Evaluation of real-world mepolizumab use in severe asthma across Europe: the SHARP experience with privacy-preserving federated analysis.

Background: An objective of the Severe Heterogeneous Asthma Registry, Patient-centered (SHARP) is to produce real-world evidence on a pan-European scale by linking nonstandardised, patient-level registry data. Mepolizumab has shown clinical efficacy in randomised controlled trials and prospective real-world studies and could therefore serve as a proof of principle for this novel approach. The aim of the present study was to harmonise data from 10 national severe asthma registries and characterise patients receiving mepolizumab, assess its effectiveness on annual exacerbations and maintenance oral glucocorticoid (OCS) use, and evaluate treatment patterns. Methods: In this observational cohort study, registry data (5871 patients) were extracted for harmonisation. Where harmonisation was possible, patients who initiated mepolizumab between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2021 were examined. Changes of a 12-month (range 11-18 months) period in frequent (two or more) exacerbations, maintenance OCS use and dose were analysed in a privacy-preserving manner using meta-analysis of generalised estimating equation parameters. Periods before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic were analysed separately. Results: In 912 patients who fulfilled selection criteria, mepolizumab significantly reduced frequent exacerbations (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.13-0.25), maintenance OCS use (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.92) and dose (mean -3.93 mg·day-1, 95% CI -5.24-2.62 mg·day-1) in the pre-pandemic group, with similar trends in the pandemic group. Marked heterogeneity was observed between registries in patient characteristics and mepolizumab treatment patterns. Conclusions: By harmonising patient-level registry data and applying federated analysis, SHARP demonstrated the real-world effectiveness of mepolizumab on asthma exacerbations and maintenance OCS use in severe asthma patients across Europe, consistent with previous evidence. This paves the way for future pan-European real-world severe asthma studies using patient-level data in a privacy-proof manner.

Standard patient training versus Vik-Asthme chatbot-guided training: 'AsthmaTrain' - a protocol for a randomised controlled trial for patients with asthma.

INTRODUCTION: Therapeutic education for patients with asthma has been shown to reduce asthma morbidity. The high availability of smart phones provides the opportunity to furnish patient training via specifically designed chatbot applications. The goal of this protocol is to perform a first pilot comparison of traditional face to face versus chatbot-guided patient therapeutic education programmes for patients with asthma. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Eighty adult patients with a physician-confirmed diagnosis of asthma will be enrolled in a two-parallel-arm, randomised (1:1) controlled pilot trial. A single-Zelen consent procedure is deployed to first enrol all participants in the comparator arm, that is, the standard patient therapeutic education programme at the University Hospitals of Montpellier, France. This means of patient therapeutic education is based on reoccurring interviews and discussion with qualified nursing staff as per usual care. Following baseline data acquisition, randomisation will be performed. Those patients randomised to the comparator arm will not be informed of the second arm. Those patients randomised to the experimental arm will be proposed access to a specifically designed chatbot (Vik-Asthme) as the second tested means of patient training (refusals continue with standard training, though analysed as intention to treat). The primary outcome is change in the total Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire score at the end of follow-up (6 months). Secondary outcomes cover asthma control, spirometry, general health status, programme adherence and burden for medical staff, exacerbations and medical resource use (medications, consults, emergency visits, hospitalisation and intensive care). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study ('AsthmaTrain' protocol version 4-20220330) has been approved by the Committee for the Protection of Persons Ile-de-France VII on 28 March 2022 (reference number 21.03617.000059). Enrolment began on 24 May 2022. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05248126.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on severe asthma care in Europe: will care change for good?

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put pressure on healthcare services, forcing the reorganisation of traditional care pathways. We investigated how physicians taking care of severe asthma patients in Europe reorganised care, and how these changes affected patient satisfaction, asthma control and future care. Methods: In this European-wide cross-sectional study, patient surveys were sent to patients with a physician-diagnosis of severe asthma, and physician surveys to severe asthma specialists between November 2020 and May 2021. Results: 1101 patients and 268 physicians from 16 European countries contributed to the study. Common physician-reported changes in severe asthma care included use of video/phone consultations (46%), reduced availability of physicians (43%) and change to home-administered biologics (38%). Change to phone/video consultations was reported in 45% of patients, of whom 79% were satisfied or very satisfied with this change. Of 709 patients on biologics, 24% experienced changes in biologic care, of whom 92% were changed to home-administered biologics and of these 62% were satisfied or very satisfied with this change. Only 2% reported worsening asthma symptoms associated with changes in biologic care. Many physicians expect continued implementation of video/phone consultations (41%) and home administration of biologics (52%). Conclusions: Change to video/phone consultations and home administration of biologics was common in severe asthma care during the COVID-19 pandemic and was associated with high satisfaction levels in most but not all cases. Many physicians expect these changes to continue in future severe asthma care, though satisfaction levels may change after the pandemic.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on severe asthma care in Europe - will care change for good?

