Why are physicians so skeptical about positive randomized controlled clinical trials in critical care medicine?

Redefining ARDS: a paradigm shift

Although the defining elements of "acute respiratory distress syndrome" (ARDS) have been known for over a century, the syndrome was first described in 1967. Since then, despite several revisions of its conceptual definition, it remains a matter of debate whether ARDS is a discrete nosological entity. After almost 60 years, it is appropriate to examine how critical care has modeled this fascinating syndrome and affected patient's outcome. Given that the diagnostic criteria of ARDS (e.g., increased pulmonary vascular permeability and diffuse alveolar damage) are difficult to ascertain in clinical practice, we believe that a step forward would be to standardize the assessment of pulmonary and extrapulmonary involvement in ARDS to ensure that each patient can receive the most appropriate and effective treatment. The selection of treatments based on arbitrary ranges of PaO2/FiO2 lacks sufficient sensitivity to individualize patient care.

Clinical relevance of timing of assessment of ICU mortality in patients with moderate-to-severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Mortality is a frequently reported outcome in clinical studies of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, timing of mortality assessment has not been well characterized. We aimed to identify a crossing-point between cumulative survival and death in the intensive care unit (ICU) of patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS, beyond which the number of survivors would exceed the number of deaths. We hypothesized that this intersection would occur earlier in a successful clinical trial vs. observational studies of moderate/severe ARDS and predict treatment response. We conducted an ancillary study of 1580 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS managed with lung-protective ventilation to assess the relevance and timing of measuring ICU mortality rates at different time-points during ICU stay. First, we analyzed 1303 patients from four multicenter, observational cohorts enrolling consecutive patients with moderate/severe ARDS. We assessed cumulative ICU survival from the time of moderate/severe ARDS diagnosis to ventilatory support discontinuation within 7-days, 28-days, 60-days, and at ICU discharge. Then, we compared these findings to those of a successful randomized trial of 277 moderate/severe ARDS patients. In the observational cohorts, ICU mortality (487/1303, 37.4%) and 28-day mortality (425/1102, 38.6%) were similar (p = 0.549). Cumulative proportion of ICU survivors and non-survivors crossed at day-7; after day-7, the number of ICU survivors was progressively higher compared to non-survivors. Measures of oxygenation, lung mechanics, and severity scores were different between survivors and non-survivors at each point-in-time (p < 0.001). In the trial cohort, the cumulative proportion of survivors and non-survivors in the treatment group crossed before day-3 after diagnosis of moderate/severe ARDS. In clinical ARDS studies, 28-day mortality closely approximates and may be used as a surrogate for ICU mortality. For patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS, ICU mortality assessment within the first week of a trial might be an early predictor of treatment response.

Respiratory Subsets in Patients with Moderate to Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for Early Prediction of Death

Introduction: In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the PaO2/FiO2 ratio at the time of ARDS diagnosis is weakly associated with mortality. We hypothesized that setting a PaO2/FiO2 threshold in 150 mm Hg at 24 h from moderate/severe ARDS diagnosis would improve predictions of death in the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: We conducted an ancillary study in 1303 patients with moderate to severe ARDS managed with lung-protective ventilation enrolled consecutively in four prospective multicenter cohorts in a network of ICUs. The first three cohorts were pooled (n = 1000) as a testing cohort; the fourth cohort (n = 303) served as a confirmatory cohort. Based on the thresholds for PaO2/FiO2 (150 mm Hg) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (10 cm H2O), the patients were classified into four possible subsets at baseline and at 24 h using a standardized PEEP-FiO2 approach: (I) PaO2/FiO2 ≥ 150 at PEEP < 10, (II) PaO2/FiO2 ≥ 150 at PEEP ≥ 10, (III) PaO2/FiO2 < 150 at PEEP < 10, and (IV) PaO2/FiO2 < 150 at PEEP ≥ 10. Primary outcome was death in the ICU. Results: ICU mortalities were similar in the testing and confirmatory cohorts (375/1000, 37.5% vs. 112/303, 37.0%, respectively). At baseline, most patients from the testing cohort (n = 792/1000, 79.2%) had a PaO2/FiO2 < 150, with similar mortality among the four subsets (p = 0.23). When assessed at 24 h, ICU mortality increased with an advance in the subset: 17.9%, 22.8%, 40.0%, and 49.3% (p < 0.0001). The findings were replicated in the confirmatory cohort (p < 0.0001). However, independent of the PEEP levels, patients with PaO2/FiO2 < 150 at 24 h followed a distinct 30-day ICU survival compared with patients with PaO2/FiO2 ≥ 150 (hazard ratio 2.8, 95% CI 2.2−3.5, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Subsets based on PaO2/FiO2 thresholds of 150 mm Hg assessed after 24 h of moderate/severe ARDS diagnosis are clinically relevant for establishing prognosis, and are helpful for selecting adjunctive therapies for hypoxemia and for enrolling patients into therapeutic trials.

