ABSTRACT
Sleep brings major challenges for the control of ventilation in humans, particularly the regulation of arterial carbon dioxide pressure (P aCO2 ). In patients with COPD, chronic hypercapnia is associated with increased mortality. Therefore, nocturnal high-level noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIV) is recommended with the intention to reduce P aCO2 down to normocapnia. However, the long-term physiological consequences of P aCO2 "correction" on the mechanics of breathing, gas exchange efficiency and resulting symptoms (i.e. dyspnoea) remain poorly understood. Investigating the influence of sleep on the neural drive to breathe and its translation to the mechanical act of breathing is of foremost relevance to create a solid rationale for the use of nocturnal NIV. In this review, we critically discuss the mechanisms by which sleep influences ventilatory neural drive and mechanical consequences in healthy subjects and hypercapnic patients with advanced COPD. We then discuss the available literature on the effects of nocturnal NIV on ventilatory neural drive and respiratory mechanics, highlighting open avenues for further investigation.
Subject(s)
Noninvasive Ventilation , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Respiratory Insufficiency , Carbon Dioxide , Humans , Hypercapnia/complications , Hypercapnia/therapy , Noninvasive Ventilation/adverse effects , Noninvasive Ventilation/methods , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/complications , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/therapy , Sleep/physiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: As the treatment landscape in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFRm) continues to evolve, real-world health utility scores (HUS) become increasingly important for economic analyses. METHODS: In an observational cohort study, questionnaires were completed in EGFRm NSCLC outpatients, to include demographics, EQ-5D-based HUS and patient-reported toxicity and symptoms. Clinical and radiologic characteristics together with outcomes were extracted from chart review. The impact of health states, treatment type, toxicities, and clinical variables on HUS were evaluated. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2018, a total of 260 patients completed 994 encounters. Across treatment groups, patients with disease progression had lower HUS compared to controlled disease (0.771 vs 0.803; P = .01). Patients predominantly received gefitinib as the first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) (n = 157, mean-HUS = 0.798), whereas osimertinib (n = 62, mean-HUS = 0.806) and chemotherapy (n = 38, mean-HUS = 0.721) were more likely used in subsequent treatment lines. In longitudinal analysis, TKIs retained high HUS (>0.78) compared to chemotherapy (HUS < 0.74). There were no differences between the frequency or severity of toxicity scores in patients receiving gefitinib compared to osimertinib; however, TKI therapy resulted in fewer toxicities than chemotherapy (P < .05), with the exception of worse diarrhea and skin rash (P < .001). Severity in toxicities inversely correlated with HUS (P < .001). Clinico-demographic factors significantly affecting HUS included age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score (ECOG PS), disease state, treatment group, and metastatic burden. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world EGFRm population, patients treated with gefitinib or osimertinib had similar HUS and toxicities, scores which were superior to chemotherapy. Health utility scores inversely correlated with patient-reported toxicity scores. In the era of targeted therapies, future economic analyses should incorporate real-world HUS.
