Association between P-pulmonale and respiratory morbidity in COPD: a secondary analysis of the BLOCK-COPD trial.

RATIONALE: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) in COPD confers increased risk of exacerbations (ECOPD). Electrocardiogram (ECG) indicators of PH are prognostic both in PH and COPD. In the Beta-Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of COPD (BLOCK-COPD) trial, metoprolol increased risk of severe ECOPD through unclear mechanisms. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether an ECG indicator of PH, P-pulmonale, would be associated with ECOPD and whether participants with P-pulmonale randomized to metoprolol were at higher risk of ECOPD and worsened respiratory symptoms given the potential detrimental effects of beta-blockers in PH. METHODS: ECGs of 501 participants were analyzed for P-pulmonale (P wave enlargement in lead II). Cox proportional hazards models evaluated for associations between P-pulmonale and time to ECOPD (all and severe) for all participants and by treatment assignment (metoprolol vs. placebo). Linear mixed-effects models evaluated the association between treatment assignment and P-pulmonale on change in symptom scores (measured by CAT and SOBQ). RESULTS: We identified no association between P-pulmonale and risk of any ECOPD or severe ECOPD. However, in individuals with P-pulmonale, metoprolol was associated with increased risk for ECOPD (aHR 2.92, 95% CI: 1.45-5.85). There was no association between metoprolol and ECOPD in individuals without P-pulmonale (aHR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.77-1.31). Individuals with P-pulmonale assigned to metoprolol experienced worsening symptoms (mean increase of 3.95, 95% CI: 1.32-6.58) whereas those assigned to placebo experienced a mean improvement in CAT score of -2.45 (95% CI: -0.30- -4.61). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with P-pulmonale, metoprolol was associated with increased exacerbation risk and worsened symptoms. These findings may explain the findings observed in BLOCK-COPD.

Sigh Ventilation in Patients With Trauma: The SiVent Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Among patients receiving mechanical ventilation, tidal volumes with each breath are often constant or similar. This may lead to ventilator-induced lung injury by altering or depleting surfactant. The role of sigh breaths in reducing ventilator-induced lung injury among trauma patients at risk of poor outcomes is unknown. Objective: To determine whether adding sigh breaths improves clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pragmatic, randomized trial of sigh breaths plus usual care conducted from 2016 to 2022 with 28-day follow-up in 15 academic trauma centers in the US. Inclusion criteria were age older than 18 years, mechanical ventilation because of trauma for less than 24 hours, 1 or more of 5 risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, expected duration of ventilation longer than 24 hours, and predicted survival longer than 48 hours. Interventions: Sigh volumes producing plateau pressures of 35 cm H2O (or 40 cm H2O for inpatients with body mass indexes >35) delivered once every 6 minutes. Usual care was defined as the patient's physician(s) treating the patient as they wished. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcomes included all-cause 28-day mortality. Results: Of 5753 patients screened, 524 were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.2] years; 394 [75.2%] were male). The median ventilator-free days was 18.4 (IQR, 7.0-25.2) in patients randomized to sighs and 16.1 (IQR, 1.1-24.4) in those receiving usual care alone (P = .08). The unadjusted mean difference in ventilator-free days between groups was 1.9 days (95% CI, 0.1 to 3.6) and the prespecified adjusted mean difference was 1.4 days (95% CI, -0.2 to 3.0). For the prespecified secondary outcome, patients randomized to sighs had 28-day mortality of 11.6% (30/259) vs 17.6% (46/261) in those receiving usual care (P = .05). No differences were observed in nonfatal adverse events comparing patients with sighs (80/259 [30.9%]) vs those without (80/261 [30.7%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In a pragmatic, randomized trial among trauma patients receiving mechanical ventilation with risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, the addition of sigh breaths did not significantly increase ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcome data suggest that sighs are well-tolerated and may improve clinical outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02582957.