Unsuccessful and Successful Clinical Trials in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Addressing Physiology-Based Gaps

The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe form of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure caused by an insult to the alveolar-capillary membrane, resulting in a marked reduction of aerated alveoli, increased vascular permeability and subsequent interstitial and alveolar pulmonary edema, reduced lung compliance, increase of physiological dead space, and hypoxemia. Most ARDS patients improve their systemic oxygenation, as assessed by the ratio between arterial partial pressure of oxygen and inspired oxygen fraction, with conventional intensive care and the application of moderate-to-high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure. However, in some patients hypoxemia persisted because the lungs are markedly injured, remaining unresponsive to increasing the inspiratory fraction of oxygen and positive end-expiratory pressure. For decades, mechanical ventilation was the only standard support technique to provide acceptable oxygenation and carbon dioxide removal. Mechanical ventilation provides time for the specific therapy to reverse the disease-causing lung injury and for the recovery of the respiratory function. The adverse effects of mechanical ventilation are direct consequences of the changes in pulmonary airway pressures and intrathoracic volume changes induced by the repetitive mechanical cycles in a diseased lung. In this article, we review 14 major successful and unsuccessful randomized controlled trials conducted in patients with ARDS on a series of techniques to improve oxygenation and ventilation published since 2010. Those trials tested the effects of adjunctive therapies (neuromuscular blocking agents, prone positioning), methods for selecting the optimum positive end-expiratory pressure (after recruitment maneuvers, or guided by esophageal pressure), high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, extracorporeal oxygenation, and pharmacologic immune modulators of the pulmonary and systemic inflammatory responses in patients affected by ARDS. We will briefly comment physiology-based gaps of negative trials and highlight the possible needs to address in future clinical trials in ARDS.

A Prognostic Enrichment Strategy for Selection of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVES

Incomplete or ambiguous evidence for identifying high-risk patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome for enrollment into randomized controlled trials has come at the cost of an unreasonable number of negative trials. We examined a set of selected variables early in acute respiratory distress syndrome to determine accurate prognostic predictors for selecting high-risk patients for randomized controlled trials.

DESIGN

A training and testing study using a secondary analysis of data from four prospective, multicenter, observational studies.

SETTING

A network of multidisciplinary ICUs.

PATIENTS

We studied 1,200 patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome managed with lung-protective ventilation.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We evaluated different thresholds for patient's age, PaO2/FIO2, plateau pressure, and number of extrapulmonary organ failures to predict ICU outcome at 24 hours of acute respiratory distress syndrome diagnosis. We generated 1,000 random scenarios as training (n = 900, 75% of population) and testing (n = 300, 25% of population) datasets and averaged the logistic coefficients for each scenario. Thresholds for age (< 50, 50-70, > 70 yr), PaO2/FIO2 (≤ 100, 101-150, > 150 mm Hg), plateau pressure (< 29, 29-30, > 30 cm H2O), and number of extrapulmonary organ failure (< 2, 2, > 2) stratified accurately acute respiratory distress syndrome patients into categories of risk. The model that included all four variables proved best to identify patients with the highest or lowest risk of death (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.84-0.88). Decision tree analyses confirmed the accuracy and robustness of this enrichment model.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined thresholds for patient's age, PaO2/FIO2, plateau pressure, and extrapulmonary organ failure provides prognostic enrichment accuracy for stratifying and selecting acute respiratory distress syndrome patients for randomized controlled trials.

Is Overall Mortality the Right Composite Endpoint in Clinical Trials of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome?

