Good Statistical Monitoring: A Flexible Open-Source Tool to Detect Risks in Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Risk-based quality management is a regulatory-recommended approach to manage risk in a clinical trial. A key element of this strategy is to conduct risk-based monitoring to detect potential risks to critical data and processes earlier. However, there are limited publicly available tools to perform the analytics required for this purpose. Good Statistical Monitoring is a new open-source solution developed to help address this need. METHODS: A team of statisticians, data scientists, clinicians, data managers, clinical operations, regulatory, and quality compliance staff collaborated to design Good Statistical Monitoring, an R package, to flexibly and efficiently implement end-to-end analyses of key risks. The package currently supports the mapping of clinical trial data from a variety of formats, evaluation of 12 key risk indicators, interactive visualization of analysis results, and creation of standardized reports. RESULTS: The Good Statistical Monitoring package is freely available on GitHub and empowers clinical study teams to proactively monitor key risks. It employs a modular workflow to perform risk assessments that can be customized by replacing any workflow component with a study-specific alternative. Results can be exported to other clinical systems or can be viewed as an interactive report to facilitate follow-up risk mitigation. Rigorous testing and qualification are performed as part of each release to ensure package quality. CONCLUSIONS: Good Statistical Monitoring is an open-source solution designed to enable clinical study teams to implement statistical monitoring of critical risks, as part of a comprehensive risk-based quality management strategy.

Assessing the performance of methods for central statistical monitoring of a binary or continuous outcome in multi-center trials: A simulation study.

BACKGROUND: Quality study monitoring is fundamental to patient safety and data integrity. Regulators and industry consortia have increasingly advocated for risk-based monitoring (RBM) and central statistical monitoring (CSM) for more effective and efficient monitoring. Assessing which statistical methods underpin these approaches can best identify unusual data patterns in multi-center clinical trials that may be driven by potential systematic errors is important. METHODS: We assessed various CSM techniques, including cross-tests, fixed-effects, mixed-effects, and finite mixture models, across scenarios with different sample sizes, contamination rates, and overdispersion via simulation. Our evaluation utilized threshold-independent metrics such as the area under the curve (AUC) and average precision (AP), offering a fuller picture of CSM performance. RESULTS: All CSM methods showed consistent characteristics across center sizes or overdispersion. The adaptive finite mixture model outperformed others in AUC and AP, especially at 30% contamination, upholding high specificity unless converging to a single-component model due to low contamination or deviation. The mixed-effects model performed well at lower contamination rates. However, it became conservative in specificity and exhibited declined performance for binary outcomes under high deviation. Cross-tests and fixed-effects methods underperformed, especially when deviation increased. CONCLUSION: Our evaluation explored the merits and drawbacks of multiple CSM methods, and found that relying on sensitivity and specificity alone is likely insufficient to fully measure predictive performance. The finite mixture method demonstrated more consistent performance across scenarios by mitigating the influence of outliers. In practice, considering the study-specific costs of false positives/negatives with available resources for monitoring is important.

A New Paradigm for Safety Data Signal Detection and Evaluation Using Open-Source Software Created by an Interdisciplinary Working Group.

Techniques to evaluate large amounts of safety data continue to evolve based on a greater understanding of how the brain processes visual information and the advancement of programing tools. The Interactive Safety Graphics Task Force of the American Statistical Association Biopharmaceutical Safety Working Group has assembled a multidisciplinary team of experts in a variety of domains to develop the next generation of open-source visual analytical tools for safety data based on these advances. The multidisciplinary approach resulted in the rapid development of the first tool, a novel interactive version of the familiar Evaluation of Drug-Induced Serious Hepatotoxicity (eDISH) graphic along with a unique clinical workflow to guide the reviewer through the data analysis. This now serves as the model for the team to expand the open-source platform into a suite of other interactive safety analysis tools.

