Dataset Information

Nocturnal temperature controlled laminar airflow for treating atopic asthma: a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: To determine whether environmental control using nocturnal temperature controlled laminar airflow (TLA) treatment could improve the quality of life of patients with persistent atopic asthma.Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. Setting Nineteen European asthma clinics.312 patients aged 7-70 with inadequately controlled persistent atopic asthma.Proportion of patients with an increase of ?0.5 points in asthma quality of life score after 1 year of treatment.TLA devices were successfully installed in the bedrooms of 282 (90%) patients included in the primary efficacy analysis. There was a difference in treatment response rate between active (143 of 189, 76%) and placebo (56 of 92, 61%) groups, difference 14.8% (95% CI 3.1 to 26.5, p=0.02).3 In patients aged ?12, on whom the study was powered, the difference in response rate was similar-active 106 of 143 (74%), placebo 42 of 70 (60%), difference 14.1% (0.6 to 27.7, p=0.059). There was a difference between groups in fractional exhaled nitric oxide change of -7.1 ppb (-13.6 to -0.7, p=0.03). Active treatment was associated with less increase in cat-specific IgE than placebo. There was no difference in adverse event rates between treatment groups.Inhalant exposure reduction with TLA improves quality of life, airway inflammation and systemic allergy in patients with persistent atopic asthma. TLA may be a treatment option for patients with inadequately controlled persistent atopic asthma. Trial registration number Clinical Trials NCT00986323.

SUBMITTER: Boyle RJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3282042 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nocturnal temperature controlled laminar airflow for treating atopic asthma: a randomised controlled trial.

Boyle Robert J RJ Pedroletti Christophe C Wickman Magnus M Bjermer Leif L Valovirta Erkka E Dahl Ronald R Von Berg Andrea A Zetterström Olof O Warner John O JO

Thorax 20111130 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether environmental control using nocturnal temperature controlled laminar airflow (TLA) treatment could improve the quality of life of patients with persistent atopic asthma.<h4>Design</h4>Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. Setting Nineteen European asthma clinics.<h4>Participants</h4>312 patients aged 7-70 with inadequately controlled persistent atopic asthma.<h4>Main outcome measure</h4>Proportion of patients with an increase o ...[more]

PMID: 22131290

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Allergen avoidance is important in allergic asthma management. Nocturnal treatment with Temperature-controlled Laminar Airflow (TLA) has been shown to provide a significant reduction in the exposure to allergens in the breathing zone, leading to a long-term reduction in airway inflammation and improvement in Quality of life (QoL). Allergic asthma patients symptomatic on Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) step 4/5 were found to benefit the most as measured by Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ). However, the effect of TLA on severe asthma exacerbations is uncertain and therefore a meta-analysis was performed. Methods: Patients with severe allergic asthma (GINA 4/5) were extracted from two 1-year randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials conducted with TLA. A meta-analysis of the effect on severe exacerbations was performed by negative binomial regression in a sequential manner, defined by baseline markers of asthma control (symptoms and QoL scores). Results: The pooled dataset included 364patients. Patients with more symptoms at baseline (ACT<18 or ACQ7>3; N=179), had a significant mean 41% reduction in severe exacerbations (RR=0.59 (0.38-0.90); p=0.015) in favour of TLA. Higher ACQ7 cut-points of 3.5-4.5 resulted in significant reductions of 48-59%.More uncontrolled patients based on AQLQ total and symptom domains ≤3.0 at baseline also showed a significant reduction in severe exacerbations for TLA vs. placebo ((47% (p=0.037) and 53% (p=0.011), respectively). The meta-analysis also confirmed a significant difference in AQLQ-responders ((Minimal Clinically Important Difference)≥0.5; 74% vs. 43%, p=0.04). Conclusion: This meta-analysis of individual patient data shows a beneficial effect on severe exacerbations and quality of life for TLA over placebo in more symptomatic patients with severe allergic asthma. These outcomes support the national management recommendations for patients with symptomatic severe allergic asthma. The actual effect of TLA on severe exacerbations should be confirmed in a prospective study with larger numbers of patients.

