Antibiotics for bronchiectasis exacerbations in children: rationale and study protocol for a randomised placebo-controlled trial

Task Force report: European Respiratory Society guidelines for the management of children and adolescents with bronchiectasis

There is increasing awareness of bronchiectasis in children and adolescents, a chronic pulmonary disorder associated with poor quality-of-life for the child/adolescent and their parents, recurrent exacerbations and costs to the family and health systems. Optimal treatment improves clinical outcomes. Several national guidelines exist, but there are no international guidelines.The European Respiratory Society (ERS) Task Force for the management of paediatric bronchiectasis sought to identify evidence-based management (investigation and treatment) strategies. It used the ERS standardised process that included a systematic review of the literature and application of the GRADE approach to define the quality of the evidence and level of recommendations.A multidisciplinary team of specialists in paediatric and adult respiratory medicine, infectious disease, physiotherapy, primary care, nursing, radiology, immunology, methodology, patient advocacy and parents of children/adolescents with bronchiectasis considered the most relevant clinical questions (for both clinicians and patients) related to managing paediatric bronchiectasis. Fourteen key clinical questions (7 "Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome" [PICO] and 7 narrative) were generated. The outcomes for each PICO were decided by voting by the panel and parent advisory group.This guideline addresses the definition, diagnostic approach and antibiotic treatment of exacerbations, pathogen eradication, long-term antibiotic therapy, asthma-type therapies (inhaled corticosteroids, bronchodilators), mucoactive drugs, airway clearance, investigation of underlying causes of bronchiectasis, disease monitoring, factors to consider before surgical treatment and the reversibility and prevention of bronchiectasis in children/adolescents. Benchmarking quality of care for children/adolescents with bronchiectasis to improve clinical outcomes and evidence gaps for future research could be based on these recommendations.

Efficacy of oral amoxicillin-clavulanate or azithromycin for non-severe respiratory exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis (BEST-1): a multicentre, three-arm, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Background

Bronchiectasis guidelines recommend antibiotics for the treatment of acute respiratory exacerbations, but randomised placebo-controlled trials in children are lacking. We hypothesised that oral amoxicillin–clavulanate and azithromycin would each be superior to placebo in achieving symptom resolution of non-severe exacerbations in children by day 14 of treatment.

Methods

In this multicentre, three-arm, parallel, double-dummy, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial at four paediatric centres in Australia and New Zealand, we enrolled children aged 1–18 years with CT-confirmed bronchiectasis unrelated to cystic fibrosis, who were under the care of a respiratory physician and who had had at least two respiratory exacerbations in the 18 months before study entry. Participants were allocated (1:1:1) at exacerbation onset to receive oral suspensions of amoxicillin–clavulanate (45 mg/kg per day) plus placebo azithromycin, azithromycin (5 mg/kg per day) plus placebo amoxicillin–clavulanate, or both placebos for 14 days. An independent statistician prepared a computer-generated, permuted-block (size 2–8) randomisation sequence, stratified by centre, age, and cause. Participants, caregivers, study coordinators, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment until data analysis was completed. The primary outcome was the proportion of children with exacerbation resolution by day 14 in the intention-to-treat population. Treatment groups were compared using generalised linear models. Statistical significance was set at p<0·0245 to account for multiple comparisons. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12612000011886) and is completed.

Findings

Between April 17, 2012, and March 1, 2017, 604 children were screened and 252 were enrolled. Between July 31, 2012, and June 26, 2017, 197 children were allocated at the start of an exacerbation (63 to the amoxicillin–clavulanate group, 67 to the azithromycin group, and 67 to the placebo group). Respiratory viruses were identified in 82 (53%) of 154 children with available nasal swabs on day 1 of treatment. Primary outcome data were available for 196 (99%) children (one child with missing data [placebo group] was recorded as non-resolved according to criteria defined a priori). By day 14, exacerbations had resolved in 41 (65%) children in the amoxicillin–clavulanate group, 41 (61%) in the azithromycin group, and 29 (43%) in the placebo group. Compared with placebo, relative risk for resolution by day 14 was 1·50 (95% CI 1·08–2·09, p=0·015; number-needed-to-treat [NNT] 5 [95% CI 3–20]) in the amoxicillin–clavulanate group and 1·41 (1·01–1·97, p=0·042; NNT 6 [3–79]) in the azithromycin group. Adverse events were recorded in 19 (30%) children in the amoxicillin–clavulanate group, 20 (30%) in the azithromycin group, and 14 (21%) in the placebo group, but no events were severe or life-threatening.