A computerized decision support tool to implement asthma guidelines for children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for asthma management that incorporate usual-care regimens could benefit from standardized application of evidence-based guidelines. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate performance of a computerized decision support tool, the Asthma Control Evaluation and Treatment (ACET) Program, to standardize usual-care regimens for asthma management in RCTs. METHODS: Children and adolescents with persistent uncontrolled asthma living in urban census tracts were recruited into 3 multicenter RCTs (each with a usual-care arm) between 2004 and 2014. A computerized decision support tool scored asthma control and assigned an appropriate treatment step based on published guidelines. Control-level determinants (symptoms, rescue medication use, pulmonary function measure, and adherence estimates) were collected at visits and entered into the ACET Program. Changes in control levels and treatment steps were examined during the trials. RESULTS: At screening, more than half of the participants were rated as having symptoms that were not controlled or poorly controlled. The proportion of participants who gained good control between screening and randomization increased significantly in all 3 trials. Between 51% and 70% had symptoms that were well controlled by randomization. The proportion of well-controlled participants remained constant or improved slightly from randomization until the last posttreatment visit. Nighttime symptoms were the most common control-level determinant; there were few (<1%) instances of complete overlap of factors. FEV1 was the driver of control-level assignment in 30% of determinations. CONCLUSION: The ACET Program decision support tool facilitated standardized asthma assessment and treatment in multicenter RCTs and was associated with attaining and maintaining good asthma control in most participants.

The Safety Explorer Suite: Interactive Safety Monitoring for Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Frequent and thorough monitoring of patient safety is a requirement of clinical trials research. Safety data are traditionally reported in a tabular or listing format, which often translates into many pages of static displays. This poses the risk that clinically relevant signals will be obscured by the sheer volume of data reported. Interactive graphics enable the delivery of the vast scope of information found in traditional reports, but allow the user to interact with the charts in real time, focusing on signals of interest. METHODS: Clinical research staff, including biostatisticians, project managers, and a medical monitor, were consulted to guide the development of a set of interactive data visualizations that enable key safety assessments for participants. The resulting "Safety Explorer" is a set of 6 interactive, web-based, open source tools designed to address the shortcomings of traditional, static reports for safety monitoring. RESULTS: The Safety Explorer is freely available on GitHub as individual JavaScript libraries: Adverse Event Explorer, Adverse Event Timelines, Safety Histogram, Safety Outlier Explorer, Safety Results Over Time, and Safety Shift Plot; or in a single combined framework: Safety Explorer Suite. The suite can also be utilized through its R interface, the safetyexploreR package. CONCLUSIONS: The Safety Explorer provides interactive charts that contain the same information available in standard displays, but the interactive interface allows for improved exploration of patterns and comparisons. Medical Monitors, Safety Review Boards, and Project Teams can use these tools to effectively track and analyze key safety variables and study endpoints.

Effects of Omalizumab on Rhinovirus Infections, Illnesses, and Exacerbations of Asthma.

RATIONALE: Allergic inflammation has been linked to increased susceptibility to viral illnesses, but it is unclear whether this association is causal. OBJECTIVES: To test whether omalizumab treatment to reduce IgE would shorten the frequency and duration of rhinovirus (RV) illnesses in children with allergic asthma. METHODS: In the PROSE (Preventative Omalizumab or Step-up Therapy for Severe Fall Exacerbations) study, we examined children with allergic asthma (aged 6-17 yr; n = 478) from low-income census tracts in eight U.S. cities, and we analyzed virology for the groups randomized to treatment with guidelines-based asthma care (n = 89) or add-on omalizumab (n = 259). Weekly nasal mucus samples were analyzed for RVs, and respiratory symptoms and asthma exacerbations were recorded over a 90-day period during the fall seasons of 2012 or 2013. Adjusted illness rates (illnesses per sample) by treatment arm were calculated using Poisson regression. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: RVs were detected in 97 (57%) of 171 exacerbation samples and 2,150 (36%) of 5,959 nonexacerbation samples (OR, 2.32; P < 0.001). Exacerbations were significantly associated with detection of rhinovirus C (OR, 2.85; P < 0.001) and rhinovirus A (OR, 2.92; P < 0.001), as well as, to a lesser extent, rhinovirus B (OR, 1.98; P = 0.019). Omalizumab decreased the duration of RV infection (11.2 d vs. 12.4 d; P = 0.03) and reduced peak RV shedding by 0.4 log units (95% confidence interval, -0.77 to -0.02; P = 0.04). Finally, omalizumab decreased the frequency of RV illnesses (risk ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: In children with allergic asthma, treatment with omalizumab decreased the duration of RV infections, viral shedding, and the risk of RV illnesses. These findings provide direct evidence that blocking IgE decreases susceptibility to RV infections and illness. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01430403).

Can we predict fall asthma exacerbations? Validation of the seasonal asthma exacerbation index.

