Cyclophosphamide for interstitial lung disease-associated acute respiratory failure:mortality, clinical response and radiological characteristics

BACKGROUND: Treatment for interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) is challenging, and literature to guide such treatment is scarce. The reported in-hospital mortality rates of ILD patients with ARF are high (62–66%). Cyclophosphamide is considered a second-line treatment in steroid-refractory ILD-associated ARF. The first aim of this study was to evaluate the in-hospital mortality in patients with ILD-associated ARF treated with cyclophosphamide. The second aim was to compare computed tomographic (CT) patterns and physiological and ventilator parameters between survivors and non-survivors. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with ILD-associated ARF treated with cyclophosphamide between February 2016 and October 2017. Patients were categorized into three subgroups: connective tissue disease (CTD)-associated ILD, other ILD or vasculitis. In-hospital mortality was evaluated in the whole cohort and in these subgroups. Clinical response was determined using physiological and ventilator parameters: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score (SOFA), PaO2/FiO2 (P/F) ratio and dynamic compliance (Cdyn) before and after cyclophosphamide treatment. The following CT features were quantified: ground-glass opacification (GGO) proportion, reticulation proportion, overall extent of parenchymal disease and fibrosis coarseness score. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were included. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 40%. In-hospital mortality rates for CTD-associated ILD, other ILD and vasculitis were 20, 57, and 33%, respectively. The GGO proportion (71% vs 45%) was higher in non-survivors. There were no significant differences in the SOFA score, P/F ratio or Cdyn between survivors and non-survivors. However, in survivors the P/F ratio increased from 129 to 220 mmHg and Cdyn from 75 to 92 mL/cmH2O 3 days after cyclophosphamide treatment. In non-survivors the P/F ratio hardly changed (113–114 mmHg) and Cdyn even decreased (27–20 mL/cmH2O). CONCLUSION: In this study, we found a mortality rate of 40% in patients treated with cyclophosphamide for ILD-associated ARF. Connective tissue disease-associated ILD and vasculitis were associated with a lower risk of death. In non-survivors, the CT GGO proportion was significantly higher. The P/F ratio and Cdyn in survivors increased after 3 days of cyclophosphamide treatment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12890-021-01615-2

Optimizing the use of patients' individual outcome information - Development and usability tests of a Chronic Kidney Disease dashboard

Background: Reporting individual clinical and patient-reported outcomes to patients during consultations may add to patients' disease knowledge and activation and stimulate Shared Decision Making (SDM). These outcomes can be presented over time in a clear way by the means of dashboarding. We aimed to systematically develop a Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) dashboard designed to support consultations, test its usability and explore conditions for optimal use in practice.Methods: For development a participatory approach with patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) from three hospitals was used. Working groups and patient focus groups were conducted to identify needs and inform the dashboard's design. Usability was tested in patient interviews. A focus group with HCPs was held to identify conditions for optimal use of the dashboard in daily practice.Results: A dashboard was developed for CKD patients stage 3b-4 visualizing both clinical and patient-reported outcomes over time for use during consultations and accessible for patients at home. Both HCPs and patients indicated that the dashboard can: motivate patients in their treatment by providing feedback on outcomes over time; improve consultation conversations by enhanced preparation of both HCPs and patients; better inform patients, thereby facilitating shared decision making. HCPs and patients both stated that setting a topic agenda for the consultation together is important in effectively discussing the dashboard during consultations. Moreover, the dashboard should not dominate the conversation. Lastly, findings of the usability tests provided design requirements for optimal user-friendliness and clarity.Conclusions: Dashboarding can be a valuable way of reporting individual outcome information to patients and their clinicians as findings suggest it may stimulate patient activation and facilitate decision making. Co-creation with patients and HCPs was essential for successful development of the dashboard. Gained knowledge from the co-creation process can inform others wishing to develop similar digital tools for use in clinical practice