Interpretation

Amoxicillin–clavulanate treatment is beneficial in terms of resolution of non-severe exacerbations of bronchiectasis in children, and should remain the first-line oral antibiotic in this setting.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), Cure Kids (New Zealand).

Adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics versus placebo for any indication

BACKGROUND

Macrolide antibiotics (macrolides) are among the most commonly prescribed antibiotics worldwide and are used for a wide range of infections. However, macrolides also expose people to the risk of adverse events. The current understanding of adverse events is mostly derived from observational studies, which are subject to bias because it is hard to distinguish events caused by antibiotics from events caused by the diseases being treated. Because adverse events are treatment-specific, rather than disease-specific, it is possible to increase the number of adverse events available for analysis by combining randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the same treatment across different diseases.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the incidences of reported adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics compared to placebo for any indication.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register (2018, Issue 4); MEDLINE (Ovid, from 1946 to 8 May 2018); Embase (from 2010 to 8 May 2018); CINAHL (from 1981 to 8 May 2018); LILACS (from 1982 to 8 May 2018); and Web of Science (from 1955 to 8 May 2018). We searched clinical trial registries for current and completed trials (9 May 2018) and checked the reference lists of included studies and of previous Cochrane Reviews on macrolides.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that compared a macrolide antibiotic to placebo for any indication. We included trials using any of the four most commonly used macrolide antibiotics: azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin, or roxithromycin. Macrolides could be administered by any route. Concomitant medications were permitted provided they were equally available to both treatment and comparison groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted and collected data. We assessed the risk of bias of all included studies and the quality of evidence for each outcome of interest. We analysed specific adverse events, deaths, and subsequent carriage of macrolide-resistant bacteria separately. The study participant was the unit of analysis for each adverse event. Any specific adverse events that occurred in 5% or more of any group were reported. We undertook a meta-analysis when three or more included studies reported a specific adverse event.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 183 studies with a total of 252,886 participants (range 40 to 190,238). The indications for macrolide antibiotics varied greatly, with most studies using macrolides for the treatment or prevention of either acute respiratory tract infections, cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, gastrointestinal conditions, or urogynaecological problems. Most trials were conducted in secondary care settings. Azithromycin and erythromycin were more commonly studied than clarithromycin and roxithromycin.Most studies (89%) reported some adverse events or at least stated that no adverse events were observed.Gastrointestinal adverse events were the most commonly reported type of adverse event. Compared to placebo, macrolides caused more diarrhoea (odds ratio (OR) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34 to 2.16; low-quality evidence); more abdominal pain (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.26; low-quality evidence); and more nausea (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.90; moderate-quality evidence). Vomiting (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.56; moderate-quality evidence) and gastrointestinal disorders not otherwise specified (NOS) (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.00; moderate-quality evidence) were also reported more often in participants taking macrolides compared to placebo.The number of additional people (absolute difference in risk) who experienced adverse events from macrolides was: gastrointestinal disorders NOS 85/1000; diarrhoea 72/1000; abdominal pain 62/1000; nausea 47/1000; and vomiting 23/1000.The number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) ranged from 12 (95% CI 8 to 23) for gastrointestinal disorders NOS to 17 (9 to 47) for abdominal pain; 19 (12 to 33) for diarrhoea; 19 (13 to 30) for nausea; and 45 (22 to 295) for vomiting.There was no clear consistent difference in gastrointestinal adverse events between different types of macrolides or route of administration.Taste disturbances were reported more often by participants taking macrolide antibiotics, although there were wide confidence intervals and moderate heterogeneity (OR 4.95, 95% CI 1.64 to 14.93; I² = 46%; low-quality evidence).Compared with participants taking placebo, those taking macrolides experienced hearing loss more often, however only four studies reported this outcome (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.70; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence).We did not find any evidence that macrolides caused more cardiac disorders (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.40; very low-quality evidence); hepatobiliary disorders (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.27 to 4.09; very low-quality evidence); or changes in liver enzymes (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.73 to 3.37; very low-quality evidence) compared to placebo.We did not find any evidence that appetite loss, dizziness, headache, respiratory symptoms, blood infections, skin and soft tissue infections, itching, or rashes were reported more often by participants treated with macrolides compared to placebo.Macrolides caused less cough (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer respiratory tract infections (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) compared to placebo, probably because these are not adverse events, but rather characteristics of the indications for the antibiotics. Less fever (OR 0.73, 95% 0.54 to 1.00; moderate-quality evidence) was also reported by participants taking macrolides compared to placebo, although these findings were non-significant.There was no increase in mortality in participants taking macrolides compared with placebo (OR 0.96, 95% 0.87 to 1.06; I² = 11%; low-quality evidence).Only 24 studies (13%) provided useful data on macrolide-resistant bacteria. Macrolide-resistant bacteria were more commonly identified among participants immediately after exposure to the antibiotic. However, differences in resistance thereafter were inconsistent.Pharmaceutical companies supplied the trial medication or funding, or both, for 91 trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The macrolides as a group clearly increased rates of gastrointestinal adverse events. Most trials made at least some statement about adverse events, such as "none were observed". However, few trials clearly listed adverse events as outcomes, reported on the methods used for eliciting adverse events, or even detailed the numbers of people who experienced adverse events in both the intervention and placebo group. This was especially true for the adverse event of bacterial resistance.