BACKGROUND: A Seasonal Asthma Exacerbation Predictive Index (saEPI) was previously reported based on 2 prior National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Inner City Asthma Consortium trials. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to validate the saEPI in a separate trial designed to prevent fall exacerbations with omalizumab therapy. METHODS: The saEPI and its components were analyzed to characterize those who had an asthma exacerbation during the Preventative Omalizumab or Step-Up Therapy for Fall Exacerbations (PROSE) study. We characterized those inner-city children with and without asthma exacerbations in the fall period treated with guidelines-based therapy (GBT) in the absence and presence of omalizumab. RESULTS: A higher saEPI was associated with an exacerbation in both the GBT alone (P < .001; area under the curve, 0.76) and the GBT + omalizumab group (P < .01; area under the curve, 0.65). In the GBT group, younger age at recruitment, higher total IgE, higher blood eosinophil percentage and number, and higher treatment step were associated with those who had an exacerbation compared with those who did not. In the GBT + omalizumab group, younger age at recruitment, increased eosinophil number, recent exacerbation, and higher treatment step were also associated with those who had an exacerbation. The saEPI was associated with a high negative predictive value in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: An exacerbation in children treated with GBT with or without omalizumab was associated with a higher saEPI along with higher markers of allergic inflammation, treatment step, and a recent exacerbation. Those that exacerbated on omalizumab had similar features with the exception of some markers of allergic sensitization, indicating a need to develop better markers to predict poor response to omalizumab therapy and alternative treatment strategies for children with these risk factors. The saEPI was able to reliably predict those children unlikely to have an asthma exacerbation in both groups.

Adapting and implementing an evidence-based asthma counseling intervention for resource-poor populations.

OBJECTIVE: To report implementation strategies and outcomes of an evidence-based asthma counseling intervention. The Head-off Environmental Asthma in Louisiana (HEAL) intervention integrated asthma counseling (AC) capacity and addressed challenges facing children with asthma in post-disaster New Orleans. METHODS: The HEAL intervention enrolled 182 children (4-12 years) with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma. Recruitment occurred from schools in the Greater New Orleans area for one year. Participants received home environmental assessments and tailored asthma counseling sessions during the study period based on the National Cooperative Inner City Asthma Study and the Inner City Asthma Study. Primary (i.e., asthma symptoms) and secondary outcomes (i.e., healthcare utilization) were captured. During the study, changes were made to meet the demands of a post-hurricane and resource-poor environment which included changes to staffing, training, AC tools, and AC sessions. RESULTS: After study changes were made, the AC visit rate increased by 92.3%. Significant improvements were observed across several adherence measures (e.g., running out of medications (p = 0.009), financial/insurance problems for appointments (p = 0.006), worried about medication side-effects (p = 0.01), felt medications did not work (p < 0.001)). Additionally, an increasing number of AC visits was modestly associated with a greater reduction in symptoms (test-for-trend p = 0.059). CONCLUSION: By adapting to the needs of the study population and setting, investigators successfully implemented a counseling intervention that improved participant behaviors and clinical outcomes. The strategies for implementing the AC intervention may serve as a guide for managing asthma and other chronic conditions in resource-poor settings.

Preseasonal treatment with either omalizumab or an inhaled corticosteroid boost to prevent fall asthma exacerbations.

BACKGROUND: Short-term targeted treatment can potentially prevent fall asthma exacerbations while limiting therapy exposure. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare (1) omalizumab with placebo and (2) omalizumab with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) boost with regard to fall exacerbation rates when initiated 4 to 6 weeks before return to school. METHODS: A 3-arm, randomized, double-blind, double placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial was conducted among inner-city asthmatic children aged 6 to 17 years with 1 or more recent exacerbations (clincaltrials.gov #NCT01430403). Guidelines-based therapy was continued over a 4- to 9-month run-in phase and a 4-month intervention phase. In a subset the effects of omalizumab on IFN-α responses to rhinovirus in PBMCs were examined. RESULTS: Before the falls of 2012 and 2013, 727 children were enrolled, 513 were randomized, and 478 were analyzed. The fall exacerbation rate was significantly lower in the omalizumab versus placebo arms (11.3% vs 21.0%; odds ratio [OR], 0.48; 95% CI, 0.25-0.92), but there was no significant difference between omalizumab and ICS boost (8.4% vs 11.1%; OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.33-1.64). In a prespecified subgroup analysis, among participants with an exacerbation during the run-in phase, omalizumab was significantly more efficacious than both placebo (6.4% vs 36.3%; OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.64) and ICS boost (2.0% vs 27.8%; OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.002-0.98). Omalizumab improved IFN-α responses to rhinovirus, and within the omalizumab group, greater IFN-α increases were associated with fewer exacerbations (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.01-0.88). Adverse events were rare and similar among arms. CONCLUSIONS: Adding omalizumab before return to school to ongoing guidelines-based care among inner-city youth reduces fall asthma exacerbations, particularly among those with a recent exacerbation.

