Dataset Information

Measuring respiratory symptoms in moderate/severe asthma: evaluation of a respiratory symptom tool, the E-RS®: COPD in asthma populations.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Symptom constructs included in the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (E-RS®: COPD) tool may be relevant to patients with asthma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate content validity and psychometric performance of the E-RS: COPD in moderate/severe asthma patients.

Methods

Content validity of the E-RS: COPD was evaluated in patients with moderate/severe asthma using concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. Secondary analyses using data from two clinical trials in patients with moderate/severe asthma evaluated the factor structure of the E-RS: COPD plus two supplementary items (wheeze; shortness of breath with strenuous physical activity) and assessed psychometric properties of the tool, which will be referred to as E-RS®: Asthma when used in asthma populations.

Results

Qualitative interviews (N = 25) achieved concept saturation for asthma respiratory symptoms. Concepts in the E-RS: COPD were relevant to patients and instructions were understood. Most patients (19/25; 76%) reported experiencing all concepts in the E-RS: COPD; no patients indicated missing symptoms. Secondary analyses of clinical trial data supported the original factor structure (RS-Total and three symptom-specific subscales). The two supplemental items did not fit with this factor structure and were not retained. RS-Total and subscale score reliability was high (internal consistency [α] > 0.70). Validity was demonstrated through significant (P < 0.0001) relationships with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and Asthma Symptom Severity scale. E-RS: Asthma was responsive to change when evaluated using SGRQ, Patient Global Impression of Change and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire as anchors (P < 0.0001). Clinically meaningful change thresholds were also identified (RS-Total: - 2.0 units).

Conclusions

The E-RS: Asthma is reliable and responsive for evaluating respiratory symptoms in patients with moderate/severe asthma.

SUBMITTER: Tabberer M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8502721 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measuring respiratory symptoms in moderate/severe asthma: evaluation of a respiratory symptom tool, the E-RS®: COPD in asthma populations.

Tabberer Maggie M von Maltzahn Robyn R Bacci Elizabeth D ED Karn Hayley H Hsieh Ray R Howell Timothy A TA Bailes Zelie Z Fowler Andrew A Lee Laurie L Murray Lindsey T LT

Journal of patient-reported outcomes 20211010 1

<h4>Background</h4>Symptom constructs included in the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (E-RS®: COPD) tool may be relevant to patients with asthma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate content validity and psychometric performance of the E-RS: COPD in moderate/severe asthma patients.<h4>Methods</h4>Content validity of the E-RS: COPD was evaluated in patients with moderate/severe asthma using concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. Seco ...[more]

PMID: 34632556

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSymptomatic relief is an important treatment goal for patients with COPD. To date, no diary for evaluating respiratory symptoms in clinical trials has been developed and scientifically-validated according to FDA and EMA guidelines. The EXACT - Respiratory Symptoms (E-RS) scale is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure designed to address this need. The E-RS utilizes 11 respiratory symptom items from the existing and validated 14-item EXACT, which measures symptoms of exacerbation. The E-RS total score quantifies respiratory symptom severity, and 3 domains assess breathlessness, cough and sputum, and chest symptoms.MethodsThis study examined the performance of the E-RS in each of 3 controlled trials with common and unique validation variables: one 6-month (N = 235, US) and two 3-month (N = 749; N = 597; international). Subjects completed the E-RS as part of a daily eDiary. Tests of reliability, validity, and responsiveness were conducted in each dataset.ResultsIn each study, RS-Total score was internally consistent (Cronbach α) (0.88, 0.92, 0.92) and reproducible (intra-class correlation) in stable patients (2 days apart: 0.91; 7 days apart: 0.71, 0.74). RS-Total scores correlated significantly with the following criterion variables (Spearman's rho; p < 0.01, all comparisons listed here): FEV1% predicted (-0.19, -0.14, -0.15); St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) (0.65, 0.52, 0.51); Breathlessness, Cough, and Sputum Scale (BCSS) (0.89, 0.89); modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale (mMRC) (0.40); rescue medication use (0.43, 0.42); Functional Performance Inventory Short-Form (FPI-SF) (0.43); 6-minute walk distance (6-MWT) (-0.30, -0.14) and incremental shuttle walk (ISWT) (-0.18) tests. Correlations between these variables and RS-Breathlessness, RS-Cough and Sputum, RS-Chest Symptoms scores supported subscale validity. RS-Total, RS-Breathlessness, and RS-Chest Symptoms differentiated mMRC levels of breathlessness severity (p < 0.0001). RS-Total and domain scores differentiated subjects with no rescue medication use and 3 or more puffs (p < 0.0001). Sensitivity to changes in health status (SGRQ), symptoms (BCSS), and exercise capacity (6MWT, ISWT) were also shown and responder definitions using criterion- and distribution-based methods are proposed.ConclusionsResults suggest the E-RS is a reliable, valid, and responsive measure of respiratory symptoms of COPD suitable for use in natural history studies and clinical trials.Trial registrationMPEX: NCT00739648 ; AZ1: NCT00949975 ; AZ 2: NCT01023516.

