Search

Summary Background INCREASE was a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial that evaluated inhaled treprostinil in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) and associated pulmonary hypertension. Treprostinil improved exercise capacity from baseline to week 16, assessed with the use of a 6-min walk test, compared with placebo. Improvements in forced vital capacity (FVC) were also reported. The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to further characterise the effects of inhaled treprostinil on FVC in the overall study population and in various subgroups of interest. Methods In this post-hoc analysis, we evaluated FVC changes in the overall study population and in various subgroups defined by cause of disease or baseline clinical parameters. The study population included patients aged 18 years and older who had a diagnosis of ILD based on evidence of diffuse parenchymal lung disease on chest CT done within 6 months before random assignment (not centrally adjudicated). All analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population, defined as individuals who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of study drug. The INCREASE study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02630316. Findings Between Feb 3, 2017, and Aug 30, 2019, 326 patients were enrolled in the INCREASE trial. Inhaled treprostinil was associated with a placebo-corrected least squares mean improvement in FVC of 28·5 mL (SE 30·1; 95% CI −30·8 to 87·7; p=0·35) at week 8 and 44·4 mL (35·4; −25·2 to 114·0; p=0·21) at week 16, with associated percentage of predicted FVC improvements of 1·8% (0·7; 0·4 to 3·2; p=0·014) and 1·8% (0·8; 0·2 to 3·4; p=0·028). Subgroup analysis of patients with idiopathic interstitial pneumonia showed FVC differences of 46·5 mL (SE 39·9; 95% CI −32·5 to 125·5; p=0·25) at week 8 and 108·2 mL (46·9; 15·3 to 201·1; p=0·023) at week 16. Analysis of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis showed FVC differences of 84·5 mL (52·7; −20·4 to 189·5; p=0·11) at week 8 and 168·5 mL (64·5; 40·1 to 297·0; p=0·011) at week 16. The most frequent adverse events included cough, headache, dyspnoea, dizziness, nausea, fatigue, and diarrhoea. Interpretation In patients with ILD and associated pulmonary hypertension, inhaled treprostinil was associated with improvements in FVC versus placebo at 16 weeks. This difference was most evident in patients with idiopathic interstitial pneumonia, particularly idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Inhaled treprostinil appears to be a promising therapy for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis that warrants further investigation in a prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled study. Funding United Therapeutics Corporation.

Rationale: Less invasive, nonsurgical approaches are needed to treat severe emphysema. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the Spiration Valve System (SVS) versus optimal medical management. Methods: In this multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial, subjects aged 40 years or older with severe, heterogeneous emphysema were randomized 2:1 to SVS with medical management (treatment) or medical management alone (control). Measurements and Main Results: The primary efficacy outcome was the difference in mean FEV1 from baseline to 6 months. Secondary effectiveness outcomes included: difference in FEV1 responder rates, target lobe volume reduction, hyperinflation, health status, dyspnea, and exercise capacity. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of composite thoracic serious adverse events. All analyses were conducted by determining the 95% Bayesian credible intervals (BCIs) for the difference between treatment and control arms. Between October 2013 and May 2017, 172 participants (53.5% male; mean age, 67.4 yr) were randomized to treatment (n = 113) or control (n = 59). Mean FEV1 showed statistically significant improvements between the treatment and control groups—between-group difference at 6 and 12 months, respectively, of 0.101 L (95% BCI, 0.060–0.141) and 0.099 L (95% BCI, 0.048–0.151). At 6 months, the treatment group had statistically significant improvements in all secondary endpoints except 6-minute-walk distance. Composite thoracic serious adverse event incidence through 6 months was greater in the treatment group (31.0% vs. 11.9%), primarily due to a 12.4% incidence of serious pneumothorax. Conclusions: In patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema, the SVS shows significant improvement in multiple efficacy outcomes, with an acceptable safety profile. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01812447).

Rationale: Usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) is the defining morphology of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Guidelines for IPF diagnosis conditionally recommend surgical lung biopsy for histopathology diagnosis of UIP when radiology and clinical context are not definitive. A "molecular diagnosis of UIP" in transbronchial lung biopsy, the Envisia Genomic Classifier, accurately predicted histopathologic UIP.Objectives: We evaluated the combined accuracy of the Envisia Genomic Classifier and local radiology in the detection of UIP pattern.Methods: Ninety-six patients who had diagnostic lung pathology as well as a transbronchial lung biopsy for molecular testing with Envisia Genomic Classifier were included in this analysis. The classifier results were scored against reference pathology. UIP identified on high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) as documented by features in local radiologists' reports was compared with histopathology.Measurements and Main Results: In 96 patients, the Envisia Classifier achieved a specificity of 92.1% (confidence interval [CI],78.6-98.3%) and a sensitivity of 60.3% (CI, 46.6-73.0%) for histology-proven UIP pattern. Local radiologists identified UIP in 18 of 53 patients with UIP histopathology, with a sensitivity of 34.0% (CI, 21.5-48.3%) and a specificity of 96.9% (CI, 83.8-100%). In conjunction with HRCT patterns of UIP, the Envisia Classifier results identified 24 additional patients with UIP (sensitivity 79.2%; specificity 90.6%).Conclusions: In 96 patients with suspected interstitial lung disease, the Envisia Genomic Classifier identified UIP regardless of HRCT pattern. These results suggest that recognition of a UIP pattern by the Envisia Genomic Classifier combined with HRCT and clinical factors in a multidisciplinary discussion may assist clinicians in making an interstitial lung disease (especially IPF) diagnosis without the need for a surgical lung biopsy.

