Characteristics and feedback of adult survivors of childhood cancer seen in Swiss comprehensive follow-up clinics led by general internists: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: In our study, we aimed to characterise adult childhood cancer survivors (ACCS), assess their health issues, gauge health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and evaluate visit satisfaction. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using data from clinical visits and questionnaires. SETTING: Interdisciplinary follow-up programme for ACCS based on the long-term follow-up (LTFU) guidelines of the Children's Oncology Group and overseen by internists in two Swiss hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: ACCS attending our LTFU clinics between April 2017 and January 2022 were eligible. INTERVENTIONS: We documented medical history, current health status and assessed HRQOL using Short Form-36 V.2, comparing it with Swiss general population (SGP) norms (T mean=50, SD=10; age stratified). 3 months post visit, a feedback questionnaire was distributed. MAIN RESULTS: Among 102 ACCS (mean age: 32 years (range: 18-62 years), 68% women), 43 had no prior follow-up (36 ACCS>28 years, 7 ACCS≤28 years). A notable 94% had health issues, affecting an average of 6.1 (SD=3.3) organ systems. HRQOL was lower in ACCS>28 years than the SGP>28 years (physical: 44.8 (SD=11.65) vs 49.3 (SD=10.29), p=0.016; mental: 44.4 (SD=13.78) vs 50.53 (SD=9.92), p=0.004). Older ACCS (>28 years) reported inferior physical (44.8 vs 50.1 (SD=9.30), p=0.017) and mental HRQOL (44.4 vs 50.3 (SD=7.20), p=0.009) than younger ACCS. The majority of respondents reported high levels of satisfaction with the consultation, exceeding 90%. CONCLUSION: ACCS attending LTFU clinics face diverse health issues impacting multiple organ systems and exhibit lower HRQOL compared with the SGP. Thus, internist-led LTFU clinics are crucial for optimising follow-up care.

Diagnosis and Therapy of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Observational Study and Medical Audit.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in therapy, community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is still associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Several studies conducted in different countries have reported suboptimal adherence to the guidelines. However, there are currently no available data on adherence to CAP guidelines specifically in Switzerland. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to audit the quality of diagnosis and therapy of CAP at a Swiss general hospital. METHODS: A retrospective, observational, single-center cohort study was conducted, including patients older than 18 years diagnosed with CAP and admitted to a medical ward throughout 2019 without prior antibiotic therapy prescribed by their general practitioner (GP). The baseline characteristics of the patients were analyzed, and the diagnostic workup and treatment were compared to the Swiss guidelines for CAP. RESULTS: A total of 254 patients diagnosed with CAP were included in this study (median age 78 years, 51.6% males). Atypical pneumonia was diagnosed in 4% of patients, while an organism was identified in 33% of cases, with Streptococcus pneumoniae being the most frequently detected pathogen (57%). A chest image was taken in almost all patients. Documentation of respiratory rate was missing in 23% of cases. Procalcitonin was measured in 23.2% of cases. Pneumococcal and legionella urinary antigen testing was performed on approximately 90% of all patients and blood cultures were drawn in approximately 80% of patients. In 39% of cases, arterial blood gas analysis was performed. Guideline adherence for the administration of empiric antibiotics was documented/recorded in 75% of cases. Twelve different antibiotic regimens were administered, and they were mostly amoxicillin/clavulanate with or without macrolides, as suggested by the guidelines. In particular, the use of ceftriaxone was higher (19.7%) compared to the Swiss guidelines. The average length of antibiotic therapy was longer (8.2 days) compared to the guidelines (5-7 days). Oral steroid therapy was administered to 29.1% of patients, including to 75% of those diagnosed with COPD. CONCLUSION: Overall, guideline adherence was moderately low, especially with regards to the assessment of respiratory rate, performance of arterial blood gas analysis, and sputum collection. Regarding antibiotic therapy, the use of ceftriaxone and the length of antibiotic therapy should be reduced. Further research is needed to identify the reasons for guideline non-adherence, and to find effective measures for the improvement of guideline adherence.

