Nemiralisib in Patients with an Acute Exacerbation of COPD: Placebo-Controlled, Dose-Ranging Study.

Background: Management of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is sometimes inadequate leading to either prolonged duration and/or an increased risk of recurrent exacerbations in the period following the initial event. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of inhaled nemiralisib, a phosphoinositide 3-kinase δ inhibitor, in patients experiencing an acute exacerbation of COPD. Patients and Methods: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, COPD patients (40-80 years, ≥10 pack-year smoking history, current moderate/severe acute exacerbation of COPD requiring standard-of-care treatment) were randomized to placebo or nemiralisib 12.5 µg, 50 µg, 100 µg, 250 µg, 500 µg, or 750 µg (ratio of 3:1:1:1:1:1:3; N=938) for 12 weeks with an exploratory 12-week follow-up period. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in post-bronchodilator FEV1 at week 12. Key secondary endpoints were rate of re-exacerbations, patient-reported outcomes (Exacerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool, COPD Assessment Test, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire-COPD), plasma pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety/tolerability. Results: There was no difference in change from baseline FEV1 at week 12 between the nemiralisib and placebo treatment groups (posterior adjusted median difference, nemiralisib 750 µg and placebo: -0.004L (95% CrI: -0.051L to 0.042L)). Overall, there were also no differences between nemiralisib and placebo in secondary endpoints, including re-exacerbations. Plasma PK increased in a dose proportional manner. The most common adverse event for nemiralisib was post-inhalation cough which appeared to be dose-related. Conclusion: The addition of nemiralisib to standard-of-care treatment for 12 weeks did not improve lung function or re-exacerbations in patients with, and following an acute exacerbation of COPD. However, this study demonstrated that large clinical trials recruiting acutely exacerbating patients can successfully be conducted.

Predicting Re-Exacerbation Timing and Understanding Prolonged Exacerbations: An Analysis of Patients with COPD in the ECLIPSE Cohort.

PURPOSE: Understanding risk factors for an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is important for optimizing patient care. We re-analyzed data from the Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints (ECLIPSE) study (NCT00292552) to identify factors predictive of re-exacerbations and associated with prolonged AECOPDs. METHODS: Patients with COPD from ECLIPSE with moderate/severe AECOPDs were included. The end of the first exacerbation was the index date. Timing of re-exacerbation risk was assessed in patients with 180 days' post-index-date follow-up data. Factors predictive of early (1-90 days) vs late (91-180 days) vs no re-exacerbation were identified using a multivariable partial-proportional-odds-predictive model. Explanatory logistic-regression modeling identified factors associated with prolonged AECOPDs. RESULTS: Of the 1,554 eligible patients from ECLIPSE, 1,420 had 180 days' follow-up data: more patients experienced early (30.9%) than late (18.7%) re-exacerbations; 50.4% had no re-exacerbation within 180 days. Lower post-bronchodilator FEV1 (P=0.0019), a higher number of moderate/severe exacerbations on/before index date (P<0.0001), higher St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score (P=0.0036), and season of index exacerbation (autumn vs winter, P=0.00164) were identified as predictors of early (vs late/none) re-exacerbation risk within 180 days. Similarly, these were all predictors of any (vs none) re-exacerbation risk within 180 days. Median moderate/severe AECOPD duration was 12 days; 22.7% of patients experienced a prolonged AECOPD. The odds of experiencing a prolonged AECOPD were greater for severe vs moderate AECOPDs (adjusted odds ratio=1.917, P=0.002) and lower for spring vs winter AECOPDs (adjusted odds ratio=0.578, P=0.017). CONCLUSION: Prior exacerbation history, reduced lung function, poorer respiratory-related quality-of-life (greater disease burden), and season may help identify patients who will re-exacerbate within 90 days of an AECOPD. Severe AECOPDs and winter AECOPDs are likely to be prolonged and may require close monitoring.

Terms and Definitions Used to Describe Recurrence, Treatment Failure and Recovery of Acute Exacerbations of COPD: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies.

INTRODUCTION: Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPDs) are important clinical events, with many patients experiencing multiple AECOPDs annually. The terms used in the literature to define recurring AECOPD events are inconsistent and may impact the ability to describe the true burden of these events. We undertook a systematic review to identify and summarize terms and definitions used in observational studies to describe AECOPD-related events occurring after an initial AECOPD (hereafter "subsequent AECOPD"). METHODS: PubMed was searched (2000-2019) for observational studies on subsequent AECOPD events using broad search strings for "COPD", "exacerbation", and "subsequent exacerbation events". Only English-language studies were included. Small studies (n<50) and studies focusing on hospital re-admission only were excluded. Extracted data were analyzed descriptively to generate a narrative summary, using a thematic approach to group studies utilizing similar terms for subsequent AECOPD. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies were included. No single, distinct terms or definitions were used to define and identify multiple occurrences of AECOPDs, though most (46) studies used one or more of four clustered terms and definitions: reapse (n = 13), recurrence/re-exacerbation (n = 11), treatment failure (n = 12) and non-recovery/time to recovery (n = 16). Heterogeneity was observed within and between the four clusters with respect to study setting, starting point for observing subsequent AECOPDs, time frame to identify a subsequent AECOPD (except for studies using "time to recovery"), and basis for identifying a subsequent exacerbation. CONCLUSION: Our review demonstrates that subsequent AECOPDs (including events such as relapse, recurrence/re-exacerbation, treatment failure, non-recovery/time to recovery) are ill-defined in the observational study literature, emphasizing the need to reach consensus on precise and objective definitions (for example, when one AECOPD ends and another begins). Use of standardized terminology and definitions may aid comparability between, and synthesis of, studies, thus improving the understanding of the natural history and burden of exacerbations in COPD patients.

