8 research outputs found

    Small airways disease:time for a revisit?

    Get PDF
    James A Stockley,1 Brendan G Cooper,1 Robert A Stockley,2 Elizabeth Sapey3 1Department of Lung Function and Sleep, 2Department of Respiratory Medicine, University Hospital Birmingham, 3Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, Centre for Translational Inflammation Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK Abstract: It is increasingly acknowledged that delays in the diagnosis of chronic inflammatory lung conditions have hampered our understanding of pathogenesis and thus our ability to design efficacious therapies. This is particularly true for COPD, where most patients are diagnosed with moderate-to-severe airflow obstruction and little is known about the inflammatory processes present in early disease. There is great interest in developing screening tests that can identify those most at risk of developing COPD before airflow obstruction has developed for the purpose of research and clinical care. Landmark pathology studies have suggested that damage to the small airways precedes the development of airflow obstruction and emphysema and, thus, presents an opportunity to identify those at risk of COPD. However, despite a number of physiological tests being available to assess small airways function, none have been adopted into routine care in COPD. The reasons that tests of small airways have not been utilized widely include variability in test results and a lack of validated reference ranges from which to compare results for some methodologies. Furthermore, population studies have not consistently demonstrated their ability to diagnose disease. However, the landscape may be changing. As the equipment that delivers tests of small airways become more widely available, reference ranges are emerging and newer methodologies specifically seek to address variability and difficulty in test performance. Moreover, there is evidence that while tests of small airways may not be helpful across the full range of established disease severity, there may be specific groups (particularly those with early disease) where they might be informative. In this review, commonly utilized tests of small airways are critically appraised to highlight why these tests may be important, how they can be used and what knowledge gaps remain for their use in COPD. Keywords: small airways, COPD, early disease, physiology, emphysema, airflow obstructio

    Neural correlates of hyperalgesia in the monosodium iodoacetate model of osteoarthritis pain

    Get PDF
    Background: The mechanisms driving osteoarthritic pain remain poorly understood, but there is increasing evidence for a role of the central nervous system in the chronification of pain.We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the influence of a model of unilateral knee osteoarthritis on nociceptive processing. Results: Four to five weeks post intra-articular injection of monosodium iodoacetate (MIA, 1 mg) into the left knee, Sprague Dawley rats were anesthetized for functional magnetic resonance imaging studies to characterize the neural response to a noxious stimulus (intra-articular capsaicin injection). In a two-arm cross-over design, 5 mM/50 ml capsaicin was injected into either the left knee (n¼8, CAPS-MIA) or right control knee (n¼8, CAPS-CON), preceded by contralateral vehicle (SAL) injection. To assess neural correlates of mechanical hyperalgesia, hindpaws were stimulated with von Frey hairs (8 g: MIA; 15 g: control knee, based on behavioral withdrawal responses). The CAPS-MIA group exhibited significant activation of the periaqueductal gray, unilateral thalamus and bilateral mensencephalon, superior-colliculus, and hippocampus, with no significant activation in the other groups/conditions. Capsaicin injection increased functional connectivity in the mid-brain network and mediodorsal thalamic nucleus, hippocampus, and globus pallidus, which was significantly stronger in CAPS-MIA compared to CAPS-CON groups. Mechanical stimulation of the hyperalgesic (ipsilateral to MIA knee) and normalgesic (contralateral) hindpaws evoked qualitatively different brain activation with more widespread brainstem and anterior cingulate (ACC) activation when stimulating the hyperalgesic paw, and clearer frontal sensory activation from the normalgesic paw. Conclusions: We provide evidence for modulation of nociceptive processing in a chronic knee osteoarthritis pain model with stronger brain activation and alteration of brain networks induced by the pro-nociceptive stimulus. We also report a shift to a medial pain activation pattern following stimulation of the hyperalgesic hindpaw. Taken together, our data support altered neural pain processing as a result of peripheral and central pain sensitization in this model

    Efficacy and safety of baricitinib or ravulizumab in adult patients with severe COVID-19 (TACTIC-R): a randomised, parallel-arm, open-label, phase 4 trial