PLUS-IS-LESS project: Procalcitonin and Lung UltraSonography-based antibiotherapy in patients with Lower rESpiratory tract infection in Swiss Emergency Departments: study protocol for a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) are among the most frequent infections and a significant contributor to inappropriate antibiotic prescription. Currently, no single diagnostic tool can reliably identify bacterial pneumonia. We thus evaluate a multimodal approach based on a clinical score, lung ultrasound (LUS), and the inflammatory biomarker, procalcitonin (PCT) to guide prescription of antibiotics. LUS outperforms chest X-ray in the identification of pneumonia, while PCT is known to be elevated in bacterial and/or severe infections. We propose a trial to test their synergistic potential in reducing antibiotic prescription while preserving patient safety in emergency departments (ED). METHODS: The PLUS-IS-LESS study is a pragmatic, stepped-wedge cluster-randomized, clinical trial conducted in 10 Swiss EDs. It assesses the PLUS algorithm, which combines a clinical prediction score, LUS, PCT, and a clinical severity score to guide antibiotics among adults with LRTIs, compared with usual care. The co-primary endpoints are the proportion of patients prescribed antibiotics and the proportion of patients with clinical failure by day 28. Secondary endpoints include measurement of change in quality of life, length of hospital stay, antibiotic-related side effects, barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the algorithm, cost-effectiveness of the intervention, and identification of patterns of pneumonia in LUS using machine learning. DISCUSSION: The PLUS algorithm aims to optimize prescription of antibiotics through improved diagnostic performance and maximization of physician adherence, while ensuring safety. It is based on previously validated tests and does therefore not expose participants to unforeseeable risks. Cluster randomization prevents cross-contamination between study groups, as physicians are not exposed to the intervention during or before the control period. The stepped-wedge implementation of the intervention allows effect calculation from both between- and within-cluster comparisons, which enhances statistical power and allows smaller sample size than a parallel cluster design. Moreover, it enables the training of all centers for the intervention, simplifying implementation if the results prove successful. The PLUS algorithm has the potential to improve the identification of LRTIs that would benefit from antibiotics. When scaled, the expected reduction in the proportion of antibiotics prescribed has the potential to not only decrease side effects and costs but also mitigate antibiotic resistance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on July 19, 2022, on the ClinicalTrials.gov registry using reference number: NCT05463406. TRIAL STATUS: Recruitment started on December 5, 2022, and will be completed on November 3, 2024. Current protocol version is version 3.0, dated April 3, 2023.

The Early HOSPITAL Score to Predict 30-Day Readmission Soon After Hospitalization: a Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: The simplified HOSPITAL score is an easy-to-use prediction model to identify patients at high risk of 30-day readmission before hospital discharge. An earlier stratification of this risk would allow more preparation time for transitional care interventions. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the simplified HOSPITAL score would perform similarly by using hemoglobin and sodium level at the time of admission instead of discharge. DESIGN: Prospective national multicentric cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: In total, 934 consecutively discharged medical inpatients from internal general services. MAIN MEASURES: We measured the composite of the first unplanned readmission or death within 30 days after discharge of index admission and compared the performance of the simplified score with lab at discharge (simplified HOSPITAL score) and lab at admission (early HOSPITAL score) according to their discriminatory power (Area Under the Receiver Operating characteristic Curve (AUROC)) and the Net Reclassification Improvement (NRI). KEY RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 3239 patients were screened and 934 included. In total, 122 (13.2%) of them had a 30-day unplanned readmission or death. The simplified and the early versions of the HOSPITAL score both showed very good accuracy (Brier score 0.11, 95%CI 0.10-0.13). Their AUROC were 0.66 (95%CI 0.60-0.71), and 0.66 (95%CI 0.61-0.71), respectively, without a statistical difference (p value 0.79). Compared with the model at discharge, the model with lab at admission showed improvement in classification based on the continuous NRI (0.28; 95%CI 0.08 to 0.48; p value 0.004). CONCLUSION: The early HOSPITAL score performs, at least similarly, in identifying patients at high risk for 30-day unplanned readmission and allows a readmission risk stratification early during the hospital stay. Therefore, this new version offers a timely preparation of transition care interventions to the patients who may benefit the most.