Objective Patient satisfaction with HIV screening is crucial for sustainable implementation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) HIV testing recommendations. This investigation assesses patient satisfaction with rapid HIV testing in the emergency department (ED) of an urban tertiary academic medical center. Methods After receiving HIV test results, participants in the Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room (USHER) randomized controlled trial were offered a patient satisfaction survey. Questions concerned overall satisfaction with ED visit, time spent on primary medical problem, time spent on HIV testing, and test provider's ability to answer HIV-related questions. Responses were reported on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from very dissatisfied to very satisfied (defined as optimal satisfaction). Results Of 4,860 USHER participants, 2,025 completed testing and were offered the survey: 1,616 (79.8%) completed the survey. Overall, 1,478 (91.5%) were very satisfied. Satisfaction was less than optimal for 34.5% (10 of 29) of participants with reactive results and for 7.5% (115 of 1,542) with nonreactive results. The independent factors associated with less than optimal satisfaction were reactive test result, aged 60 years or older, black race, Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, and testing by ED provider instead of HIV counselor. Conclusion Most participants were very satisfied with the ED-based rapid HIV testing program. Identification of independent factors that correlate with patient satisfaction will help guide best practices as EDs implement CDC recommendations. It is critical to better understand whether patients with reactive results were negatively affected by their results or truly had concerns about the testing process.

Oral rapid HIV testing has been reported to have a lower sensitivity and specificity than rapid HIV testing with whole blood and has been associated with clusters of false-positive results. Patient preference for oral rapid HIV testing compared with more invasive whole blood fingerstick may influence the acceptance of rapid HIV testing.To compare HIV test acceptance rates among patients routinely offered fingerstick compared with those routinely offered oral fluid screening in an urban hospital emergency department.The Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room Phase II was a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial that randomized subjects to either fingerstick or oral rapid HIV screening in an urban academic emergency department. From May 5, 2009, to January 4, 2010, eligible patients aged 18-75 years were invited to participate in the trial. The primary outcome measure was HIV test acceptance rate.: 2012 eligible patients were approached, of whom 1651 (82%) consented to trial participation and enrolled. Among those enrolled, 830 and 821 were randomized to the fingerstick and oral fluid arms, respectively. Acceptance of rapid HIV testing was similar in both arms; 67% (553 of 830) of subjects accepted fingerstick testing compared with 69% (565 of 821) who accepted oral (P = 0.34).Although fingerstick rapid HIV testing is more invasive than oral fluid testing, test acceptance rates did not differ. Given the option, preference should therefore be given to fingerstick testing because of its slightly superior test characteristics. System factors such as ease of staff use, necessary Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments waivers, laboratory capacity, and HIV prevalence should also be considered.

ObjectiveTo estimate the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV, the prevalence of diagnosed HIV, and proportion of HIV that is undiagnosed in populations with similar demographics as the Universal Screening for HIV in the Emergency Room (USHER) Trial and the Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) Emergency Department (ED) in Boston, MA. We also sought to estimate these quantities within demographic and risk behavior subgroups.MethodWe used data from the USHER Trial, which was a randomized clinical trial of HIV screening conducted in the BWH ED. Since eligible participants were HIV-free at time of enrollment, we were able to calculate the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV. We used data from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MA/DPH) to estimate the prevalence of diagnosed HIV since the MA/DPH records the number of persons within MA who are HIV-positive. We calculated the proportion of HIV that is undiagnosed using these estimates of the prevalence of undiagnosed and diagnosed HIV. Estimates were stratified by age, sex, race/ethnicity, history of testing, and risk behaviors.ResultsThe overall expected prevalence of diagnosed HIV in a population similar to those presenting to the BWH ED was 0.71% (95% CI: 0.63%, 0.78%). The prevalence of undiagnosed HIV was estimated at 0.22% (95% CI: 0.10%, 0.42%) and resultant overall prevalence was 0.93%. The proportion of HIV-infection that is undiagnosed in this ED-based setting was estimated to be 23.7% (95% CI: 11.6%, 34.9%) of total HIV-infections.ConclusionsDespite different methodology, our estimate of the proportion of HIV that is undiagnosed in an ED-setting was similar to previous estimates based on national surveillance data. Universal routine testing programs in EDs should use these data to help plan their yield of HIV detection.