Project description:BackgroundDespite effective pharmacotherapy, asthma continues to impair quality of life for most patients. Non-pharmacological approaches, including breathing retraining, are therefore of great interest to patients. However, clinicians rarely advocate breathing retraining and access to this intervention is restricted for most patients due to the limited availability of suitable physiotherapists and poor integration of breathing retraining into standard care. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of a digital self-guided breathing retraining intervention.MethodsIn this randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients from 34 general practices in the UK. Eligibility criteria for patients with asthma were broad, comprising a physician diagnosis of asthma, age of 16-70 years, receipt of at least one anti-asthma medication in the previous year, and impaired asthma-related quality of life (Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire [AQLQ] score of <5·5). We developed a self-guided intervention, which was delivered as a DVD plus a printed booklet (DVDB). Participants were randomly assigned to receive either the DVDB intervention, three face-to-face breathing retraining sessions, or standard care, in a 2:1:2 ratio, for 12 months. Randomisation was achieved using the Southampton Clinical Trials Unit telephone randomisation service by use of random number generators. The primary outcome was the AQLQ score in the intention-to-treat population at 12 months. The trial was powered to show equivalence between the two active intervention groups, and superiority of both intervention groups over usual care. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported and physiological measures of asthma control, patient acceptability, and health-care costs. This trial was registered with International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry, number ISRCTN88318003.FindingsBetween Nov 5, 2012 and Jan 28, 2014, invitations to participate in the study were sent to 15 203 patients with general practitioner-diagnosed asthma, of whom 655 were recruited into the study. AQLQ scores at 12 months were significantly higher in the DVDB group (mean 5·40, SD 1·14) than in the usual care group (5·12, SD 1·17; adjusted mean difference 0·28, 95% CI 0·11 to 0·44), and in the face-to-face group (5·33, SD 1·06) than in the usual care group (adjusted mean difference 0·24, 95% CI 0·04 to 0·44); AQLQ scores were similar between the DVDB group and the face-to-face group (0·04, 95% CI -0·16 to 0·24). There were no significant differences between the randomisation groups in FEV1 or fraction of exhaled nitric oxide. 744 adverse events occurred in 272 patients: 101 (39%) of 261 patients in the DVDB group, 55 (42%) of 132 patients in the face-to-face group, and 132 (50%) of 262 in the usual care group, with patients reporting one or more event. 11 (4%) patients in the DVDB group, four (3%) patients in the face-to-face group, and 20 (8%) patients in the usual care group had a serious adverse event.InterpretationBreathing retraining programmes improve quality of life in patients with incompletely controlled asthma despite having little effect on lung function or airway inflammation. Such programmes can be delivered conveniently and cost-effectively as a self-guided digital audiovisual programme, so might also reduce health-care costs.FundingUK National Institute of Health Research.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To compare the efficacy and tolerability of Hypericum perforatum (St John's wort extract) with imipramine in patients with mild to moderate depression. DESIGN:Randomised, multicentre, double blind, parallel group trial. SETTING:40 outpatient clinics in Germany. PARTICIPANTS:324 outpatients with mild to moderate depression. INTERVENTION:75 mg imipramine twice daily or 250 mg hypericum extract ZE 117 twice daily for 6 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Hamilton depression rating scale, clinical global impression scale, and patient's global impression scale. RESULTS:Among the 157 participants taking hypericum mean scores on the Hamilton depression scale decreased from 22.4 at baseline to 12.00 at end point; among the 167 participants taking imipramine they fell from 22.1 to 12.75. Mean clinical global impression scores at end point were 2.22 out of 7 for the hypericum group and 2.42 for the imipramine group. On the 7 point self assessments of global improvement completed by participants (score of 1 indicating "very much improved" and 7 indicating "very much deteriorated") mean scores were 2.44 in the hypericum group and 2.60 in the imipramine group. None of the differences between treatment groups were significant. However, the mean score on the anxiety-somatisation subscale of the Hamilton scale (3.79 in the hypericum group and 4.26 in the imipramine group) indicated a significant advantage for hypericum relative to imipramine. Mean scores on the 5 point scale used by participants to assess tolerability (score of 1 indicating excellent tolerability and 5 indicating very poor tolerability) were better for hypericum (1.67) than imipramine (2.35). Adverse events occurred in 62/157 (39%) participants taking hypericum and in 105/167 (63%) taking imipramine. 4 (3%) participants taking hypericum withdrew because of adverse events compared with 26 (16%) taking imipramine. CONCLUSIONS:This Hypericum perforatum extract is therapeutically equivalent to imipramine in treating mild to moderate depression, but patients tolerate hypericum better.