Seasonal risk factors for asthma exacerbations among inner-city children.

BACKGROUND: Asthma exacerbations remain common, even in children and adolescents, despite optimal medical management. Identification of host risk factors for exacerbations is incomplete, particularly for seasonal episodes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to define host risk factors for asthma exacerbations unique to their season of occurrence. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of patients aged 6 to 20 years who comprised the control groups of the Asthma Control Evaluation study and the Inner City Anti-IgE Therapy for Asthma study. Univariate and multivariate models were constructed to determine whether patients' demographic and historical factors, allergic sensitization, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide values, spirometric measurements, asthma control, and treatment requirements were associated with seasonal exacerbations. RESULTS: The analysis included 400 patients (54.5% male; 59.0% African American; median age, 13 years). Exacerbations occurred in 37.5% of participants over the periods of observation and were most common in the fall (28.8% of participants). In univariate analysis impaired pulmonary function was significantly associated with greater odds of exacerbations for all seasons, as was an exacerbation in the previous season for all seasons except spring. In multivariate analysis exacerbation in the previous season was the strongest predictor in fall and winter, whereas a higher requirement for inhaled corticosteroids was the strongest predictor in spring and summer. The multivariate models had the best predictive power for fall exacerbations (30.5% variance attributed). CONCLUSIONS: Among a large cohort of inner-city children with asthma, patients' risk factors for exacerbation vary by season. Thus information on individual patients might be beneficial in strategies to prevent these seasonal events.

Development of cockroach immunotherapy by the Inner-City Asthma Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Cockroach allergy is a key contributor to asthma morbidity in children living in urban environments. OBJECTIVE: We sought to document immune responses to cockroach allergen and provide direction for the development of immunotherapy for cockroach allergy. METHODS: Four pilot studies were conducted: (1) an open-label study to assess the safety of cockroach sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in adults and children; (2) a randomized, double-blind biomarker study of cockroach SLIT versus placebo in adults; (3) a randomized, double-blind biomarker study of 2 doses of cockroach SLIT versus placebo in children; and (4) an open-label safety and biomarker study of cockroach subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in adults. RESULTS: The adult SLIT trial (n = 54; age, 18-54 years) found a significantly greater increase in cockroach-specific IgE levels between the active and placebo groups (geometric mean ratio, 1.92; P < .0001) and a trend toward increased cockroach-specific IgG4 levels in actively treated subjects (P = .09) but no evidence of functional blocking antibody response. The pediatric SLIT trial (n = 99; age, 5-17 years) found significant differences in IgE, IgG, and IgG4 responses between both active groups and the placebo group but no consistent differences between the high- and low-dose groups. In the SCIT study the treatment resulted in significant changes from baseline in cockroach IgE, IgG4, and blocking antibody levels. The safety profile of cockroach immunotherapy was reassuring in all studies. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of cockroach allergen by means of SCIT is immunologically more active than SLIT, especially with regard to IgG4 levels and blocking antibody responses. No safety concerns were raised in any age group. These pilot studies suggest that immunotherapy with cockroach allergen is more likely to be effective with SCIT.

Reassessment of omalizumab-dosing strategies and pharmacodynamics in inner-city children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Treatment regimens for omalizumab are guided by a dosing table that is based on total serum IgE and body weight. Limited data exist about onset and offset of omalizumab efficacy in children and adolescents or subgroups that most benefit from treatment. OBJECTIVES: Post hoc analyses were conducted to (1) examine patient characteristics of those eligible and ineligible for omalizumab, (2) describe onset of effect after initiation of omalizumab and offset of treatment effect after stopping therapy, and (3) determine whether the efficacy differs by age, asthma severity, dosing regimen, and prespecified biomarkers. METHODS: Inner-city children and adolescents with persistent allergic asthma were enrolled in the Inner-City Anti-IgE Therapy for Asthma trial that compared omalizumab with placebo added to guidelines-based therapy for 60 weeks. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-three of 889 participants (33%) clinically suitable for omalizumab were ineligible for dosing according to a modified dosing table specifying IgE level and body weight criteria. Baseline symptoms were comparable among those eligible and ineligible to receive omalizumab, but other characteristics (rate of health care utilization and skin test results) differed. The time of onset of omalizumab effect was <30 days and time of offset was between 30 and 120 days. No difference in efficacy was noted by age or asthma severity, but high exhaled nitric oxide, blood eosinophils, and body mass index predicted efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: A significant portion of children and adolescents particularly suited for omalizumab because of asthma severity status may be ineligible due to IgE >1300 IU/mL. Omalizumab reduced asthma symptoms and exacerbations rapidly; features associated with efficacy can be identified to guide patient selection.