The Correct Indication to Induce Labour in a Swiss Cantonal Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Induction of labour (IOL) is a way to stimulate the onset of labour using mechanical and pharmacological methods. IOL is one of the most frequently performed obstetric procedures worldwide. We aimed to determine compliance with guidelines and to investigate factors associated with the success of labour. METHODS: In this retrospective, observational study, we analysed all induced deliveries in a Swiss hospital between January 2020 and December 2022. RESULTS: Out of 1705 deliveries, 349 women underwent IOL, and 278 were included in this study, with an average age of 32 years (range 19-44 years). Most of the women were induced for missed deadlines (20.1%), the premature rupture of membranes (16.5%), and gestational diabetes mellitus (9.3%), and there was a good adherence to the guideline, especially with the indication and IOL monitoring (100%). However, an improvement needs to be made in measuring and documenting the Bishop score (41%). The success of labour was associated with multiparity (81.8% vs. 62.4% p = 0.001) and maternal non-obesity (73.4 vs. 54.1% p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: An improvement is needed in the measurement and documentation of the Bishop score. Further research is needed to confirm the found associations between parity, obesity, and the success of IOL.

[COPD : a still neglected condition]. / BPCO : une maladie encore négligée.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous lung disorder with a complex clinical picture. The diagnosis may be difficult at times, as COPD may develop insidiously and remain unnoticed for a long time. Therefore, general practitioners play a central role in early detection of disease. Suspected COPD may be confirmed by further investigations in collaboration with a pulmonologist. The most recent GOLD guideline defines three COPD risk groups (A-B-E) which should guide the personalized treatment concept. General practitioners are crucial for implementing non-pharmacological measures such as smoking cessation, regular exercise, vaccinations, and patient self-management education. However, this also underlines the challenges to implement the GOLD recommendations in daily practice.

La BPCO est une maladie hétérogène avec un tableau clinique complexe. Le diagnostic n'est pas toujours facile à évoquer, car elle peut se développer insidieusement et passer longtemps inaperçue. Les médecins de premier recours (MPR) jouent donc un rôle central dans le diagnostic précoce. La suspicion de BPCO peut être confirmée en collaboration avec un pneumologue par des examens fonctionnels respiratoires avant l'instauration d'un traitement médicamenteux. Les nouvelles recommandations GOLD, publiées en 2022 définissent trois groupes de risques pour la BPCO (A-B-E). Les MPR sont importants pour la mise en œuvre de mesures accompagnant le traitement (arrêt du tabac, activité physique régulière, vaccinations, éducation thérapeutique). Mais cela souligne également les exigences élevées de la mise en œuvre des recommandations GOLD dans la pratique quotidienne.*.

Is Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Level Associated with Severity of COVID-19? A Retrospective Study.

(1) Background: SARS-COV2 infection has a clinical spectrum ranging from asymptomatic infection to COVID-19 with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Although vitamin D deficiency is often found in patients with ARDS, its role in COVID-19 is not clear. The aim of this study was to explore a possible association between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and the severity of COVID-19 in hospitalised patients. (2) Methods: In this retrospective observational study, we analysed data from 763 patients hospitalised for COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021. Patients were included in the study if serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D was assessed 30 days before or after hospital admission. Vitamin D deficiency was defined as <50 nmol/L (<20 ng/mL). The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity. (3) Results: The overall median serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level was 54 nmol/L (IQR 35-76); 47% of the patients were vitamin D deficient. Most patients had mild to moderate COVID-19 and no differences were observed between vitamin D deficient and non-deficient patients (81% vs. 84% of patients, respectively p = 0.829). (4) Conclusion: No association was found between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and COVID-19 severity in this large observational study conducted over 2 years of the pandemic.

Occurrence of sensitive topics during ward round: an ancillary analysis of the BEDSIDE-OUTSIDE trial.

OBJECTIVE: Discussing sensitive topics (eg, medical uncertainty, social issues, non-adherence) during ward rounds is challenging and may negatively impact patient satisfaction with the healthcare they are receiving. In the previous multicentre randomised BEDSIDE-OUTSIDE trial focusing on communication during ward rounds, we investigated the interplay between sensitive topics and low reported satisfaction with care. DESIGN: Pre-planned secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial. For this analysis data of the original trial was pooled across intervention groups. SETTING: Three Swiss teaching hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients hospitalised for medical care. INTERVENTIONS: We analysed predefined sensitive health topics and specific elements of communication from audiotapes recorded during ward rounds, for both patients dealing with and without sensitive topics. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was overall patient satisfaction with care; measured on a Visual Analogue Scale from 0 to 100. Secondary endpoints included duration of ward rounds and further satisfaction outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 919 included patients, 474 had at least one sensitive topic including medical uncertainty (n=251), psychiatric comorbidities (n=161), tumour diagnosis (n=137) and social issues (n=125). Compared with patients without sensitive topics, patients with sensitive topics reported lower satisfaction with care (mean (SD), 87.7 (±14.6) vs 90.2 (±12.1), adjusted difference -2.5 (95% CI -4.28 to -0.72), p=0.006. Among patients with sensitive topics, risk factors for low satisfaction included several parameters concerning patient-physician interaction such as disagreements during ward rounds (mean (SD), 14/212 (6.6%) vs 41/254 (16.1%), adjusted OR 2.78 (95% CI 1.47 to 5.27), p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of medical inpatients must deal with sensitive health topics. This is associated with lower satisfaction with care, particularly if the patient perceives the interaction with doctors during ward rounds as unsatisfactory. Educating physicians on specific communication techniques may help improve care for these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03210987.

