A review of the challenges, learnings and future directions of home handheld spirometry in interstitial lung disease

Background Patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) require regular physician visits and referral to specialist ILD clinics. Difficulties or delays in accessing care can limit opportunities to monitor disease trajectory and response to treatment, and the COVID-19 pandemic has added to these challenges. Therefore, home monitoring technologies, such as home handheld spirometry, have gained increased attention as they may help to improve access to care for patients with ILD. However, while several studies have shown that home handheld spirometry in ILD is acceptable for most patients, data from clinical trials are not sufficiently robust to support its use as a primary endpoint. This review discusses the challenges that were encountered with handheld spirometry across three recent ILD studies, which included home spirometry as a primary endpoint, and highlights where further optimisation and research into home handheld spirometry in ILD is required. Abstract body Rate of decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) as measured by daily home handheld spirometry versus site spirometry was of primary interest in three recently completed studies: STARLINER (NCT03261037), STARMAP and a Phase II study of pirfenidone in progressive fibrosing unclassifiable ILD (NCT03099187). Unanticipated practical and technical issues led to problems with estimating FVC decline. In all three studies, cross-sectional correlations for home handheld versus site spirometry were strong/moderate at baseline and later timepoints, but longitudinal correlations were weak. Other issues observed with the home handheld spirometry data included: high within-patient variability in home handheld FVC measurements; implausible longitudinal patterns in the home handheld spirometry data that were not reflected in site spirometry; and extreme estimated rates of FVC change. Conclusions Home handheld spirometry in ILD requires further optimisation and research to ensure accurate and reliable FVC measurements before it can be used as an endpoint in clinical trials. Refresher training, automated alerts of problems and FVC changes, and patient support could help to overcome some practical issues. Despite the challenges, there is value in incorporating home handheld spirometry into clinical practice, and the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the potential for home monitoring technologies to help improve access to care for patients with ILD

Unfavourable effects of medically indicated oral anticoagulants on survival in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

Copyright © ERS 2016.Procoagulant and antifibrinolytic activity has been associated with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF); however, investigation of anticoagulant therapy in IPF has suggested deleterious effects. This post hoc analysis evaluated the effect of medically indicated anticoagulation on mortality and other clinical outcomes in IPF. Patients randomised to placebo (n=624) from three controlled trials in IPF were analysed by oral anticoagulant use. End-points included all-cause and IPF-related mortality, disease progression, hospitalisation, and adverse events, over 1 year. At baseline, 32 (5.1%) patients randomised to placebo were prescribed anticoagulants for non-IPF indications, 29 (90.6%) of whom received warfarin. Unadjusted analyses demonstrated significantly higher all-cause and IPF-related mortality at 1 year in baseline anticoagulant users versus nonusers (15.6% versus 6.3%, p=0.039 and 15.6% versus 3.9%, p=0.002, respectively). In multivariate analyses, baseline use of anticoagulants was an independent predictor of IPF-related mortality (hazard ratio 4.7, p=0.034), but not other end-points. Rates of bleeding and cardiac events did not differ significantly between groups. In an exploratory analysis, anticoagulant use at any time during the study was an independent predictor of all end-points. This post hoc analysis suggests that anticoagulants used for non-IPF indications may have unfavourable effects in IPF patients. Future studies are needed to explore this relationship further

Phase 2B study of inhaled RVT-1601 for chronic cough in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis A multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled study (SCENIC trial)

Rationale: Chronic cough remains a major and often debilitating symptom for patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). In a phase 2A study, inhaled RVT-1601 (cromolyn sodium) reduced daytime cough and 24-hour average cough counts in patients with IPF. Objectives: To determine the efficacy, safety, and optimal dose of inhaled RVT-1601 for the treatment of chronic cough in patients with IPF. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 2B study, patients with IPF and chronic cough for ⩾8 weeks were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive 10, 40, and 80 mg RVT-1601 three times daily or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to end of treatment in log-transformed 24-hour cough count. Key secondary endpoints were change from baseline in cough severity and cough-specific quality of life. Safety was monitored throughout the study. Measurements and Main Results: The study was prematurely terminated owing to the impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Overall, 108 patients (mean age 71.0 years, 62.9% males) received RVT-1601 10 mg (n = 29), 40 mg (n = 25), 80 mg (n = 27), or matching placebo (n = 27); 61.1% (n = 66) completed double-blind treatment. No statistically significant difference was observed in the least-square mean change from baseline in log-transformed 24-hour average cough count, cough severity, and cough-specific quality of life score between the RVT-1601 groups and the placebo group. The mean percentage change from baseline in 24-hour average cough count was 27.7% in the placebo group. Treatment was generally well tolerated. Conclusions: Treatment with inhaled RVT-1601 (10, 40, and 80 mg three times a day) did not provide benefit over placebo for the treatment of chronic cough in patients with IPF

Home monitoring in interstitial lung diseases

The widespread use of smartphones and the internet has enabled self-monitoring and more hybrid-care models. The COVID-19 pandemic has further accelerated remote monitoring, including in the heterogenous and often vulnerable group of patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). Home monitoring in ILD has the potential to improve access to specialist care, reduce the burden on health-care systems, improve quality of life for patients, identify acute and chronic disease worsening, guide treatment decisions, and simplify clinical trials. Home spirometry has been used in ILD for several years and studies with other devices (such as pulse oximeters, activity trackers, and cough monitors) have emerged. At the same time, challenges have surfaced, including technical, analytical, and implementational issues. In this Series paper, we provide an overview of experiences with home monitoring in ILD, address the challenges and limitations for both care and research, and provide future perspectives. VIDEO ABSTRACT

Gaps in care of patients living with pulmonary fibrosis: a joint patient and expert statement on the results of a Europe-wide survey

Introduction Pulmonary fibrosis (PF) and its most common form, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), are chronic, progressive diseases resulting in increasing loss of lung function and impaired quality of life and survival. The aim of this joint expert and patient statement was to highlight the most pressing common unmet needs of patients with PF/IPF, putting forward recommendations to improve the quality of life and health outcomes throughout the patient journey. Methods Two online surveys for patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) were conducted by the European Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis and Related Disorders Federation (EU-IPFF) in 14 European countries. Results The surveys were answered by 286 patients and 69 HCPs, including physicians and nurses. Delays in diagnosis and timely access to interstitial lung disease specialists and pharmacological treatment have been identified as important gaps in care. Additionally, patients and HCPs reported that a greater focus on symptom-centred management, adequate information, trial information and increasing awareness of PF/IPF is required. Conclusions The surveys offer important insights into the current unmet needs of PF/IPF patients. Interventions at different points of the care pathway are needed to improve patient experience

Long-term treatment with recombinant human pentraxin 2 protein in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: an open-label extension study

BACKGROUND: Patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) treated with PRM-151, a recombinant human pentraxin 2 protein, in a phase 2 double-blind, randomised controlled trial had significantly reduced decline in percentage of predicted forced vital capacity (FVC) and stabilised 6-min walking distance compared with placebo over a 28-week period. Here we report the 76-week results of an open-label extension study. METHODS: Patients who completed the 28-week double-blind period of the PRM-151-202 trial were eligible to participate in the open-label extension study. Patients previously enrolled in the PRM-151 group continued this treatment and those previously in the placebo group crossed over to PRM-151. All patients received PRM-151 in 28-week cycles with loading doses of 10 mg/kg by 60 min intravenous infusions on days 1, 3, and 5 in the first week of each cycle followed by one infusion of 10 mg/kg every 4 weeks. The primary objective of the open-label extension study was to assess the long-term safety and tolerability of PRM-151, which were assessed by analysing adverse events (AEs) up to week 76 in all patients who received at least one dose of PRM-151 during the open-label extension study. Exploratory efficacy analyses were done by assessing changes from baseline in percentage of predicted FVC and 6-min walking distance, with descriptive statistics to week 76 and with random-intercept mixed models to week 52. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02550873, and with EudraCT, number 2014-004782-24. FINDINGS: Of 116 patients who completed the double-blind treatment period, 111 entered the open-label extension study (74 from the PRM-151 group and 37 from the placebo group). 84 (76%) of 111 patients received concomitant IPF therapy (pirfenidone n=55 or nintedanib n=29). AEs were consistent with long-term IPF sequelae. 31 (28%) patients had serious AEs. Those occurring in two or more patients were pneumonia (six [5%] of 111), IPF exacerbation (four [4%]), IPF progression (four [4%]), and chest pain (two [2%]). 21 (19%) patients had severe AEs, of which IPF exacerbation and IPF progression each occurred in two (2%) patients. Two (2%) patients experienced life-threatening AEs (one had pneumonia and one had small-cell lung cancer extensive stage). A persistent treatment effect was observed for PRM-151 in patients who continued treatment, with a decline in percentage of predicted FVC of -3\ub76% per year and in 6-min walking distance of -10\ub75 m per year at week 52. In patients who started PRM-151 during the open-label extension study, compared with the slopes for placebo, decline reduced for percentage of predicted FVC (from -8\ub77% per year in weeks 0-28 to -0\ub79% per year in weeks 28-52, p<0\ub70001) and 6-min walking distance (from -54\ub79 m per year to -3\ub75 m per year, p=0\ub70224). INTERPRETATION: Long-term treatment with PRM-151 was well tolerated and the effects on percentage of predicted FVC and 6-min walking distance were persistent on continuation and positive in patients who crossed over from placebo. These findings support further study of PRM-151 in larger populations of patients with IPF. FUNDING: Promedior