Metoprolol for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of COPD.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies suggest that beta-blockers may reduce the risk of exacerbations and death in patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but these findings have not been confirmed in randomized trials. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized trial, we assigned patients between the ages of 40 and 85 years who had COPD to receive either a beta-blocker (extended-release metoprolol) or placebo. All the patients had a clinical history of COPD, along with moderate airflow limitation and an increased risk of exacerbations, as evidenced by a history of exacerbations during the previous year or the prescribed use of supplemental oxygen. We excluded patients who were already taking a beta-blocker or who had an established indication for the use of such drugs. The primary end point was the time until the first exacerbation of COPD during the treatment period, which ranged from 336 to 350 days, depending on the adjusted dose of metoprolol. RESULTS: A total of 532 patients underwent randomization. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 65.0±7.8 years; the mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 41.1±16.3% of the predicted value. The trial was stopped early because of futility with respect to the primary end point and safety concerns. There was no significant between-group difference in the median time until the first exacerbation, which was 202 days in the metoprolol group and 222 days in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metoprolol vs. placebo, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.32; P = 0.66). Metoprolol was associated with a higher risk of exacerbation leading to hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.83). The frequency of side effects that were possibly related to metoprolol was similar in the two groups, as was the overall rate of nonrespiratory serious adverse events. During the treatment period, there were 11 deaths in the metoprolol group and 5 in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with moderate or severe COPD who did not have an established indication for beta-blocker use, the time until the first COPD exacerbation was similar in the metoprolol group and the placebo group. Hospitalization for exacerbation was more common among the patients treated with metoprolol. (Funded by the Department of Defense; BLOCK COPD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02587351.).

Simvastatin for the prevention of exacerbations in moderate-to-severe COPD.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies have shown that statins decrease the rate and severity of exacerbations, the rate of hospitalization, and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We prospectively studied the efficacy of simvastatin in preventing exacerbations in a large, multicenter, randomized trial. METHODS: We designed the Prospective Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of Simvastatin in the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations (STATCOPE) as a randomized, controlled trial of simvastatin (at a daily dose of 40 mg) versus placebo, with annual exacerbation rates as the primary outcome. Patients were eligible if they were 40 to 80 years of age, had COPD (defined by a forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] of less than 80% and a ratio of FEV1 to forced vital capacity of less than 70%), and had a smoking history of 10 or more pack-years, were receiving supplemental oxygen or treatment with glucocorticoids or antibiotic agents, or had had an emergency department visit or hospitalization for COPD within the past year. Patients with diabetes or cardiovascular disease and those who were taking statins or who required statins on the basis of Adult Treatment Panel III criteria were excluded. Participants were treated from 12 to 36 months at 45 centers. RESULTS: A total of 885 participants with COPD were enrolled for approximately 641 days; 44% of the patients were women. The patients had a mean (±SD) age of 62.2±8.4 years, an FEV1 that was 41.6±17.7% of the predicted value, and a smoking history of 50.6±27.4 pack-years. At the time of study closeout, the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were lower in the simvastatin-treated patients than in those who received placebo. The mean number of exacerbations per person-year was similar in the simvastatin and placebo groups: 1.36±1.61 exacerbations and 1.39±1.73 exacerbations, respectively (P=0.54). The median number of days to the first exacerbation was also similar: 223 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 195 to 275) and 231 days (95% CI, 193 to 303), respectively (P=0.34). The number of nonfatal serious adverse events per person-year was similar, as well: 0.63 events with simvastatin and 0.62 events with placebo. There were 30 deaths in the placebo group and 28 in the simvastatin group (P=0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Simvastatin at a daily dose of 40 mg did not affect exacerbation rates or the time to a first exacerbation in patients with COPD who were at high risk for exacerbations. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; STATCOPE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01061671.).

Serum bilirubin and the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations.

BACKGROUND: Bilirubin is a potent anti-oxidant and higher serum concentrations of bilirubin have been associated with better lung function, slower lung function decline, and lower incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We sought to determine whether elevated bilirubin blood concentrations are associated with lower risk for acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD). METHODS: We performed a secondary analyses of data in the Simvastatin for Prevention of Exacerbations in Moderate-to-Severe COPD (STATCOPE) and the Azithromycin for Prevention of Exacerbations of COPD (MACRO) studies. We used time-dependent multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses, using bilirubin concentrations prior to first AECOPD as the exposure variable and time to first AECOPD as the outcome variable. STATCOPE was used for model development, with validation in MACRO. RESULTS: In STATCOPE (n = 853), higher bilirubin was associated with a lower but statistically insignificant hazard for AECOPD, (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.89 per log10 increase [95%CI: 0.74 to 1.09; p = 0.26]). In the validation MACRO study (n = 1018), higher bilirubin was associated with a significantly lower hazard for AECOPD (aHR 0.80 per log10 increase [95%CI: 0.67 to 0.94; p = 0.008]). CONCLUSIONS: Bilirubin may be a biomarker of AECOPD risk and may be a novel therapeutic target to reduce AECOPD risk. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01061671 (registered 02 February 2010) and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00325897 (registered 12 May 2006).