Project description:BackgroundPhysical and psychological symptoms are the hallmark of patients' subjective perception of their illness. The purpose of this analysis was to determine if patients with COPD have distinctive symptom profiles and to examine the association of symptom profiles with systemic biomarkers of inflammation.MethodsWe conducted latent class analyses of three physical (dyspnea, fatigue, and pain) and two psychological symptoms (depression and anxiety) in 302 patients with moderate to severe COPD using baseline data from a longitudinal observational study of depression in COPD. Systemic inflammatory markers included IL1, IL8, IL10, IL12, IL13, INF, GM-CSF, TNF-α (levels >75thcentile was considered high); and CRP (levels >3 mg/L was considered high). Multinominal logistic regression models were used to examine the association between symptom classes and inflammation while adjusting for key socio-demographic and disease characteristics.ResultsWe found that a 4-class model best fit the data: 1) low physical and psychological symptoms (26%, Low-Phys/Low-Psych), 2) low physical but moderate psychological symptoms (18%, Low-Phys/Mod Psych), 3) high physical but moderate psychological symptoms (25%, High-Phys/Mod Psych), and 4) high physical and psychological symptoms (30%, High-Phys/High Psych). Unadjusted analyses showed associations between symptom class with high levels of IL7, IL-8 (p ≤ .10) and CRP (p < .01). In the adjusted model, those with a high CRP level were less likely to be in the High-Phys/Mod-Psych class compared to the Low-Phys/Low-Psych (OR: 0.41, 95%CI 0.19, 0.90) and Low-Phys/Mod-Psych classes (OR: 0.35, 95%CI 0.16, 0.78); elevated CRP was associated with in increased odds of being in the High-Phys/High-Psych compared to the High-Phys/Mod-Psych class (OR: 2.22, 95%CI 1.08, 4.58). Younger age, having at least a college education, oxygen use and depression history were more prominent predictors of membership in the higher symptom classes.ConclusionsPatients with COPD can be classified into four distinct symptom classes based on five commonly co-occurring physical and psychological symptoms. Systemic biomarkers of inflammation were not associated with symptom class. Additional work to test the reliability of these symptom classes, their biological drivers and their validity for prognostication and tailoring therapy in larger and more diverse samples is needed.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT01074515 .

Project description:BackgroundMetformin is associated with improved respiratory outcomes in asthma; however, metformin in COPD and asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) remains unexplored.ObjectiveTo determine the association between metformin use and respiratory outcomes in COPD and ACO.Study design and methodsParticipants with COPD (FEV1/FVC < 0.70) in the Genetic Epidemiology of COPD study (COPDGene®) were categorized as ACO (n = 510), defined as concurrent physician-diagnosed asthma before age 40 years, or COPD alone (n = 3459). We estimated the association of baseline metformin use with (1) rate of total and severe respiratory exacerbations during follow-up, (2) cross-sectional St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score, six-minute walk distance (6MWD), and post-bronchodilator FEV1 percent predicted (FEV1pp), and (3) 5-year change in SGRQ, 6MWD, and FEV1pp. We also examined change in SGRQ, 6MWD and FEV1pp among participants who initiated metformin during follow-up (n = 108) compared to persistent metformin non-users (n = 2080). Analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic factors, medications, and comorbidities.ResultsAmong participants with ACO, metformin use was associated with lower rate of total (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] 0.3; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.11, 0.77) and severe exacerbations (aIRR 0.29; 95%CI 0.10, 0.89). Among participants with COPD alone, there was no association between metformin use with total (aIRR 0.98; 95%CI 0.62, 1.5) or severe exacerbations (aIRR 1.3; 95% CI 0.68, 2.4) (p-interaction < 0.05). Metformin use was associated with lower baseline SGRQ score (adjusted mean difference [aMD] - 2.7; 95%CI - 5.3, - 0.2) overall. Metformin initiation was associated with improved SGRQ score (aMD -10.0; 95% CI - 18.7, - 1.2) among participants with ACO but not COPD alone (p-interaction < 0.05). There was no association between metformin use and 6MWD or FEV1pp in any comparison.ConclusionsMetformin use was associated with fewer respiratory exacerbations and improved quality of life among individuals with ACO but not COPD alone. Results suggest a potential role for metformin in ACO which requires further prospective study.Trial registryNCT00608764.

