Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 85
Filtrar
1.
Lancet Respir Med ; 10(1): e3, 2022 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34973212
2.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 8(1)2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34848495

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Respiratory high-dependency units (rHDUs) are used to manage respiratory failure in COVID-19 outside of the intensive care unit (ICU). The alpha variant of COVID-19 has been linked to increased rates of mortality and admission to ICU; however, its impact on a rHDU population is not known. We aimed to compare rHDU outcomes between the two main UK waves of COVID-19 infection and evaluate the impact of the alpha variant on second wave outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre, retrospective analysis of all patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to the rHDU of our teaching hospital for respiratory support during the first and second main UK waves. RESULTS: In total, 348 patients were admitted to rHDU. In the second wave, mortality (26.7% s vs 50.7% first wave, χ2=14.7, df=1, p=0.0001) and intubation rates in those eligible (24.3% s vs 58.8% first wave, χ2=17.3, df=2, p=0.0002) were improved compared with the first wave. In the second wave, the alpha variant had no effect on mortality (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.32, p=0.64). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) (89.5%) and awake proning (85.6%) were used in most patients in the second wave. DISCUSSION: Our single-centre experience shows that rHDU mortality and intubation rates have improved over time in spite of the emergence of the alpha variant. Our data support the use of CPAP and awake proning, although improvements in outcome are likely to be multifactorial.

4.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis ; 16: 3009-3016, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34754186

RESUMO

Background: Therapeutic inertia, defined as failure to escalate or initiate adequate therapy when treatment goals are not met, contributes to poor management of COPD exacerbations. Methods: A multidisciplinary panel of five expert clinicians actively managing COPD and representative of UK practice developed action points to reduce exacerbation risk, based on evidence, clinical expertise, and experience. The action points are applicable despite changing circumstances (eg, virtual clinics). The panel agreed areas where further evidence is needed. Results: The four action points were (1) an experienced HCP, such as a GP or member of the multi-professional COPD team should review patients within one month of every exacerbation that requires oral steroids, antibiotics, or hospitalization to address modifiable risk factors, optimize non-pharmacological measures, and evaluate pharmacological therapy. (2) Presenting to hospital with an exacerbation defines an important window of opportunity to reduce the risk of further exacerbations. Follow-up by a GP, or member of the multi-professional specialist COPD team within one month of discharge with a full management review and appropriate escalation of pharmacological treatment is essential. (3) Healthcare professionals (HCPs) in all healthcare settings should be able to recognize COPD exacerbations, refer as appropriate and document the episode accurately in medical records across service boundaries. HCPs should support patients to recognize and report exacerbations. (4) HCPs should intervene proactively based on risk assessments, disease activity and any treatable traits at or as soon as possible after diagnosis and annually thereafter. Delivering these action points needs coordinated action with policymakers, funders, and service providers. Conclusion: These action points should be a fundamental part of clinical practice to determine if a change in management is necessary to reduce the risk of exacerbations. Policymakers should use these action points to develop systems and initiatives that reduce the risk of further exacerbations.


Assuntos
Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Atenção à Saúde , Pessoal de Saúde , Hospitalização , Humanos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/epidemiologia , Autocuidado
5.
Eur Respir Rev ; 30(162)2021 Dec 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34789465

RESUMO

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have a class effect of increasing pneumonia risk in patients with COPD. However, pneumonia incidence varies widely across clinical trials of ICS use in COPD. This review clarifies methodological differences in defining and recording pneumonia events in these trials and discusses factors that could contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. Literature searches and screening yielded 40 relevant references for inclusion. Methods used to capture pneumonia events in these studies included investigator-reported pneumonia adverse events, standardised list of signs or symptoms, radiographic confirmation of suspected cases and/or confirmation by an independent clinical end-point committee. In general, more stringent pneumonia diagnosis criteria led to lower reported pneumonia incidence rates. In addition, studies varied in design and population characteristics, including exacerbation history and lung function, factors that probably contribute to the varying pneumonia incidence. As such, cross-trial comparisons are problematic. A minimal set of standardised criteria for diagnosis and reporting of pneumonia should be used in COPD studies, as well as reporting of patients' pneumonia history at baseline, to allow comparison of pneumonia rates between trials. Currently, within-trial comparison of ICS-containing versus non-ICS-containing treatments is the appropriate method to assess the influence of ICS on pneumonia incidence.


Assuntos
Pneumonia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Administração por Inalação , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Pneumonia/diagnóstico , Pneumonia/epidemiologia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/epidemiologia
6.
BMC Pulm Med ; 21(1): 299, 2021 Sep 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34556057

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with COPD experience acute worsenings, termed 'exacerbations'. While other terms to describe these events have been proposed there is no consensus on terminology which has led to multiple terms being used across the UK. Respiratory nurses are part of a multi-disciplinary team managing COPD patients, however, the nursing perspective on the term 'exacerbation' is unknown. METHODS: An anonymised survey of 17 questions was sent to respiratory nurses through an email invitation link. The survey link was open for one month. The aim was to understand the nurse perspective on 'exacerbation'. Alternative terms used in the UK were compared versus the term 'exacerbation'. RESULTS: Responses were received from 113 nurses. The majority (88%) were female. There was no consensus on preference or meaning for the term 'exacerbation' between nurses. Less than 5% of nurses thought that patients with COPD would understand the term 'exacerbation'. In ranked order, the nurses preferred the following terms: 'flare-up', 'lung attack', 'crisis', 'exacerbation' and 'chest infection'. The term 'crisis', although new, was considered to be the term that most resonated with clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Respiratory nurses in the UK report that the term 'exacerbation' is not fit for purpose for patients, and alternatives should be sought.

8.
ERJ Open Res ; 7(3)2021 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34350278

RESUMO

Introduction: COPD exacerbations are heterogeneous and can be triggered by bacterial, viral, or noninfectious insults. Exacerbations are also heterogeneous in neutrophilic or eosinophilic inflammatory responses. A noninvasive peripheral biomarker of COPD exacerbations characterised by bacterial/neutrophilic inflammation is lacking. Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a key cytokine elevated during bacterial infection and mediates survival, proliferation, differentiation and function of neutrophils. Objective: We hypothesised that high peripheral G-CSF would be indicative of COPD exacerbations with a neutrophilic and bacterial phenotype associated with microbial dysbiosis. Methods: Serum G-CSF was measured during hospitalised exacerbation (day 0 or D0) and after 30 days of recovery (Day30 or D30) in 37 subjects. In a second cohort, serum and sputum cytokines were measured in 59 COPD patients during stable disease, at exacerbation, and at 2-weeks and 6-weeks following exacerbation. Results: Serum G-CSF was increased during exacerbation in a subset of patients. These exacerbations were enriched for bacterial but not viral or type-2 biologies. The median serum G-CSF level was 1.6-fold higher in bacterial exacerbation compared to nonbacterial exacerbation (22 pg·mL-1 versus 13 pg·mL-1, p=0.0007). Serum G-CSF classified bacterial exacerbations with an area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve equal to 0.76. Exacerbations with a two-fold or greater increase in serum G-CSF were characterised by neutrophilic inflammation, with increased sputum and blood neutrophils, and high sputum interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-6 and serum amyloid A1 (SAA1) levels. These exacerbations were preceded by dysbiosis, with decreased microbiome diversity and enrichment of respiratory pathogens such as Haemophilus and Moraxella. Furthermore, serum G-CSF at exacerbation classified neutrophilic-dysbiotic exacerbations (AUC for the ROC curve equal to 0.75). Conclusions: High serum G-CSF enriches for COPD exacerbations characterised by neutrophilic inflammation with underlying bacterial dysbiosis.

9.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0254425, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34415919

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: COPD and asthma exacerbations result in many emergency department admissions. Not all treatments are successful, often leading to hospital readmissions. AIMS: We sought to develop predictive models for exacerbation treatment outcome in a cohort of exacerbating asthma and COPD patients presenting to the emergency department. METHODS: Treatment failure was defined as the need for additional systemic corticosteroids (SCS) and/or antibiotics, hospital readmissison or death within 30 days of initial emergency department visit. We performed univariate analysis comparing characteristics of patients either given or not given SCS at exacerbation and of patients who succeeded versus failed treatment. Patient demographics, medications and exacerbation symptoms, physiology and biology were available. We developed multivariate random forest models to identify predictors of SCS prescription and for predicting treatment failure. RESULTS: Data were available for 81 patients, 43 (53%) of whom failed treatment. 64 (79%) of patients were given SCS. A random forest model using presence of wheeze at exacerbation and blood eosinophil percentage predicted SCS prescription with area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.69. An 11 variable random forest model (which included medication, previous exacerbations, symptoms and quality of life scores) could predict treatment failure with AUC 0.81. A random forest model using just the two best predictors of treatment failure, namely, visual analogue scale for breathlessness and sputum purulence, predicted treatment failure with AUC 0.68. CONCLUSION: Prediction of exacerbation treatment outcome can be achieved via supervised machine learning combining different predictors at exacerbation. Validation of our predictive models in separate, larger patient cohorts is required.


Assuntos
Asma , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Hospitalização , Modelos Biológicos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Qualidade de Vida , Adulto , Idoso , Asma/epidemiologia , Asma/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/epidemiologia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/terapia , Resultado do Tratamento
11.
Lancet ; 398(10303): 843-855, 2021 09 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34388395

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: A previous efficacy trial found benefit from inhaled budesonide for COVID-19 in patients not admitted to hospital, but effectiveness in high-risk individuals is unknown. We aimed to establish whether inhaled budesonide reduces time to recovery and COVID-19-related hospital admissions or deaths among people at high risk of complications in the community. METHODS: PRINCIPLE is a multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial done remotely from a central trial site and at primary care centres in the UK. Eligible participants were aged 65 years or older or 50 years or older with comorbidities, and unwell for up to 14 days with suspected COVID-19 but not admitted to hospital. Participants were randomly assigned to usual care, usual care plus inhaled budesonide (800 µg twice daily for 14 days), or usual care plus other interventions, and followed up for 28 days. Participants were aware of group assignment. The coprimary endpoints are time to first self-reported recovery and hospital admission or death related to COVID-19, within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. The primary analysis population included all eligible SARS-CoV-2-positive participants randomly assigned to budesonide, usual care, and other interventions, from the start of the platform trial until the budesonide group was closed. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN86534580) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: The trial began enrolment on April 2, 2020, with randomisation to budesonide from Nov 27, 2020, until March 31, 2021, when the prespecified time to recovery superiority criterion was met. 4700 participants were randomly assigned to budesonide (n=1073), usual care alone (n=1988), or other treatments (n=1639). The primary analysis model includes 2530 SARS-CoV-2-positive participants, with 787 in the budesonide group, 1069 in the usual care group, and 974 receiving other treatments. There was a benefit in time to first self-reported recovery of an estimated 2·94 days (95% Bayesian credible interval [BCI] 1·19 to 5·12) in the budesonide group versus the usual care group (11·8 days [95% BCI 10·0 to 14·1] vs 14·7 days [12·3 to 18·0]; hazard ratio 1·21 [95% BCI 1·08 to 1·36]), with a probability of superiority greater than 0·999, meeting the prespecified superiority threshold of 0·99. For the hospital admission or death outcome, the estimated rate was 6·8% (95% BCI 4·1 to 10·2) in the budesonide group versus 8·8% (5·5 to 12·7) in the usual care group (estimated absolute difference 2·0% [95% BCI -0·2 to 4·5]; odds ratio 0·75 [95% BCI 0·55 to 1·03]), with a probability of superiority 0·963, below the prespecified superiority threshold of 0·975. Two participants in the budesonide group and four in the usual care group had serious adverse events (hospital admissions unrelated to COVID-19). INTERPRETATION: Inhaled budesonide improves time to recovery, with a chance of also reducing hospital admissions or deaths (although our results did not meet the superiority threshold), in people with COVID-19 in the community who are at higher risk of complications. FUNDING: National Institute of Health Research and United Kingdom Research Innovation.


