Search

The exponential growth in digital technology coupled with the global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is driving a profound change in the delivery of medical care and research conduct. The growing availability of electronic monitoring, electronic health records, smartphones and other devices and access to ever greater computational power provides not only new opportunities, but also new challenges. Artificial intelligence (AI) exemplifies the potential of this digital revolution, which also includes other tools such as mobile health (mHealth) services and wearables. Despite digital technology becoming commonplace, its use in medicine and medical research is still in its infancy, with many clinicians and researchers having limited experience with such tools in their usual practice. This article, derived from the 'Digital Health and Artificial Intelligence' session of the Kidney Disease Clinical Trialists virtual workshop held in September 2020, aims to illustrate the breadth of applications to which digital tools and AI can be applied in clinical medicine and research. It highlights several innovative projects incorporating digital technology that range from streamlining medical care of those with acute kidney injury to the use of AI to navigate the vast genomic and proteomic data gathered in kidney disease. Important considerations relating to any new digital health project are presented, with a view to encouraging the further evolution and refinement of these new tools in a manner that fosters collaboration and the generation of robust evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We examined the effects of vericiguat compared with placebo in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction enrolled in VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction) on health status outcomes measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and evaluated whether clinical outcomes varied by baseline KCCQ score. Methods: KCCQ was completed at baseline and 4, 16, and 32 weeks. We assessed treatment effect on KCCQ using a mixed-effects model adjusting for baseline KCCQ and stratification variables. Cox proportional-hazards modeling was performed to evaluate the effect of vericiguat on clinical outcomes by tertiles of baseline KCCQ clinical summary score (CSS), total symptom score (TSS), and overall summary score (OSS). Results: Of 5050 patients, 4664, 4741, and 4470 had KCCQ CSS (median [25th to 75th], 65.6 [45.8–81.8]), TSS (68.8 [47.9–85.4]), and OSS (59.9 [42.0–77.1]) at baseline; 94%, 88%, and 82% had data at 4, 16, and 32 weeks. At 16 weeks, CSS improved by a median of 6.3 in both arms; no significant differences in improvement were seen for TSS and OSS between the 2 groups (P =0.69, 0.97, and 0.13 for CSS, TSS, and OSS). Trends were similar at 4 and 32 weeks. Vericiguat versus placebo reduced cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization risk similarly across tertiles of baseline KCCQ CSS, TSS, and OSS (interaction P =0.13, 0.21, and 0.65). Conclusions: Vericiguat did not significantly improve KCCQ scores compared with placebo. Vericiguat reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization across the range of baseline health status. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02861534. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to empirically generate a responder definition for the treatment of papulopustular rosacea., Methods: A total of 8 multicenter clinical studies on patients with papulopustular facial rosacea were analyzed. All patients were treated with azelaic acid and/or comparator treatments. The severity of rosacea was described by the Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) and the number of lesions. Patients with the IGA score of "clear/minimal" were considered as responders, and those staying in the range of IGA "mild to severe" as nonresponders. The respective number of lesions was determined., Results: A total of 2,748 patients providing 12,410 measurements were included. After treatment, responders showed 2.23±2.48 lesions (median 2 lesions [0-3]), and nonresponders showed 13.74±10.40 lesions (median 12 lesions [6-18]). The optimal cutoff point between both groups was 5.69 lesions., Conclusion: The calculated cutoff point of 5.69 lesions allows discrimination of responders (5 or less remaining lesions) and nonresponders (6 or more remaining lesions) of therapeutic interventions in rosacea., Competing Interests: Disclosure All the authors are full-time employees of Bayer AG. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Patient-reported treatment outcomes are important for evaluating the impact of drug therapies on patient experience. A randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3 study was conducted in 961 participants to assess patient perception of efficacy, utility, and effect on quality of life (QOL) of an azelaic acid (AzA) 15% foam formulation for the treatment of papulopustular rosacea (PPR). Secondary end points included patient-reported global assessment of treatment response, global assessment of tolerability, and opinion on cosmetic acceptability and practicability of product use. Quality of life assessments included the Dermatology Quality of Life Index (DLQI) and Rosacea Quality of Life Index (RosaQOL). Self-reported global assessment of treatment response favored AzA foam over vehicle foam (P<.001), with 57.2% of the AzA foam group reporting excellent or good improvement versus 44.7% in the vehicle foam group. Tolerability was rated excellent or good in 67.8% of the AzA foam group versus 78.2% of the vehicle foam group. Mean overall DLQI scores at end of treatment (EoT) were improved (P=.018) in favor of the AzA foam group compared with the vehicle foam group. Both treatment groups showed improvements in RosaQOL. Treatment with AzA foam was associated with improved QOL and meaningful reductions in the patient-perceived burden of PPR, which correlates with earlier reported primary end points of this study and supports the inclusion of patient perspectives in studies evaluating the effects of topical dermatologic treatments.

Papulopustular rosacea (PPR) is characterized by centrofacial papules and pustules commonly associated with erythema. To compare investigator-reported efficacy outcomes for azelaic acid (AzA) foam 15% versus vehicle foam in PPR, a randomized, vehicle-controlled, double-blind phase 3 clinical trial was conducted at 48 US sites. Participants received AzA foam or vehicle foam for 12 weeks. Secondary efficacy outcomes included change in inflammatory lesion count (ILC), therapeutic response rate according to investigator global assessment (IGA), and change in erythema rating. This study was comprised of 961 participants with PPR. The results support the therapeutic superiority of AzA foam over vehicle foam.

Rosacea is a chronic relapsing skin disorder primarily affecting the face. Although its etiology is not well defined, rosacea is associated with immune dysregulation and inflammation potentiated by external factors. These manifestations lead to skin sensitivity and impaired quality of life. Azelaic acid (AzA) is approved for the treatment of rosacea in a 15% gel formulation. This phase 3 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of AzA in a 15% foam formulation for the treatment of papulopustular rosacea (PPR). Coprimary efficacy end points were treatment success according to investigator global assessment (IGA) and the nominal change in inflammatory lesion count (ILC) from baseline to the end of treatment (EoT). Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated as a measure of safety. The IGA success rate at EoT was significantly greater in the AzA foam group versus vehicle (P<.001; Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test). Likewise, nominal ILC change at EoT in the AzA foam group showed a significantly greater decrease versus vehicle (P<.001; F test). Drug-related AEs were mainly mild to moderate, cutaneous, and local. Overall, the study results support the efficacy and safety of twice-daily AzA foam 15% in patients with PPR.