Dataset Information

Use of the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms™ in COPD as an Outcome Measure in Clinical Trials: A Rapid Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) struggle with respiratory symptoms that impair their daily activities and quality of life. Understanding a treatment's ability to relieve symptoms requires precise assessment. The Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS^TM:COPD) was developed to quantify respiratory symptoms in clinical trials. This study aimed to better understand how trials use this patient-reported outcome measure as an endpoint, as well as its responsiveness and performance relative to other outcome measures.

Objectives

To summarize the use of the E-RS:COPD in pharmacological trials since its qualification by regulatory authorities.

Methods

A rapid systematic literature review, using key biomedical databases to identify English language full-text publications of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) that included the E-RS:COPD as an endpoint (2010-2020). Two investigators independently screened the publications and extracted data.

Measurements and main results

Of 219 screened records, 28 full-text publications were included, and data from 17 reporting 20 unique double-blind RCTs were synthesized. The E-RS:COPD was positioned as a primary or secondary endpoint in six publications (35%), and served as an exploratory or additional endpoint in 11 (65%). Statistically significant E-RS:COPD treatment effects versus placebo/comparator were found in 13 of the 14 publications reporting symptom results. E-RS:COPD effects corresponded well with other outcome measures (e.g., St George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ] and forced expiratory volume 1 second [FEV₁]). Two publications reported the number of responders.

Conclusions

E-RS:COPD is sensitive to treatment effects in clinical trials testing drug therapies. Presentation of trial results should include responder analyses to facilitate interpretation and application of results.

SUBMITTER: Bushnell DM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8686855 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Symptomatic 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.This 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.In each study, RS-Total score was internally consistent (Cronbach ?) (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.Results 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.MPEX: NCT00739648 ; AZ1: NCT00949975 ; AZ 2: NCT01023516.

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 ).

Project description:BackgroundAspirin use in COPD has been associated with reduced all-cause mortality in meta-regression analysis with few equivocal studies. However, the effect of aspirin on COPD morbidity is unknown.MethodsSelf-reported daily aspirin use was obtained at baseline from SPIROMICS participants with COPD (FEV1/FVC < 70%). Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) were prospectively ascertained through quarterly structured telephone questionnaires up to 3 years and categorized as moderate (symptoms treated with antibiotics or oral corticosteroids) or severe (requiring ED visit or hospitalization). Aspirin users were matched one-to-one with nonusers, based on propensity score. The association of aspirin use with total, moderate, and severe AECOPD was investigated using zero-inflated negative binomial models. Linear or logistic regression was used to investigate the association with baseline respiratory symptoms, quality of life, and exercise tolerance.ResultsAmong 1,698 participants, 45% reported daily aspirin use at baseline. Propensity score matching resulted in 503 participant pairs. Aspirin users had a lower incidence rate of total AECOPD (adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.94), with similar effect for moderate but not severe AECOPD (IRR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.63-1.18). Aspirin use was associated with lower total St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (β, -2.2; 95% CI, -4.1 to -0.4), reduced odds of moderate-severe dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council questionnaire score ≥ 2; adjusted odds ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51-0.93), and COPD Assessment Test score (β, -1.1; 95% CI, -1.9 to -0.2) but not 6-min walk distance (β, 0.7 m; 95% CI, -14.3 to 15.6).ConclusionsDaily aspirin use is associated with reduced rate of COPD exacerbations, less dyspnea, and better quality of life. Randomized clinical trials of aspirin use in COPD are warranted to account for unmeasured and residual confounding.Trial registryClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01969344; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.