Assuntos
Budesonida/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Glucocorticoides/administração & dosagem , Administração por Inalação , Idoso , Teorema de Bayes , COVID-19/mortalidade , Feminino , Hospitalização , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco , SARS-CoV-2 , Resultado do Tratamento
12.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis ; 16: 1437-1447, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34093009

RESUMO

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma have heterogeneous inflammation with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as a mainstay of treatment. There is increased prevalence of non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae (NTHi) persistence in airways of patients with neutrophilic airway inflammation, potentially due to suppressed host defence after corticosteroid treatment. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have antimicrobial activity against pathogens and immunomodulatory effects. We investigated whether AMPs associate with NTHi presence in COPD and asthma, and whether ICS alter this. Methods: Secretory leukocyte protease inhibitor (SLPI), osteopontin, elafin and beta defensin-1 were measured in sputum supernatants from healthy donors (n=9), asthmatics (n=21) and patients with COPD (n=14). Elafin and beta defensin-1 were measured in a primary human bronchial epithelial cells (HBECs) from healthy and COPD donors infected with NTHi and pre-treated with fluticasone propionate (FP) and budesonide (BUD). Internalised NTHi was quantified by qPCR. Results: Sputum SLPI was negatively correlated with FEV1 (p<0.001, r=-0.610), FEV1% predicted (p<0.001, r=-0.583) and FEV1/FVC (p=0.001, r=-0.528). Sputum beta defensin-1 was negatively associated with FEV1 (p<0.001***r=-0.594). SLPI and beta defensin-1 levels in sputum were higher in the healthy controls and COPD group compared to the asthma group (p=0.001 and p=0.014) and (p<0.001 and p=0.007, respectively). ICS use was associated with higher sputum osteopontin compared to those with no ICS use. NTHi infection of COPD HBECs produced higher levels of beta defensin-1 compared to healthy donors (mean (SD) release: 45.1pg/mL (7.3) vs 21.2pg/mL (7.3) respectively, p=0.014). Elafin release from HBECs from COPD donors did not change following NTHi infection; however, elafin from healthy donors was significantly reduced (%mean reduction: 23.7%, 95% confidence intervals (CI) of reduction: 5.3-38.4%, p<0.01). Conclusion: Sputum SLPI and beta defensin-1 may be markers to identify those patients with declining lung function. ICS use was associated with higher sputum osteopontin compared to those with no ICS use.


Assuntos
Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , beta-Defensinas , Humanos , Proteínas Citotóxicas Formadoras de Poros , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidor Secretado de Peptidases Leucocitárias , Escarro
13.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis ; 16: 1755-1770, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34163157

