Effect of COVID-19 on Bronchiectasis Exacerbation Rates: A Retrospective U.S. Insurance Claims Study.

Rationale: Bronchiectasis is a chronic, progressive disease of bronchial dilation, inflammation, and scarring leading to impaired mucociliary clearance and increased susceptibility to infection. Identified causes include previous severe respiratory infections. A small, single-center UK study demonstrated a reduction in bronchiectasis exacerbations during the first year of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. No studies have been conducted in a U.S. (commercially insured) cohort to date. Objectives: To explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the frequency of exacerbations in a large cohort of commercially insured U.S. patients with bronchiectasis by testing the hypothesis that U.S. patients with bronchiectasis had fewer exacerbations during the pandemic. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study used health insurance claims data from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart database, which included U.S. patients and their covered dependents. Eligible patients were ⩾18 years of age with bronchiectasis; patients with other respiratory conditions were excluded. The main study cohort excluded patients with frequent asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnoses. The primary objective was to compare the bronchiectasis exacerbation rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: The median number of exacerbations per patient per year decreased significantly from the year before the COVID-19 pandemic to the first year of the pandemic (1 vs. 0; P < 0.01). More patients had zero exacerbations during the first year of the pandemic than the year prior (57% vs. 24%; McNemar's chi-square = 122.56; P < 0.01). Conclusions: In a U.S. population-based study of patients with International Classification of Diseases codes for bronchiectasis, the rate of exacerbations during Year 1 of the COVID-19 pandemic was reduced compared with the 2-year time period preceding the pandemic.

Role of thoracic ultrasonography in pleurodesis pathways for malignant pleural effusions (SIMPLE): an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pleurodesis is done as an in-patient procedure to control symptomatic recurrent malignant pleural effusion (MPE) and has a success rate of 75-80%. Thoracic ultrasonography has been shown in a small study to predict pleurodesis success early by demonstrating cessation of lung sliding (a normal sign seen in healthy patients, lung sliding indicates normal movement of the lung inside the thorax). We aimed to investigate whether the use of thoracic ultrasonography in pleurodesis pathways could shorten hospital stay in patients with MPE undergoing pleurodesis. METHODS: The Efficacy of Sonographic and Biological Pleurodesis Indicators of Malignant Pleural Effusion (SIMPLE) trial was an open-label, randomised controlled trial done in ten respiratory centres in the UK and one respiratory centre in the Netherlands. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with confirmed MPE who required talc pleurodesis via either a chest tube or as poudrage during medical thorascopy were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to thoracic ultrasonography-guided care or standard care via an online platform using a minimisation algorithm. In the intervention group, daily thoracic ultrasonography examination for lung sliding in nine regions was done to derive an adherence score: present (1 point), questionable (2 points), or absent (3 points), with a lowest possible score of 9 (preserved sliding) and a highest possible score of 27 (complete absence of sliding); the chest tube was removed if the score was more than 20. In the standard care group, tube removal was based on daily output volume (per British Thoracic Society Guidelines). The primary outcome was length of hospital stay, and secondary outcomes were pleurodesis failure at 3 months, time to tube removal, all-cause mortality, symptoms and quality-of-life scores, and cost-effectiveness of thoracic ultrasonography-guided care. All outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (patients with missing data excluded), and a non-inferiority analysis of pleurodesis failure was done in the per-protocol population. This trial was registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN16441661. FINDINGS: Between Dec 31, 2015, and Dec 17, 2019, 778 patients were assessed for eligibility and 313 participants (165 [53%] male) were recruited and randomly assigned to thoracic ultrasonography-guided care (n=159) or standard care (n=154). In the modified intention-to-treat population, the median length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the intervention group (2 days [IQR 2-4]) than in the standard care group (3 days [2-5]; difference 1 day [95% CI 1-1]; p<0·0001). In the per-protocol analysis, thoracic ultrasonography-guided care was non-inferior to standard care in terms of pleurodesis failure at 3 months, which occurred in 27 (29·7%) of 91 patients in the intervention group versus 34 (31·2%) of 109 patients in the standard care group (risk difference -1·5% [95% CI -10·2% to 7·2%]; non-inferiority margin 15%). Mean time to chest tube removal in the intervention group was 2·4 days (SD 2·5) versus 3·1 days (2·0) in the standard care group (mean difference -0·72 days [95% CI -1·22 to -0·21]; p=0·0057). There were no significant between-group differences in all-cause mortality, symptom scores, or quality-of-life scores, except on the EQ-5D visual analogue scale, which was significantly lower in the standard care group at 3 months. Although costs were similar between the groups, thoracic ultrasonography-guided care was cost-effective compared with standard care. INTERPRETATION: Thoracic ultrasonography-guided care for pleurodesis in patients with MPE results in shorter hospital stay (compared with the British Thoracic Society recommendation for pleurodesis) without reducing the success rate of the procedure at 3 months. The data support consideration of standard use of thoracic ultrasonography in patients undergoing MPE-related pleurodesis. FUNDING: Marie Curie Cancer Care Committee.

Cost-effectiveness of intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator and DNase in pleural infection: evidence from the MIST2 randomised controlled trial.

The MIST2 (Second Multicentre Intrapleural Sepsis Trial) trial showed that combined intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) and recombinant human DNase was effective when compared with single agents or placebo. However, the treatment costs are significant and overall cost-effectiveness of combined therapy remains unclear.An economic evaluation of the MIST2 trial was performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of combined therapy. Costs included were those related to study medications, initial hospital stay and subsequent hospitalisations. Outcomes were measured in terms of life-years gained. All costs were reported in euro and in 2016 prices.Mean annual costs were lowest in the t-PA-DNase group (EUR 10 605 for t-PA, EUR 17 856 for DNase, EUR 13 483 for placebo and EUR 7248 for t-PA-DNase; p=0.209). Mean 1-year life expectancy was 0.988 for t-PA, 0.923 for DNase, and 0.969 for both placebo and t-PA-DNase (p=0.296). Both DNase and placebo were less effective, in terms of life-years gained, and more costly than t-PA. When placebo was compared with t-PA-DNase, the incremental cost per life-year gained of placebo was EUR 1.6 billion, with a probability of 0.85 of t-PA-DNase being cost-effective.This study demonstrates that combined t-PA-DNase is likely to be highly cost-effective. In light of this evidence, a definitive trial designed to facilitate a thorough economic evaluation is warranted to provide further evidence on the cost-effectiveness of this promising combined intervention.

Assessment of patient-reported outcome measures in pleural interventions.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of data evaluating the clinical effect on symptoms of pleural intervention procedures. This has led to the development of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to define what constitutes patient benefit. The primary aim of this paper was to prospectively assess the effect of pleural procedures on PROMs and investigate the relationship between symptom change and clinical factors. METHODS: We prospectively collected data as part of routine clinical care from 158 patients with pleural effusion requiring interventions. Specific questionnaires included two patient-reported scores (a seven-point Likert scale and a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) to assess symptoms). RESULTS: Excluding diagnostic aspiration, the majority of patients (108/126, 85.7%) experienced symptomatic benefit from fluid drainage (mean VAS improvement 42.6 mm, SD 24.7, 95% CI 37.9 to 47.3). There was a correlation between symptomatic benefit and volume of fluid removed post aspiration. A negative association was identified between the number of septations seen on ultrasound and improvement in dyspnoea VAS score in patients treated with intercostal chest drain. CONCLUSION: The results of our study highlight the effect of pleural interventions from a patient's perspective. The outcomes defined have the potential to form the basis of a clinical useful tool to appraise the effect, compare the efficiency and identify the importance of pleural interventions to the patients.