OBJECTIVES

Overall mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome is a composite endpoint because it includes death from multiple causes. In most acute respiratory distress syndrome trials, it is unknown whether reported deaths are due to acute respiratory distress syndrome or the underlying disease, unrelated to the specific intervention tested. We investigated the causes of death after contracting acute respiratory distress syndrome in a large cohort.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis from three prospective, multicenter, observational studies.

SETTING

A network of multidisciplinary ICUs.

PATIENTS

We studied 778 patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome treated with lung-protective ventilation.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We examined death in the ICU from individual causes. Overall ICU mortality was 38.8% (95% CI, 35.4-42.3). Causes of acute respiratory distress syndrome modified the risk of death. Twenty-three percent of deaths occurred from refractory hypoxemia due to nonresolving acute respiratory distress syndrome. Most patients died from causes unrelated to acute respiratory distress syndrome: 48.7% of nonsurvivors died from multisystem organ failure, and cancer or brain injury was involved in 37.1% of deaths. When quantifying the true burden of acute respiratory distress syndrome outcome, we identified 506 patients (65.0%) with one or more exclusion criteria for enrollment into current interventional trials. Overall ICU mortality of the "trial cohort" (21.3%) was markedly lower than the parent cohort (relative risk, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.43-0.70; p < 0.000001).

CONCLUSIONS

Most deaths in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients are not directly related to lung damage but to extrapulmonary multisystem organ failure. It would be challenging to prove that specific lung-directed therapies have an effect on overall survival.

Analysis of causality from observational studies and its application in clinical research in Intensive Care Medicine

Random allocation of treatment or intervention is the key feature of clinical trials and divides patients into treatment groups that are approximately balanced for baseline, and therefore comparable covariates except for the variable treatment of the study. However, in observational studies, where treatment allocation is not random, patients in the treatment and control groups often differ in covariates that are related to intervention variables. These imbalances in covariates can lead to biased estimates of the treatment effect. However, randomized clinical trials are sometimes not feasible for ethical, logistical, economic or other reasons. To resolve these situations, interest in the field of clinical research has grown in designing studies that are most similar to randomized experiments using observational (i.e. non-random) data. Observational studies using propensity score analysis methods have been increasing in the scientific papers of Intensive Care. Propensity score analyses attempt to control for confounding in non-experimental studies by adjusting for the likelihood that a given patient is exposed. However, studies with propensity indexes may be confusing, and intensivists are not familiar with this methodology and may not fully understand the importance of this technique. The objectives of this review are: to describe the fundamentals of propensity index methods; to present the techniques to adequately evaluate propensity index models; to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these techniques.

A Quantile Analysis of Plateau and Driving Pressures: Effects on Mortality in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Receiving Lung-Protective Ventilation

OBJECTIVES

The driving pressure (plateau pressure minus positive end-expiratory pressure) has been suggested as the major determinant for the beneficial effects of lung-protective ventilation. We tested whether driving pressure was superior to the variables that define it in predicting outcome in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of existing data from previously reported observational studies.

SETTING

A network of ICUs.

PATIENTS

We studied 778 patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We assessed the risk of hospital death based on quantiles of tidal volume, positive end-expiratory pressure, plateau pressure, and driving pressure evaluated at 24 hours after acute respiratory distress syndrome diagnosis while ventilated with standardized lung-protective ventilation. We derived our model using individual data from 478 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients and assessed its replicability in a separate cohort of 300 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. Tidal volume and positive end-expiratory pressure had no impact on mortality. We identified a plateau pressure cut-off value of 29 cm H2O, above which an ordinal increment was accompanied by an increment of risk of death. We identified a driving pressure cut-off value of 19 cm H2O where an ordinal increment was accompanied by an increment of risk of death. When we cross tabulated patients with plateau pressure less than 30 and plateau pressure greater than or equal to 30 with those with driving pressure less than 19 and driving pressure greater than or equal to 19, plateau pressure provided a slightly better prediction of outcome than driving pressure in both the derivation and validation cohorts (p < 0.0000001).

CONCLUSIONS

Plateau pressure was slightly better than driving pressure in predicting hospital death in patients managed with lung-protective ventilation evaluated on standardized ventilator settings 24 hours after acute respiratory distress syndrome onset.