Characteristics of Severe Asthma Patients and Predictors of Asthma Control in the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic airway disease, affecting over 300 million people worldwide. 5-10% of patients suffer from severe asthma and account for 50% of asthma-related financial burden. Availability of real-life data about the clinical course of severe asthma is insufficient. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to characterize patients with severe asthma in Switzerland, enrolled in the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry (SSAR), and evaluate predictors for asthma control. METHOD: A descriptive characterisation of 278 patients was performed, who were prospectively enrolled in the registry until January 2022. Socio-demographic variables, comorbidities, diagnostic values, asthma treatment, and healthcare utilisation were evaluated. Groups of controlled and uncontrolled asthma according to the asthma control test were compared. RESULTS: Forty-eight percent of patients were female and the mean age was 55.8 years (range 13-87). The mean body mass index (BMI) was 27.4 kg/m2 (±6). 10.8% of patients were current smokers. Allergic comorbidities occurred in 54.3% of patients, followed by chronic rhinosinusitis (46.4%) and nasal polyps (34.1%). According to the ACT score, 54.7% had well controlled, 16.2% partly controlled and 25.9% uncontrolled asthma. The most common inhalation therapy was combined inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-agonists (78.8%). Biologics were administered to 81.7% of patients and 19.1% received oral steroids. The multivariable analysis indicated that treatment with biologics was positively associated with asthma control whereas higher BMI, oral steroids, exacerbations, and COPD were negative predictors for asthma control. CONCLUSION: Biologics are associated with improved control in severe asthma. Further studies are required to complete the picture of severe asthma in order to provide improved care for those patients.

[COPD - An Underestimated Disease]. / COPD ­ eine unterschätzte Erkrankung.

COPD - An Underestimated Disease Abstract: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous lung condition with a complex clinical picture. The diagnosis is not easy to make because COPD can develop insidiously and remain unnoticed for a long time. Therefore, general practitioners play a central role in the early detection of the disease. Suspected COPD can be confirmed by special examinations in collaboration with pulmonologists. The new GOLD guideline defines three COPD risk groups (A-B-E) which should guide the personalized treatment concept. A short- or long-acting bronchodilator (SAMA/SABA or LAMA/LABA) is recommended for group A, and a dual long-acting bronchodilator therapy (LABA+LAMA) is recommended for group B and E. In case of blood eosinophilia (≥300 cells/µl) and/or recent hospitalization for COPD exacerbation, triple therapy (LABA+LAMA+ICS) is recommended. General practitioners are important in implementing non-pharmacological measures (smoking cessation, regular exercise, vaccinations, patient selfmanagement education). However, this also underlines the high demands of the implementation of the GOLD guideline in daily practice.

Effect of Single High Dose Vitamin D Substitution in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients with Vitamin D Deficiency on Length of Hospital Stay.

Vitamin D and its role in the coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been controversially discussed, with inconclusive evidence about vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) supplementation in COVID-19 patients. Vitamin D metabolites play an important role in the initiation of the immune response and can be an easily modifiable risk factor in 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25(OH)D3)-deficient patients. This is a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind trial to compare the effect of a single high dose of vitamin D3 followed by treatment as usual (TAU) of daily vitamin D3 daily until discharge versus placebo plus TAU in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and 25(OH)D3-deficiency on length hospital stay. We included 40 patients per group and did not observe a significant difference in the median length of hospital stay (6 days in both groups, p = 0.920). We adjusted the length of stay for COVID-19 risk factors (ß = 0.44; 95% CI: -2.17-2.22), and center (ß = 0.74; 95% CI: -1.25-2.73). The subgroup analysis in patients with severe 25(OH)D3-deficiency (<25 nmol/L) showed a non-significant reduction in the median length of hospital stay in the intervention group (5.5 vs. 9 days, p = 0.299). The competing risk model with death did not reveal significant differences between the group in the length of stay (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.62-1.48, p = 0.850). Serum 25(OH)D3 level increased significantly in the intervention group (mean change in nmol/L; intervention: +26.35 vs. control: -2.73, p < 0.001). The intervention with 140,000 IU vitamin D3 + TAU did not significantly shorten the length of hospital stay but was effective and safe for the elevation of serum 25(OH)D3 levels.

