Triazole antifungal drug interactions-practical considerations for excellent prescribing.

Systemic antifungal therapy is critical for reducing the mortality from many invasive and chronic fungal infections. Triazole antifungals are the most frequently prescribed antifungals but require attention to dosing and drug interactions. Nearly 600 severe drug-drug interactions and over 1100 moderate interactions requiring dose modifications are described or anticipated with systemic antifungal agents (see https://www.aspergillus.org.uk/antifungal-drug-interactions/). In this article, we address the common and less common, but serious, drug interactions observed in clinical practice with triazole antifungals, including a group of drugs that cannot be prescribed with all or most triazole antifungals (ivabradine, ranolazine, eplerenone, fentanyl, apomorphine, quetiapine, bedaquiline, rifampicin, rifabutin, sirolimus, phenytoin and carbamazepine). We highlight interactions with drugs used in children and new agents introduced for the treatment of haematological malignancies or graft versus host disease (midostaurin, ibrutinib, ruxolitinib and venetoclax). We also summarize the multiple interactions between oral and inhaled corticosteroids and triazole antifungals, and the strategies needed to optimize the therapeutic benefits of triazole antifungal therapy while minimizing potential harm to patients.

Blood Eosinophils and Pulmonary Rehabilitation in COPD.

Background: Blood eosinophils predict the response to therapy, risk of exacerbation, and readmission in COPD. This study investigates whether blood eosinophils predict pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) outcomes in COPD. Methods: We categorized patients into eosinophilic (blood eosinophils ≥300 cells/ml) or noneosinophilic (<300 cells/ml). In a retrospective design, we compared changes within and between the two groups on BODE index, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), FEV1, and mMRC dyspnea scale. Results: Of 206 patients enrolled, 176 were included for analysis; 90 were eosinophilic. BODE index improved in both groups: (MD -1.25; 95% CI (-0.45, -4.25), P ≤ 0.001) in the eosinophilic and (MD -1.33; 95% CI (-1.72, -0.94), P ≤ 0.001) in the noneosinophilic, but a higher BODE index remained in the eosinophilic (4.98); adjusted mean change (ß): 0.7 (95% CI (0.15, 1.26), P=0.01). 6MWT improved by 29.3 m in the eosinophilic (95% CI (14.2, 44.4), P ≤ 0.001) vs. 115.1 m in the noneosinophilic (95% CI (-30.4, 260.6), P=0.12). FEV1 did not change in the eosinophilic (MD -0.6; 95% CI (-2.64, 1.48), P=0.58), but improved by 2.5% in the noneosinophilic (MD 2.5; 95% CI (0.77, 4.17), P=0.005). There were no significant between-group differences in 6MWT and FEV1; adjusted mean changes (ß) were -9.69 m (95% CI (-39.51, 20.14), P=0.52) and -2.31% (95% CI (-5.69, 1.08), P=0.18), respectively. There were no significant within- or between-group changes in the mMRC scale. Conclusion: Although PR improves the BODE index in both eosinophilic and noneosinophilic COPD, a higher eosinophil count (≥300 cells/ml) is associated with a higher (worse) BODE index. Blood eosinophils may predict PR outcomes.

Global Quality Statements on Reliever Use in Asthma in Adults and Children Older than 5 Years of Age.

INTRODUCTION: Widespread misuse of short-acting beta-agonists (SABAs) may contribute to asthma-related morbidity and mortality. Recognizing this, the Global Initiative for Asthma neither recommends SABA monotherapy nor regards this formulation as a preferred reliever. Many health systems and healthcare professionals (HCPs) experience practical issues in implementing guidelines. Clear quality standards can drive improvements in asthma care and encourage implementation of global and national medical guidelines. METHODS: A steering group of global asthma experts came together between May and September 2019 to develop quality statements codifying the minimum elements of good quality asthma care. These statements were either evidence based (when robust evidence was available) or reflected a consensus based on clinical expertise and experience of the group. RESULTS: The quality statements (and associated essential criteria) developed emphasize key elements concerning (1) objective diagnosis specific to individual symptoms, (2) treatment appropriate to the long-term management of asthma as an inflammatory disease, consistent with evidence-based recommendations, (3) controlled dispensing of SABA canisters and monitoring to prevent overuse, (4) regular review of patients after treatment initiation or change, and (5) follow-up of patients in primary care after treatment for an exacerbation in a hospital or an emergency department. CONCLUSIONS: The steering group proposes quality statements that national and local clinical groups can implement as quantitative quality standards that are appropriate to their local circumstances, including during the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. By translating these statements into locally relevant quality standards, primary care physicians and HCPs can encourage optimal management and reduce preventable healthcare interactions. The evidence-based evolution of care encapsulated in these statements will further engender high-quality, patient-centered holistic management that addresses asthma as an inflammatory disease. In particular, the statements empower self-management by patients and encourage health-promoting behaviors, which are essential to reduce exacerbations, the primary goal of asthma management.

