7, 18) for pack-years, and 16 (13, 20) for the ACT score. Participants self-identified as African American (49%), non-Hispanic whites (38%), and Hispanic whites (11%). Participants were classified as well controlled (24%), not well controlled (42%), or very poorly controlled (34%) at enrollment. Cronbach's alpha (95% confidence interval [CI]) for the ACT at enrollment was 0.81 (0.76, 0.85). The intraclass correlation coefficient (95% CI) for agreement of scores at enrollment and 6 weeks was 0.68 (0.57, 0.78) in participant with stable asthma (n = 93). ACT scores were associated with GS (P < .001). Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (95% CI) for an ACT cutoff score of ≤19 (not well controlled) was 0.76 (0.67, 0.84). The ACT score with the maximum area under the ROC curve was 18.6. CONCLUSIONS: The ACT questionnaire was reliable and discriminated between levels of asthma control in smoking asthmatics with similar sensitivity and specificity as nonsmoking asthmatics, which confirms its value as a tool for the management of asthma in this prevalent but understudied subgroup of subjects.