Effect of beta-blockers on exacerbation rate and lung function in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

BACKGROUND: Beta-blockers are commonly prescribed for patients with cardiovascular disease. Providers have been wary of treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with beta-blockers due to concern for bronchospasm, but retrospective studies have shown that cardio-selective beta-blockers are safe in COPD and possibly beneficial. However, these benefits may reflect symptom improvements due to the cardiac effects of the medication. The purpose of this study is to evaluate associations between beta-blocker use and both exacerbation rates and longitudinal measures of lung function in two well-characterized COPD cohorts. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 1219 participants with over 180 days of follow up from the STATCOPE trial, which excluded most cardiac comorbidities, and from the placebo arm of the MACRO trial. Primary endpoints were exacerbation rates per person-year and change in spirometry over time in association with beta blocker use. RESULTS: Overall 13.9% (170/1219) of participants reported taking beta-blockers at enrollment. We found no statistically significant differences in exacerbation rates with respect to beta-blocker use regardless of the prevalence of cardiac comorbidities. In the MACRO cohort, patients taking beta-blockers had an exacerbation rate of 1.72/person-year versus a rate of 1.71/person-year in patients not taking beta-blockers. In the STATCOPE cohort, patients taking beta-blockers had an exacerbation rate of 1.14/person-year. Patients without beta-blockers had an exacerbation rate of 1.34/person-year. We found no detrimental effect of beta blockers with respect to change in lung function over time. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that beta-blocker use was unsafe or associated with worse pulmonary outcomes in study participants with moderate to severe COPD.

Associations Between Coronary Artery Calcium Score and Exacerbation Risk in BLOCK-COPD.

Introduction: In 2019, the Beta-Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease study (BLOCK-COPD) evaluated the effect of metoprolol on exacerbation risk and mortality in a COPD population without indications for beta-blocker use. We hypothesized that an imaging metric of coronary artery disease (CAD), the coronary artery calcium (CAC) score, would predict exacerbation risk and identify a differential response to metoprolol treatment. Methods: The study population includes participants in the BLOCK-COPD study from multiple study sites. Participants underwent clinically indicated thoracic computed tomography (CT) scans ± 12 months from enrollment. The Weston scoring system quantified CAC. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models evaluated for associations between CAC and time to exacerbation. Results: Data is included for 109 participants. The mean CAC score was 5.1±3.7, and 92 participants (84%) had CAC scores greater than 0. Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up time of 350 (280 to 352) days, there were 61 mild exacerbations and 19 severe/very severe exacerbations. No associations were found between exacerbations of any severity and CAC>0 or total CAC. Associations were observed between total CAC and CAC>0 in the left circumflex (LCx) and time to exacerbation of any severity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=1.39, confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-1.79, p=0.01) and (aHR=1.96, 95% CI: 1.04-3.70, p=0.04), respectively. Conclusions: CAD is a prevalent comorbidity in COPD accounting for significant mortality. Our study confirms the high prevalence of CAD using the CAC score; however, we did not discover an association between CAC and exacerbation risk. We did find novel associations between CAC in the LCx and exacerbation risk which warrant further investigation in larger cohorts.