Glucocorticoid withdrawal and glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency: Study protocol of the randomized controlled «TOASST" (Taper Or Abrupt Steroid STop) multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread use of glucocorticoids in inflammatory and autoimmune disorders, there is uncertainty about the safe cessation of long-term systemic treatment, as data from prospective trials are largely missing. Due to potential disease relapse or glucocorticoid-induced hypocortisolism, the drug is often tapered to sub-physiological doses rather than stopped when the underlying disease is clinically stable, increasing the cumulative drug exposure. Conversely, the duration of exposure to glucocorticoids should be minimized to lower the risk of side effects. METHODS: We designed a multicenter, randomized, triple-blinded, placebo-controlled trial to test the clinical noninferiority of abrupt glucocorticoid stop compared to tapering after ≥28 treatment days with ≥420 mg cumulative and ≥7.5 mg mean daily prednisone-equivalent dose. 573 adult patients treated systemically for various disorders will be included after their underlying disease has been stabilized. Prednisone in tapering doses or matching placebo is administered over 4 weeks. A 250 mg ACTH-test, the result of which will be revealed a posteriori, is performed at study inclusion; all patients are instructed on glucocorticoid stress cover dosing. Follow-up is for 6 months. The composite primary outcome measure is time to hospitalization, death, initiation of unplanned systemic glucocorticoid therapy, or adrenal crisis. Secondary outcomes include the individual components of the primary outcome, cumulative glucocorticoid doses, signs and symptoms of hypocortisolism, and the performance of the ACTH test in predicting the clinical outcome. Cox proportional hazard, linear, and logistic regression models will be used for statistical analysis. CONCLUSION: This trial aims to demonstrate the clinical noninferiority and safety of abrupt treatment cessation after ≥28 days of systemic glucocorticoid therapy in patients with stabilized underlying disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03153527; EUDRA-CT: 2020-005601-48 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03153527?term=NCT03153527&draw=2&rank=1.

[Predictors for Early Unplanned Readmissions]. / Prädiktoren für frühe ungeplante Rehospitalisationen.

Predictors for Early Unplanned Readmissions Abstract. Unplanned rehospitalizations represent a major burden for patients, their relatives and the healthcare system. Since the introduction of the SwissDRG in 2012, financial incentives for hospitals have been promoted to forestall readmissions. Not every patient is at risk for rehospitalization. Affected patients can be identified by predictors from various areas in order to implement adequate interventions and avoid readmissions. Predictors can be directly related to patients as in the case of polypharmacy, multiple comorbidities or related to gender, but also provider-related and system-related. Early follow-up visits or a pre-discharge medication review are cited as effective interventions.

Are Predictors for Overall Mortality in COPD Patients Robust over Time?

(1) Background: Mortality is a major outcome in research on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with various predictors described. However, the dynamic courses of important predictors over time are disregarded. This study evaluates if longitudinal assessment of predictors provides additional information on the mortality risk in COPD when compared with a cross-sectional analysis.; (2) In a longitudinal, prospective, non-interventional cohort study including mild to very severe COPD patients, mortality and its various possible predictors were annually assessed up to seven years.; (3) Results: 297 patients were analysed. Mean (SD) age was 62.5 (7.6) years and 66% males. Mean (SD) FEV1 was 48.8 (21.4)%. A total of 105 events (35.4%) happened with a median (95% CI) survival time of 8.2 (7.2/NA) years. No evidence for a difference between the raw variable and the variable history on the predictive value for all tested variables over each visit was found. There was no evidence for changing effect estimates (coefficients) across the study visits due to the longitudinal assessment; (4) Conclusions: We found no evidence that predictors of mortality in COPD are time dependent. This implies that cross-sectional measured predictors show robust effect estimates over time and multiple assessments seem not to change the predictive value of the measure.