    Get PDF
    Background From early in the COVID-19 pandemic, evidence suggested a role for cytokine dysregulation and complement activation in severe disease. In the TACTIC-R trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of baricitinib, an inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) and JAK2, and ravulizumab, a monoclonal inhibitor of complement C5 activation, as an adjunct to standard of care for the treatment of adult patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Methods TACTIC-R was a phase 4, randomised, parallel-arm, open-label platform trial that was undertaken in the UK with urgent public health designation to assess the potential of repurposing immunosuppressants for the treatment of severe COVID-19, stratified by a risk score. Adult participants (aged ≥18 years) were enrolled from 22 hospitals across the UK. Patients with a risk score indicating a 40% risk of admission to an intensive care unit or death were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to standard of care alone, standard of care with baricitinib, or standard of care with ravulizumab. The composite primary outcome was the time from randomisation to incidence (up to and including day 14) of the first event of death, invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, cardiovascular organ support, or renal failure. The primary interim analysis was triggered when 125 patient datasets were available up to day 14 in each study group and we included in the analysis all participants who were randomly assigned. The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04390464). Findings Between May 8, 2020, and May 7, 2021, 417 participants were recruited and randomly assigned to standard of care alone (145 patients), baricitinib (137 patients), or ravulizumab (135 patients). Only 54 (39%) of 137 patients in the baricitinib group received the maximum 14-day course, whereas 132 (98%) of 135 patients in the ravulizumab group received the intended dose. The trial was stopped after the primary interim analysis on grounds of futility. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) for reaching the composite primary endpoint was 1·11 (95% CI 0·62–1·99) for patients on baricitinib compared with standard of care alone, and 1·53 (0·88–2·67) for ravulizumab compared with standard of care alone. 45 serious adverse events (21 deaths) were reported in the standard-of-care group, 57 (24 deaths) in the baricitinib group, and 60 (18 deaths) in the ravulizumab group. Interpretation Neither baricitinib nor ravulizumab, as administered in this study, was effective in reducing disease severity in patients selected for severe COVID-19. Safety was similar between treatments and standard of care. The short period of dosing with baricitinib might explain the discrepancy between our findings and those of other trials. The therapeutic potential of targeting complement C5 activation product C5a, rather than the cleavage of C5, warrants further evaluation

    Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study

    Get PDF
    Introduction: The multiorgan impact of moderate to severe coronavirus infections in the post-acute phase is still poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities after hospitalisation with COVID-19, evaluate their determinants, and explore associations with patient-related outcome measures. Methods: In a prospective, UK-wide, multicentre MRI follow-up study (C-MORE), adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital following COVID-19 who were included in Tier 2 of the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) and contemporary controls with no evidence of previous COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody negative) underwent multiorgan MRI (lungs, heart, brain, liver, and kidneys) with quantitative and qualitative assessment of images and clinical adjudication when relevant. Individuals with end-stage renal failure or contraindications to MRI were excluded. Participants also underwent detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical tests. The primary outcome was the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities (two or more organs) relative to controls, with further adjustments for potential confounders. The C-MORE study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510025. Findings: Of 2710 participants in Tier 2 of PHOSP-COVID, 531 were recruited across 13 UK-wide C-MORE sites. After exclusions, 259 C-MORE patients (mean age 57 years [SD 12]; 158 [61%] male and 101 [39%] female) who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and Nov 1, 2021, and 52 non-COVID-19 controls from the community (mean age 49 years [SD 14]; 30 [58%] male and 22 [42%] female) were included in the analysis. Patients were assessed at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 4·2–6·3) after hospital discharge. Compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity, and had more comorbidities. Multiorgan abnormalities on MRI were more frequent in patients than in controls (157 [61%] of 259 vs 14 [27%] of 52; p<0·0001) and independently associated with COVID-19 status (odds ratio [OR] 2·9 [95% CI 1·5–5·8]; padjusted=0·0023) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to have MRI evidence of lung abnormalities (p=0·0001; parenchymal abnormalities), brain abnormalities (p<0·0001; more white matter hyperintensities and regional brain volume reduction), and kidney abnormalities (p=0·014; lower medullary T1 and loss of corticomedullary differentiation), whereas cardiac and liver MRI abnormalities were similar between patients and controls. Patients with multiorgan abnormalities were older (difference in mean age 7 years [95% CI 4–10]; mean age of 59·8 years [SD 11·7] with multiorgan abnormalities vs mean age of 52·8 years [11·9] without multiorgan abnormalities; p<0·0001), more likely to have three or more comorbidities (OR 2·47 [1·32–4·82]; padjusted=0·0059), and more likely to have a more severe acute infection (acute CRP >5mg/L, OR 3·55 [1·23–11·88]; padjusted=0·025) than those without multiorgan abnormalities. Presence of lung MRI abnormalities was associated with a two-fold higher risk of chest tightness, and multiorgan MRI abnormalities were associated with severe and very severe persistent physical and mental health impairment (PHOSP-COVID symptom clusters) after hospitalisation. Interpretation: After hospitalisation for COVID-19, people are at risk of multiorgan abnormalities in the medium term. Our findings emphasise the need for proactive multidisciplinary care pathways, with the potential for imaging to guide surveillance frequency and therapeutic stratification