ß-Blocker Use and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With COPD Following Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Importance: While ß-blockers are associated with decreased mortality in cardiovascular disease (CVD), exacerbation-prone patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who received metoprolol in the Beta-Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (BLOCK-COPD) trial experienced increased risk of exacerbations requiring hospitalization. However, the study excluded individuals with established indications for the drug, raising questions about the overall risk and benefit in patients with COPD following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Objective: To investigate whether ß-blocker prescription at hospital discharge is associated with increased risk of mortality or adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes in patients with COPD and AMI. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, longitudinal cohort study with 6 months of follow-up enrolled patients aged 35 years or older with COPD who underwent cardiac catheterization for AMI at 18 BLOCK-COPD network hospitals in the US from June 2020 through May 2022. Exposure: Prescription for any ß-blocker at hospital discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to the composite outcome of death or all-cause hospitalization or revascularization. Secondary outcomes included death, hospitalization, or revascularization for CVD events, death or hospitalization for COPD or respiratory events, and treatment for COPD exacerbations. Results: Among 3531 patients who underwent cardiac catheterization for AMI, prevalence of COPD was 17.1% (95% CI, 15.8%-18.4%). Of 579 total patients with COPD and AMI, 502 (86.7%) were prescribed a ß-blocker at discharge. Among the 562 patients with COPD included in the final analysis, median age was 70.0 years (range, 38.0-94.0 years) and 329 (58.5%) were male; 553 of the 579 patients (95.5%) had follow-up information. Among those discharged with ß-blockers, there was no increased risk of the primary end point of all-cause mortality, revascularization, or hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.66-1.54; P = .96) or of cardiovascular events (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.65-1.92; P = .69), COPD-related or respiratory events (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.34-1.66; P = .48), or treatment for COPD exacerbations (rate ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.53-1.91; P = .98). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, ß-blocker prescription at hospital discharge was not associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes in patients with COPD and AMI. These findings support use of ß-blockers in patients with COPD and recent AMI.

Randomized controlled trials: what are they and who needs them?

Dentistry is rapidly entering a new era of evidence-based practice, and society is demanding prevention and treatment that has been proven to be effective in terms of meaningful health outcomes. Practitioners, individual patients and the public need randomized controlled trials because they provide the highest level of scientific evidence to change clinical practice and inform public health policy. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are conceptually simple but deceptively complex to design, implement and translate into clinical practice. Randomized controlled trials are fundamentally different from observational clinical research because they randomly assign volunteers to receive test or control interventions, they are prospective and the success of the test intervention is based on a meaningful clinical outcome that is specified before the trial begins. To be successful, randomized controlled trials must be carefully designed and powered to answer a specific question that will be generalizable to the population under study. Randomized controlled trials can be designed to evaluate efficacy, effectiveness, superiority, equivalence or noninferiority. Prominent issues and challenges in designing and conducting randomized controlled trials include carefully defining enrollment criteria, establishing an organizational infrastructure, use of a data-coordinating center, developing a manual of procedures, obtaining informed consent, recruiting and ensuring the safety of volunteer subjects, ensuring data quality, analysis and publication of trial outcomes, and translating results into clinical practice.

Short-Term Impact of the Frequency of COPD Exacerbations on Quality of Life.

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients in the Simvastatin for the Prevention of Exacerbations in Moderate-to-Severe COPD (STATCOPE) and Azithromycin for Prevention of Exacerbations of COPD (MACRO) trials provide an opportunity to prospectively study the short-term effect of acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs). Research Question: We hypothesized that those patients with frequent exacerbations (≥2 AECOPDs per patient year) would experience greater short-term decline in quality of life as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Study Design and Methods: A total of 1934 COPD patients were randomized in STATCOPE or MACRO. Patients who were randomized to azithromycin in MACRO or were followed less than 180 days were excluded. A total of 1219 patients were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups: infrequent exacerbators (< 2 exacerbations per patient year), and frequent exacerbators (≥2 exacerbations per year.) Data were collected at baseline, measured over time, and compared between groups. Results: Of the patients studied, 871 were in the infrequent exacerbators group. A total of 348 were in the frequent exacerbators group. Frequent exacerbators used more respiratory medications, were more likely to have used oxygen, steroids, or antibiotics in the 12 months preceding study entry, had more obstruction on spirometry, and had more severe symptoms as measured by SGRQ at baseline. Over at least 180 days, symptom scores worsened in frequent exacerbators and improved in infrequent exacerbators. Interpretation: Patients with frequent exacerbations of COPD experienced a short-term slight worsening of severely impaired SGRQ symptoms scores, while patients with infrequent exacerbations experienced improvement while on COPD therapies.

