14 research outputs found

    Rituximab versus intravenous cyclophosphamide in patients with connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease in the UK (RECITAL): a double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, controlled, phase 2b trial

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Rituximab is often used as rescue therapy in interstitial lung disease (ILD) associated with connective tissue disease (CTD), but has not been studied in clinical trials. This study aimed to assess whether rituximab is superior to cyclophosphamide as a treatment for severe or progressive CTD associated ILD. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 2b trial to assess the superiority of rituximab compared with cyclophosphamide. Patients aged 18-80 years with severe or progressive ILD related to scleroderma, idiopathic inflammatory myositis, or mixed CTD, recruited across 11 specialist ILD or rheumatology centres in the UK, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive rituximab (1000 mg at weeks 0 and 2 intravenously) or cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2 body surface area every 4 weeks intravenously for six doses). The primary endpoint was rate of change in forced vital capacity (FVC) at 24 weeks compared with baseline, analysed using a mixed-effects model with random intercepts, adjusted for baseline FVC and CTD type. Prespecified secondary endpoints reported in this Article were change in FVC at 48 weeks versus baseline; changes from baseline in 6 min walk distance, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), physician-assessed global disease activity (GDA) score, and quality-of-life scores on the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease (KBILD) questionnaire, and European Quality of Life Five-Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire at 24 and 48 weeks; overall survival, progression-free survival, and time to treatment failure; and corticosteroid use. All endpoints were analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01862926). FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2014, and March 31, 2020, we screened 145 participants, of whom 101 participants were randomly allocated: 50 (50%) to receive cyclophosphamide and 51 (50%) to receive rituximab. 48 (96%) participants in the cyclophosphamide group and 49 (96%) in the rituximab group received at least one dose of treatment and were included in analyses; 43 (86%) participants in the cyclophosphamide group and 42 (82%) participants in the rituximab group completed 24 weeks of treatment and follow-up. At 24 weeks, FVC was improved from baseline in both the cyclophosphamide group (unadjusted mean increase 99 mL [SD 329]) and the rituximab group (97 mL [234]); in the adjusted mixed-effects model, the difference in the primary endpoint at 24 weeks was -40 mL (95% CI -153 to 74; p=0·49) between the rituximab group and the cyclophosphamide group. KBILD quality-of-life scores were improved at 24 weeks by a mean 9·4 points (SD 20·8) in the cyclophosphamide group and 8·8 points (17·0) in the rituximab group. No significant differences in secondary endpoints were identified between the treatment groups, with the exception of change in GDA score at week 48, which favoured cyclophosphamide (difference 0·90 [95% CI 0·11 to 1·68]). Improvements in lung function and respiratory-related quality-of-life measures were observed in both treatment groups. Lower corticosteroid exposure over 48 weeks of follow-up was recorded in the rituximab group. Two (4%) of 48 participants who received cyclophosphamide and three (6%) of 49 who received rituximab died during the study, all due to complications of CTD or ILD. Overall survival, progression-free survival, and time to treatment failure did not significantly differ between the two groups. All participants reported at least one adverse event during the study. Numerically fewer adverse events were reported by participants receiving rituximab (445 events) than those receiving cyclophosphamide (646 events). Gastrointestinal and respiratory disorders were the most commonly reported adverse events in both groups. There were 62 serious adverse events of which 33 occurred in the cyclophosphamide group and 29 in the rituximab group. INTERPRETATION: Rituximab was not superior to cyclophosphamide to treat patients with CTD-ILD, although participants in both treatment groups had increased FVC at 24 weeks, in addition to clinically important improvements in patient-reported quality of life. Rituximab was associated with fewer adverse events. Rituximab should be considered as a therapeutic alternative to cyclophosphamide in individuals with CTD-ILD requiring intravenous therapy. FUNDING: Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme (Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research, UK)

    Functional associations of pleuroparenchymal fibroelastosis and emphysema with hypersensitivity pneumonitis

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Pleuroparenchymal fibroelastosis (PPFE) has been described in hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) yet its functional implications are unclear. Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) has occasionally been described in never-smokers with HP, but epidemiological data regarding its prevalence is sparse. CTs in a large HP cohort were therefore examined to identify the prevalence and effects of PPFE and emphysema. Methods: 233 HP patients had CT extents of interstitial lung disease (ILD) and emphysema quantified to the nearest 5%. Lobar percentage pleural involvement of PPFE was quantified on a 4-point categorical scale: 0 = absent, 1 = affecting 33%. Marked PPFE reflected a total lung score of ≥3/18. Results were evaluated against FVC, DLco and mortality. RESULTS: Marked PPFE prevalence was 23% whilst 23% of never-smokers had emphysema. Following adjustment for patient age, gender, smoking status, and ILD and emphysema extents, marked PPFE independently linked to reduced baseline FVC (p = 0.0002) and DLco (p = 0.002) and when examined alongside the same covariates, independently linked to worsened survival (p = 0.01). CPFE in HP demonstrated a characteristic functional profile of artificial lung volume preservation and disproportionate DLco reduction. CPFE did not demonstrate a worsened outcome when compared to HP patients without emphysema beyond that explained by CT extents of ILD and emphysema. CONCLUSIONS: PPFE is not uncommon in HP, and is independently associated with impaired lung function and increased mortality. Emphysema was identified in 23% of HP never-smokers. CPFE appears not to link to a malignant microvascular phenotype as outcome is explained by ILD and emphysema extents

    Predicting outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis related interstitial lung disease

