Propensity-Adjusted Comparison of Mortality of Elderly Versus Very Elderly Ventilated Patients

BACKGROUND

The growing proportion of elderly intensive care patients constitutes a public health challenge. The benefit of critical care in these patients remains unclear. We compared outcomes in elderly versus very elderly subjects receiving mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

In total, 5,557 mechanically ventilated subjects were included in our post hoc retrospective analysis, a subgroup of the VENTILA study. We divided the cohort into 2 subgroups on the basis of age: very elderly subjects (age ≥ 80 y; n = 1,430), and elderly subjects (age 65-79 y; n = 4,127). A propensity score on being very elderly was calculated. Evaluation of associations with 28-d mortality was done with logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Very elderly subjects were clinically sicker as expressed by higher SAPS II scores (53 ± 18 vs 50 ± 18, P < .001), and their rates of plateau pressure < 30 cm H₂O were higher, whereas other parameters did not differ. The 28-d mortality was higher in very elderly subjects (42% vs 34%, P < .001) and remained unchanged after propensity score adjustment (adjusted odds ratio 1.31 [95% CI 1.16-1.49], P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Age was an independent and unchangeable risk factor for death in mechanically ventilated subjects. However, survival rates of very elderly subjects were > 50%. Denial of critical care based solely on age is not justified. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02731898.).

Dexmedetomidine or Propofol for Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Adults with Sepsis

BACKGROUND

Guidelines currently recommend targeting light sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol for adults receiving mechanical ventilation. Differences exist between these sedatives in arousability, immunity, and inflammation. Whether they affect outcomes differentially in mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis undergoing light sedation is unknown.

METHODS

In a multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis to receive dexmedetomidine (0.2 to 1.5 μg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or propofol (5 to 50 μg per kilogram per minute), with doses adjusted by bedside nurses to achieve target sedation goals set by clinicians according to the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS, on which scores range from -5 [unresponsive] to +4 [combative]). The primary end point was days alive without delirium or coma during the 14-day intervention period. Secondary end points were ventilator-free days at 28 days, death at 90 days, and age-adjusted total score on the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status questionnaire (TICS-T; scores range from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50±10 and lower scores indicating worse cognition) at 6 months.

RESULTS

Of 432 patients who underwent randomization, 422 were assigned to receive a trial drug and were included in the analyses - 214 patients received dexmedetomidine at a median dose of 0.27 μg per kilogram per hour, and 208 received propofol at a median dose of 10.21 μg per kilogram per minute. The median duration of receipt of the trial drugs was 3.0 days (interquartile range, 2.0 to 6.0), and the median RASS score was -2.0 (interquartile range, -3.0 to -1.0). We found no difference between dexmedetomidine and propofol in the number of days alive without delirium or coma (adjusted median, 10.7 vs. 10.8 days; odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.26), ventilator-free days (adjusted median, 23.7 vs. 24.0 days; odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.51), death at 90 days (38% vs. 39%; hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.52), or TICS-T score at 6 months (adjusted median score, 40.9 vs. 41.4; odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.33). Safety end points were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis who were being treated with recommended light-sedation approaches, outcomes in patients who received dexmedetomidine did not differ from outcomes in those who received propofol. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01739933.).

Global Initiative for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. The 2020 GOLD Science Committee Report on COVID-19 and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has raised many questions about the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and whether modifications of their therapy are required. It has raised questions about recognizing and differentiating coronavirus disease (COVID-19) from COPD given the similarity of the symptoms. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Science Committee used established methods for literature review to present an overview of the management of patients with COPD during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is unclear whether patients with COPD are at increased risk of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2. During periods of high community prevalence of COVID-19, spirometry should only be used when it is essential for COPD diagnosis and/or to assess lung function status for interventional procedures or surgery. Patients with COPD should follow basic infection control measures, including social distancing, hand washing, and wearing a mask or face covering. Patients should remain up to date with appropriate vaccinations, particularly annual influenza vaccination. Although data are limited, inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting bronchodilators, roflumilast, or chronic macrolides should continue to be used as indicated for stable COPD management. Systemic steroids and antibiotics should be used in COPD exacerbations according to the usual indications. Differentiating symptoms of COVID-19 infection from chronic underlying symptoms or those of an acute COPD exacerbation may be challenging. If there is suspicion for COVID-19, testing for SARS-CoV-2 should be considered. Patients who developed moderate-to-severe COVID-19, including hospitalization and pneumonia, should be treated with evolving pharmacotherapeutic approaches as appropriate, including remdesivir, dexamethasone, and anticoagulation. Managing acute respiratory failure should include appropriate oxygen supplementation, prone positioning, noninvasive ventilation, and protective lung strategy in patients with COPD and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Patients who developed asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 should be followed with the usual COPD protocols. Patients who developed moderate or worse COVID-19 should be monitored more frequently and accurately than the usual patients with COPD, with particular attention to the need for oxygen therapy.