Heart Rate Variability on 10-Second Electrocardiogram and Risk of Acute Exacerbation of COPD: A Secondary Analysis of the BLOCK COPD Trial.

Introduction: Autonomic dysfunction is common in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and worse autonomic function may be a marker of risk for acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD). Heart rate variability (HRV) is a measure of autonomic function. Our objective was to test whether lower (worse) HRV is a risk factor for AECOPD. Methods: We measured standard deviation of normal RR intervals (SDNN) and root mean square of successive RR interval differences (RMSSD) on 10-second electrocardiograms (ECGs) performed at screening and day 42 in participants in the Beta Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of COPD trial ( BLOCK-COPD), a placebo-controlled trial of metoprolol for prevention of AECOPD. We used Cox-proportional hazards models to test if these HRV measures were associated with risk of any AECOPD, and separately, hospitalized AECOPD. We tested associations using baseline HRV measures and incorporating HRV measures from day 42 as a time-varying covariate. We also tested for interactions with metoprolol assignment. Results: Of 532 trial participants, 529 (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1 ]41 ± 16.3 % predicted) were included in this analysis. We did not find a significant association between HRV measures and risk of AECOPD when all participants were analyzed together. There was a significant interaction between RMSSD and assignment to metoprolol on time to first hospitalized AECOPD; in the placebo group greater RMSSD was associated with a lower risk of hospitalized AECOPD (adjusted hazard ratio0.71, 95% confidence interval: 0.52 to 0.96, per 10 ms increase) but there was no association in the metoprolol group. Conclusions: Autonomic dysfunction as measured by HRV may be a risk factor for AECOPD. Future studies should analyze longer HRV recordings and their performance in broader samples of people with COPD, including those on beta-blockers.

Lung Function and the Risk of Exacerbation in the ß-Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Trial.

Rationale: The BLOCK COPD (ß-Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) study found that metoprolol was associated with a higher risk of severe exacerbation. Objectives: To determine the mechanism underlying these results, we compared changes in lung function over the course of the study between treatment groups and evaluated whether baseline bronchodilator response or early reduction in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) or forced vital capacity (FVC) was associated with exacerbation risk. Methods: We compared changes in lung function (FEV1 and FVC) over the treatment period between treatment groups using linear mixed-effect models. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between baseline bronchodilator responsiveness (FEV1, FVC, and combined FEV1 and FVC), early post-randomization (14 d) change in lung function, and the interaction between treatment assignment and these measures with risk of any or severe or very severe exacerbations. Negative binomial models were used to evaluate the relationship between bronchodilator responsiveness, the interaction between bronchodilator responsiveness and treatment assignment, and exacerbation rate. Results: Over the 336-day treatment period, individuals in the metoprolol group had a significantly greater decrease in logarithmic FEV1 from baseline to visit on Day 28 than individuals in the placebo group. Individuals in the metoprolol group had a significantly greater decrease in FVC from baseline to visits on Days 14 and 28, and also a significantly greater decrease in logarithmic FVC from baseline to visits on Days 42 and 112 than individuals in the placebo group. There were no associations between early lung function reduction or interactions between lung function reduction and treatment assignment and time to any or severe or very severe exacerbations. There were no interactions between treatment arm and baseline bronchodilator responsiveness measures on risk or rate of exacerbations. However, those with baseline FVC bronchodilator responsiveness had a higher rate of severe or very severe exacerbations (adjusted rate ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-2.48). Conclusions: Metoprolol was associated with reduced lung function during the early part of the treatment period, but these effects were modest and did not persist. Early lung function reduction and baseline bronchodilator responsiveness did not interact with the treatment arm to predict exacerbations; however, baseline FVC bronchodilator responsiveness was associated with a 60% higher rate of severe or very severe exacerbations. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02587351).

