The DisEntangling Chronic Obstructive pulmonary Disease Exacerbations clinical trials NETwork (DECODE-NET): rationale and vision

open4siNo abstract availableopenMathioudakis, Alexander G; Sivapalan, Pradeesh; Papi, Alberto; Vestbo, JørgenMathioudakis, Alexander G; Sivapalan, Pradeesh; Papi, Alberto; Vestbo, Jørge

AM/PM dosing of LAMA for COPD: a randomized controlled trial protocol using digital recruitment and registries

RationaleLong-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) reduce the risk of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), usually taken once daily in the morning. However, the circadian activity of autonomic regulation suggests that the highest need for anticholinergic therapy may be in the late night/early morning. This is supported by evidence that AECOPD most often begins in the morning. Furthermore, the trough spirometry effect of LAMA is lower than the peak effect, which further argues that evening dosing may be more optimal than morning dosing. This trial aims to determine whether evening administration of LAMA reduces hospitalization-requiring AECOPD or death from all causes within 1 year as compared to morning administration of the same LAMA.MethodsRandomized controlled open-label trial. Persons aged 30 years or older with a once-daily LAMA prescription and a confirmed COPD diagnosis were recruited. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either morning or evening LAMA administration. Complete follow-up for the primary outcome, hospitalization-requiring AECOPD, or death from all causes within 1 year was captured from the Danish National Health Register, as were patient-reported outcome assessments at 6 and 12 months.ResultsA total of 10,013 participants were randomized, and the recruitment process started on 9 March 2023. Secondary outcomes include (i) moderate COPD exacerbations; (ii) all-cause hospitalization; (iii) ICU admission; (iv) need for non-invasive ventilation; and (v) all-cause mortality, among others. All outcomes will be evaluated 12 months after recruitment.Clinical trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05563675

AM/PM dosing of LAMA for COPD: a randomized controlled trial protocol using digital recruitment and registries

Rationale: Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) reduce the risk of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), usually taken once daily in the morning. However, the circadian activity of autonomic regulation suggests that the highest need for anticholinergic therapy may be in the late night/early morning. This is supported by evidence that AECOPD most often begins in the morning. Furthermore, the trough spirometry effect of LAMA is lower than the peak effect, which further argues that evening dosing may be more optimal than morning dosing. This trial aims to determine whether evening administration of LAMA reduces hospitalization-requiring AECOPD or death from all causes within 1 year as compared to morning administration of the same LAMA. Methods: Randomized controlled open-label trial. Persons aged 30 years or older with a once-daily LAMA prescription and a confirmed COPD diagnosis were recruited. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either morning or evening LAMA administration. Complete follow-up for the primary outcome, hospitalization-requiring AECOPD, or death from all causes within 1 year was captured from the Danish National Health Register, as were patient-reported outcome assessments at 6 and 12 months. Results: A total of 10,013 participants were randomized, and the recruitment process started on 9 March 2023. Secondary outcomes include (i) moderate COPD exacerbations; (ii) all-cause hospitalization; (iii) ICU admission; (iv) need for non-invasive ventilation; and (v) all-cause mortality, among others. All outcomes will be evaluated 12 months after recruitment. Clinical trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05563675

SARS-CoV-2 and risk of psychiatric hospital admission and use of psychopharmaceuticals: A nationwide registry study of 4,585,083 adult Danish citizens

Abstract Background Current evidence on the risk of admission- or medication-requiring psychiatric sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is limited to selected populations, short durations, and loss to follow-up. This study examined if SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased long-term risk of psychiatric admissions and de novo prescription of psychoactive medication in the general population of Denmark. Methods Adults (≥18 years) were assigned to either the control or SARS-CoV-2 group based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests between 1 January 2020 and 27 November 2021. Infected subjects were matched 1:5 to control subjects by propensity score. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated. Adjusted Cox regression was applied to the unmatched population with SARS-CoV-2 infection as a time-dependent covariate. Follow-up time was 12 months or until the end of the study. Results A total of 4,585,083 adults were included in the study. Approximately 342,084 had a PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were matched 1:5 with 1,697,680 controls. The IRR for psychiatric admission was 0.79 in the matched population (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73–0.85, p < 0.001). In the unmatched population, the adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for psychiatric admission were either below 1.00 or with a 95% CI lower limit of 1.01. SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an increased risk of de novo prescription of psychoactive medication in both the matched (IRR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02–1.11, p < 0.01) and unmatched population (HR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.28–1.34, p < 0.001). Conclusions We found a signal of increased use of psychoactive medication, specifically benzodiazepines, among SARS-CoV-2-positive persons, but the risk of psychiatric admissions did not increase

Calcium Channel Blockers and the Risk of Exacerbation in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Nationwide Study of 48,488 Outpatients