Head-to-head trials of antibiotics for bronchiectasis

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of bronchiectasis is defined by abnormal dilation of the airways related to a pathological mechanism of progressive airway destruction that is due to a 'vicious cycle' of recurrent bacterial infection, inflammatory mediator release, airway damage, and subsequent further infection. Antibiotics are the main treatment option for reducing bacterial burden in people with exacerbations of bronchiectasis and for longer-term eradication, but their use is tempered against potential adverse effects and concerns regarding antibiotic resistance. The comparative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and safety of different antibiotics have been highlighted as important issues, but currently little evidence is available to help resolve uncertainty on these questions.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the comparative effects of different antibiotics in the treatment of adults and children with bronchiectasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) through searches of the Cochrane Airways Group Register of trials and online trials registries, run 30 April 2018. We augmented these with searches of the reference lists of published studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs reported as full-text articles, those published as abstracts only, and unpublished data. We included adults and children (younger than 18 years) with a diagnosis of bronchiectasis by bronchography or high-resolution computed tomography who reported daily signs and symptoms, such as cough, sputum production, or haemoptysis, and those with recurrent episodes of chest infection; we included studies that compared one antibiotic versus another when they were administered by the same delivery method.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial selection, data extraction, and risk of bias. We assessed overall quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. We made efforts to collect missing data from trial authors. We have presented results with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios (ORs).