Usage Patterns of Short-Acting ß2-Agonists and Inhaled Corticosteroids in Asthma: A Targeted Literature Review.

Despite the availability of effective asthma treatments, some patients are poorly controlled because of overreliance on short-acting ß2-agonists (SABAs) and underuse of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). To identify patient characteristics and outcomes associated with SABA overreliance and ICS underuse, we conducted a targeted literature review of the quantitative evidence on asthma medication use. Articles evaluating SABA and/or ICS use in patients with asthma (aged ≥12 years), published between January 2012 and March 2018, were identified using MEDLINE and EMBASE. We observed that studies classified SABA usage as "overuse," "high use," "excess use," "extreme overuse," "suboptimal use," and "inappropriate use." Multiple thresholds were used to define overuse of SABA (≥3 to ≥12 canisters/y). SABA overreliance was prevalent, with approximately 20% of adults using 3 or more canisters per year (≥12 inhalations/wk). Similarly, inappropriate ICS use, classified as "suboptimal," "high use," "underuse," and "unlicensed use," was defined by varying thresholds. Specific patient populations, such as older adults, smokers, and patients with low income, were more susceptible to SABA overreliance and ICS underuse. Overreliance on SABAs was associated with increased risk of severe exacerbations, asthma-related hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and asthma-related costs. These findings emphasize the prevalence and related burden of SABA overreliance at the potential expense of appropriate ICS use.

Understanding Patient Perspectives on Medication Adherence in Asthma: A Targeted Review of Qualitative Studies.

Adherence to asthma medications is generally poor and undermines clinical outcomes. Poor adherence is characterized by underuse of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), often accompanied by over-reliance on short-acting ß2-agonists for symptom relief. To identify drivers of poor medication adherence, a targeted literature search was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles presenting qualitative data evaluating medication adherence in asthma patients (≥12 years old), published from January 1, 2012 to February 26, 2018. A thematic analysis of 21 relevant articles revealed several key themes driving poor medication adherence, including asthma-specific drivers and more general drivers common to chronic diseases. Due to the episodic nature of asthma, many patients felt that their daily life was not substantially impacted; consequently, many harbored doubts about the accuracy of their diagnosis or were in denial about the impact of the disease and, in turn, the need for long-term treatment. This was further compounded by poor patient-physician communication, which contributed to suboptimal knowledge about asthma medications, including lack of understanding of the distinction between maintenance and reliever inhalers, suboptimal inhaler technique, and concerns about ICS side effects. Other drivers of poor medication adherence included the high cost of asthma medication, general forgetfulness, and embarrassment over inhaler use in public. Overall, patients' perceived lack of need for asthma medications and medication concerns, in part due to suboptimal knowledge and poor patient-physician communication, emerged as key drivers of poor medication adherence. Optimal asthma care and management should therefore target these barriers through effective patient- and physician-centered strategies.

Vaccine strategies for prevention of community-acquired pneumonia in Canada: Who would benefit most from pneumococcal immunization?