Barotrauma in mechanically ventilated patients with Coronavirus disease 2019: a survey of 38 hospitals in Lombardy, Italy

BACKGROUND

The aim was to describe the incidence and risk factors of barotrauma in patients with the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on invasive mechanical ventilation, during the outbreak in our region (Lombardy, Italy).

METHODS

The study was an electronic survey open from March 27^th to May 2^nd, 2020. Patients with COVID-19 who developed barotrauma while on invasive mechanical ventilation from 61 hospitals of the COVID-19 Lombardy Intensive Care Unit network were involved.

RESULTS

The response rate was 38/61 (62%). The incidence of barotrauma was 145/2041 (7.1%; 95%-CI: 6.1-8.3%). Only a few cases occurred with ventilatory settings that may be considered non-protective such as a plateau airway pressure >35 cmH<inf>2</inf>O (2/113 [2%]), a driving airway pressure >15 cmH<inf>2</inf>O (30/113 [27%]), or a tidal volume >8 mL/kg of ideal body weight and a plateau airway pressure >30 cmH<inf>2</inf>O (12/134 [9%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of a survey, patients with COVID-19 might be at high risk for barotrauma during invasive (and allegedly lung-protective) mechanical ventilation.

Tiotropium/Olodaterol Decreases Exacerbation Rates Compared with Tiotropium in a Range of Patients with COPD: Pooled Analysis of the TONADO®/DYNAGITO® Trials

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies demonstrated that tiotropium/olodaterol reduced rates of exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, this should be examined in a wider population.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis pooled data from TONADO^® 1 + 2 and DYNAGITO^®, three 52-week, parallel-group, randomised, double-blind, phase III trials investigating patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD, with and without previous exacerbations, who received tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg or tiotropium 5 µg. Subgroup analyses were conducted on patients stratified by exacerbation history, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage 2-4 disease severity and baseline inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use.

RESULTS

In 9942 patients, tiotropium/olodaterol was associated with lower rates of moderate/severe exacerbations (0.68 vs. 0.77 per patient-year; rate ratio (RR) vs. tiotropium 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84, 0.95; P = 0.0003) and exacerbations requiring hospitalisation (0.11 vs. 0.13 per patient-year; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75, 0.99; P = 0.0380) versus tiotropium. Lower rates of moderate/severe exacerbations with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium were evident in patients with 0-1 moderate exacerbation in the previous year (0.54 vs. 0.60 per patient-year; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.82, 0.98; P = 0.0187) and at least two moderate or at least one severe exacerbation(s) in the previous year (0.97 vs. 1.09 per patient-year; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82, 0.97; P = 0.0096). In patients with GOLD 2 and GOLD 3 COPD, moderate/severe exacerbation rates were lower with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium; GOLD 4 patients showed negligible difference between treatments. When evaluating patients by baseline ICS use, there was a significantly lower rate of moderate/severe exacerbations with tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium in patients receiving ICS.

CONCLUSIONS

Tiotropium/olodaterol decreased the rate of moderate/severe exacerbations and exacerbations leading to hospitalisation versus tiotropium. Results from this large, pooled, post hoc analysis support the use of dual bronchodilation with tiotropium/olodaterol in a broad range of patients, reflective of patients with COPD in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TONADO^® 1 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01431274); TONADO^® 2 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01431287); DYNAGITO^® (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02296138). People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may have times when their symptoms worsen, known as exacerbations. This may mean that they need to take additional medications, such as antibiotics or oral steroids. Studies have shown that a combination of two types of inhaled medicine-tiotropium and olodaterol-can help to reduce exacerbations in some people. To see if this is also the case across a larger and more diverse range of people, we combined the results from three studies (TONADO^® 1 + 2 and DYNAGITO^®) that looked at people who were taking tiotropium and olodaterol together and people who were taking tiotropium alone. We showed that, across a wide range of people, treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol was generally better at reducing exacerbations than tiotropium. Tiotropium/olodaterol also decreased the number of exacerbations that led to hospitalisation compared with tiotropium. Overall, our results support the use of combined tiotropium/olodaterol in people at different stages of COPD.

Tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - a review of clinical development

Background

Bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy is recommended as initial treatment for Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) groups B, C, and D.

Main body

Tiotropium bromide was the first LAMA available for COPD in clinical practice and, because of its long duration of action, is administered once daily. Tiotropium was initially available as an inhalation powder delivered via a dry-powder inhaler (DPI). Later, tiotropium also became available as an inhalation spray delivered via a soft mist inhaler (SMI). The SMI was designed to overcome or minimize some of the issues associated with other inhaler types (eg, the need for strong inspiratory airflow with DPIs). Results of short- and long-term randomized, controlled clinical trials of tiotropium in patients with COPD indicated tiotropium was safe and significantly improved lung function, health-related quality of life, and exercise endurance, and reduced dyspnea, lung hyperinflation, exacerbations, and use of rescue medication compared with placebo or active comparators. These positive efficacy findings triggered the evaluation of tiotropium in fixed-dose combination with olodaterol (a long-acting β₂-agonist). In this review, we provide an overview of studies of tiotropium for the treatment of COPD, with a focus on pivotal studies.

Conclusion

Tiotropium is safe and efficacious as a long-term, once-daily LAMA for the maintenance treatment of COPD and for reducing COPD exacerbations. The SMI generates a low-velocity, long-duration aerosol spray with a high fine-particle fraction, which results in marked lung drug deposition. In addition, high inspiratory flow rates are not required.

Aspiration Risk Factors, Microbiology, and Empiric Antibiotics for Patients Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Aspiration community-acquired pneumonia (ACAP) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients with aspiration risk factors (AspRFs) are infections associated with anaerobes, but limited evidence suggests their pathogenic role.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the aspiration risk factors, microbiology patterns, and empiric anti-anaerobic use in patients hospitalized with CAP?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of GLIMP, an international, multicenter, point-prevalence study of adults hospitalized with CAP. Patients were stratified into three groups: (1) ACAP, (2) CAP/AspRF+ (CAP with AspRF), and (3) CAP/AspRF- (CAP without AspRF). Data on demographics, comorbidities, microbiological results, and anti-anaerobic antibiotics were analyzed in all groups. Patients were further stratified in severe and nonsevere CAP groups.

RESULTS

We enrolled 2,606 patients with CAP, of which 193 (7.4%) had ACAP. Risk factors independently associated with ACAP were male, bedridden, underweight, a nursing home resident, and having a history of stroke, dementia, mental illness, and enteral tube feeding. Among non-ACAP patients, 1,709 (70.8%) had CAP/AspRF+ and 704 (29.2%) had CAP/AspRF-. Microbiology patterns including anaerobes were similar between CAP/AspRF-, CAP/AspRF+ and ACAP (0.0% vs 1.03% vs 1.64%). Patients with severe ACAP had higher rates of total gram-negative bacteria (64.3% vs 44.3% vs 33.3%, P = .021) and lower rates of total gram-positive bacteria (7.1% vs 38.1% vs 50.0%, P < .001) when compared with patients with severe CAP/AspRF+ and severe CAP/AspRF-, respectively. Most patients (>50% in all groups) independent of AspRFs or ACAP received specific or broad-spectrum anti-anaerobic coverage antibiotics.

INTERPRETATION

Hospitalized patients with ACAP or CAP/AspRF+ had similar anaerobic flora compared with patients without aspiration risk factors. Gram-negative bacteria were more prevalent in patients with severe ACAP. Despite having similar microbiological flora between groups, a large proportion of CAP patients received anti-anaerobic antibiotic coverage.

Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Immunocompromised Adults: A Consensus Statement Regarding Initial Strategies

Background

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines have improved the treatment and outcomes of patients with CAP, primarily by standardization of initial empirical therapy. But current society-published guidelines exclude immunocompromised patients.