The Management of Acute Exacerbations in COPD: A Retrospective Observational Study and Clinical Audit.

(1) Background: Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are not only associated with increased patient morbidity and mortality, but with extensive healthcare costs. Thus, adequate clinical management is crucial. The aim of this project was to evaluate the management of acute COPD exacerbations in a public teaching hospital in Switzerland. (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical routine data of patients presenting with an acute exacerbation of COPD at the emergency department of a Swiss hospital between January 2019 and February 2020. Management was evaluated against recommendations from the GOLD 2019 report and previous audits. (3) Results: The data of 184 patients (mean age 73.5 years, range 41-95 years, 53% male) with 226 visits were included. While the documentation of GOLD stage (I-IV) and smoking status was consistent (81.0% and 91.6%), GOLD risk category (A-D) was only documented in 36% of the cases. Patients' respiratory rate upon presentation was measured in 73%, and blood gas analysis was performed in 70%. A total of 94% of the patients received a chest imaging; spirometry was performed in 10%. Initial symptomatic therapy with short acting bronchodilators was applied in 56%. Systemic steroid treatment was installed in 86%. Antibiotics were given in 56%, but in one fourth the indication was not clear. Non-invasive ventilation was applied in 25% of the indicated cases. Smoking cessation was recommended to 26% of the current smokers and referral to pulmonary rehabilitation was given in 16%. (4) Conclusion: GOLD recommendations were not comprehensively implemented, especially with regard to the assessment of severity, initial symptomatic therapy, and non-invasive ventilation. These results show the importance of the frequent revision of routine practice and may help to create awareness among practitioners and ultimately improve the quality of COPD management.

Inhaled aviptadil for the possible treatment of COVID-19 in patients at high risk for ARDS: study protocol for a randomized, placebo-controlled, and multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the fast establishment of new therapeutic agents in the management of COVID-19 and large-scale vaccination campaigns since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in early 2020, severe disease courses still represent a threat, especially to patients with risk factors. This indicates the need for alternative strategies to prevent respiratory complications like acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) associated with COVID-19. Aviptadil, a synthetic form of human vasoactive intestinal peptide, might be beneficial for COVID-19 patients at high risk of developing ARDS because of its ability to influence the regulation of exaggerated pro-inflammatory proteins and orchestrate the lung homeostasis. Aviptadil has recently been shown to considerably improve the prognosis of ARDS in COVID-19 when applied intravenously. An inhaled application of aviptadil has the advantages of achieving a higher concentration in the lung tissue, fast onset of activity, avoiding the hepatic first-pass metabolism, and the reduction of adverse effects. The overall objective of this project is to assess the efficacy and safety of inhaled aviptadil in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at high risk of developing ARDS. METHODS: This multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, randomized trial with 132 adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and at high risk for ARDS (adapted early acute lung injury score ≥ 2 points) is conducted in five public hospitals in Europe. Key exclusion criteria are mechanical ventilation at baseline, need for intensive care at baseline, and severe hemodynamic instability. Patients are randomly allocated to either inhale 67 µg aviptadil or normal saline (three times a day for 10 days), in addition to standard care, stratified by center. The primary endpoint is time from hospitalization to clinical improvement, defined as either hospital discharge, or improvement of at least two levels on the nine-level scale for clinical status suggested by the World Health Organization. DISCUSSION: Treatment strategies for COVID-19 are still limited. In the context of upcoming new variants of SARS-CoV-2 and possible inefficacy of the available vaccines and antibody therapies, the investigation of alternative therapy options plays a crucial role in decreasing associated mortality and improving prognosis. Due to its unique immunomodulating properties also targeting the SARS-CoV-2 pathways, inhaled aviptadil may have the potential to prevent ARDS in COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04536350 . Registered 02 September 2020.

[Novelties in the Treatment of Asthma]. / Nouveautés dans la prise en charge de l'asthme.

For general practitioners there have been important novelties in the treatment of asthma due to recent modifications of the international guidelines from Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA). In Step 1, use of short-acting beta2-agonists (SABA) without concomitant inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as controller is no longer recommended for lack of efficacy and safety reasons. Instead, low dose ICS-formoterol as needed is recommended. In Step 5, in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma GINA recommends targeted biologic therapies like interleukin antibodies. Asthma patients presenting simultaneously with symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should receive treatment containing ICS. Independent of the current corona pandemic, GINA recommendations stay in place.