RESUMO

Background: A pre-specified meta-analysis of individual patient data from the 52-week METREX and METREO trials, which investigated mepolizumab for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/µL (screening) or ≥300 cells/µL (prior year) and frequent exacerbations, enables more robust characterization of mepolizumab efficacy in COPD and exploration of the relationship between blood eosinophil count and treatment responses. Methods: In METREX (117106/NCT02105948) and METREO (117113/NCT02105961), randomized patients received mepolizumab or placebo added to existing inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-based triple maintenance therapy. The annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations (primary endpoint) was compared between subcutaneous (SC) mepolizumab 100 mg versus placebo (primary comparison of interest) and all doses (100 mg and 300 mg SC) versus placebo in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells/µL at screening or ≥300 cells/µL in the prior year. Secondary/other endpoints included time to first moderate/severe exacerbation, exacerbations leading to emergency department visit/hospitalization and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A predictive model of the relationship between screening blood eosinophil counts and exacerbation rates included data from all randomized patients. Results: In total, 1510 patients were randomized in METREX and METREO and 1136 patients were included in the pre-specified meta-analysis. From the meta-analysis, mepolizumab 100 mg SC significantly reduced annual moderate/severe exacerbation rates versus placebo by 18% (rate ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.71, 0.95; p=0.006) and delayed time to first moderate/severe exacerbation (hazard ratio: 0.80 [0.68, 0.94]; p=0.006). Mepolizumab 100 mg SC versus placebo numerically reduced exacerbations leading to ED visits/hospitalization and improved HRQoL. A modelling approach demonstrated increasing efficacy for moderate/severe exacerbations with increasing screening blood eosinophil count; this relationship was more pronounced for exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids (post hoc). The all-doses comparison had similar results. Conclusion: Mepolizumab reduces exacerbations in patients with eosinophil-associated COPD. Results suggest that blood eosinophil counts (≥150 cells/µL at screening or ≥300 cells/µL in the prior year) allow for identification of patients with COPD who experience exacerbations while treated with maximal ICS-based triple maintenance therapy who are likely to benefit from mepolizumab.


Assuntos
Eosinófilos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Progressão da Doença , Humanos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
14.
Digit Health ; 7: 20552076211020876, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34104470

RESUMO

Background: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are often hospitalised with acute exacerbations (AECOPD) and many patients get readmitted. Intervening with hospitalised patients may be optimal timing to provide support. Our previous work demonstrated use of a digital monitoring and self-management support tool in the community. However, we wanted to explore the feasibility of recruiting patients whilst hospitalised for an AECOPD, and to identify the rate of dropout attrition around admission for AECOPD. Methods: Patients were recruited to the EDGE2 study between May 2019 and March 2020. Patients were identified by the clinical teams and patients were recruited by members of the clinical research team. Participants were aged 40 years or older, had a diagnosis of COPD and were attending or admitted to hospital for an AECOPD. Participants were given a tablet computer, Bluetooth-linked pulse oximeter and wrist-worn physical activity monitor to use until 6 months post-discharge. Use of the system aimed to support COPD self-management by enabling self-monitoring of vital signs, COPD symptoms, mood and physical activity, and access to multi-media educational resources. Results: 281 patients were identified and 126 approached. The main referral source was the specialist respiratory nursing and physiotherapist team (49.8% of patients identified). Twenty-six (37.1%) patients were recruited. As of 21 April 2020, 14 (53.8%) participants withdrew and 11 (of 14; 78.6%) participants withdrew within four weeks of discharge. The remaining participants withdrew between one and three months follow-up (1 of 14; 7.1%) and between three and six months follow-up (2 of 14; 14.3%). Conclusion: A large number of patients were screened to recruit a relatively small sample and a high rate of dropout was observed. It does not appear feasible to recruit patients with COPD to digital interventional studies from the hospital setting when they have the burden of coping with acute illness.

17.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 18(12): 1978-1987, 2021 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33891831

RESUMO

Rationale: Blood eosinophil counts are used to inform diagnosis/management of eosinophilic asthma. Objectives: Examine blood eosinophil variability and identify factors affecting eosinophil levels to inform clinical interpretation. Methods: Post hoc analysis to understand eosinophil variability using data from four randomized controlled asthma trials. We examined 1) influence of intrinsic/extrinsic factors (comorbidities, medication, and patient history) using baseline data (n = 2,612); 2) monthly variation using placebo-treated patient data (n = 713); 3) stability of eosinophil classification (<150, 150-299, and ⩾300 cells/µl) in placebo-treated patients with monthly measurements over a 1-year period (n = 751); and 4) impact of technical factors (laboratory-to-laboratory differences and time from collection to analysis). Results: Of intrinsic/extrinsic factors examined, nasal polyps increased eosinophil levels by 38%, whereas current smoking decreased levels by 23%. Substantial seasonal differences in eosinophil counts were observed, with differences of ∼20% between July and January. Eosinophil levels between 150 and 299 cells/µl were least stable, with 44% of patients remaining in the same classification for seven of 10 measurements versus 59% and 66% of patients in the <150 and ⩾300 cells/µl subgroups, respectively. Measurements at different laboratories showed high association (Spearman's correlation coefficient, R = 0.89); however, eosinophil counts were reduced, with longer time from collection to analysis, and variability increased with increasing eosinophil counts. Conclusions: Several intrinsic, extrinsic, and technical factors may influence, and should be considered in, clinical interpretation of eosinophil counts. Additionally, a single measurement may not be sufficient when using eosinophil counts for diagnosis/management of eosinophilic asthma.