MAIN RESULTS

Four randomised trials were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review - two studies with 83 adults comparing fluoroquinolones with β-lactams and two studies with 55 adults comparing aminoglycosides with polymyxins.None of the included studies reported information on exacerbations - one of our primary outcomes. Included studies reported no serious adverse events - another of our primary outcomes - and no deaths. We graded this evidence as low or very low quality. Included studies did not report quality of life. Comparison between fluoroquinolones and β-lactams (amoxicillin) showed fewer treatment failures in the fluoroquinolone group than in the amoxicillin group (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.32; low-quality evidence) after 7 to 10 days of therapy. Researchers reported that Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection was eradicated in more participants treated with fluoroquinolones (Peto OR 20.09, 95% CI 2.83 to 142.59; low-quality evidence) but provided no evidence of differences in the numbers of participants showing improvement in sputum purulence (OR 2.35, 95% CI 0.96 to 5.72; very low-quality evidence). Study authors presented no evidence of benefit in relation to forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁). The two studies that compared polymyxins versus aminoglycosides described no clear differences between groups in the proportion of participants with P aeruginosa eradication (OR 1.40. 95% CI 0.36 to 5.35; very low-quality evidence) or improvement in sputum purulence (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.85; very low-quality evidence). The evidence for changes in FEV₁ was inconclusive. Two of three trials reported adverse events but did not report the proportion of participants experiencing one or more adverse events, so we were unable to interpret the information.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Limited low-quality evidence favours short-term oral fluoroquinolones over beta-lactam antibiotics for patients hospitalised with exacerbations. Very low-quality evidence suggests no benefit from inhaled aminoglycosides verus polymyxins. RCTs have presented no evidence comparing other modes of delivery for each of these comparisons, and no RCTs have included children. Overall, current evidence from a limited number of head-to-head trials in adults or children with bronchiectasis is insufficient to guide the selection of antibiotics for short-term or long-term therapy. More research on this topic is needed.

Streptococcus pneumoniae and chronic endobronchial infections in childhood

Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumococcus) is the main cause of bacterial pneumonia worldwide and has been studied extensively in this context. However, its role in chronic endobronchial infections and accompanying lower airway neutrophilic infiltration has received little attention. Severe and recurrent pneumonia are risk factors for chronic suppurative lung disease (CSLD) and bronchiectasis; the latter causes considerable morbidity and, in some populations, premature death in children and adults. Protracted bacterial bronchitis (PBB) is another chronic endobronchial infection associated with substantial morbidity. In some children, PBB may progress to bronchiectasis. Although nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae is the main pathogen in PBB, CSLD and bronchiectasis, pneumococci are isolated commonly from the lower airways of children with these diagnoses. Here we review what is known currently about pneumococci in PBB, CSLD and bronchiectasis, including the importance of pneumococcal nasopharyngeal colonization and how persistence in the lower airways may contribute to the pathogenesis of these chronic pulmonary disorders. Antibiotic treatments, particularly long-term azithromycin therapy, are discussed together with antibiotic resistance and the impact of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines. Important areas requiring further investigation are identified, including immune responses associated with pneumococcal lower airway infection, alone and in combination with other respiratory pathogens, and microarray serotyping to improve detection of carriage and infection by multiple serotypes. Genome wide association studies of pneumococci from the upper and lower airways will help identify virulence and resistance determinants, including potential therapeutic targets and vaccine antigens to treat and prevent endobronchial infections. Much work is needed, but the benefits will be substantial.

An update on pediatric bronchiectasis

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence and awareness of bronchiectasis not related to cystic fibrosis (CF) is increasing and it is now recognized as a major cause of respiratory morbidity, mortality and healthcare utilization worldwide. The need to elucidate the early origins of bronchiectasis is increasingly appreciated and has been identified as an important research priority. Current treatments for pediatric bronchiectasis are limited to antimicrobials, airway clearance techniques and vaccination. Several new drugs targeting airway inflammation are currently in development. Areas covered: Current management of pediatric bronchiectasis, including discussion on therapeutics, non-pharmacological interventions and preventative and surveillance strategies are covered in this review. We describe selected adult and pediatric data on bronchiectasis treatments and briefly discuss emerging therapeutics in the field. Expert commentary: Despite the burden of disease, the number of studies evaluating potential treatments for bronchiectasis in children is extremely low and substantially disproportionate to that for CF. Research into the interactions between early life respiratory tract infections and the developing immune system in children is likely to reveal risk factors for bronchiectasis development and inform future preventative and therapeutic strategies. Tailoring interventions to childhood bronchiectasis is imperative to halt the disease in its origins and improve adult outcomes.