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has put pressure on health-care services forcing the reorganisation of traditional care pathways. We investigated how physicians taking care of severe asthma patients in Europe reorganised care, and how these changes affected patient satisfaction, asthma control and future care. Methods In this European-wide cross-sectional study, patient surveys were sent to patients with a physician-diagnosis of severe asthma, and physician surveys to severe asthma specialists between November 2020 and May 2021. Results 1101 patients and 268 physicians from 16 European countries contributed to the study. Common physician-reported changes in severe asthma care included use of video/phone consultations (46%), reduced availability of physicians (43%) and change to home-administered biologics (38%). Change to phone/video consultations was reported in 45% of patients, of whom 79% were satisfied or very satisfied with this change. Of 709 patients on biologics, 24% experienced changes in biologic care, of whom 92% were changed to home-administered biologics and of these 62% were satisfied or very satisfied with this change. Only 2% reported worsening asthma symptoms associated with changes in biologic care. Many physicians expect continued implementation of video/phone consultations (41%) and home administration of biologics (52%). Conclusions Change to video/phone consultations and home administration of biologics was common in severe asthma care during the COVID-19 pandemic, and was associated with high satisfaction levels in most but not all cases. Many physicians expect these changes to continue in future severe asthma care, though satisfaction levels may change after the pandemic.

Did COVID-19 impact Positive Airway Pressure adherence in 2020? A cross-sectional study of 8477 patients with sleep apnea.

BACKGROUND: Whether the COVID-19 pandemic impacts Positive Airway Pressure (PAP) adherence over the long-term is unknown and only preliminary short-term data have been reported. METHODS: With the aim of describing the impact of the first and second waves of COVID-19 on PAP adherence during 2020 in France, we designed a cross-sectional study of Sleep-Apnea (SA)-patients under PAP telemonitoring. To examine PAP adherence in adult SA patients, we assessed de-identified data from a non-profit healthcare provider database during the period January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020. Included patients met the following criteria: (i) PAP-treated for at least 4 months before January 1, 2019 and with continuous PAP during both 2019 and 2020; (ii) ≥ 360 daily PAP telemonitored data per year. For PAP adherence, data were collected using the PAP-software. RESULTS: 8477/10482 patients were finally included in the analysis [72.4% male, median age 70 years (IQ25-75: 61-77], 25.6% < 62 years old, initial Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) of 41 (31-59)/h. Median PAP adherence was 7.21 (6.12-8.10) h/day in 2020 versus 7.12 (6.05-8.02) h/day in 2019, p < 0.001. The median difference in PAP adherence between the first 2020 lockdown and the corresponding 2019 weeks was 9.75 (CI95% 8.75-10.75) min/day, p < 0.001. The median difference in PAP adherence between the second 2020 lockdown and the corresponding 2019 weeks was 5.00 (CI95% 4.00-6.00) min/day, p < 0.001. If we consider the minimal clinically important difference of 30 min for PAP adherence, 30.4% and 26% of the patients increased their PAP adherence by at least 30 min during the first and second lockdowns respectively; 17.6% and 19.3% of the patients lowered their PAP adherence by at least 30 min in the first and second lockdowns, respectively. CONCLUSION: During the first and second lockdowns, the COVID-19 pandemic had a clinically irrelevant effect on PAP adherence for the study population. Future studies are needed to describe COVID-19 pandemic impact on PAP adherence not only for long-term PAP-treated SA patients but also for incident cases. Trial registration The COVADENE study was registered on March 1st, 2021 on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04775966).

Monocyte CD169 Expression as a Biomarker in the Early Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

We assessed the expression of CD169, a type I interferon-inducible receptor, on monocytes (monocyte CD169 [mCD169]) in 53 adult patients admitted to the hospital during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak for a suspicion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Monocyte CD169 was strongly overexpressed in 30 of 32 (93.7%) confirmed COVID-19 cases, compared with 3 of 21 (14.3%) patients in whom the diagnosis of COVID-19 was finally ruled out. Monocyte CD169 was associated with the plasma interferon-alpha level and thrombocytopenia. Monocyte CD169 testing may be helpful for the rapid triage of suspected COVID-19 patients during an outbreak.

Monocyte CD169 expression as a biomarker in the early diagnosis of COVID-19 (preprint)

We assessed the expression of the cell adhesion molecule Sialoadhesin (CD169), a type I interferon-inducible receptor, on monocytes (mCD169) in 53 adult patients admitted to the hospital during the COVID-19 outbreak for a suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection. mCD169 was strongly overexpressed in 30 out of 32 (93.7%) confirmed COVID-19 cases, compared to three out of 21 (14.3%) patients for whom the diagnosis of COVID-19 was finally ruled out. mCD169 was associated with the plasma interferon alpha level and thrombocytopenia. mCD169 testing may be helpful for the rapid triage of suspected COVID-19 patients during an outbreak.