Efficacy of Losartan in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19-Induced Lung Injury: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: SARS-CoV-2 viral entry may disrupt angiotensin II (AII) homeostasis, contributing to COVID-19 induced lung injury. AII type 1 receptor blockade mitigates lung injury in preclinical models, although data in humans with COVID-19 remain mixed. Objective: To test the efficacy of losartan to reduce lung injury in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 13 hospitals in the United States from April 2020 to February 2021. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and a respiratory sequential organ failure assessment score of at least 1 and not already using a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor were eligible for participation. Data were analyzed from April 19 to August 24, 2021. Interventions: Losartan 50 mg orally twice daily vs equivalent placebo for 10 days or until hospital discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the imputed arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (Pao2:Fio2) ratio at 7 days. Secondary outcomes included ordinal COVID-19 severity; days without supplemental o2, ventilation, or vasopressors; and mortality. Losartan pharmacokinetics and RAAS components (AII, angiotensin-[1-7] and angiotensin-converting enzymes 1 and 2)] were measured in a subgroup of participants. Results: A total of 205 participants (mean [SD] age, 55.2 [15.7] years; 123 [60.0%] men) were randomized, with 101 participants assigned to losartan and 104 participants assigned to placebo. Compared with placebo, losartan did not significantly affect Pao2:Fio2 ratio at 7 days (difference, -24.8 [95%, -55.6 to 6.1]; P = .12). Compared with placebo, losartan did not improve any secondary clinical outcomes and led to fewer vasopressor-free days than placebo (median [IQR], 9.4 [9.1-9.8] vasopressor-free days vs 8.7 [8.2-9.3] vasopressor-free days). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that initiation of orally administered losartan to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and acute lung injury did not improve Pao2:Fio2 ratio at 7 days. These data may have implications for ongoing clinical trials. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04312009.

Impact of COPD exacerbations leading to hospitalization on general and disease-specific quality of life.

RATIONALE: Acute exacerbations negatively impact quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but the impact of hospitalized exacerbations on quality of life is not clear. We hypothesized that patients with hospitalized exacerbations would benefit from hospitalization and experience improvement in general and disease-specific quality of life (as measured by the St. George's respiratory questionnaire (SGRQ) and the medical outcomes study 36-item short form health survey (SF-36)) compared to those without exacerbations, or with non-hospitalized acute exacerbations. METHODS: 1219 COPD patients enrolled in either the simvastatin for the prevention of exacerbations in moderate-to severe COPD Trial (STATCOPE) or azithromycin for prevention of exacerbations of COPD trial (MACRO) were analyzed. Demographic information, spirometry, and symptom scores were noted at baseline. Exacerbation events and changes in quality of life scores were assessed over a mean of 538 days of follow-up. RESULTS: Of patients studied, 25.6% were hospitalized, 44.0% had at least one outpatient exacerbation, and 30.4% had no exacerbation. Baseline SGRQ and SF-36 scores were severely impaired in all groups studied. Over time, SF-36 scores did not change significantly between groups. SGRQ symptom domain scores improved in other groups but did not improve in those hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation. CONCLUSIONS: At baseline, patients hospitalized for acute exacerbations of COPD had more impaired quality of life scores. Over time, SGRQ symptom domain scores improved in other groups but did not in those who were hospitalized. Other measurements of quality of life were not improved by hospitalization for COPD.

Effects of simvastatin on tissue factor pathway of blood coagulation in STATCOPE (Simvastatin in the prevention of COPD exacerbations) trial.

BACKGROUND: Statins are widely used to lower lipids and reduce cardiovascular events. In vitro studies and small studies in patients with hyperlipidemias show statins inhibit tissue factor (TF) and blood coagulation mechanisms. We assessed the effects of simvastatin on TF and coagulation biomarkers in patients entered in STATCOPE, a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of simvastatin (40 mg daily) versus placebo on exacerbation rates in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: In 227 patients (114 simvastatin, 113 placebo; mean [± standard error of the mean] age 62 ± 0.53 years, 44.5% women) we measured (baseline, and 6 and 12 months): whole blood membrane TF-procoagulant activity (TF-PCA) and plasma factors VIIa, VII, VIII, fibrinogen, TF antigen, tissue factor pathway inhibitor (TFPI), thrombin-antithrombin complexes (TAT), and D-dimer. We excluded patients with diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and those taking or requiring a statin. RESULTS: In the statin group, there was a small increase in TF-PCA (from 25.18 ± 1.08 to 30.36 ± 1.10 U/ml; p = .03) over 12 months; factors VIIa and VIII, fibrinogen, TAT, and D-dimer did not change. Plasma TFPI (from 52.4 ± 1.75 to 44.7 ± 1.78 ng/ml; p < .0001) and FVIIC (1.23 ± 0.04 to 1.15 ± 0.03 U/ml; p = .03) decreased and correlated with total cholesterol levels. No changes in biomarkers were observed with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to previous studies on statins, in COPD patients without diabetes, cardiovascular disease, or requiring a statin treatment, simvastatin (40 mg per day) did not decrease TF or factors VIIa and VIII, fibrinogen, TAT, or D-dimer. The decreases in TFPI and factor VII reflect the decrease in serum lipids.