The American-European Consensus Conference definition of the acute respiratory distress syndrome is dead, long live positive end-expiratory pressure!

In 1994, an American-European Consensus Conference (AECC) formalized the criteria for the diagnosis of the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Although that definition is simple to apply in the clinical setting, it has been challenged over the years in several studies since the assessment of the oxygenation defect does not require standardized ventilatory support. We were the first to propose new guidelines, based on a specific, standard method of evaluating oxygenation status, a proposal that was later advocated by others. To address the limitations of the AECC definition, a modified ARDS definition has been proposed by a task force panel of experts, referred to as the Berlin Defintion, using a terminology similar to that we previously proposed. However, that proposal has several methodological flaws. Since all ARDS patients start off with terrible oxygenation, the Berlin Definition offers no room for stratifying and identifyng true ARDS patients since there is no further re-evaluation of the hypoxemia under standard ventilator setting in a specific time period. In this Point of View, we review the history of the definition of ARDS and discussed the methodological concerns regarding adopting this new, revised ARDS definition.

Effects of a clinical trial on mechanical ventilation practices in patients with acute lung injury

RATIONALE

In a clinical trial by the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network (ARDSNet), mechanical ventilation with tidal volumes of 6 ml/kg decreased mortality from acute lung injury. However, interpretations of these results generated controversy and it was unclear if this trial would change usual-care practices.

OBJECTIVES

First, to determine if clinical practices at ARDSNet hospitals changed after the tidal volume trial. Second, to determine if tidal volume and plateau pressure (Pplat) within 48 hours before randomization affected hospital mortality in patients subsequently managed with 6 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW).

METHODS

We used preenrollment data from 2,451 patients enrolled in six trials (1996-2005) to describe changes in tidal volume over time. We used logistic regression to determine if preenrollment tidal volume or Pplat affected mortality.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Median preenrollment tidal volume decreased from 10.3 ml/kg PBW (range, 4.3-17.1) during the tidal volume trial (1996-1999) to 7.3 ml/kg PBW (range, 3.9-16.2) after its completion (P < 0.001). Preenrollment tidal volume was not associated with mortality (P = 0.566). The odds of death increased multiplicatively with each cm H(2)O of preenrollment Pplat (P < 0.001) (e.g., the odds of death was 1.37 times greater when preenrollment Pplat increased by 10 cm H(2)O).

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians used lower tidal volumes after publication of the tidal volume trial. Preenrollment Pplat was strongly associated with mortality, and may reflect disease severity independent of tidal volume. Pplat measured early in the course of acute lung injury, after accounting for tidal volume, is a respiratory system-specific value with strong prognostic significance.

Lessons for successful study enrollment from the Veterans Affairs/National Institutes of Health Acute Renal Failure Trial Network Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Design elements of clinical trials can introduce recruitment bias and reduce study efficiency. Trials involving the critically ill may be particularly prone to design-related inefficiencies.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Enrollment into the Veterans Affairs/National Institutes of Health Acute Renal Failure Trial Network Study was systematically monitored. Reasons for nonenrollment into this study comparing strategies of renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury were categorized as modifiable or nonmodifiable.

RESULTS

4339 patients were screened; 2744 fulfilled inclusion criteria. Of these, 1034 were ineligible by exclusion criteria. Of the remaining 1710 patients, 1124 (65.7%) enrolled. Impediments to informed consent excluded 21.4% of potentially eligible patients. Delayed identification of potential patients, physician refusal, and involvement in competing trials accounted for 4.4, 2.7, and 2.3% of exclusions. Comfort measures only status, chronic illness, chronic kidney disease, and obesity excluded 11.8, 7.8, 7.6, and 5.9% of potential patients. Modification of an enrollment window reduced the loss of patients from 6.6 to 2.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

The Acute Renal Failure Trial Network Study's enrollment efficiency compared favorably with previous intensive care unit intervention trials and supports the representativeness of its enrolled population. Impediments to informed consent highlight the need for nontraditional acquisition methods. Restrictive enrollment windows may hamper recruitment but can be effectively modified. The low rate of physician refusal acknowledges clinical equipoise in the study design. Underlying comorbidities are important design considerations for future trials that involve the critically ill with acute kidney injury.