The Likelihood of Preventing Respiratory Exacerbations in Children and Adolescents with either Chronic Suppurative Lung Disease or Bronchiectasis

Chronic suppurative lung disease (CSLD) and bronchiectasis in children and adolescents are important causes of respiratory morbidity and reduced quality of life (QoL), also leading to subsequent premature death during adulthood. Acute respiratory exacerbations in pediatric CSLD and bronchiectasis are important markers of disease control clinically, given that they impact upon QoL and increase health-care-associated costs and can adversely affect future lung functioning. Preventing exacerbations in this population is, therefore, likely to have significant individual, familial, societal, and health-sector benefits. In this review, we focus on therapeutic interventions, such as drugs (antibiotics, mucolytics, hyperosmolar agents, bronchodilators, corticosteroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents), vaccines and physiotherapy, and care-planning, such as post-hospitalization management and health promotion strategies, including exercise, diet, and reducing exposure to environmental toxicants. The review identified a conspicuous lack of moderate or high-quality evidence for preventing respiratory exacerbations in children and adolescents with CSLD or bronchiectasis. Given the short- and long-term impact of exacerbations upon individuals, their families, and society as a whole, large studies addressing interventions at the primary and tertiary prevention phases are required. This research must include children and adolescents in both developing and developed countries and address long-term health outcomes.

Pediatric bronchiectasis: No longer an orphan disease

Bronchiectasis is described classically as a chronic pulmonary disorder characterized by a persistent productive cough and irreversible dilatation of one or more bronchi. However, in children unable to expectorate, cough may instead be wet and intermittent and bronchial dilatation reversible in the early stages. Although still considered an orphan disease, it is being recognized increasingly as causing significant morbidity and mortality in children and adults in both affluent and developing countries. While bronchiectasis has multiple etiologies, the final common pathway involves a complex interplay between the host, respiratory pathogens and environmental factors. These interactions lead to a vicious cycle of repeated infections, airway inflammation and tissue remodelling resulting in impaired airway clearance, destruction of structural elements within the bronchial wall causing them to become dilated and small airway obstruction. In this review, the current knowledge of the epidemiology, pathobiology, clinical features, and management of bronchiectasis in children are summarized. Recent evidence has emerged to improve our understanding of this heterogeneous disease including the role of viruses, and how antibiotics, novel drugs, antiviral agents, and vaccines might be used. Importantly, the management is no longer dependent upon extrapolating from the cystic fibrosis experience. Nevertheless, substantial information gaps remain in determining the underlying disease mechanisms that initiate and sustain the pathophysiological pathways leading to bronchiectasis. National and international collaborations, standardizing definitions of clinical and research end points, and exploring novel primary prevention strategies are needed if further progress is to be made in understanding, treating and even preventing this often life-limiting disease.

Prolonged antibiotics for non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis in children and adults

BACKGROUND

The vicious cycle hypothesis for bronchiectasis predicts that bacterial colonisation of the respiratory tract perpetuates inflammatory change. This damages the mucociliary escalator, preventing bacterial clearance and allowing persistence of pro-inflammatory mediators. Conventional treatment with physiotherapy and intermittent antibiotics is believed to improve the condition of people with bronchiectasis, although no conclusive data show that these interventions influence the natural history of the condition. Various strategies have been tried to interrupt this cycle of infection and inflammation, including prolonging antibiotic treatment with the goal of allowing the airway mucosa to heal.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits of prolonged antibiotic therapy in the treatment of patients with bronchiectasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register and reference lists of identified articles. Searches were current as of February 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials examining the use of prolonged antibiotic therapy (for four or more weeks) in the treatment of bronchiectasis compared with placebo or usual care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors to ask for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen trials met the inclusion criteria, randomly assigning a total of 1157 participants. Antibiotics were given for between four weeks and 83 weeks. Limited meta-analysis was possible because of the diversity of outcomes reported in these trials. Based on the number of participants with at least one exacerbation, the meta-analysis showed significant effects in favour of the intervention (odds ratio (OR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.52; P value < 0.00001), with events occurring in 271 per 1000 people in the intervention arm (95% CI 126 to 385) and in 546 per 1000 in the control population, based on evidence of moderate quality. A non-statistically significant reduction in hospitalisation favoured the use of prolonged antibiotics with a moderate quality grade of supporting evidence (37 per 1000 in the intervention arm (95% CI 13 to 96) and 87 per 1000 in control (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.11; P value = 0.08). Drug resistance developed in 36 of 220 participants taking antibiotics compared with 10 of 211 participants given placebo or standard therapy (OR 3.48, 95% CI 1.20 to 10.07; P value = 0.02), translating to natural frequencies of 155 per 1000 in the intervention arm (95% CI 59 to 346) and 50 per 1000 in the control arm. The intervention was well tolerated with no overall significant difference in withdrawal between treatment and placebo groups (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.49). Diarrhoea was commonly reported as an adverse event, particularly with an oral intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence shows benefit associated with use of prolonged antibiotics in the treatment of patients with bronchiectasis, at least halving the odds of exacerbation (with 275 fewer exacerbations per every 1000 people treated in the antibiotic arm compared with the control arm) and hospitalisation (50 fewer hospitalisations per 1000 people in the antibiotic arm compared with the control arm). However, the risk of emerging drug resistance is increased more than threefold. This review is limited by diversity of trials and by evidence of moderate to low quality. Further randomised controlled trials with adequate power and standardised end points are required.