18.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(7): 763-772, 2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33844996

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Multiple early reports of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 showed that patients with chronic respiratory disease were significantly under-represented in these cohorts. We hypothesised that the widespread use of inhaled glucocorticoids among these patients was responsible for this finding, and tested if inhaled glucocorticoids would be an effective treatment for early COVID-19. METHODS: We performed an open-label, parallel-group, phase 2, randomised controlled trial (Steroids in COVID-19; STOIC) of inhaled budesonide, compared with usual care, in adults within 7 days of the onset of mild COVID-19 symptoms. The trial was done in the community in Oxfordshire, UK. Participants were randomly assigned to inhaled budsonide or usual care stratified for age (≤40 years or >40 years), sex (male or female), and number of comorbidities (≤1 and ≥2). Randomisation was done using random sequence generation in block randomisation in a 1:1 ratio. Budesonide dry powder was delivered using a turbohaler at a dose of 400 µg per actuation. Participants were asked to take two inhalations twice a day until symptom resolution. The primary endpoint was COVID-19-related urgent care visit, including emergency department assessment or hospitalisation, analysed for both the per-protocol and intention-to-treat (ITT) populations. The secondary outcomes were self-reported clinical recovery (symptom resolution), viral symptoms measured using the Common Cold Questionnare (CCQ) and the InFLUenza Patient Reported Outcome Questionnaire (FLUPro), body temperature, blood oxygen saturations, and SARS-CoV-2 viral load. The trial was stopped early after independent statistical review concluded that study outcome would not change with further participant enrolment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04416399. FINDINGS: From July 16 to Dec 9, 2020, 167 participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility. 21 did not meet eligibility criteria and were excluded. 146 participants were randomly assigned-73 to usual care and 73 to budesonide. For the per-protocol population (n=139), the primary outcome occurred in ten (14%) of 70 participants in the usual care group and one (1%) of 69 participants in the budesonide group (difference in proportions 0·131, 95% CI 0·043 to 0·218; p=0·004). For the ITT population, the primary outcome occurred in 11 (15%) participants in the usual care group and two (3%) participants in the budesonide group (difference in proportions 0·123, 95% CI 0·033 to 0·213; p=0·009). The number needed to treat with inhaled budesonide to reduce COVID-19 deterioration was eight. Clinical recovery was 1 day shorter in the budesonide group compared with the usual care group (median 7 days [95% CI 6 to 9] in the budesonide group vs 8 days [7 to 11] in the usual care group; log-rank test p=0·007). The mean proportion of days with a fever in the first 14 days was lower in the budesonide group (2%, SD 6) than the usual care group (8%, SD 18; Wilcoxon test p=0·051) and the proportion of participants with at least 1 day of fever was lower in the budesonide group when compared with the usual care group. As-needed antipyretic medication was required for fewer proportion of days in the budesonide group compared with the usual care group (27% [IQR 0-50] vs 50% [15-71]; p=0·025) Fewer participants randomly assigned to budesonide had persistent symptoms at days 14 and 28 compared with participants receiving usual care (difference in proportions 0·204, 95% CI 0·075 to 0·334; p=0·003). The mean total score change in the CCQ and FLUPro over 14 days was significantly better in the budesonide group compared with the usual care group (CCQ mean difference -0·12, 95% CI -0·21 to -0·02 [p=0·016]; FLUPro mean difference -0·10, 95% CI -0·21 to -0·00 [p=0·044]). Blood oxygen saturations and SARS-CoV-2 load, measured by cycle threshold, were not different between the groups. Budesonide was safe, with only five (7%) participants reporting self-limiting adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Early administration of inhaled budesonide reduced the likelihood of needing urgent medical care and reduced time to recovery after early COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre and AstraZeneca.


Assuntos
Budesonida/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Glucocorticoides/administração & dosagem , Administração por Inalação , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores de Tempo , Adulto Jovem
19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33688176

RESUMO

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with major healthcare and socioeconomic burdens. International consortia recommend a personalized approach to treatment and management that aims to reduce both symptom burden and the risk of exacerbations. Recent clinical trials have investigated single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA), and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for patients with symptomatic COPD. Here, we review evidence from randomized controlled trials showing the benefits of SITT and weigh these against the reported risk of pneumonia with ICS use. We highlight the challenges associated with cross-trial comparisons of benefit/risk, discuss blood eosinophils as a marker of ICS responsiveness, and summarize current treatment recommendations and the position of SITT in the management of COPD, including potential advantages in terms of improving patient adherence. Evidence from trials of SITT versus dual therapies in symptomatic patients with moderate to very severe airflow limitation and increased risk of exacerbations shows benefits in lung function and patient-reported outcomes. Moreover, the key benefits reported with SITT are significant reductions in exacerbations and hospitalizations, with data also suggesting reduced all-cause mortality. These benefits outweigh the ICS-class effect of higher incidence of study-reported pneumonia compared with LAMA/LABA. Important differences in trial design, baseline population characteristics, such as exacerbation history, and assessment of outcomes, have significant implications for interpreting data from cross-trial comparisons. Current understanding interprets the blood eosinophil count as a continuum that can help predict response to ICS and has utility alongside other clinical factors to aid treatment decision-making. We conclude that treatment decisions in COPD should be guided by an approach that considers benefit versus risk, with early optimization of treatment essential for maximizing long-term benefits and patient outcomes.


Assuntos
Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Administração por Inalação , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/efeitos adversos , Broncodilatadores/efeitos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Antagonistas Muscarínicos/efeitos adversos , Nebulizadores e Vaporizadores , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico
20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33623379

RESUMO

Background: Despite hospitalization for exacerbation being a high-risk event for morbidity and mortality, there is little consensus globally regarding the assessment and management of hospitalised exacerbations of COPD. We aimed to establish a consensus list of symptoms, physiological measures, clinical scores, patient questionnaires and investigations to be obtained at time of hospitalised COPD exacerbation and follow-up. Methods: A modified Delphi online survey with pre-defined consensus of importance, feasibility and frequency of measures at hospitalisation and follow-up of a COPD exacerbation was undertaken. Findings: A total of 25 COPD experts from 18 countries contributed to all 3 rounds of the survey. Experts agreed that a detailed history and examination were needed. Experts also agreed on which treatments are needed and how soon these should be delivered. Experts recommended that a full blood count, renal function, C-reactive protein and cardiac blood biomarkers (BNP and troponin) should be measured within 4 hours of admission and that the modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale (mMRC) and COPD assessment test (CAT) should be performed at time of exacerbation and follow-up. Experts encouraged COPD clinicians to strongly consider discussing palliative care, if indicated, at time of hospitalisation. Interpretation: This Europe-wide consensus document is the first attempt to standardise the assessment and care of patients hospitalised for COPD exacerbations. This should be regarded as the starting point to build knowledge and evidence on patients hospitalised for COPD exacerbations.


Assuntos
Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Consenso , Progressão da Doença , Europa (Continente) , Seguimentos , Humanos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/epidemiologia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/terapia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...