    Get PDF
    Aims: To compare radiology-based prediction models in rheumatoid arthritis-related interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD) to identify patients with a progressive fibrosis phenotype.Methods: RAILD patients had CTs scored visually and by CALIPER and forced vital capacity (FVC) measurements. Outcomes were evaluated using three techniques: 1.Scleroderma system evaluating visual ILD extent and FVC values; 2.Fleischer Society IPF diagnostic guidelines applied to RAILD; 3.CALIPER scores of vessel-related structures (VRS). Outcomes were compared to IPF patients.Results: On univariable Cox analysis, all three staging systems strongly predicted outcome: Scleroderma System:HR=3.78, p=9×10-5; Fleischner System:HR=1.98, p=2×10-3; 4.4% VRS threshold:HR=3.10, p=4×10-4 When the Scleroderma and Fleischner Systems were combined, termed the Progressive Fibrotic System (C-statistic=0.71), they identified a patient subset (n=36) with a progressive fibrotic phenotype and similar 4-year survival to IPF.On multivariable analysis, with adjustment for patient age, gender and smoking status, when analysed alongside the Progressive Fibrotic System, the VRS threshold of 4.4% independently predicted outcome (Model C-statistic=0.77).Conclusions: The combination of two visual CT-based staging systems identified 23% of an RAILD cohort with an IPF-like progressive fibrotic phenotype. The addition of a computer-derived VRS threshold further improved outcome prediction and model fit, beyond that encompassed by RAILD measures of disease severity and extent

    Diagnostic accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: An international case-cohort study

    Get PDF
    We conducted an international study of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) diagnosis among a large group of physicians and compared their diagnostic performance to a panel of IPF experts.A total of 1141 respiratory physicians and 34 IPF experts participated. Participants evaluated 60 cases of interstitial lung disease (ILD) without interdisciplinary consultation. Diagnostic agreement was measured using the weighted kappa coefficient (κw). Prognostic discrimination between IPF and other ILDs was used to validate diagnostic accuracy for first-choice diagnoses of IPF and were compared using the C-index.A total of 404 physicians completed the study. Agreement for IPF diagnosis was higher among expert physicians (κw=0.65, IQR 0.53–0.72, p less than 0.0001) or physicians with access to multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings (κw=0.54, IQR 0.45–0.64, p less than 0.0001). The prognostic accuracy of academic physicians with greater than 20 years of experience (C-index=0.72, IQR 0.0–0.73, p=0.229) and non-university hospital physicians with more than 20 years of experience, attending weekly MDT meetings (C-index=0.72, IQR 0.70–0.72, p=0.052), did not differ significantly (p=0.229 and p=0.052 respectively) from the expert panel (C-index=0.74 IQR 0.72–0.75).Experienced respiratory physicians at university-based institutions diagnose IPF with similar prognostic accuracy to IPF experts. Regular MDT meeting attendance improves the prognostic accuracy of experienced non-university practitioners to levels achieved by IPF experts

    Patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures in interstitial lung disease: where to go from here?

    Get PDF

    Real-world experience of nintedanib for progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease in the UK

    Get PDF
    Background Nintedanib slows progression of lung function decline in patients with progressive fibrosing (PF) interstitial lung disease (ILD) and was recommended for this indication within the United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service in Scotland in June 2021 and in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in November 2021. To date, there has been no national evaluation of the use of nintedanib for PF-ILD in a real-world setting.Methods 26 UK centres were invited to take part in a national service evaluation between 17 November 2021 and 30 September 2022. Summary data regarding underlying diagnosis, pulmonary function tests, diagnostic criteria, radiological appearance, concurrent immunosuppressive therapy and drug tolerability were collected via electronic survey.Results 24 UK prescribing centres responded to the service evaluation invitation. Between 17 November 2021 and 30 September 2022, 1120 patients received a multidisciplinary team recommendation to commence nintedanib for PF-ILD. The most common underlying diagnoses were hypersensitivity pneumonitis (298 out of 1120, 26.6%), connective tissue disease associated ILD (197 out of 1120, 17.6%), rheumatoid arthritis associated ILD (180 out of 1120, 16.0%), idiopathic nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (125 out of 1120, 11.1%) and unclassifiable ILD (100 out of 1120, 8.9%). Of these, 54.4% (609 out of 1120) were receiving concomitant corticosteroids, 355 (31.7%) out of 1120 were receiving concomitant mycophenolate mofetil and 340 (30.3%) out of 1120 were receiving another immunosuppressive/modulatory therapy. Radiological progression of ILD combined with worsening respiratory symptoms was the most common reason for the diagnosis of PF-ILD.Conclusion We have demonstrated the use of nintedanib for the treatment of PF-ILD across a broad range of underlying conditions. Nintedanib is frequently co-prescribed alongside immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapy. The use of nintedanib for the treatment of PF-ILD has demonstrated acceptable tolerability in a real-world setting

    Interaction between the promoter MUC5B polymorphism and mucin expression: is there a difference according to ILD subtype?

    No full text
    The MUC5B promoter variant rs35705950 is associated with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). MUC5B glycoprotein is overexpressed in IPF lungs. We examined immunohistochemical expression of MUC5B in different interstitial lung disease patterns according to rs35705950 T-allele carriage. We observed increased expression of MUC5B in T-allele carriers in both distal airways and honeycomb cysts in patients with IPF (n=23), but no difference in MUC5B expression according to T-carrier status in the distal airways of patients with idiopathic non-specific interstitial pneumonitis (n=17), in scleroderma-associated non-specific interstitial pneumonitis (n=15) or in control lungs (n=20), suggesting that tissue overexpression in MUC5B rs35705950 T-carriers is specific to IPF
    corecore