Antimicrobial treatment of non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis

Bronchiectasis unrelated to cystic fibrosis is characterized by chronic wet or productive cough, recurrent exacerbations and irreversible bronchial dilatation. After antibiotics and vaccines became available and living standards in affluent countries improved, its resulting reduced prevalence meant bronchiectasis was considered an 'orphan disease'. This perception has changed recently with increasing use of CT scans to diagnose bronchiectasis, including in those with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or 'difficult to control' asthma, and adds to its already known importance in non-affluent countries and disadvantaged Indigenous communities. Following years of neglect, there is renewed interest in identifying the pathogenetic mechanisms of bronchiectasis, including the role of infection, and conducting clinical trials. This is providing much needed evidence to guide antimicrobial therapy, which has relied previously upon extrapolating treatments used in cystic fibrosis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. While many knowledge gaps and management challenges remain, the future is improving for patients with bronchiectasis.

To investigate the prevention of OM-85 on bronchiectasis exacerbations (iPROBE) in Chinese patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis is characterized by the irreversible dilatation of the medium-sized bronchi as a result of airway injury from recurrent or chronic inflammation and lower respiratory tract infections. Bronchiectasis airways are commonly colonized with bacterial species. Infections of the airways play important role in bronchiectasis exacerbations. The non-specific prevention of recurrent airway infections by immunostimulating agents has gained growing interest. OM-85, consisting of extracts of eight kinds of bacteria important in respiratory infections, could support the respiratory tract resistance to the pathogens. OM-85 has been shown to be a benefit by decreasing the risk of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in several perspective clinical trials. Exacerbation of bronchiectasis substantially contributes to a more rapid decline in lung function, reduced quality of life, and healthcare costs. In this context, we plan to conduct a clinical trial to investigate the PReventive effect of OM-85 on Bronchiectasis Exacerbation in Chinese patients (iPROBE).

METHODS/DESIGN

This study is designed as a prospective, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial. A total of 244 patients with bronchiectasis, who have had at least one exacerbation of bronchiectasis in the previous year, will be included. The subjects will randomly receive two courses of 7 mg of OM-85 or a matching placebo. The treatment dose of OM-85 will be one daily capsule taken orally for 10 days each month for 3 consecutive months at the beginning of the study, followed by 3 months of no drug. This schedule will repeat until the patient has been seen for one year.

DISCUSSION

We will investigate whether long-term treatment with an oral immunostimulant (OM-85) could decrease exacerbations of bronchiectasis over a one-year period. We will also assess other relevant outcomes, including the rate of event-based exacerbation, lung function parameters, and total scores judged by the St George's respiratory questionnaire, Leicester cough questionnaire, and inflammatory index. We hope that this study will provide new information on the preventive effects of OM-85 on bronchiectasis exacerbations and will address a knowledge gap for this understudied disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (identifier NCT01968421) on 19 October 2013.