Chronotropic Index and Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Secondary Analysis of BLOCK COPD.

Rationale: The chronotropic index quantifies the proportion of the expected heart rate increase that is attained during exercise. The relationship between the chronotropic index and acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPDs) has not been evaluated. Objectives: To determine whether a higher chronotropic index during a 6-minute walk (CI-6MW) is associated with lower risk of AECOPD and whether the CI-6MW is a marker of susceptibility to adverse effects of metoprolol in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: We analyzed data from the BLOCK COPD (Beta-Blockers for the Prevention of AECOPDs) trial. We used Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the relationship between the CI-6MW and the time to AECOPDs. We also tested for interactions between study group assignment (metoprolol vs. placebo) and the CI-6MW on the time to AECOPDs. Results: Four hundred seventy-seven participants with exacerbation-prone COPD (mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second, 41% of predicted) were included in this analysis. A higher CI-6MW was independently associated with a decreased risk of AECOPDs of any severity (adjusted hazard ratio per 0.1 increase in CI-6MW of 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.96) but was not independently associated with AECOPDs requiring hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.05). There was a significant interaction by treatment assignment, and in a stratified analysis, the protective effects of a higher CI-6MW on AECOPDs were negated by metoprolol use. Conclusions: A higher CI-6MW is associated with a decreased risk of AECOPDs and may be an indicator of susceptibility to the adverse effects of metoprolol.

A multi-center phase II randomized clinical trial of losartan on symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 virus enters cells via Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), disrupting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis, potentially contributing to lung injury. Treatment with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), such as losartan, may mitigate these effects, though induction of ACE2 could increase viral entry, replication, and worsen disease. METHODS: This study represents a placebo-controlled blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) to test the efficacy of losartan on outpatients with COVID-19 across three hospital systems with numerous community sites in Minnesota, U.S. Participants included symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 not already taking ACE-inhibitors or ARBs, enrolled within 7 days of symptom onset. Patients were randomized to 1:1 losartan (25 mg orally twice daily unless estimated glomerular filtration rate, eGFR, was reduced, when dosing was reduced to once daily) versus placebo for 10 days, and all patients and outcome assesors were blinded. The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization within 15 days. Secondary outcomes included functional status, dyspnea, temperature, and viral load. (clinicatrials.gov, NCT04311177, closed to new participants). FINDINGS: From April to November 2020, 117 participants were randomized 58 to losartan and 59 to placebo, and all were analyzed under intent to treat principles. The primary outcome did not differ significantly between the two arms based on Barnard's test [losartan arm: 3 events (5.2% 95% CI 1.1, 14.4%) versus placebo arm: 1 event (1.7%; 95% CI 0.0, 9.1%)]; proportion difference -3.5% (95% CI -13.2, 4.8%); p = 0.32]. Viral loads were not statistically different between treatment groups at any time point. Adverse events per 10 patient days did not differ signifcantly [0.33 (95% CI 0.22-0.49) for losartan vs. 0.37 (95% CI 0.25-0.55) for placebo]. Due to a lower than expected hospitalization rate and low likelihood of a clinically important treatment effect, the trial was terminated early. INTERPRETATION: In this multicenter blinded RCT for outpatients with mild symptomatic COVID-19 disease, losartan did not reduce hospitalizations, though assessment was limited by low event rate. Importantly, viral load was not statistically affected by treatment. This study does not support initiation of losartan for low-risk outpatients.