Dataset Information

Safety and Adverse Events after Targeted Lung Denervation for Symptomatic Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (AIRFLOW). A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Rationale: Targeted lung denervation (TLD) is a bronchoscopic radiofrequency ablation therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which durably disrupts parasympathetic pulmonary nerves to decrease airway resistance and mucus hypersecretion.Objectives: To determine the safety and impact of TLD on respiratory adverse events.Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, sham bronchoscopy-controlled, double-blind trial in patients with symptomatic (modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale score, ≥2; or COPD Assessment Test score, ≥10) COPD (FEV₁, 30-60% predicted). The primary endpoint was the rate of respiratory adverse events between 3 and 6.5 months after randomization (defined as COPD exacerbation, tachypnea, wheezing, worsening bronchitis, worsening dyspnea, influenza, pneumonia, other respiratory infections, respiratory failure, or airway effects requiring therapeutic intervention). Blinding was maintained through 12.5 months.Measurements and Main Results: Eighty-two patients (50% female; mean ± SD: age, 63.7 ± 6.8 yr; FEV₁, 41.6 ± 7.3% predicted; modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale score, 2.2 ± 0.7; COPD Assessment Test score, 18.4 ± 6.1) were randomized 1:1. During the predefined 3- to 6.5-month window, patients in the TLD group experienced significantly fewer respiratory adverse events than those in the sham group (32% vs. 71%, P = 0.008; odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.0750-0.4923, P = 0.0006). Between 0 and 12.5 months, these findings were not different (83% vs. 90%; P = 0.52). The risk of COPD exacerbation requiring hospitalization in the 0- to 12.5-month window was significantly lower in the TLD group than in the sham group (hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.99; P = 0.039). There was no statistical difference in the time to first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation, patient-reported symptoms, or other physiologic measures over the 12.5 months of follow-up.Conclusions: Patients with symptomatic COPD treated with TLD combined with optimal pharmacotherapy had fewer study-defined respiratory adverse events, including hospitalizations for COPD exacerbation.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02058459).

SUBMITTER: Slebos DJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6909835 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIn cancer clinical trials, symptomatic adverse events (AEs), such as nausea, are reported by investigators rather than by patients. There is increasing interest to collect symptomatic AE data via patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, but it is unclear whether it is feasible to implement this approach in multicenter trials.ObjectiveTo examine whether patients are willing and able to report their symptomatic AEs in multicenter trials.Design, setting, and participantsA total of 361 consecutive patients enrolled in any 1 of 9 US multicenter cancer treatment trials were invited to self-report 13 common symptomatic AEs using a PRO adaptation of the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) via tablet computers at 5 successive clinic visits. Patient adherence was tracked with reasons for missed self-reports. Agreement with clinician AE reports was analyzed with weighted κ statistics. Patient and investigator perspectives were elicited by survey. The study was conducted from March 15, 2007, to August 11, 2011. Data analysis was performed from August 9, 2013, to March 21, 2014.ResultsOf the 361 patients invited to participate, 285 individuals enrolled, with a median age of 57 years (range, 24-88), 202 (74.3%) female, 241 (85.5%) white, 73 (26.8%) with a high school education or less, and 176 (64.7%) who reported regular internet use (denominators varied owing to missing data). Across all patients and trials, there were 1280 visits during which patients had an opportunity to self-report (ie, patients were alive and enrolled in a treatment trial at the time of the visit). Self-reports were completed at 1202 visits (93.9% overall adherence). Adherence was highest at baseline and declined over time (visit 1, 100%; visit 2, 96%; visit 3, 95%; visit 4, 91%; and visit 5, 85%). Reasons for missing PROs included institutional errors in 27 of 48 (56.3%) of the cases (eg, staff forgetting to bring computers to patients at visits), patients feeling "too ill" in 8 (16.7%), patient refusal in 8 (16.7%), and internet connectivity problems in 5 (10.4%). Patient-investigator CTCAE agreement was moderate or worse for most symptoms (most κ < 0.05), with investigators reporting fewer AEs than patients across symptoms. Most patients believed that the system was easy to use (234 [93.2%]) and useful (230 [93.1%]), and investigators thought that the patient-reported AEs were useful (133 [94.3%]) and accurate (119 [83.2%]).Conclusions and relevanceParticipants in multicenter cancer trials are willing and able to report their own symptomatic AEs at most clinic visits and report more AEs than investigators. This approach may improve the precision of AE reporting in cancer trials.