Research Question

There is no consensus regarding the initial treatment of immunocompromised patients with suspected CAP.

Study Design and Methods

This consensus document was created by a multidisciplinary panel of 45 physicians with experience in the treatment of CAP in immunocompromised patients. The Delphi survey methodology was used to reach consensus.

Results

The panel focused on 21 questions addressing initial management strategies. The panel achieved consensus in defining the population, site of care, likely pathogens, microbiologic workup, general principles of empirical therapy, and empirical therapy for specific pathogens.

Interpretation

This document offers general suggestions for the initial treatment of the immunocompromised patient who arrives at the hospital with pneumonia.

Mechanical ventilation in Spain, 1998-2016: Epidemiology and outcomes

PURPOSE

To evaluate changes in the epidemiology of mechanical ventilation in Spain from 1998 to 2016.

DESIGN

A post hoc analysis of four cohort studies was carried out.

SETTING

A total of 138 Spanish ICUs.

PATIENTS

A sample of 4293 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 12h or noninvasive ventilation for more than 1h.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Demographic variables, reason for mechanical ventilation, variables related to ventilatory support (ventilation mode, tidal volume, PEEP, airway pressures), complications during mechanical ventilation, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU stay and ICU mortality.

RESULTS

There was an increase in severity (SAPSII: 43 points in 1998 vs. 47 points in 2016), changes in the reason for mechanical ventilation (decrease in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and acute respiratory failure secondary to trauma, and increase in neurological disease and post-cardiac arrest). There was an increase in noninvasive mechanical ventilation as the first mode of ventilatory support (p<0.001). Volume control ventilation was the most commonly used mode, with increased support pressure and pressure-regulated volume-controlled ventilation. A decrease in tidal volume was observed (9ml/kg actual b.w. in 1998 and 6.6ml/kg in 2016; p<0.001) as well as an increase in PEEP (3cmH₂O in 1998 and 6cmH₂O in 2016; p<0.001). In-ICU mortality decreased (34% in 1998 and 27% in 2016; p<0.001), without geographical variability (median OR 1.43; p=0.258).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant decrease in mortality was observed in patients ventilated in Spanish ICUs. These changes in mortality could be related to modifications in ventilation strategy to minimize ventilator-induced lung injury.

Efficacy and safety of two doses of budesonide/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler in COPD

Inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist combination therapy is a recommended treatment option for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and increased exacerbation risk, particularly those with elevated blood eosinophil levels. SOPHOS (NCT02727660) evaluated the efficacy and safety of two doses of budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate metered dose inhaler (BFF MDI) versus formoterol fumarate dihydrate (FF) MDI, each delivered using co-suspension delivery technology, in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and a history of exacerbations.

In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, 12–52-week, variable length study, patients received twice-daily BFF MDI 320/10 µg or 160/10 µg, or FF MDI 10 µg. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) at week 12. Secondary and other endpoints included assessments of moderate/severe COPD exacerbations and safety.

The primary analysis (modified intent-to-treat) population included 1843 patients (BFF MDI 320/10 µg, n=619; BFF MDI 160/10 µg, n=617; and FF MDI, n=607). BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg improved morning pre-dose trough FEV₁ at week 12 versus FF MDI (least squares mean differences 34 mL [p=0.0081] and 32 mL [p=0.0134], respectively), increased time to first exacerbation (hazard ratios 0.827 [p=0.0441] and 0.803 [p=0.0198], respectively) and reduced exacerbation rate (rate ratios 0.67 [p=0.0001] and 0.71 [p=0.0010], respectively). Lung function and exacerbation benefits were driven by patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells·mm⁻³. The incidence of adverse events was similar, and pneumonia rates were low (≤2.4%) across treatments.

SOPHOS demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD at increased risk of exacerbations.

Co-suspension delivery technology budesonide/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler improve lung function and reduce exacerbation risk versus LABA monotherapy in patients with moderate to very severe COPD and an exacerbation history in the prior yearhttp://bit.ly/3aDOvru

Diagnosis and Treatment of Adults with Community-acquired Pneumonia. An Official Clinical Practice Guideline of the American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America

Background: This document provides evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the management of adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

Methods: A multidisciplinary panel conducted pragmatic systematic reviews of the relevant research and applied Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology for clinical recommendations.

Results: The panel addressed 16 specific areas for recommendations spanning questions of diagnostic testing, determination of site of care, selection of initial empiric antibiotic therapy, and subsequent management decisions. Although some recommendations remain unchanged from the 2007 guideline, the availability of results from new therapeutic trials and epidemiological investigations led to revised recommendations for empiric treatment strategies and additional management decisions.

Conclusions: The panel formulated and provided the rationale for recommendations on selected diagnostic and treatment strategies for adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

Understanding the impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations on patient health and quality of life

Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) represent a significant clinical problem, and are associated with decreased lung function, worsening quality of life and decreased physical activity levels, with even a single exacerbation having detrimental effects. The occurrence of COPD exacerbations can also have a considerable impact on healthcare costs and mortality rates, with over one-fifth of patients hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation for the first time dying within one year of discharge. This highlights the need for COPD exacerbations to be a major focus in clinical practice. Furthermore, the substantial effect that COPD exacerbations can have on patient mental health should not be underestimated. Despite their clinical importance, COPD exacerbations are poorly recognized and reported by patients, and improving patient understanding and reporting of exacerbations to ensure prompt treatment may minimize their deleterious effects. Renewed focus on improving current clinical practice with support from evidence-based guidelines is required. This also raises a challenge to payors, healthcare systems and government policies to do more to tackle the considerable outstanding burden of COPD exacerbations.

Inter-country variability over time in the mortality of mechanically ventilated patients

Purpose

Variations in clinical characteristics and management and in the mortality of mechanically ventilated patients have not been sufficiently evaluated. We hypothesized that mortality shows a variability associated with country after adjustment for clinical characteristics and management.

Methods

Analysis of four studies carried out at 6-year intervals over an 18-year period. The studies included 26,024 patients (5183 in 1998, 4968 in 2004, 8108 in 2010, and 7765 in 2016) admitted to 1253 units from 38 countries. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. We performed analyses using multilevel logistic modeling with mixed-random effects, including country as a random variable. To evaluate the effect of management strategies on mortality, a mediation analysis was performed.

Results

Adjusted 28-day mortality decreased significantly over time (first study as reference): 2004: odds ratio 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72–0.93); 2010: 0.63 (95% CI 0.53–0.75); 2016: 0.49 (95% CI 0.39–0.61). A protective ventilatory strategy and the use of continuous sedation mediated a moderate fraction of the effect of time on mortality in patients with moderate hypoxemia and without hypoxemia, respectively. Logistic multilevel modeling showed a significant effect of country on mortality: median odds ratio (MOR) in 1998: 2.02 (95% CI 1.57–2.48); in 2004: 1.76 (95% CI 1.47–2.06); in 2010: 1.55 (95% CI 1.37–1.74), and in 2016: 1.39 (95% CI 1.25–1.54).

Conclusions

These findings suggest that country could contribute, independently of confounder variables, to outcome. The magnitude of the effect of country decreased over time.

Clinical trials registered with http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02731898).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-019-05867-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Easy prognostic assessment of concomitant organ failure in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening disease. We evaluated the prognostic utility of Model for End-stage Liver Disease excluding INR (MELD-XI) score for predicting mortality in a cohort of critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

In total, 11,091 mechanically ventilated patients were included in our post-hoc retrospective analysis, a subgroup of the VENTILA study (NCT02731898). Evaluation of associations with mortality was done by logistic and Cox regression analysis, an optimal cut-off was calculated using the Youden Index. We divided the cohort in two sub-groups based on their MELD-XI score at the optimal cut-off (12 score points).

RESULTS

Peak-, plateau- and positive end-expiratory pressure were higher in patients with MELD-XI>12. Patients with MELD-XI>12 had higher driving pressures (14 ± 6 cmH2O versus 13 ± 6; p < 0.001). MELD-XI was associated with 28-day mortality after correction for relevant cofounders including SAPS II and ventilation pressures (HR 1.04 95%CI 1.03-1.05; p < 0.001. Patients with MELD-XI>12 evidenced both increased hospital (46% versus 27%; p < 0.001) and 28-day mortality (39% versus 22%).

CONCLUSIONS

MELD-XI is independently associated with mortality and constitutes a useful and easily applicable tool for risk stratification in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02731898, registered 4 April 2016.

Association of atypical antipsychotics and mortality for patients hospitalised with pneumonia

Introduction

Atypical antipsychotics are commonly used in patients with psychiatric conditions and dementia. They are also frequently used in patients being admitted with pneumonia; however, there are few safety data. The purpose of this study was to examine whether atypical antipsychotic use prior to admission is associated with increased mortality in patients with pneumonia.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of hospitalised patients with pneumonia over a 10-year period. We included patients 65 years or older and hospitalised with pneumonia. For our primary analysis, we used propensity score matching to balance confounders between atypical antipsychotic users and nonusers.

Results

There were 102 897 patients and 5977 were taking atypical antipsychotics. After matching there were 5513 users and 5513 nonusers. Atypical antipsychotic use was associated with increased odds of 30-day (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.11–1.31) and 90-day mortality (1.19, 1.09–1.30).

Conclusion

In patients 65 years or older that are hospitalised with pneumonia, we found an association between atypical antipsychotic use and increased odds of mortality. This was particularly pronounced for patients with pre-existing psychiatric or cardiac conditions. We suggest closely monitoring patients who use these medications and minimising their use in older adult patients.

When hospitalised with pneumonia, older patients who use atypical antipsychotics should be monitored closely and their use of these drugs should be minimised as much as possiblehttp://bit.ly/2JEevHV

NR, Make BJ, Marchetti N, Martinez FJ, Maselli DJ, Mathews AM, McCormack MC, McDonald MLN, McEvoy CE, Moll M, Molye SS, Murray S, Nath H, Newell Jr. JD, Occhipinti M, Paoletti M, Parekh T, Pistolesi M, Pratte KA, Putcha N, Ragland M, Reinhardt JM, Rennard SI, Rosiello RA, Ross JC, Rossiter HB, Ruczinski I, San Jose Estepar R, Sciurba FC, Sieren JC, Singh H, Soler X, Steiner RM, Strand MJ, Stringer WW, Tal-Singer R, Thomashow B, Vegas Sánchez-Ferrero G, Walsh JW, Wan ES, Washko GR, Michael Wells J, Wendt CH, Westney G, Wilson A, Wise RA, Yen A, Young K, Yun J, Silverman EK, Crapo JD. COPDGene® 2019: Redefining the Diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Present-day diagnostic criteria are largely based solely on spirometric criteria. Accumulating evidence has identified a substantial number of individuals without spirometric evidence of COPD who suffer from respiratory symptoms and/or increased morbidity and mortality. There is a clear need for an expanded definition of COPD that is linked to physiologic, structural (computed tomography [CT]) and clinical evidence of disease. Using data from the COPD Genetic Epidemiology study (COPDGene®), we hypothesized that an integrated approach that includes environmental exposure, clinical symptoms, chest CT imaging and spirometry better defines disease and captures the likelihood of progression of respiratory obstruction and mortality.

METHODS

Four key disease characteristics - environmental exposure (cigarette smoking), clinical symptoms (dyspnea and/or chronic bronchitis), chest CT imaging abnormalities (emphysema, gas trapping and/or airway wall thickening), and abnormal spirometry - were evaluated in a group of 8784 current and former smokers who were participants in COPDGene® Phase 1. Using these 4 disease characteristics, 8 categories of participants were identified and evaluated for odds of spirometric disease progression (FEV1 > 350 ml loss over 5 years), and the hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was examined.

RESULTS

Using smokers without symptoms, CT imaging abnormalities or airflow obstruction as the reference population, individuals were classified as Possible COPD, Probable COPD and Definite COPD. Current Global initiative for obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) criteria would diagnose 4062 (46%) of the 8784 study participants with COPD. The proposed COPDGene® 2019 diagnostic criteria would add an additional 3144 participants. Under the new criteria, 82% of the 8784 study participants would be diagnosed with Possible, Probable or Definite COPD. These COPD groups showed increased risk of disease progression and mortality. Mortality increased in patients as the number of their COPD characteristics increased, with a maximum hazard ratio for all cause-mortality of 5.18 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.15-6.48) in those with all 4 disease characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial portion of smokers with respiratory symptoms and imaging abnormalities do not manifest spirometric obstruction as defined by population normals. These individuals are at significant risk of death and spirometric disease progression. We propose to redefine the diagnosis of COPD through an integrated approach using environmental exposure, clinical symptoms, CT imaging and spirometric criteria. These expanded criteria offer the potential to stimulate both current and future interventions that could slow or halt disease progression in patients before disability or irreversible lung structural changes develop.