OBJECTIVE: To describe the burden of pneumococcal disease and associated risk factors in the Canadian adult population, delineate available pneumococcal vaccines and associated efficacy and effectiveness data, and review current pneumococcal vaccine recommendations and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) prevention strategies in Canada. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: Pneumococcal vaccination guidelines from the Canadian National Advisory Committee on Immunization in 2013 and 2016 constitute level III evidence for CAP prevention in the Canadian adult population. MAIN MESSAGE: It is recommended that immunosuppressed adults of all ages receive the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) (grades A and B recommendations). In 2016, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization also recommended that all adults aged 65 years and older receive PCV13 (grade A recommendation) on an individual basis, followed by the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (grade B recommendation). This update is based on a large clinical study that demonstrated PCV13 efficacy against vaccine-type CAP in this population. CONCLUSION: Physicians should focus on improving pneumococcal vaccination rates among adults, which remain low. Vaccination with PCV13 should also be considered for adults with chronic conditions, whose baseline risk is often higher than that for healthy individuals aged 65 years and older.

Corrigendum to "Cost-Effectiveness of the Aerobika® Oscillating Positive Expiratory Pressure Device in the Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations in Canada".

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1155/2019/9176504.].

Cost-Effectiveness of the Aerobika® Oscillating Positive Expiratory Pressure Device in the Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations in Canada.

Background: The Aerobika® oscillating positive expiratory pressure (OPEP) device is a hand-held, drug-free medical device that has been shown to improve lung function and improve health-related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We estimated the cost-effectiveness of this device among postexacerbation COPD patients in the Canadian healthcare system. Methods: We performed a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model to compare both costs and outcome of patients with COPD who had recently experienced an exacerbation between 2 treatment arms: patients who used the Aerobika® device and patients who did not use the Aerobika® device. This cost-utility analysis included costs based on the Alberta healthcare system perspective as these represent Canadian experience. A one-year horizon with 12 monthly cycles was used. Results: For a patient after 1 year, the use of the Aerobika® device would save $694 in healthcare costs and produce 0.04 more in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in comparison with no positive expiratory pressure (PEP)/OPEP therapy. In other words, the economic outcome of the device was dominant (i.e., more effective and less costly). The probability for this device to be the dominant strategy was 72%. With a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained, the probability for the Aerobika® device to be cost-effective was 77%. Conclusions: Given one of the major treatment goals in the GOLD guidelines is to minimize the negative impact of exacerbations and prevent re-exacerbations, the Aerobika® OPEP device should be viewed as a potential component of a treatment strategy to improve symptom control and reduce the risk of re-exacerbations in patients with COPD.

Real-life effectiveness of indacaterol-glycopyrronium after switching from tiotropium or salmeterol/fluticasone therapy in patients with symptomatic COPD: the POWER study.

PURPOSE: In contrast to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), changes in maintenance pharmacotherapy in clinical practice occur without a washout period. The Prospective cohort study for the real-life effectiveness evaluation of glycOpyrronium With indacatERol combination in the management of COPD in Canada (POWER) study evaluated the real-life effectiveness of indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY) following a direct switch from a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA, tiotropium) or long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance treatment (salmeterol/fluticasone [SFC]). METHODS: POWER was a single-cohort, prospective, multicenter, interventional study in which patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, who remained symptomatic on their current treatment of once-daily (od) tiotropium 18 µg or twice-daily (bid) SFC (any dose), were switched to treatment with open-label IND/GLY 110/50 µg od for 16 weeks. Effectiveness end points were change from baseline in trough FEV1, transition dyspnea index (TDI) total scores, and COPD assessment test (CAT) scores at 16 weeks. RESULTS: Trough FEV1 improved by 175 mL at Week 16 in patients who switched to IND/GLY. The change was 176 mL (95% CI: 135-217) when switched from tiotropium and 172 mL (95% CI: 85-258) when switched from SFC fixed-dose combination (FDC). At Week 16, significant improvements were observed in the mean TDI total scores (Δ=2.5) and CAT scores (Δ=-6.5) after the switch to IND/GLY treatment (both P<0.0001). Additionally, IND/GLY was well tolerated in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, and no safety signal was observed. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice settings, a direct switch from previous treatment with either tiotropium or SFC to IND/GLY was safe and provided superior clinically significant improvements in lung function and patient-related outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02202616.

Determinants of Response to Roflumilast in Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Pooled Analysis of Two Randomized Trials.