Les nouvelles recommandations GINA (Global Initiative for Asthma) modifient radicalement la prise en charge des patients asthmatiques pour le médecin de premier recours. Dans l'asthme léger (palier 1 GINA), les bêta2-agonistes à courte durée d'action (SABA) seuls comme traitement de secours ne sont plus recommandés au profit d'une association de corticostéroïdes inhalés (CSI) faiblement dosés avec un bronchodilatateur à longue durée d'action à début d'action rapide (formotérol). Dans l'asthme sévère non contrôlé (palier 5 GINA), l'objectif est d'éviter la corticothérapie orale au profit de thérapies biologiques ciblées (par exemple, anticorps anti-interleukine). Un traitement contenant des CSI doit être maintenu chez les asthmatiques même si une BPCO est associée. Les recommandations GINA ne sont pas modifiées par les conditions actuelles de pandémie.

Understanding physician's knowledge and perception of chronic cough in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Cough is one of the most common health issues for which medical attention is sought. A chronic cough (CC) is understood as a cough that lasts longer than 8 weeks. CC encompasses two subsets referred to as refractory chronic cough (RCC) and unexplained chronic cough (UCC). This study aims to assess the current understanding and perceptions of a RCC and UCC, from a physician's perspective in Switzerland and how this understanding and practical work leads to the relevant diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: In October 2020, 549 GPs and 338 pulmonologists in Switzerland, received an invite to participate in the online-based quantitative survey. Data collection was carried out through a 25-minute online survey. The questionnaire was based on structured questions, and conducted on a randomized sample of doctors (general practitioners -GPs and pulmonologists) in the German- and French-speaking part of Switzerland. RESULTS: Overall, 33 pulmonologists and 52 GPs participated in the online survey. Only 39% of GPs, but 73% of pulmonologists, defined chronic cough as a cough lasting 8 weeks or longer. The majority of physicians (72%), especially pulmonologists (88%), perceived a clinical gap regarding the treatment of persistent cough. 74% of the sampled physicians agreed that persistent cough is a high burden of disease for patients. Based on the answers, the annual number of new patients with RCC and UCC in Switzerland is estimated at 9322 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study have highlighted differences in the terminology used to describe CC (RCC and UCC), in the diagnostic tests used and, in the treatments used between GPs and pulmonologists. These findings suggest the need to align the current language regarding the disease to facilitate a standardized approach for diagnosis and treatment and towards improving patient care and reduce burden of disease for CC (RCC and UCC) patients.

High-dose vitamin D substitution in patients with COVID-19: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center study-VitCov Trial.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused millions of deaths, and new treatments are urgently needed. Factors associated with a worse COVID-19 prognosis include old age (> 65 years), ethnicity, male sex, obesity, and people with comorbidities. Furthermore, vitamin D deficiency was reported as a predictor of poor prognosis in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. According to a recent clinical case series, vitamin D deficiency is a modifiable risk factor, which has the prospect of reducing hospital stay, intensive care, and fatal outcomes. Vitamin D has potent immunomodulatory properties, and its supplementation might improve important outcomes in critically ill and vitamin D-deficient COVID-19 patients. Despite the evidence that supports an association between vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 severity, there is uncertainty about the direct link. Therefore, the aim of the trial is to assess if high-dose vitamin D supplementation has a therapeutic effect in vitamin D-deficient patients with COVID-19. METHODS: As the trial design, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multi-center approach was chosen to compare a high single dose of vitamin D (140,000 IU) followed by treatment as usual (TAU) (VitD + TAU) with treatment as usual only (placebo + TAU) in patients with COVID-19 and vitamin D deficiency. DISCUSSION: Vitamin D substitution in patients with COVID-19 and vitamin D deficiency should be investigated for efficacy and safety. The study aim is to test the hypothesis that patients with vitamin D deficiency suffering from COVID-19 treated under standardized conditions in hospital will recover faster when additionally treated with high-dose vitamin D supplementation. Latest studies suggest that vitamin D supplementation in patients with COVID-19 is highly recommended to positively influence the course of the disease. With this randomized controlled trial, a contribution to new treatment guidelines shall be made. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04525820 and SNCTP 2020-01401.