Project description:OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of symptomatic moderate-to-severe adverse events during treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis, and to compare their risk and outcomes by patients' human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infection status. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of patients treated for drug-resistant tuberculosis between January 2008 and February 2010. Routinely, clinicians monitored and managed patients' response to treatment until its completion. Any symptomatic adverse event observed by the clinician or reported by the patient was recorded in the standard patient treatment booklet of the National Tuberculosis and Leprosy Programme. There were 18 symptomatic adverse events routinely monitored. Depending on the nature of the medical intervention needed, each was graded as mild, moderate or severe. Data were extracted from the patient treatment booklet using a structured form, then descriptive, bivariate and Cox proportional hazard analysis performed, stratified by patients' HIV infection status. Statistical associations were done at the 5% level of significance and reported with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Fifty seven (57) patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis were identified, 31 (53%) of whom were HIV co-infected. The cumulative incidence of moderate-to-severe adverse events was 46 events in 100 patients. HIV co-infected patients experienced more moderate-to-severe adverse events compared with the HIV uninfected patients (median 3 versus 1 events, p?=?0.01). They had a four-fold increase in the cumulative hazard of moderate-to-severe adverse events compared with the HIV uninfected patients (HR?=?4.0, 95% CI 1.5 - 10.5). Moderate-to-severe adverse events were the main determinant of a clinician's decision to reduce the dose or to stop the suspected offending medicine (RR?=?3.8, 95% 1.2-11.8). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-to-severe adverse events are common during drug-resistant tuberculosis therapy. They are more likely to occur and to persist in HIV co-infected patients than in HIV uninfected patients. Clinicians should employ various strategies for preventing drug-induced patient discomfort and harm, such as reducing the dose or stopping the suspected offending medicine. Managers of tuberculosis control programmes should strengthen pharmacovigilance systems. We recommend a more powered study for conclusive risk-factor analysis.

Project description:BackgroundClinician reporting of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) in phase I trials uses the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). The utility of the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) in this setting is unknown. This prospective, observational study compared patient- and clinician-reported symptomatic AEs in phase I patients.MethodsPhase I study-eligible patients at Princess Margaret were surveyed with the PRO-CTCAE full-item library (78 symptomatic AEs) at baseline (BL), mid-cycle 1, and mid-cycle 2 (C2). Patient and trial characteristics, best response, and survival data were collected. Presence or absence of patient- (PRO-CTCAE) or clinician-reported symptomatic AEs were compared (kappa) at defined timepoints and overall (BL+ mid-cycle 1 + C2).ResultsOf 292 patients approached from May 2017 to January 2019, a total of 265 (90.8%) were consented, with 243 (91.7%) evaluable and 552 PRO-CTCAE surveys (completion rate = 98.7%) included in analyses. Evaluation of overall patient-reported symptomatic AEs identified 50 PRO-CTCAE and 11 CTCAE items with 10% or greater reporting frequency. Nineteen CTCAE items were reported as 1% or less despite matched PRO-CTCAE items reporting as 10% or greater. Underreported categories included sexual health, bodily emissions, and cognition. Clinician- relative to patient-reporting frequency (ratio) demonstrated 9 symptomatic AEs with a 50-fold or more lower clinician reporting rate. Overall patient-clinician agreement for individual symptomatic AEs ranged from poor (κ = 0.00-0.19) to moderate (κ = 0.40-0.59), with discordance driven by lack of clinician reporting. Dyspnea (κ = 0.54) and peripheral neuropathy (κ = 0.63) at BL and limb edema (κ = 0.55) at C2 demonstrated the highest patient-clinician agreement.ConclusionsPoor to moderate patient-clinician agreement for symptomatic AEs suggests clinician underreporting in phase I trials. Analyses of severity and interference PRO categories are ongoing.

Dataset Information

Safety and Adverse Events after Targeted Lung Denervation for Symptomatic Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (AIRFLOW). A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets