Patient-reported outcome measures in systemic sclerosis–related interstitial lung disease for clinical practice and clinical trials

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from SAGE via the DOI in this record. Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a progressive vasculopathic, fibrosing autoimmune condition, portending significant mortality; wherein interstitial lung disease (ILD) is the leading cause of death. Although lacking a definitive cure, therapeutics for (SSc-ILD) that stave progression exist with further promising primary and adjuvant compounds in development, as well as interventions to reduce symptom burden and increase quality of life. To date, there has been a significant but varied history related to systemic sclerosis–related interstitial lung disease trial design and endpoint designation. This is especially true of endpoints measuring patient-reported perceptions of efficacy and tolerability. This article describes the underpinnings and complexity of the science, methodology, and current state of patient-reported outcome measures used in (SSc-ILD) systemic sclerosis–related interstitial lung disease in clinical practice and trials.National Institutes of Health (NIH

A defect in myoblast fusion underlies Carey-Fineman-Ziter syndrome

Multinucleate cellular syncytial formation is a hallmark of skeletal muscle differentiation. Myomaker, encoded by Mymk (Tmem8c), is a well-conserved plasma membrane protein required for myoblast fusion to form multinucleated myotubes in mouse, chick, and zebrafish. Here, we report that autosomal recessive mutations in MYMK (OMIM 615345) cause Carey-Fineman-Ziter syndrome in humans (CFZS; OMIM 254940) by reducing but not eliminating MYMK function. We characterize MYMK-CFZS as a congenital myopathy with marked facial weakness and additional clinical and pathologic features that distinguish it from other congenital neuromuscular syndromes. We show that a heterologous cell fusion assay in vitro and allelic complementation experiments in mymk knockdown and mymk insT/insT zebrafish in vivo can differentiate between MYMK wild type, hypomorphic and null alleles. Collectively, these data establish that MYMK activity is necessary for normal muscle development and maintenance in humans, and expand the spectrum of congenital myopathies to include cell-cell fusion deficits

World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Set Development for Interstitial Lung Disease

This is the final version. Available on open access from Frontiers Media via the DOI in this recordData availability statement: The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) introduced the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) as a scientific method of disability data collection comprised of >1,200 categories describing the spectrum of impairment types (functional, symptoms-based and anatomical) under the bio-psycho-social model with consideration of environmental and personal factors (pf). ICF Core Sets and ICF Checklists are streamlined disease-specific resources for clinical use, service provision, and for use in health economics and health policy. ICF can disclose strengths and weaknesses across multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and help consolidate best-fitting question-items from multiple PROMs. Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs), are generally progressive, with restrictive physiology sometimes occurring in the context of multi-organ autoimmunity/inflammatory conditions such as connective tissue diseases (CTDs). In spite of significant associated morbidity and potential disability, ILD has yet to be linked to the ICF. Methods: Each instrument and their question-items within the consensus-recommended core sets for clinical trials in ILD were deconstructed to single concept units, and then linked per updated ICF linkage rules. Inter-linker agreement was established. Three additional subsequently validated measures were also included. Results: One-hundred-eleven ICF categories were identified for ten PROMs and three traditional objective measures that were amenable to ICF linkage. The proportion of agreement ranged from 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62, 0.91) to 0.93 (0.76, 0.99) with the overall proportion of inter-linker agreement being very high 0.86 (0.82, 0.89) for the initial instruments, with 94–100% for the three additional PROMs. Thirty-four new ‘Personal Factors’ emerged to capture disease-specific qualities not elsewhere described in ICF, e.g. ‘pf_embarrassed by cough’ or ‘pf_panic/afraid when can’t get a breath’. Conclusion: This first known effort in ICF linkage of ILD has provided important revelations on the current utility of the ICF in lung disease. Results have indicated areas for meaningful assessment of ICF descriptors for lung impairment. The mapping across PROMs provides insight into possibilities of developing more streamline and precise instrumentation. Finally, familiarity with the ICF in ILD may enable clinicians to experience a smoother transition with the imminent harmonization of ICD and ICF, ICD-11