Implementation of evidence-based asthma interventions in post-Katrina New Orleans: the Head-off Environmental Asthma in Louisiana (HEAL) study.

BACKGROUND: Childhood asthma morbidity and mortality in New Orleans, Louisiana, is among the highest in the nation. In August 2005, Hurricane Katrina created an environmental disaster that led to high levels of mold and other allergens and disrupted health care for children with asthma. OBJECTIVES: We implemented a unique hybrid asthma counselor and environmental intervention based on successful National Institutes of Health asthma interventions from the National Cooperative Inner City Asthma (NCICAS) and Inner-City Asthma (ICAS) Studies with the goal of reducing asthma symptoms in New Orleans children after Hurricane Katrina. METHODS: Children (4-12 years old) with moderate-to-severe asthma (n = 182) received asthma counseling and environmental intervention for approximately 1 year. HEAL was evaluated employing several analytical approaches including a pre-post evaluation of symptom changes over the entire year, an analysis of symptoms according to the timing of asthma counselor contact, and a comparison to previous evidence-based interventions. RESULTS: Asthma symptoms during the previous 2 weeks decreased from 6.5 days at enrollment to 3.6 days at the 12-month symptom assessment (a 45% reduction, p < 0.001), consistent with changes observed after NCICAS and ICAS interventions (35% and 62% reductions in symptom days, respectively). Children whose families had contact with a HEAL asthma counselor by 6 months showed a 4.09-day decrease [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.25 to 4.94-day decrease] in symptom days, compared with a 1.79-day decrease (95% CI: 0.90, 2.67) among those who had not yet seen an asthma counselor (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The novel combination of evidence-based asthma interventions was associated with improved asthma symptoms among children in post-Katrina New Orleans. Post-intervention changes in symptoms were consistent with previous randomized trials of NCICAS and ICAS interventions.

Indoor environmental exposures for children with asthma enrolled in the HEAL study, post-Katrina New Orleans.

BACKGROUND: Rain and flooding from Hurricane Katrina resulted in widespread growth of mold and bacteria and production of allergens in New Orleans, Louisiana, which may have led to increased exposures and morbidity in children with asthma. OBJECTIVES: The goal of the Head-off Environmental Asthma in Louisiana (HEAL) study was to characterize post-Katrina exposures to mold and allergens in children with asthma. METHODS: The homes of 182 children with asthma in New Orleans and surrounding parishes were evaluated by visual inspection, temperature and moisture measurements, and air and dust sampling. Air was collected using vacuum-pump spore traps and analyzed for > 30 mold taxa using bright field microscopy. Dust was collected from the children's beds and bedroom floors and analyzed for mouse (Mus m 1), dust mite (Der p 1), cockroach (Bla g 1), and mold (Alternaria mix) allergens using ELISA. RESULTS: More than half (62%) of the children were living in homes that had been damaged by rain, flooding, or both. Geometric mean indoor and outdoor airborne mold levels were 501 and 3,958 spores/m3, respectively. Alternaria antigen was detected in dust from 98% of homes, with 58% having concentrations > 10 µg/g. Mus m 1, Der p 1, and Bla g 1 were detected in 60%, 35%, and 20% of homes, respectively, at low mean concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Except for Alternaria antigen in dust, concentrations of airborne mold (ratio of indoor to outdoor mold) and dust allergens in the homes of HEAL children were lower than measurements found in other studies, possibly because of extensive post-Katrina mold remediation and renovations, or because children moved into cleaner homes upon returning to New Orleans.

The Head-off Environmental Asthma in Louisiana (HEAL) study--methods and study population.