Surgical treatment of non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis in Brazilian children

PURPOSE

To determine the clinical characteristics of patients submitted to surgical treatment for non-cystic fibrosis (CF) bronchiectasis, the indications for surgery, and the results obtained at a referral facility for pediatric thoracic surgery.

METHODS

Between January 1998 and December 2009, we retrospectively reviewed the medical charts of 109 pediatric patients with non-CF bronchiectasis who underwent surgical treatment. These findings were subsequently analyzed by focusing on postoperative complications and long-term results.

RESULTS

Of the 109 patients undergoing pulmonary resection, the mean age was 7.6 years (ranging from 1 to 15.5 y-o) with male predominance (59 %). The most common procedure was segmentectomy (43 %) followed by left lower lobectomy (38 %). Minor postoperative complications occurred in 36 % of the patients; the most common was transient atelectasis (26 %), followed by air leak (6 %), and postoperative pain (4 %). There was one death within the 30-day postoperative period, but it was unrelated to the procedure. Eighty-three children were followed after discharge, with a mean follow-up period of 667 days. Sixty-five (76 %) patients showed improvement of clinical symptoms after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung resection for the treatment of non-CF bronchiectasis in children is a safe procedure, with no life-treating morbidity and low mortality. This procedure also leads to significant improvements in symptoms and quality of life.

Bronchiectasis exacerbation study on azithromycin and amoxycillin-clavulanate for respiratory exacerbations in children (BEST-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Bronchiectasis unrelated to cystic fibrosis (CF) is being increasingly recognized in children and adults globally, both in resource-poor and in affluent countries. However, high-quality evidence to inform management is scarce. Oral amoxycillin-clavulanate is often the first antibiotic chosen for non-severe respiratory exacerbations, because of the antibiotic-susceptibility patterns detected in the respiratory pathogens commonly associated with bronchiectasis. Azithromycin has a prolonged half-life, and with its unique anti-bacterial, immunomodulatory, and anti-inflammatory properties, presents an attractive alternative. Our proposed study will test the hypothesis that oral azithromycin is non-inferior (within a 20% margin) to amoxycillin-clavulanate at achieving resolution of non-severe respiratory exacerbations by day 21 of treatment in children with non-CF bronchiectasis.

METHODS

This will be a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial involving six Australian and New Zealand centers. In total, 170 eligible children will be stratified by site and bronchiectasis etiology, and randomized (allocation concealed) to receive: 1) azithromycin (5 mg/kg daily) with placebo amoxycillin-clavulanate or 2) amoxycillin-clavulanate (22.5 mg/kg twice daily) with placebo azithromycin for 21 days as treatment for non-severe respiratory exacerbations. Clinical data and a parent-proxy cough-specific quality of life (PC-QOL) score will be obtained at baseline, at the start and resolution of exacerbations, and on day 21. In most children, blood and deep-nasal swabs will also be collected at the same time points. The primary outcome is the proportion of children whose exacerbations have resolved at day 21. The main secondary outcome is the PC-QOL score. Other outcomes are: time to next exacerbation; requirement for hospitalization; duration of exacerbation, and spirometry data. Descriptive viral and bacteriological data from nasal samples and blood inflammatory markers will be reported where available.

DISCUSSION

Currently, there are no published randomized controlled trials (RCT) to underpin effective, evidence-based management of acute respiratory exacerbations in children with non-CF bronchiectasis. To help address this information gap, we are conducting two RCTs. The first (bronchiectasis exacerbation study; BEST-1) evaluates the efficacy of azithromycin and amoxycillin-clavulanate compared with placebo, and the second RCT (BEST-2), described here, is designed to determine if azithromycin is non-inferior to amoxycillin-clavulanate in achieving symptom resolution by day 21 of treatment in children with acute respiratory exacerbations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR) number http://ACTRN12612000010897. http://www.anzctr.org.au/trial_view.aspx?id=347879.