RATIONALE: Roflumilast reduces exacerbations in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease associated with chronic bronchitis and a history of exacerbations. Further characterization of patients most likely to benefit is warranted. OBJECTIVES: Define characteristics that most robustly identify patients who derive greatest exacerbation risk reduction with roflumilast. METHODS: Predefined, pooled analyses of REACT (Roflumilast in the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations While Taking Appropriate Combination Treatment; NCT01329029) and RE2SPOND (Roflumilast Effect on Exacerbations in Patients on Dual [LABA/ICS] Therapy; NCT01443845) multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. The primary endpoint was rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per patient per year. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the overall intention-to-treat population (n = 4,287), roflumilast reduced moderate or severe exacerbations by 12.3% (rate ratio, 0.88, 95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.97; P = 0.0086) and severe exacerbations by 16.1% (0.84; 0.71-0.99; P = 0.0409) versus placebo. The reduction in moderate or severe exacerbations with roflumilast was most pronounced in patients who had been hospitalized for an exacerbation in the prior year (0.74; 0.63-0.88; P = 0.0005); had more than two exacerbations in the prior year (0.79; 0.65-0.96; P = 0.0160); or had baseline eosinophils ≥150 cells/µl (0.81; 0.71-0.93; P = 0.0020), ≥150 to <300 cells/µl (0.84; 0.71-0.98; P = 0.0282), or ≥300 cells/µl (0.77; 0.61-0.97; P = 0.0264). Similar subgroup results were noted for severe exacerbations. In patients with prior hospitalization and higher baseline blood eosinophil concentrations, roflumilast reduced moderate or severe exacerbations by 34.5% at ≥150 cells/µl (0.65; 0.52-0.82; P = 0.0003) and 42.7% at ≥300 cells/µl (0.57; 0.37-0.88; P = 0.0111) versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: This prespecified, pooled analysis confirms the benefit of roflumilast in decreasing exacerbations in patients with prior hospitalization for exacerbation, greater exacerbation frequency, and higher (≥150 cells/µl, ≥150 to <300 cells/µl, or ≥300 cells/µl) baseline blood eosinophil count.

Effect of Roflumilast and Inhaled Corticosteroid/Long-Acting ß2-Agonist on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations (RE(2)SPOND). A Randomized Clinical Trial.

RATIONALE: Moderate and severe exacerbations are incompletely prevented by maximal inhalation therapy in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether roflumilast reduces moderate and/or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations in patients at risk for exacerbations despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist with or without a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA). METHODS: In this 52-week, phase 4, double-blind, placebo-controlled RE(2)SPOND (Roflumilast Effect on Exacerbations in Patients on Dual [LABA/ICS] Therapy) trial (NCT01443845), participants aged 40 years or older with severe/very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic bronchitis, two or more exacerbations and/or hospitalizations in the previous year, and receiving inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist with or without LAMA daily for 3 or more months were equally randomized to once-daily roflumilast, 500 µg (n = 1,178), or placebo (n = 1,176). Stratification was based on LAMA use. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Although rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per patient per year (primary endpoint) was reduced by 8.5% with roflumilast versus placebo, the between-group difference was not statistically significant (rate ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.04; P = 0.163). However, roflumilast improved lung function, and in a post hoc analysis roflumilast significantly reduced the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations in participants with a history of more than three exacerbations and/or one or more hospitalizations in the prior year. Adverse event-related discontinuations occurred in 11.7% roflumilast-treated and 5.4% placebo-treated participants. Deaths occurred in 2.5% roflumilast and 2.1% placebo participants. CONCLUSIONS: Roflumilast failed to statistically significantly reduce moderate and/or severe exacerbations in the overall population. Roflumilast improved lung function and reduced exacerbations in participants with frequent exacerbations and/or hospitalization history. The safety profile of roflumilast was consistent with that of previous studies. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01443845).

Effects of roflumilast in COPD patients receiving inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist fixed-dose combination: RE(2)SPOND rationale and study design.