Nintedanib for Systemic Sclerosis-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease

BACKGROUND: Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a common manifestation of systemic sclerosis and a leading cause of systemic sclerosis-related death. Nintedanib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been shown to have antifibrotic and antiinflammatory effects in preclinical models of systemic sclerosis and ILD. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of nintedanib in patients with ILD associated with systemic sclerosis. Patients who had systemic sclerosis with an onset of the first non-Raynaud's symptom within the past 7 years and a high-resolution computed tomographic scan that showed fibrosis affecting at least 10% of the lungs were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive 150 mg of nintedanib, administered orally twice daily, or placebo. The primary end point was the annual rate of decline in forced vital capacity (FVC), assessed over a 52-week period. Key secondary end points were absolute changes from baseline in the modified Rodnan skin score and in the total score on the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) at week 52. RESULTS: A total of 576 patients received at least one dose of nintedanib or placebo; 51.9% had diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis, and 48.4% were receiving mycophenolate at baseline. In the primary end-point analysis, the adjusted annual rate of change in FVC was 1252.4 ml per year in the nintedanib group and 1293.3 ml per year in the placebo group (difference, 41.0 ml per year; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9 to 79.0; P=0.04). Sensitivity analyses based on multiple imputation for missing data yielded P values for the primary end point ranging from 0.06 to 0.10. The change from baseline in the modified Rodnan skin score and the total score on the SGRQ at week 52 did not differ significantly between the trial groups, with differences of 120.21 (95% CI, 120.94 to 0.53; P=0.58) and 1.69 (95% CI, 120.73 to 4.12 [not adjusted for multiple comparisons]), respectively. Diarrhea, the most common adverse event, was reported in 75.7% of the patients in the nintedanib group and in 31.6% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with ILD associated with systemic sclerosis, the annual rate of decline in FVC was lower with nintedanib than with placebo; no clinical benefit of nintedanib was observed for other manifestations of systemic sclerosis. The adverse-event profile of nintedanib observed in this trial was similar to that observed in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; gastrointestinal adverse events, including diarrhea, were more common with nintedanib than with placebo

Sarcoidosis illuminations on living during COVID-19 : patient experiences of diagnosis, management and survival before and during the pandemic

Background: Inspired by intense challenges encountered by patients and clinicians, we examined the experiences of living with sarcoidosis in three of the hardest impacted English-speaking cities during the early COVID-19 pandemic: London, New Orleans, and New York. Methods: A multi-disciplinary, multi-national research team including 6 patient leaders conducted qualitative investigations with analyses rooted in grounded theory. Recruitment occurred by self-referral through patient advocacy groups. Results: A total of 28 people living with sarcoidosis participated. The majority of patients had multi-system and severe sarcoidosis. Dominant themes were consistent across groups with differences expressed in spirituality and government and health systems. Racial, gender, and able-bodied inequity were voiced regarding healthcare access and intervention, societal interactions, and COVID-19 exposure and contraction. Agreement regarding extreme disruption in care and communication created concern for disability and survival. Concerns of COVID-19 exposure triggering new sarcoidosis cases or exacerbating established sarcoidosis were expressed. Pre-COVID-19 impediments in sarcoidosis healthcare delivery, medical knowledge, and societal burdens were intensified during the pandemic. Conversely, living with sarcoidosis cultivated personal and operational preparedness for navigating the practicalities and uncertainties of the pandemic. Optimism prevailed that knowledge of sarcoidosis, respiratory, and multi-organ diseases could provide pathways for COVID-19-related therapy and support; however, remorse was expressed regarding pandemic circumstances to draw long-awaited attention to multi-organ system and respiratory conditions. Conclusion: Participants expressed concepts warranting infrastructural and scientific attention. This framework reflects pre- and intra-pandemic voiced needs in sarcoidosis and may be an agent of sensitization and strategy for other serious health conditions. A global query into sarcoidosis will be undertaken

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of pirfenidone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study