BACKGROUND: In the city of New Orleans, Louisiana, and surrounding parishes (NOLA), children with asthma were perilously impacted by Hurricane Katrina as a result of disrupted health care, high home mold and allergen levels, and high stress. OBJECTIVES: The Head-off Environmental Asthma in Louisiana (HEAL) study was conducted to examine relationships between the post-Katrina environment and childhood asthma in NOLA and assess a novel asthma counselor intervention that provided case management and guidance for reducing home mold and allergen levels. METHODS: Children (4-12 years old) with moderate-to-severe asthma were recruited from NOLA schools. Over 1 year, they received two clinical evaluations, three home environmental evaluations, and the asthma intervention. Quarterly end points included symptom days, medication use, and unscheduled emergency department or clinic visits. A community advisory group was assembled and informed HEAL at all phases. RESULTS: Of the children (n = 182) enrolled in HEAL, 67% were African American, and 25% came from households with annual incomes < $15,000. HEAL children were symptomatic, averaging 6.6 symptom days in the 2 weeks before baseline, and had frequent unscheduled visits to clinics or emergency departments (76% had at least one unscheduled visit in the preceding 3 months). In this report, we describe study design and baseline characteristics of HEAL children. CONCLUSIONS: Despite numerous challenges faced by investigators, study staff, and participants, including destroyed infrastructure, disrupted lives, and lost jobs, HEAL was successful in terms of recruitment and retention, the high quality of data collected that will provide insight into asthma-allergen relationships, and the asthma intervention. This success was attributable to using an adaptive approach and refining processes as needed.

Development and validation of the Composite Asthma Severity Index--an outcome measure for use in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Asthma severity is reflected in many aspects of the disease, including impairment and future risks, particularly for exacerbations. According to the Expert Panel Report 3: Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma, however, to assess more comprehensively the severity of asthma the level of current treatment needed to maintain a level of control should be included. OBJECTIVE: Development and validation of a new instrument, the Composite Asthma Severity Index (CASI), which can quantify disease severity by taking into account impairment, risk, and the amount of medication needed to maintain control. At present, there is no instrument available to measure and assess the multidimensional nature of asthma. METHODS: Twenty-six established asthma investigators, who are part of the National Institutes of Health-supported Inner City Asthma Consortium, participated in a modified Delphi consensus process to identify and weight the dimensions of asthma. Factor analysis was performed to identify independent domains of asthma by using the Asthma Control Evaluation trial. CASI was validated by using the Inner City Anti-IgE Therapy for Asthma trial. RESULTS: CASI scores include 5 domains: day symptoms and albuterol use, night symptoms and albuterol use, controller treatment, lung function measures, and exacerbations. At Asthma Control Evaluation trial enrollment, CASI ranged from 0 to 17, with a mean of 6.2. CASI was stable, with minimal change in variance after 1 year of treatment. In external validation, CASI detected a 32% larger improvement than did symptoms alone. CONCLUSION: CASI retained its discriminatory ability even with low levels of symptoms reported after months of guidelines-directed care. Thus, CASI has the ability to determine the level of asthma severity and provide a composite clinical characterization of asthma.

Management of asthma based on exhaled nitric oxide in addition to guideline-based treatment for inner-city adolescents and young adults: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence is equivocal about the role of exhaled nitric oxide (NO) in clinical asthma management. We aimed to assess whether measurement of exhaled NO, as a biomarker of airway inflammation, could increase the effectiveness of asthma treatment, when used as an adjunct to clinical care based on asthma guidelines for inner-city adolescents and young adults. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial at ten centres in the USA. We screened 780 inner-city patients, aged 12-20 years, who had persistent asthma. All patients completed a run-in period of 3 weeks on a regimen based on standard treatment. 546 eligible participants who adhered to treatment during this run-in period were then randomly assigned to 46 weeks of either standard treatment, based on the guidelines of the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP), or standard treatment modified on the basis of measurements of fraction of exhaled NO. The primary outcome was the number of days with asthma symptoms. We analysed patients on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00114413. FINDINGS: During the 46-week treatment period, the mean number of days with asthma symptoms did not differ between the treatment groups (1.93 [95% CI 1.74 to 2.11] in the NO monitoring group vs 1.89 [1.71 to 2.07] in the control group; difference 0.04 [-0.22 to 0.29], p=0.780). Other symptoms, pulmonary function, and asthma exacerbations did not differ between groups. Patients in the NO monitoring group received higher doses of inhaled corticosteroids (difference 119 mug per day, 95% CI 49 to 189, p=0.001) than controls. Adverse events did not differ between treatment groups (p>0.1 for all adverse events). INTERPRETATION: Conventional asthma management resulted in good control of symptoms in most participants. The addition of fraction of exhaled NO as an indicator of control of asthma resulted in higher doses of inhaled corticosteroids, without clinically important improvements in symptomatic asthma control.