BACKGROUND: Roflumilast, a once-daily, selective phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, reduces the risk of COPD exacerbations in patients with severe COPD associated with chronic bronchitis and a history of exacerbations. The RE(2)SPOND study is examining whether roflumilast, when added to an inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist (ICS/LABA) fixed-dose combination (FDC), further reduces exacerbations. The methodology is described herein. METHODS: In this Phase IV, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, participants were randomized 1:1 (stratified by long-acting muscarinic antagonist use) to receive roflumilast or placebo, plus ICS/LABA FDC, for 52 weeks. Eligible participants had severe COPD associated with chronic bronchitis, had two or more moderate-severe exacerbations within 12 months, and were receiving ICS/LABA FDC for ≥3 months. The primary efficacy measure is the rate of moderate or severe COPD exacerbations per participant per year. The secondary efficacy outcomes include mean change in prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) over 52 weeks, rate of severe exacerbations, and rate of moderate, severe, or antibiotic-treated exacerbations. Additional assessments include spirometry, rescue medication use, the COPD assessment test, daily symptoms using the EXACT-Respiratory symptoms (E-RS) questionnaire, all-cause and COPD-related hospitalizations, and safety and pharmacokinetic measures. RESULTS: Across 17 countries, 2,354 participants were randomized from September 2011 to October 2014. Enrollment goal was met in October 2014, and study completion occurred in June 2016. CONCLUSION: This study will further characterize the effects of roflumilast added to ICS/LABA on exacerbation rates, lung function, and health of severe-very severe COPD participants at risk of further exacerbations. The results will determine the clinical benefits of roflumilast combined with standard-of-care inhaled COPD treatment.

GOLD Stage and Treatment in COPD: A 500 Patient Point Prevalence Study.

Background and Objective: The Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines recommend using a combination of spirometry, symptoms and exacerbation history to classify patients into 4 categories (A, B, C, D) to guide treatment decisions along with a stepwise increase in therapy. Our objectives were to identify the GOLD stage of patients in respiratory outpatient clinics and assess how treatment compares to guideline recommendations. Methods: This was a point prevalence study using a convenience sample of 500 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from a single tertiary care outpatient respiratory clinic. Results: Patients' GOLD classification was determined based on symptoms (modified Medical Research Council [mMRC] dyspnea scale, COPD Assessment Test [CAT]), spirometry and self-reported exacerbation history. A total of 8.2% of patients were in the GOLD group A, 28.3% in group B, 4.2% in group C and 59.2% in group D. Conclusions: In this 500 patient point prevalence study we report a low proportion of patients in GOLD group C and a high level of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/ long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and triple therapy use throughout all GOLD categories. Clinical Implications: The GOLD guidelines have attempted to provide direction to practitioners by grouping patients into 4 groups based on symptoms and exacerbations however, the low prevalence of GOLD group C may indicate that not all of these groupings are clinically relevant. Future research is needed to better identify clinically relevant phenotypes that predict benefit from ICS and methods to promote guideline concordant management in COPD.

The COPD Foundation Pocket Consultant Guide.

The COPD Foundation Guide to COPD Diagnosis and Treatment is designed to provide practical advice for the health care provider. Available as a hard copy, online and as a mobile device application (app), the Guide serves as an accessible tool for clinicians. To date, over 400,000 cards have been distributed to health care providers nationwide at no charge. The Guide is updated as necessary and suggestions from the COPD physician and health care provider community are integrated into updates.

Introducing the COPD Foundation Guide for Diagnosis and Management of COPD, recommendations of the COPD Foundation.

The increasing number of treatment options for managing patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) promises to improve the outcomes for COPD patients. However, determining which treatments are appropriate for individual patients has become increasingly complex. The COPD Foundation Guide for Diagnosis and Management of COPD was developed to be a practical, easy to use tool for clinicians. The Guide includes specific recommendations for diagnostic studies and treatments based on specific diagnostic criteria. This manuscript describes the rationale for the development of the Guide, the process used, the rationale for the specific recommendations and the plans for further development. The current recommendations of the COPD Foundation have been summarized in the form of Pocket Cards, which may be obtained from the Foundation at no charge (1-866-316-COPD (2673), www.copdfoundation.org).

Update on exhaled nitric oxide in pulmonary disease.