Background: Interstitial lung disease is a known complication of rheumatoid arthritis, with a lifetime risk of developing the disease in any individual of 7·7%. We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of pirfenidone for the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD). Methods: TRAIL1 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial done in 34 academic centres specialising in interstitial lung disease in four countries (the UK, the USA, Australia, and Canada). Adults aged 18–85 years were eligible for inclusion if they met the 2010 American College of Rheumatology and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology criteria for rheumatoid arthritis and had interstitial lung disease on a high-resolution CT scan imaging and, when available, lung biopsy. Exclusion criteria include smoking, clinical history of other known causes of interstitial lung disease, and coexistant clinically significant COPD or asthma. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 2403 mg oral pirfenidone (pirfenidone group) or placebo (placebo group) daily. The primary endpoint was the incidence of the composite endpoint of a decline from baseline in percent predicted forced vital capacity (FVC%) of 10% or more or death during the 52-week treatment period assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Key secondary endpoints included change in absolute and FVC% over 52 weeks, the proportion of patients with a decline in FVC% of 10% or more, and the frequency of progression as defined by Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials (OMERACT) in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02808871. Findings: From May 15, 2017, to March 31, 2020, 231 patients were assessed for inclusion, of whom 123 patients were randomly assigned (63 [51%] to the pirfenidone group and 60 [49%] to the placebo group). The trial was stopped early (March 31, 2020) due to slow recruitment and the COVID-19 pandemic. The difference in the proportion of patients who met the composite primary endpoint (decline in FVC% from baseline of 10% or more or death) between the two groups was not significant (seven [11%] of 63 patients in the pirfenidone group vs nine [15%] of 60 patients in the placebo group; OR 0·67 [95% CI 0·22 to 2·03]; p=0·48). Compared with the placebo group, patients in the pirfenidone group had a slower rate of decline in lung function, measured by estimated annual change in absolute FVC (–66 vs –146; p=0·0082) and FVC% (–1·02 vs –3·21; p=0·0028). The groups were similar with regards to the decline in FVC% by 10% or more (five [8%] participants in the pirfenidone group vs seven [12%] in the placebo group; OR 0·52 [95% CI 0·14–1·90]; p=0·32) and the frequency of progression as defined by OMERACT (16 [25%] in the pirfenidone group vs 19 [32%] in the placebo group; OR 0·68 [0·30–1·54]; p=0·35). There was no significant difference in the rate of treatment-emergent serious adverse events between the two groups, and there were no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation: Due to early termination of the study and underpowering, the results should be interpreted with caution. Despite not meeting the composite primary endpoint, pirfenidone slowed the rate of decline of FVC over time in patients with RA-ILD. Safety in patients with RA-ILD was similar to that seen in other pirfenidone trials. Funding: Genentech

Treatment of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis With Ambrisentan

Background: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is characterized by formation and proliferation of fibroblast foci. Endothelin-1 induces lung fibroblast proliferation and contractile activity via the endothelin A (ETA) receptor. Objective: To determine whether ambrisentan, an ETA receptor- selective antagonist, reduces the rate of IPF progression. Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, eventdriven trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00768300) Setting: Academic and private hospitals. Participants: Patients with IPF aged 40 to 80 years with minimal or no honeycombing on high-resolution computed tomography scans. Intervention: Ambrisentan, 10 mg/d, or placebo. Measurements: Time to disease progression, defined as death, respiratory hospitalization, or a categorical decrease in lung function. Results: The study was terminated after enrollment of 492 patients (75% of intended enrollment; mean duration of exposure to study medication, 34.7 weeks) because an interim analysis indicated a low likelihood of showing efficacy for the end point by the scheduled end of the study. Ambrisentan-treated patients were more likely to meet the prespecified criteria for disease progression (90 [27.4%] vs. 28 [17.2%] patients; P = 0.010; hazard ratio, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.66]). Lung function decline was seen in 55 (16.7%) ambrisentan-treated patients and 19 (11.7%) placebotreated patients (P = 0.109). Respiratory hospitalizations were seen in 44 (13.4%) and 9 (5.5%) patients in the ambrisentan and placebo groups, respectively (P =0.007). Twenty-six (7.9%) patients who received ambrisentan and 6 (3.7%) who received placebo died (P = 0.100). Thirty-two (10%) ambrisentan-treated patients and 16 (10%) placebo-treated patients had pulmonary hypertension at baseline, and analysis stratified by the presence of pulmonary hypertension revealed similar results for the primary end point. Limitation: The study was terminated early. Conclusion: Ambrisentan was not effective in treating IPF and may be associated with an increased risk for disease progression and respiratory hospitalizations. Primary Funding Source: Gilead Sciences. © 2013 American College of Physicians

Ziritaxestat, a novel autotaxin inhibitor, and lung function in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

Importance There is a major need for effective, well-tolerated treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of the autotaxin inhibitor ziritaxestat in patients with IPF. Design, Setting, and Participants The 2 identically designed, phase 3, randomized clinical trials, ISABELA 1 and ISABELA 2, were conducted in Africa, Asia-Pacific region, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, and North America (26 countries). A total of 1306 patients with IPF were randomized (525 patients at 106 sites in ISABELA 1 and 781 patients at 121 sites in ISABELA 2). Enrollment began in November 2018 in both trials and follow-up was completed early due to study termination on April 12, 2021, for ISABELA 1 and on March 30, 2021, for ISABELA 2. Interventions Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 600 mg of oral ziritaxestat, 200 mg of ziritaxestat, or placebo once daily in addition to local standard of care (pirfenidone, nintedanib, or neither) for at least 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the annual rate of decline for forced vital capacity (FVC) at week 52. The key secondary outcomes were disease progression, time to first respiratory-related hospitalization, and change from baseline in St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire total score (range, 0 to 100; higher scores indicate poorer health-related quality of life). Results At the time of study termination, 525 patients were randomized in ISABELA 1 and 781 patients in ISABELA 2 (mean age: 70.0 [SD, 7.2] years in ISABELA 1 and 69.8 [SD, 7.1] years in ISABELA 2; male: 82.4% and 81.2%, respectively). The trials were terminated early after an independent data and safety monitoring committee concluded that the benefit to risk profile of ziritaxestat no longer supported their continuation. Ziritaxestat did not improve the annual rate of FVC decline vs placebo in either study. In ISABELA 1, the least-squares mean annual rate of FVC decline was –124.6 mL (95% CI, −178.0 to −71.2 mL) with 600 mg of ziritaxestat vs –147.3 mL (95% CI, −199.8 to −94.7 mL) with placebo (between-group difference, 22.7 mL [95% CI, −52.3 to 97.6 mL]), and –173.9 mL (95% CI, −225.7 to −122.2 mL) with 200 mg of ziritaxestat (between-group difference vs placebo, −26.7 mL [95% CI, −100.5 to 47.1 mL]). In ISABELA 2, the least-squares mean annual rate of FVC decline was –173.8 mL (95% CI, −209.2 to −138.4 mL) with 600 mg of ziritaxestat vs –176.6 mL (95% CI, −211.4 to −141.8 mL) with placebo (between-group difference, 2.8 mL [95% CI, −46.9 to 52.4 mL]) and –174.9 mL (95% CI, −209.5 to −140.2 mL) with 200 mg of ziritaxestat (between-group difference vs placebo, 1.7 mL [95% CI, −47.4 to 50.8 mL]). There was no benefit with ziritaxestat vs placebo for the key secondary outcomes. In ISABELA 1, all-cause mortality was 8.0% with 600 mg of ziritaxestat, 4.6% with 200 mg of ziritaxestat, and 6.3% with placebo; in ISABELA 2, it was 9.3% with 600 mg of ziritaxestat, 8.5% with 200 mg of ziritaxestat, and 4.7% with placebo. Conclusions and Relevance Ziritaxestat did not improve clinical outcomes compared with placebo in patients with IPF receiving standard of care treatment with pirfenidone or nintedanib or in those not receiving standard of care treatment. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03711162 and NCT0373344