Methods to generate and validate a Pregnancy Register in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink primary care database.

PURPOSE: Primary care databases are increasingly used for researching pregnancy, eg, the effects of maternal drug exposures. However, ascertaining pregnancies, their timing, and outcomes in these data is challenging. While individual studies have adopted different methods, no systematic approach to characterise all pregnancies in a primary care database has yet been published. Therefore, we developed a new algorithm to establish a Pregnancy Register in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD primary care database. METHODS: We compiled over 4000 read and entity codes to identify pregnancy-related records among women aged 11 to 49 years in CPRD GOLD. Codes were categorised by the stage or outcome of pregnancy to facilitate delineation of pregnancy episodes. We constructed hierarchical rule systems to handle information from multiple sources. We assessed the validity of the Register to identify pregnancy outcomes by comparing our results to linked hospitalisation records and Office for National Statistics population rates. RESULTS: Our algorithm identified 5.8 million pregnancies among 2.4 million women (January 1987-February 2018). We observed close agreement with hospitalisation data regarding completeness of pregnancy outcomes (91% sensitivity for deliveries and 77% for pregnancy losses) and their timing (median 0 days difference, interquartile range 0-2 days). Miscarriage and prematurity rates were consistent with population figures, although termination and, to a lesser extent, live birth rates were underestimated in the Register. CONCLUSIONS: The Pregnancy Register offers huge research potential because of its large size, high completeness, and availability. Further validation work is underway to enhance this data resource and identify optimal approaches for its use.

Clinical burden of illness among patients with severe eosinophilic COPD.

Background: There are currently limited real-world data on the clinical burden of illness in patients with COPD who continue to exacerbate despite receiving triple therapy. The aim of this study was to compare the burden of COPD in patients with and without a phenotype characterized by a high blood eosinophil count and high risk of exacerbations while receiving triple therapy. Methods: This retrospective cohort study (GSK ID: 207323/PRJ2647) used UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink records linked with Hospital Episode Statistics. Eligible patients had a COPD medical diagnosis code recorded between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2014, and a blood eosinophil count recorded on/after that date. Patients were followed from index date (first qualifying blood eosinophil count) until December 31, 2015. The study phenotype was defined as ≥2 moderate/≥1 severe acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) in the year prior to the index date, current use of multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT), and blood eosinophil count ≥150 cells/µL on the index date. Outcomes measured during follow-up included moderate/severe AECOPDs, severe AECOPDs, all-cause mortality, primary care (GP) clinical consultations, and non-AECOPD-related unscheduled hospitalizations. Results: Of 46,814 patients eligible for inclusion, 2512 (5.4%) met the definition of the study phenotype. Adjusted rate ratios (95% CI) of moderate/severe AECOPDs and all-cause mortality in patients with the study phenotype versus those without were 2.32 (2.22, 2.43) and 1.26 (1.16, 1.37), respectively. For GP visits and non-AECOPD-related unscheduled hospitalizations, adjusted rate ratios (95% CI), in patients with the study phenotype versus those without, were 1.09 (1.05, 1.12) and 1.31 (1.18, 1.46), respectively. Conclusion: Patients with COPD and raised blood eosinophil counts who continue to exacerbate despite MITT represent a distinct subgroup who experience substantial clinical burden and account for high healthcare expenditure. There is a need for more effective management and therapeutic options for these patients.

Field comparison of novel and gold standard traps for collecting Aedes albopictus in Northern Virginia.

Aedes albopictus is a potential West Nile virus bridge vector in Northern Virginia; however, information regarding its virus transmission dynamics is limited, as this species is not readily collected in existing traps. This study used 5 replicates of a 5 x 5 Latin square to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of 2 novel host-seeking mosquito traps (the BG-Sentinel and the Collapsible Mosquito Trap (CMT-20) in collecting Ae. albopictus, relative to a carbon dioxide (CO2)-baited Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) miniature light trap. When used with CO2, the BG-Sentinel (with BG-Lure) collected 33 times more female Ae. albopictus per 24-h trapping period than did the CO2-baited CDC light trap. Without CO2, the BG-Sentinel (with BG-Lure) still collected over 6 times as many female Ae. albopictus as the CO2-baited CDC trap. Both configurations of the BG-Sentinel were significantly more effective than the other traps. The BG-Sentinel was also significantly more efficient in collecting Ae. albopictus and collected a high proportion of this species, both with CO2 and without CO2. The CMT-20 (with SkinLure) collected significantly more Ae. albopictus when used with CO2 than without CO2, but did not collect significantly more Ae. albopictus than the CO2-baited CDC light trap. The proportion of Ae. albopictus collected in the CMT-20 with CO2 and without CO2 did not differ significantly from the proportion of Ae. albopictus collected in the CDC trap.