The ability to assess the inflammatory status of a patient's airway using a noninvasive method is the ideal situation for clinicians. Owing in part to the relationship between the levels of exhaled nitric oxide to inflammation and the ease of the technique, the measurement of the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (F(E)NO) has achieved considerable attention, particularly with respect to asthma. A multitude of studies have shown that when measured in exhaled air, this unique molecule has the potential to have both diagnostic and therapeutic roles in the clinical setting for many pulmonary diseases. The incorporation of F(E)NO into asthma management and treatment algorithms may help shed further insight on the current control and future risk of patients. Research is ongoing to determine the biology and the benefits of the use of F(E)NO in respiratory conditions in addition to asthma. This review will briefly outline the pathophysiology of nitric oxide, the measurement of F(E)NO and the potential clinical uses of F(E)NO in asthma and a number of other respiratory diseases. Despite its promise, until further research is conducted, the use of F(E)NO cannot be recommended for routine clinical management of respiratory diseases at present, but should be considered as an adjuvant to help guide therapy in certain patients with asthma and in those with eosinophilic bronchitis.

Safety and tolerability of varenicline tartrate (Champix(®)/Chantix(®)) for smoking cessation in HIV-infected subjects: a pilot open-label study.

The prevalence of smoking in HIV-infected subjects is high. As a smoking cessation aid, varenicline (Champix(®), Pfizer, Saint-Laurent, QC, Canada or Chantix(®), Pfizer, Mission, KS) has not been previously evaluated in HIV-infected smokers. In this multicenter pilot open label study, varenicline 1.0 mg was used twice daily for 12 weeks with dose titration in the first week. Adverse events (AEs) during the treatment period were recorded. Changes from baseline in laboratory tests, vital signs, daily cigarette consumption, nicotine dependence, and withdrawal were measured through week 24. Self-reported abstinence was validated by serum cotinine at week 12. We enrolled 36 subjects with a mean of 29 pack-years of smoking and a minimum of 4 cigarettes per day. All but 1 were male, 33 (92%) were white. The most frequently reported AEs were nausea (33%), abnormal dreams (31%), affect lability (19%), and insomnia (19%). Six (17%) subjects discontinued varenicline due to AEs. No grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities or serious AEs occurred during the study. There was no significant change in HIV viral load. CD4 counts increased by 69 cells/mm3 (p = 0.001) at week 24. Serum cotinine-verified 4-week continuous abstinence rate through weeks 9-12 was 42% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 26-58%). AEs and abstinence rates were comparable to those in published randomized controlled trials conducted in generally healthy HIV-negative smokers. Varenicline was safe and appears effective among HIV-infected smokers in this exploratory study, although AEs were common. The most common AE was nausea, with no adverse effect on HIV treatment outcome. Close monitoring of liver enzymes and blood pressure is recommended for HIV-positive smokers taking varenicline.

Evaluation outcomes resulting from an internet-based continuing professional development (CPD) asthma program: its impact on participants' knowledge and satisfaction.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have focused on the evaluation of Internet-based continuing professional development (CPD), but few have focused on the clinical area of asthma. Our purpose was to examine the evaluation outcomes related to knowledge and satisfaction that resulted from the provision of an Internet-based CPD program focusing on this clinical area. METHODS: Evaluation methodologies included a pre-/post-knowledge assessment (multiple choice) and a satisfaction survey. Completion of all assessments was voluntary, with the exception of the post-knowledge assessment for which completion was required for credit claim. RESULTS: There were a total of N = 457 unique registrants in the course over 1 year. A total of N = 125 course participants completed both pre- and post-knowledge assessments. An overall mean pre-knowledge score of 11.54 and a post-knowledge score of 16.04 were reported. Paired samples t-test analyses indicated a significant pre- to post-knowledge gain overall and for the majority of professions; 95.8% of the N = 46 satisfaction survey respondents reported that the program addressed their learning needs; 89.1% reported that it was relevant to practice. DISCUSSION: Recent studies focusing specifically on asthma were non-Canadian pilot studies with small sample sizes. The study findings highlight a similar initiative in Canada, which provided health professionals who care for patients with asthma access to relevant CPD with a Canadian perspective. The findings show that course participants were extremely satisfied and that they increased their knowledge in this clinical area. Further development of such Internet-based programs may encourage health professionals to improve their knowledge in a variety of therapeutic areas.