Project description:While poor inhaler technique in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can compromise the effectiveness of inhaled medications, identifying and quantifying these errors may suggest ways to improve inhalation technique and patient outcomes. The objective of this international, multicentre care improvement programme was to investigate errors in inhaler use (handling errors and inhalation errors) made by patients in handling two dry powder inhalers; DuoResp® Spiromax® and Symbicort® Turbuhaler®. Patients with asthma or COPD aged between 18 and 80 years attending the allergology/pneumology departments of 14 hospitals in Spain and Portugal were included. All assessments were performed during one regular scheduled visit to the study clinic. Among 161 eligible patients (138 with asthma; 23 with COPD), inhalation errors were the most common type of error, with no significant difference between devices in overall total error rate, handling error rate or inhalation error rate. Significantly fewer total errors per patient (1.4 vs. 1.9; p < 0.001) and handling errors per patient (0.5 vs. 0.8; p < 0.001) were observed with DuoResp® Spiromax® compared with Symbicort® Turbuhaler®. The mean number of attempts for patients using DuoResp® Spiromax® to perform two correct procedures was 1.9 (0.6) compared with 2.1 (0.9) attempts for patients using Symbicort® Turbuhaler® (p = 0.016). Compared with Symbicort® Turbuhaler®, DuoResp® Spiromax® was found to be easy to learn how to use (p < 0.001), easy to prepare (p < 0.001), easy to use (p < 0.001), comfortable in terms of weight and size (p = 0.001), and patients felt that they were using the device correctly (p < 0.001). Overall, 79.5% of patients stated that they preferred DuoResp® Spiromax® as their first option over Symbicort® Turbuhaler®. The findings of this study may be useful in developing effective inhaler training programmes and thus improve outcomes in asthma and COPD.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Reducing the severity of respiratory symptoms is a key goal in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated the effect of aclidinium bromide 400 ?g twice daily (BID) on respiratory symptoms, assessed using the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS(™): COPD) scale (formerly EXACT-RS). METHODS:Data were pooled from the aclidinium 400 ?g BID and placebo arms of two 24-week, double-blind, randomized Phase III studies evaluating aclidinium monotherapy (ATTAIN) or combination therapy (AUGMENT COPD I) in patients with moderate to severe airflow obstruction. Patients were stratified by Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Groups A-D. Change from baseline in E-RS scores, proportion of responders (patients achieving pre-defined improvements in E-RS scores), and net benefit (patients who improved minus patients who worsened) were analyzed. RESULTS:Of 1210 patients, 1167 had data available for GOLD classification. Mean (standard deviation) age was 63.2 (8.6) years, 60.7 % were male, and mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s was 54.4 % predicted. Compared with placebo, aclidinium 400 ?g BID significantly improved RS-Total (2.38 units vs 0.79 units, p?<?0.001) and domain scores (all p?<?0.001) at Week 24, and doubled the likelihood of being an RS-Total score responder (p?<?0.05), irrespective of GOLD group. The net benefit for RS-Total (Overall: 56.9 % vs 19.4 %; A?+?C: 65.7 % vs 6.3 %; B?+?D: 56.0 % vs 20.8 %, for aclidinium 400 ?g BID and placebo respectively; all p?<?0.05) and domain scores (all p?<?0.05) was significantly greater with aclidinium compared with placebo, in both GOLD Groups A?+?C and B?+?D. CONCLUSIONS:Aclidinium 400 ?g BID significantly improved respiratory symptoms regardless of the patients' level of symptoms at baseline. Net treatment benefit was similar in patients with low or high levels of symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ATTAIN (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001494 ) and AUGMENT COPD I (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01437397 ).

Dataset Information

Measuring respiratory symptoms in moderate/severe asthma: evaluation of a respiratory symptom tool, the E-RS®: COPD in asthma populations.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Measuring respiratory symptoms in moderate/severe asthma: evaluation of a respiratory symptom tool, the E-RS®: COPD in asthma populations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets