Bronchiectasis in India:results from the European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration (EMBARC) and Respiratory Research Network of India Registry

BACKGROUND: Bronchiectasis is a common but neglected chronic lung disease. Most epidemiological data are limited to cohorts from Europe and the USA, with few data from low-income and middle-income countries. We therefore aimed to describe the characteristics, severity of disease, microbiology, and treatment of patients with bronchiectasis in India. METHODS: The Indian bronchiectasis registry is a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study. Adult patients ( 6518 years) with CT-confirmed bronchiectasis were enrolled from 31 centres across India. Patients with bronchiectasis due to cystic fibrosis or traction bronchiectasis associated with another respiratory disorder were excluded. Data were collected at baseline (recruitment) with follow-up visits taking place once per year. Comprehensive clinical data were collected through the European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration registry platform. Underlying aetiology of bronchiectasis, as well as treatment and risk factors for bronchiectasis were analysed in the Indian bronchiectasis registry. Comparisons of demographics were made with published European and US registries, and quality of care was benchmarked against the 2017 European Respiratory Society guidelines. FINDINGS: From June 1, 2015, to Sept 1, 2017, 2195 patients were enrolled. Marked differences were observed between India, Europe, and the USA. Patients in India were younger (median age 56 years [IQR 41-66] vs the European and US registries; p<0\ub70001]) and more likely to be men (1249 [56\ub79%] of 2195). Previous tuberculosis (780 [35\ub75%] of 2195) was the most frequent underlying cause of bronchiectasis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most common organism in sputum culture (301 [13\ub77%]) in India. Risk factors for exacerbations included being of the male sex (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1\ub717, 95% CI 1\ub703-1\ub732; p=0\ub7015), P aeruginosa infection (1\ub729, 1\ub710-1\ub750; p=0\ub7001), a history of pulmonary tuberculosis (1\ub720, 1\ub707-1\ub734; p=0\ub7002), modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea score (1\ub732, 1\ub725-1\ub739; p<0\ub70001), daily sputum production (1\ub716, 1\ub703-1\ub730; p=0\ub7013), and radiological severity of disease (1\ub703, 1\ub701-1\ub704; p<0\ub70001). Low adherence to guideline-recommended care was observed; only 388 patients were tested for allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis and 82 patients had been tested for immunoglobulins. INTERPRETATION: Patients with bronchiectasis in India have more severe disease and have distinct characteristics from those reported in other countries. This study provides a benchmark to improve quality of care for patients with bronchiectasis in India. FUNDING: EU/European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations Innovative Medicines Initiative inhaled Antibiotics in Bronchiectasis and Cystic Fibrosis Consortium, European Respiratory Society, and the British Lung Foundation

Challenges in recruitment and retention of clinical trial subjects

Background: Successful recruitment of patients is known to be one of the most challenging aspects in conduct of randomized controlled trials. Inadequate patient retention during conduct of trial affects conclusive results. Objective: To assess the level of challenges faced by Indian investigators in recruitment and retention of trial subjects. Methods: We developed a survey questionnaire on challenges encountered by investigators in subject recruitment and retention which was hosted on a web portal. Results: Seventy-three investigators from India participated in the survey. The frequently encountered challenges in subject recruitment were complexity of study protocol (38%), lack of awareness about clinical trials in patients (37%), and sociocultural issues related to trial participation (37%). About 63% of participants strongly agreed that creating a positive awareness about clinical trials among people through press and media, having a dedicated clinical research coordinator for trial (50.7%), and designing a recruitment strategy prior to study initiation (46.6%) would enhance recruitment. Almost 50.7% of participants agreed that interacting with medical community in vicinity of the study site and educating patients about clinical trials during routine outpatient department visits (46.6%) would enhance recruitment. Experiencing a serious adverse event, subject′s fear for study procedures (47%) and side effects (44%) were thought to have a moderate effect on subject retention. Conclusion: Our survey has put forth factors related to negative publicity by media, lack of patient education about clinical trials; complex study designs are barriers to clinical trial recruitment in India. It is essential to devise innovative and effective strategies focusing on education of public and mass media about clinical research in India