Mechanical ventilation with lower tidal volumes does not influence the prescription of opioids or sedatives

Introduction

We compared the effects of mechanical ventilation with a lower tidal volume (V_T) strategy versus those of greater V_T in patients with or without acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) on the use of opioids and sedatives.

Methods

This is a secondary analysis of a previously conducted before/after intervention study, which consisting of feedback and education on lung protective mechanical ventilation using lower V_T. We evaluated the effects of this intervention on medication prescriptions from days 0 to 28 after admission to our multidisciplinary intensive care unit.

Results

Medication prescriptions in 23 patients before and 38 patients after intervention were studied. Of these patients, 10 (44%) and 15 (40%) suffered from ALI/ARDS. The V_T of ALI/ARDS patients declined from 9.7 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW) before to 7.8 ml/kg PBW after the intervention (P = 0.007). For patients who did not have ALI/ARDS there was a trend toward a decline from 10.2 ml/kg PBW to 8.6 ml/kg PBW (P = 0.073). Arterial carbon dioxide tension was significantly greater after the intervention in ALI/ARDS patients. Neither the proportion of patients receiving opioids or sedatives, or prescriptions at individual time points differed between pre-intervention and post-intervention. Also, there were no statistically significant differences in doses of sedatives and opioids. Findings were no different between non-ALI/ARDS patients and ALI/ARDS patients.

Conclusion

Concerns regarding sedation requirements with use of lower V_T are unfounded and should not preclude its use in patients with ALI/ARDS.

Intensive care unit exposures for long-term outcomes research: development and description of exposures for 150 patients with acute lung injury

PURPOSE

Long-term follow-up studies in critical care have described survivors' outcomes, but provided less insight into the patient/disease characteristics and intensive care therapies ("exposures") associated with these outcomes. Such insights are essential for improving patients' long-term outcomes. This report describes the development of a strategy for comprehensively measuring relevant exposures for long-term outcomes research, and presents empiric results from its implementation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multistep, iterative process was used to develop the exposures strategy. First, a comprehensive list of potential exposures was generated and subsequently reduced based on feasibility, redundancy, and relevance criteria. Next, data abstraction methods were designed and tested. Finally, the strategy was implemented in 150 patients with acute lung injury with iterative refinement.

RESULTS

The strategy resulted in the development of more than 60 unique exposures requiring less than 45 minutes per patient-day for data collection. Most exposures had minimal missing data and adequate reliability. These data revealed that evidence-based practices including lower tidal volume ventilation, spontaneous breathing trials, sedation interruption, adequate nutrition, and blood glucose of less than 6.1 mmol/L (110 mg/dL) occurred in only 23% to 50% of assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a multistep, iterative process, a comprehensive and feasible exposure measurement strategy for long-term outcomes research was successfully developed and implemented.

Limitations of clinical trials in acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the challenges and limitations of randomized clinical trials in acute respiratory distress syndrome, with special emphasis on those pertaining to ventilatory management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Superbly executed randomized trials of ventilatory strategy have garnered deserved attention from the critical care community and yet have illustrated the limitations of our current approach to clinical research in this area. Inexact definitions, incomplete mechanistic understanding of complex pathophysiology, inappropriate outcome variables, diverse therapeutic environments, lengthy data acquisition time and ethical constraints on trial design limit the applicability of randomized control trial methodology to acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute lung injury. As yet, clinical practice does not seem to have been greatly impacted by the implications of completed randomized controlled trials per se. Recent issues, both ethical and interpretive, regarding control group participants have raised troubling and theoretically important issues that are yet to be fully resolved.

SUMMARY

Without tighter definitions of the condition under treatment, more specific targets for interventions to act upon, stratification that recognizes key interactive elements, and cointerventions based on better mechanistic understanding, randomized controlled trials of new drugs, ventilatory strategy, and other management approaches in acute respiratory distress syndrome are likely to remain a blunt instrument for investigation. As valuable as they are for calling important therapeutic principles to attention and for helping to suggest general guidelines for care, the limitations of randomized controlled trials for treating the individual with acute respiratory distress syndrome must be acknowledged.

Recent Publications on Medications and Pharmacy

Hospital Pharmacy presents a new feature to keep pharmacists abreast of new publications in the medical/pharmacy literature. Articles of interest will be abstracted monthly regarding a broad scope of topics.