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are prone to developing arterial hypertension, and many patients are treated with the calcium channel blocker amlodipine. However, it remains unclear whether using this drug potentially affects the risk of acute severe exacerbations (AECOPD) and all-cause mortality in these patients. The data were collected from Danish national registries, containing complete information on health, prescriptions, hospital admissions, and outpatient clinic visits. The COPD patients (n = 48,488) were matched via propensity score on known predictors of the primary outcome in an active comparator design. One group was exposed to amlodipine treatment, and the other was exposed to bendroflumethiazide, since both of these drugs are considered to be the first choice for the treatment of arterial hypertension according to Danish guidelines. The use of amlodipine was associated with a reduced risk of death from all causes at the 1-year follow-up (hazard ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval: 0.62–0.76) compared with the use of bendroflumethiazide in the matched patients. No difference in the risk of severe AECOPD was found. In the COPD patients, amlodipine use was associated with a lower risk of death from all causes compared with the use of bendroflumethiazide. Amlodipine seems to be a safe first choice for the treatment of arterial hypertension in COPD patients.publishedVersio

Corticosteroid Resistance in Smokers—A Substudy Analysis of the CORTICO-COP Randomised Controlled Trial

From MDPI via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: accepted 2021-06-16, pub-electronic 2021-06-21Publication status: PublishedFunder: Danish Regions Medical Fund; Grant(s): 5894/16Funder: Sundhed og Sygdom, Det Frie Forskningsråd; Grant(s): 6110-00268BThe CORTICO-COP trial showed that eosinophil-guided corticosteroid-sparing treatment for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was non-inferior to standard of care and decreased the accumulated dose of systemic corticosteroids that patients were exposed to by approximately 60%. Smoking status has been shown to affect corticosteroid responsiveness. This post hoc analysis investigated whether eosinophil-guided treatment is non-inferior to conventional treatment in current smokers. The main analysis of current smokers showed no significant difference in the primary endpoint, days alive, and out of hospital within 14 days between the control group (mean, 9.8 days; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8.7–10.8) and the eosinophil-guided group (mean, 8.7 days; 95% CI, 7.5–9.9; p = 0.34). Secondary analyses of the number of exacerbations or deaths, the number of intensive care unit admissions or deaths, lung function improvement, and change in health-related quality of life also showed no significant differences between the two groups. The results of a sensitivity analysis of ex-smokers are consistent with the main analysis. Our results suggest that eosinophil-guided treatment is non-inferior to standard of care in current smokers and ex-smokers. Because data on the impact of smoking status on eosinophil-guided treatments are sparse, more randomised trials are needed to confirm our results

Time of day for vaccination, outcomes, and relative effectiveness of high-dose vs. standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine: a post-hoc analysis of the DANFLU-1 randomized clinical trial

Objectives Morning influenza vaccination enhances antibody response. In this posthoc analysis of the DANFLU-1 trial, we sought to evaluate the association between time of day for vaccination (ToV) and outcomes, and whether ToV modified the relative effectiveness of high-dose (QIV-HD) vs. standard-dose (QIV-SD) quadrivalent influenza vaccine. Methods DANFLU-1 was a pragmatic feasibility trial of QIV-HD vs. QIV-SD. Outcomes included hospitalizations and mortality. For subgroup analysis, the population was dichotomized at median ToV into two groups (early and late). Results The study population included 12,477 participants. Mean age was 71.7±3.9 years with 5,877 (47.1%) female participants. Median ToV was 11.29AM. Earlier ToV was associated with fewer respiratory hospitalizations independent of vaccine type, which persisted in adjusted analysis (IRR 0.88 per 1-hour decrement (95% CI 0.78- 0.98, p=0.025). No effect modification by continuous or dichotomous ToV was found. In subgroup analysis, effects consistently favored QIV-HD against hospitalizations for pneumonia or influenza (early: IRR 0.30; late: 0.29), all-cause hospitalizations (early: IRR 0.87; late: 0.86), and mortality (early: HR 0.53; late: 0.50). Conclusion In this exploratory post-hoc analysis, earlier ToV was associated with fewer respiratory hospitalizations. The relative effectiveness of QIV-HD vs. QIV-SD was not modified by ToV. Further research is needed to confirm findings. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT0504858

Assessing Treatment Success or Failure as an Outcome in Randomised Clinical Trials of COPD Exacerbations. A Meta-Epidemiological Study

From MDPI via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: accepted 2021-12-03, pub-electronic 2021-12-05Publication status: PublishedA recently published ERS core outcome set recommends that all trials of COPD exacerbation management should assess the treatment success (or “cure” of the exacerbation), defined as a dichotomous measure of the overall outcome of an exacerbation. This methodological systematic review describes and compares the instruments that were used to assess treatment success or failure in 54 such RCTs, published between 2006–2020. Twenty-three RCTs used composite measures consisting of several undesirable outcomes of an exacerbation, together defining an overall unfavourable outcome, to define treatment failure. Thirty-four RCTs used descriptive instruments that used qualitative or semi-quantitative descriptions to define cure, marked improvement, improvement of the exacerbation, or treatment failure. Treatment success and failure rates among patients receiving guidelines-directed treatments at different settings and timepoints are described and could be used to inform power calculations in future trials. Descriptive instruments appeared more sensitive to treatment effects compared to composite instruments. Further methodological studies are needed to optimise the evaluation of treatment success/failure. In the meantime, based on the findings of this systematic review, the ERS core outcome set recommends that cure should be defined as sufficient improvement of the signs and symptoms of the exacerbation such that no additional systemic treatments are required