    A Systematic Review of the Use of Physiological Tests Assessing the Acute Response to Treatment During Exacerbations of COPD (with a Focus on Small Airway Function).

    No full text
    Exacerbations are prevalent in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients and associated with poor clinical outcomes. Currently, there is a lack of sensitive and specific tools that can objectively identify exacerbations and assess their progress or treatment response. FEV is often reported as a study outcome, but it has significant limitations. Studies have suggested that small airways measures might provide physiological biomarkers during exacerbations. Therefore, this study was done to assess which physiological tests of small airways function have been used in the acute setting during exacerbations of COPD and the evidence to support their use. An electronic databases search was conducted in April 2019. A standard systematic review methodology was used. Eligible studies were those of ≥10 participants that compared at least one small airway test with FEV to assess response to treatment with baseline and a follow-up measurement ≤2 months after. Analyses were narrative. Of 1436 screened studies, seven studies were eligible. There was heterogeneity in which tests of small airways were used and three different small airways measures were reported. Studies were small (including 20 to 87 subjects). Six articles reported improvements in small airway measurements during the recovery from exacerbation which correlated with FEV. Included studies varied in their timing and duration of the assessment. There is some evidence to support the use of small airway tests in acute exacerbations of COPD. However, studies have been small with different tests being utilized. Further studies to determine the usefulness of each test may be of interest

    Physiological tests of small airways function in diagnosing asthma: a systematic review.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND Asthma is a common, heterogeneous disease that is characterised by chronic airway inflammation and variable expiratory airflow limitation. Current guidelines use spirometric measures for asthma assessment. This systematic review aimed to assess whether the most commonly reported tests of small airways function could contribute to the diagnosis of asthma. METHODS Standard systematic review methodology was used, and a range of electronic databases was searched (Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Web of Science, DARE). Studies that included physiological tests of small airways function to diagnose asthma in adults were included, with no restrictions on language or date. The risk of bias and quality assessment tools used were Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality tool for cross-sectional studies and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 for diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies. RESULTS 7072 studies were identified and 10 studies met review criteria. 7 included oscillation techniques and 5 included maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF). Studies were small and of variable quality. In oscillometry, total resistance (R5) and reactance at 5 Hz (X5) was altered in asthma compared with healthy controls. The percentage predicted of MMEF was lower in patients with asthma compared with controls in all studies and lower than the % predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s. In DTA of oscillometry, R5 showed a sensitivity between 69% and 72% and specificity between 61% and 86%. CONCLUSION There were differences in the results of physiological tests of small airway function in patients with asthma compared with controls. However, studies are small and heterogeneous. Further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of these tests on a larger scale, including studies to determine which test methodology is the most useful in asthma
    corecore