Adherence and quality of life assessment in patients with asthma treatment with budesonide/formoterol via the Elpenhaler device: the COMPLETE study.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways that causes recurring episodes of wheezing, breathlessness, chest tightness and coughing. Inhaled drugs on a daily basis are the cornerstone of asthma treatment, therefore, patient adherence is very important. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, open, non-interventional, observational, prospective study of 716 adult patients diagnosed with asthma receiving FDC (Fixed-dose combination) budesonide/formoterol via the Elpenhaler device. We assessed the adherence to treatment at 3 and 6 months (based on the MMAS-8: 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale), the quality of life and change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) from baseline to follow-up. RESULTS: Approximately 80% of the patients showed medium to high adherence throughout the study. The mean (SD) MMAS-8 score at 6 months was 6.85 (1.54) and we observed a statistically significant shift of patients from the low adherence group to the high adherence group at 6 months. Moreover, after 6 months of treatment with FDC budesonide/formoterol, we observed an increase in the patients' quality of life that as expressed by a change 2.01 (95%CI 1.93-2.10) units in Mini AQLQ (p < 0.0001) that was more pronounced in the high adherence group. The same trend was also observed in terms of spirometry (mean FEV1 2.58 L (0.85) at the end of the study, increased by 220 mL from baseline) with a higher improvement in the medium and high adherence groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with FDC of budesonide/formoterol via the Elpenhaler device was associated with improvement in asthma-related quality of life and lung function over 6 months that were more prominent in patients with higher adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 2017-HAL-EL-74 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03300076).

SARS-Cov-2 Infection in Severe Asthma Patients Treated With Biologics.

BACKGROUND: At the beginning of the pandemic, there have been considerable concerns regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity and outcomes in patients with severe asthma treated with biologics. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively observe a cohort of severe asthmatics treated with biologics for the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and disease severity during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Physicians from centers treating patients with severe asthma all over Greece provided demographic and medical data regarding their patients treated with biologics. Physicians were also asked to follow up patients during the pandemic and to perform a polymerase chain reaction test in case of a suspected SARS-Cov-2 infection. RESULTS: Among the 591 severe asthmatics (63.5% female) included in the study, 219 (37.1%) were treated with omalizumab, 358 (60.6%) with mepolizumab, and 14 (2.4%) with benralizumab. In total, 26 patients (4.4%) had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 9 (34.6%) of whom were admitted to the hospital because of severe COVID-19, and 1 required mechanical ventilation and died 19 days after admission. Of the 26 infected patients, 5 (19.2%) experienced asthma control deterioration, characterized as exacerbation that required treatment with systemic corticosteroids. The scheduled administration of the biological therapy was performed timely in all patients with the exception of 2, in whom it was postponed for 1 week according to their doctors' suggestion. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms that despite the initial concerns, SARS-CoV-2 infection is not more common in asthmatics treated with biologics compared with the general population, whereas the use of biologic treatments for severe asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to be related to adverse outcomes from severe COVID-19.

New dilemmas in small-cell lung cancer TNM clinical staging.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with limited disease (LD) behave similarly to those with extensive disease (ED) from a prognostic point of view. On the other hand, a proportion of patients with ED small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) behave similarly to those with LD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study analysis, 764 patients with proven SCLC were included and managed with the same therapeutic protocols. Of these patients, 278 (36.4%) had LD, while 486 (63.6%) had ED. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was observed for survival for IA and IB disease stages (P = 0.254) and between IIA and IIB stages (P = 0.256) according to the new tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) staging classification classification. In addition, no statistical significant difference was observed for survival between patients with (IIA + IIB) and IIIA (P = 0.951), (IIA + IIIA, P = 0.658), and (IIB + IIIA, P = 0.573) stages. Statistical significant difference was observed for survival among the LD SCLC patients with (IA + IB), (IIA + IIB + IIIA), and IIIB stages (P < 0.001). Similarly, statistical significance was observed for ED SCLC patients with (IIA + IIB + IIIA), IIIB, and IV stages (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although stratification of SCLC patients in LD and ED is generally satisfactory, the TNM staging system is recommended for more detailed prognostic information and treatment evaluation in these patients.

Immunomodifiers in combination with conventional chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer: a phase II, randomized study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of immunotherapy on response, survival, and certain immune markers in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) who are receiving chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with SCLC (n = 164) were assigned to receive either chemotherapy alone (group A) or a combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy as follows: interferon α (IFN-α; 3 million IU) 3 times per week (group B); IFN-γ (3 million IU) 3 times per week (group C); and IFN-α and IFN-γ (1.5 million IU of each) 3 times per week (group D). Chemotherapy was the same for all groups and consisted of eight cycles with carboplatin 5.5 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, ifosfamide 3.5 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, and etoposide 200 mg/m(2) total dose taken orally on days 1 through 3, every 28 days. Patients completing chemotherapy were restaged, and those who were found to have limited disease received primary site and prophylactic cranial irradiation. Immunotherapy was continued throughout these treatments and during the follow-up period. Blood was taken before each course of chemotherapy and during follow-up to measure CD3+ lymphocytes, CD3+CD4+ lymphocytes, CD3+CD8+ lymphocytes, natural killer cells, and natural killer T cells. RESULTS: Differences in response and survival were not significantly different when all patients were considered. However, among patients with limited disease, Kaplan-Meier analysis disclosed a survival benefit for group B (P , 0.05). The analysis of immunologic measurements revealed that the improvement of immune markers was always accompanied by clinical improvement, whereas deterioration of all markers was accompanied by disease progression (result not statistically significant except for group C; P , 0.05). CONCLUSION: Among cytokines used in the study, only IFN-α seems to confer a survival benefit to patients with SCLC with limited disease. However, immunotherapy remains a challenge in the treatment of lung neoplasms and should be further explored.

The role of second-line chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the benefit of second-line chemotherapy with platinum-based treatment in patients with recurrent small cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 535 patients continued with follow-up or best supportive care if needed, and 229 patients who progressed after the completion of first-line chemotherapy were treated with second-line chemotherapy at the time of progression. In total, 103/229 patients received paclitaxel 190 mg/m(2) and carboplatin 5.5 area under the curve while 126/229 patients received etoposide 200 mg/m(2) and carboplatin 5.5 area under the curve every 28 days. RESULTS: Patients administered second-line chemotherapy lived significantly longer, with a median survival of 422 days compared to 228 days in patients with best supportive care alone (P<0.001). Patients who received paclitaxel as second-line chemotherapy lived for an average of 462 days (95% confidence interval: 409-514), versus 405 days in the etoposide group (95% confidence interval: 371-438), which was not statistically significant (P=0.086). The overall response rate was 8% for the paclitaxel group and 6% for the etoposide group. Patients with progression of the disease in more than 3 months had significantly better survival compared with those that progressed in less than 3 months (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Continuation with carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/etoposide as second-line chemotherapy has no significant survival impact, and it did not improve response rates.

Iliopsoas tuberculous abscess associated with cervical and axillary tuberculous lymphadenopathy.

The authors report a case of iliopsoas tuberculous abscess without obvious spinal column involvement. Cervical and axillary tuberculous lymphadenopathy were also presented. Despite appropriate antituberculous treatment, patient required percutaneous drainage with CT-guided catheter insertion.