Time To Revise COPD Treatment Algorithm

In 2017, a new two-step algorithm for the treatment of COPD was proposed. This algorithm was based on the severity of symptoms and phenotypes or treatable traits, and patient-specialised assessment targeting eosinophilic inflammation, chronic bronchitis, and frequent infections is recommended after exacerbation occurs despite maximal bronchodilation therapy. However, recent studies have revealed the clinical characteristics of patients who should have second controllers added, such as ICS. We again realized that treatable traits should be assessed and intervened for as early as possible. Moreover, the treatment algorithm is necessary to be adapted to the situation of clinical practice, taking into account the characteristics of the patients. The time to revise COPD treatment algorithm has come and we propose a new 3-step parallel approach for initial COPD treatment. After the diagnosis of COPD, the first assessment is to divide into two categories based on the usual clinical characteristics for patients with COPD and the specific clinical characteristics for each patient with concomitant disease. In the former, the assessment should be based on the level of dyspnea and the frequency of exacerbations. After the assessment, mono- or dual bronchodilator should be selected. In the latter, the assessment should be based on asthma characteristics, chronic bronchitis, and chronic heart failure. After the assessment, patients with asthmatic characteristics may consider treatment with ICS, while patients with chronic bronchitis may consider treatment with roflumilast and/or macrolide, while patients with chronic heart failure may consider treatment with selective β1-blocker. The 3-step parallel approach is completed by adding an additional therapy for patients with concomitant disease to essential therapy for patients with COPD. In addition, it is important to review the response around 4 weeks after the initial therapy. This COPD management proposal might be considered as an approach based on patients’ clinical characteristics and on personalized therapy.

Determinants of Response to Roflumilast in Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Pooled Analysis of Two Randomized Trials

RATIONALE

Roflumilast reduces exacerbations in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease associated with chronic bronchitis and a history of exacerbations. Further characterization of patients most likely to benefit is warranted.

OBJECTIVES

Define characteristics that most robustly identify patients who derive greatest exacerbation risk reduction with roflumilast.

METHODS

Predefined, pooled analyses of REACT (Roflumilast in the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations While Taking Appropriate Combination Treatment; NCT01329029) and RE²SPOND (Roflumilast Effect on Exacerbations in Patients on Dual [LABA/ICS] Therapy; NCT01443845) multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. The primary endpoint was rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per patient per year.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In the overall intention-to-treat population (n = 4,287), roflumilast reduced moderate or severe exacerbations by 12.3% (rate ratio, 0.88, 95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.97; P = 0.0086) and severe exacerbations by 16.1% (0.84; 0.71-0.99; P = 0.0409) versus placebo. The reduction in moderate or severe exacerbations with roflumilast was most pronounced in patients who had been hospitalized for an exacerbation in the prior year (0.74; 0.63-0.88; P = 0.0005); had more than two exacerbations in the prior year (0.79; 0.65-0.96; P = 0.0160); or had baseline eosinophils ≥150 cells/μl (0.81; 0.71-0.93; P = 0.0020), ≥150 to <300 cells/μl (0.84; 0.71-0.98; P = 0.0282), or ≥300 cells/μl (0.77; 0.61-0.97; P = 0.0264). Similar subgroup results were noted for severe exacerbations. In patients with prior hospitalization and higher baseline blood eosinophil concentrations, roflumilast reduced moderate or severe exacerbations by 34.5% at ≥150 cells/μl (0.65; 0.52-0.82; P = 0.0003) and 42.7% at ≥300 cells/μl (0.57; 0.37-0.88; P = 0.0111) versus placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

This prespecified, pooled analysis confirms the benefit of roflumilast in decreasing exacerbations in patients with prior hospitalization for exacerbation, greater exacerbation frequency, and higher (≥150 cells/μl, ≥150 to <300 cells/μl, or ≥300 cells/μl) baseline blood eosinophil count.