Project description:BackgroundInfluenza is an important cause of morbidity and mortality for frail older people. Whilst the antiviral drug oseltamivir (a neuraminidase inhibitor) is approved for treatment and prophylaxis of influenza during outbreaks, there have been no trials comparing treatment only (T) versus treatment and prophylaxis (T&P) in Aged Care Facilities (ACFs). Our objective was to compare a policy of T versus T&P for influenza outbreaks in ACFs.Methods and findingsWe performed a cluster randomised controlled trial in 16 ACFs, that followed a policy of either "T"-oseltamivir treatment (75 mg twice a day for 5 days)-or "T&P"-treatment and prophylaxis (75 mg once a day for 10 days) for influenza outbreaks over three years, in addition to enhanced surveillance. The primary outcome measure was the attack rate of influenza. Secondary outcomes measures were deaths, hospitalisation, pneumonia and adverse events. Laboratory testing was performed to identify the viral cause of influenza-like illness (ILI) outbreaks. The study period 30 June 2006 to 23 December 2008 included three southern hemisphere winters. During that time, influenza was confirmed as the cause of nine of the 23 ILI outbreaks that occurred amongst the 16 ACFs. The policy of T&P resulted in a significant reduction in the influenza attack rate amongst residents: 93/255 (36%) in residents in T facilities versus 91/397 (23%) in T&P facilities (p=0.002). We observed a non-significant reduction in staff: 46/216 (21%) in T facilities versus 47/350 (13%) in T&P facilities (p=0.5). There was a significant reduction in mean duration of outbreaks (T=24 days, T&P=11 days, p=0.04). Deaths, hospitalisations and pneumonia were non-significantly reduced in the T&P allocated facilities. Drug adverse events were common but tolerated.ConclusionOur trial lacked power but these results provide some support for a policy of "treatment and prophylaxis" with oseltamivir in controlling influenza outbreaks in ACFs.Trial registration[corrected] Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12606000278538.

Project description:IntroductionA minority of school-aged children with asthma have persistent poor control and experience frequent asthma attacks despite maximal prescribed maintenance therapy. These children have higher morbidity and risk of death. The first add-on biologic therapy, omalizumab, a monoclonal antibody that blocks immunoglobulin (Ig)E, was licensed for children with severe asthma in 2005. While omalizumab is an effective treatment, non-response is common. A second biologic, mepolizumab which blocks interleukin 5 and targets eosinophilic inflammation, was licensed in 2018, but the licence was granted by extrapolation of adult clinical trial data to children. This non-inferiority (NI) trial will determine whether mepolizumab is as efficacious as omalizumab in reducing asthma attacks in children with severe therapy resistant asthma (STRA) and refractory difficult asthma (DA).Methods and analysisThis is an ongoing multicentre 1:1 randomised NI open-label trial of mepolizumab and omalizumab. Up to 150 children and young people (CYP) aged 6-17 years with severe asthma will be recruited from specialist paediatric severe asthma centres in the UK. Prior to randomisation, children will be monitored for medication adherence for up to 16 weeks to determine STRA and refractory DA diagnoses. Current prescribing recommendations of serum IgE and blood eosinophils will not influence eligibility or enrolment. The primary outcome is the 52-week asthma attack rate. Bayesian analysis using clinician-elicited prior distributions will be used to calculate the posterior probability that mepolizumab is not inferior to omalizumab. Secondary outcomes include Composite Asthma Severity Index, Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, lung function measures (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), bronchodilator reversibility), fractional exhaled nitric oxide, Asthma Control Test (ACT), health outcomes EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) and optimal serum IgE and blood eosinophil levels that may predict a response to therapy. These outcomes will be analysed in a frequentist framework using longitudinal models.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the South Central-Berkshire Research Ethics Committee REC Number 19/SC/0634 and had Clinical Trials Authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) (EudraCT 2019-004085-17). All parents/legal guardians will give informed consent for their child to participate in the trial, and CYP will give assent to participate. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at international conferences and disseminated via our patient and public involvement partners.Trial registration numberISRCTN12109108; EudraCT Number: 2019-004085-17.

Dataset Information

Nocturnal temperature controlled laminar airflow for treating atopic asthma: a randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Nocturnal temperature controlled laminar airflow for treating atopic asthma: a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets