Search

During June-October 2022, the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5 sublineage accounted for most of the sequenced viral genomes in the United States, with further Omicron sublineage diversification through November 2022.* Bivalent mRNA vaccines contain an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain component plus an updated component of the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineages. On September 1, 2022, a single bivalent booster dose was recommended for adults who had completed a primary vaccination series (with or without subsequent booster doses), with the last dose administered ≥2 months earlier (1). During September 13-November 18, the VISION Network evaluated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of a bivalent mRNA booster dose (after 2, 3, or 4 monovalent doses) compared with 1) no previous vaccination and 2) previous receipt of 2, 3, or 4 monovalent-only mRNA vaccine doses, among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years with an emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) encounter or hospitalization for a COVID-19-like illness.

Background We assessed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination impact on illness severity among adults hospitalized with COVID-19, August 2021–March 2022. Methods We evaluated differences in intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital death, and length of stay among vaccinated (2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses) versus unvaccinated patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for ≥24 hours with COVID-19–like illness and positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) molecular testing. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for ICU admission and death and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) for time to hospital discharge adjusted for age, geographic region, calendar time, and local virus circulation. Results We included 27 149 SARS-CoV-2–positive hospitalizations. During both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, protection against ICU admission was strongest among 3-dose vaccinees compared with unvaccinated patients (Delta OR, 0.52 [95% CI, .28–.96]; Omicron OR, 0.69 [95% CI, .54–.87]). During both periods, risk of in-hospital death was lower among vaccinated compared with unvaccinated patients but ORs overlapped across vaccination strata. We observed SHR >1 across all vaccination strata in both periods indicating faster discharge for vaccinated patients. Conclusions COVID-19 vaccination was associated with lower rates of ICU admission and in-hospital death in both Delta and Omicron periods compared with being unvaccinated.

The Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was first identified in the United States in November 2021, with the BA.1 sublineage (including BA.1.1) causing the largest surge in COVID-19 cases to date. Omicron sublineages BA.2 and BA.2.12.1 emerged later and by late April 2022, accounted for most cases.* Estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) can be reduced by newly emerging variants or sublineages that evade vaccine-induced immunity (1), protection from previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated persons (2), or increasing time since vaccination (3). Real-world data comparing VE during the periods when the BA.1 and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 predominated (BA.1 period and BA.2/BA.2.12.1 period, respectively) are limited. The VISION network

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥18 years receive a single COVID-19 vaccine booster dose ≥2 months after receipt of an Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [JohnsonJohnson]) adenovirus vector-based primary series vaccine; a heterologous COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is preferred over a homologous (matching) Janssen vaccine for booster vaccination. This recommendation was made in light of the risks for rare but serious adverse events following receipt of a Janssen vaccine, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome

Background Bronchial thermoplasty is a device-based treatment for subjects ≥18 years with severe asthma poorly controlled with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. The Post-FDA Approval Clinical Trial Evaluating Bronchial Thermoplasty in Severe Persistent Asthma (PAS2) study collected data on severe asthmatics undergoing this procedure. Research Question What are the 5-year efficacy and safety results in severe asthmatics who have undergone bronchial thermoplasty? Study Design and Methods This was a prospective, open-label, observational, multi-center study conducted in the United States and Canada. Subjects aged 18-65, taking inhaled corticosteroids ≥1000μg/day (beclomethasone or equivalent) and long-acting β-agonists ≥80μg/day (salmeterol or equivalent) were included. Severe exacerbations, hospitalization, emergency department visits, and medication usage were evaluated for the 12 months prior to and at years 1-5 post-treatment. Spirometry was evaluated at baseline and at years 1-5 post-treatment. Results 284 subjects were enrolled at 27 centers; 227 subjects (80%) completed 5 years of follow-up. By year 5 post-treatment, the proportion of subjects with severe exacerbations, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations was 42.7%, 7.9%, and 4.8%, respectively, compared to 77.8%, 29.4%, and 16.1% in the 12 months prior to treatment. The proportion of subjects on maintenance oral corticosteroids decreased from 19.4% at baseline to 9.7% at 5 years. Analyses of subgroups based on baseline clinical and biomarker characteristics revealed a statistically significant clinical improvement among all subgroups. Interpretation Five years after treatment, subjects experienced decreases in severe exacerbations, hospitalizations, emergency department visits and corticosteroid exposure. All subgroups demonstrated clinically significant improvement, suggesting that bronchial thermoplasty improves asthma control in different asthma phenotypes.

BackgroundGranulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and dysregulated myeloid cell responses are implicated in the pathophysiology and severity of COVID-19.MethodsIn this randomised, sequential, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, adults aged 18–79 years (Part 1) or ≥70 years (Part 2) with severe COVID-19, respiratory failure and systemic inflammation (elevated C-reactive protein/ferritin) received a single intravenous infusion of otilimab 90 mg (human anti-GM-CSF monoclonal antibody) plus standard care (NCT04376684). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28.ResultsIn Part 1 (n=806 randomised 1:1 otilimab:placebo), 71% of otilimab-treated patients were alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28versus67% who received placebo; the model-adjusted difference of 5.3% was not statistically significant (95% CI −0.8–11.4%, p=0.09). A nominally significant model-adjusted difference of 19.1% (95% CI 5.2–33.1%, p=0.009) was observed in the predefined 70–79 years subgroup, but this was not confirmed in Part 2 (n=350 randomised) where the model-adjusted difference was 0.9% (95% CI −9.3–11.2%, p=0.86). Compared with placebo, otilimab resulted in lower serum concentrations of key inflammatory markers, including the putative pharmacodynamic biomarker CC chemokine ligand 17, indicative of GM-CSF pathway blockade. Adverse events were comparable between groups and consistent with severe COVID-19.ConclusionsThere was no significant difference in the proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28. However, despite the lack of clinical benefit, a reduction in inflammatory markers was observed with otilimab, in addition to an acceptable safety profile.

Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. CDC used data from the VISION Network* to examine hospitalizations in adults with COVID-19-like illness and compared the odds of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and thus having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, between unvaccinated patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring 90-179 days before COVID-19-like illness hospitalization, and patients who were fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine 90-179 days before hospitalization with no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated with a COVID-19-like illness hospitalization during January-September 2021 and at least once earlier (since February 1, 2020, and ≥14 days before that hospitalization). Among COVID-19-like illness hospitalizations in persons whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, the odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics) among unvaccinated, previously infected adults were higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with no previous documented infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-10.99). These findings suggest that among hospitalized adults with COVID-19-like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: Smokers manifest varied phenotypes of pulmonary impairment. RESEARCH QUESTION: Which pulmonary phenotypes are associated with coronary artery disease (CAD) in smokers? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed data from the University of Pittsburgh COPD Specialized Center for Clinically Oriented Research (SCCOR) cohort (n = 481) and the Genetic Epidemiology of COPD (COPDGene) cohort (n = 2,580). Participants were current and former smokers with > 10 pack-years of tobacco exposure. Data from the two cohorts were analyzed separately because of methodologic differences. Lung hyperinflation was assessed by plethysmography in the SCCOR cohort and by inspiratory and expiratory CT scan lung volumes in the COPDGene cohort. Subclinical CAD was assessed as the coronary artery calcium score, whereas clinical CAD was defined as a self-reported history of CAD or myocardial infarction (MI). Analyses were performed in all smokers and then repeated in those with airflow obstruction (FEV(1) to FVC ratio, < 0.70). RESULTS: Pulmonary phenotypes, including airflow limitation, emphysema, lung hyperinflation, diffusion capacity, and radiographic measures of airway remodeling, showed weak to moderate correlations (r < 0.7) with each other. In multivariate models adjusted for pulmonary phenotypes and CAD risk factors, lung hyperinflation was the only phenotype associated with calcium score, history of clinical CAD, or history of MI (per 0.2 higher expiratory and inspiratory CT scan lung volume; coronary calcium: OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5; P = .02; clinical CAD: OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3; P = .01; and MI in COPDGene: OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.8; P = .05). FEV(1) and emphysema were associated with increased risk of CAD (P < .05) in models adjusted for CAD risk factors; however, these associations were attenuated on adjusting for lung hyperinflation. Results were the same in those with airflow obstruction and were present in both cohorts. INTERPRETATION: Lung hyperinflation is associated strongly with clinical and subclinical CAD in smokers, including those with airflow obstruction. After lung hyperinflation was accounted for, FEV(1) and emphysema no longer were associated with CAD. Subsequent studies should consider measuring lung hyperinflation and examining its mechanistic role in CAD in current and former smokers.

Background Electronic health record (EHR) data provide a unique opportunity to study the epidemiology of COVID-19, clinical outcomes of the infection, comparative effectiveness of therapies, and vaccine effectiveness but require a well-defined computable phenotype of COVID-19–like illness (CLI). Objective The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of pathogen-specific and other acute respiratory illness (ARI) International Statistical Classification of Diseases-9 and -10 codes in identifying COVID-19 cases in emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) and inpatient settings. Methods We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using EHR, claims, and laboratory information system data of ED or UC and inpatient encounters from 4 health systems in the United States. Patients who were aged ≥18 years, had an ED or UC or inpatient encounter for an ARI, and underwent a SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021, were included. We evaluated various CLI definitions using combinations of International Statistical Classification of Diseases-10 codes as follows: COVID-19–specific codes; CLI definition used in VISION network studies; ARI signs, symptoms, and diagnosis codes only; signs and symptoms of ARI only; and random forest model definitions. We evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each CLI definition using a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test as the reference standard. We evaluated the performance of each CLI definition for distinct hospitalization and ED or UC cohorts. Results Among 90,952 hospitalizations and 137,067 ED or UC visits, 5627 (6.19%) and 9866 (7.20%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. COVID-19–specific codes had high sensitivity (91.6%) and specificity (99.6%) in identifying patients with SARS-CoV-2 positivity among hospitalized patients. The VISION CLI definition maintained high sensitivity (95.8%) but lowered specificity (45.5%). By contrast, signs and symptoms of ARI had low sensitivity and positive predictive value (28.9% and 11.8%, respectively) but higher specificity and negative predictive value (85.3% and 94.7%, respectively). ARI diagnoses, signs, and symptoms alone had low predictive performance. All CLI definitions had lower sensitivity for ED or UC encounters. Random forest approaches identified distinct CLI definitions with high performance for hospital encounters and moderate performance for ED or UC encounters. Conclusions COVID-19–specific codes have high sensitivity and specificity in identifying adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Separate combinations of COVID-19-specific codes and ARI codes enhance the utility of CLI definitions in studies using EHR data in hospital and ED or UC settings.

BackgroundImmunocompromised (IC) persons are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes and are less protected by 1-2 COVID-19 vaccine doses than are immunocompetent (non-IC) persons. We compared vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended COVID-19 of 2-3 mRNA and 1-2 viral-vector vaccine doses between IC and non-IC adults.MethodsUsing a test-negative design among eight VISION Network sites, VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) events and hospitalizations from 26 August-25 December 2021 was estimated separately among IC and non-IC adults and among specific IC condition subgroups. Vaccination status was defined using number and timing of doses. VE for each status (versus unvaccinated) was adjusted for age, geography, time, prior positive test result, and local SARS-CoV-2 circulation.ResultsWe analyzed 8,848 ED/UC events and 18,843 hospitalizations among IC patients and 200,071 ED/UC events and 70,882 hospitalizations among non-IC patients. Among IC patients, 3-dose mRNA VE against ED/UC (73% [95% CI: 64-80]) and hospitalization (81% [95% CI: 76-86]) was lower than that among non-IC patients (ED/UC: 94% [95% CI: 93-94]; hospitalization: 96% [95% CI: 95-97]). Similar patterns were observed for viral-vector vaccines. Transplant recipients had lower VE than other IC subgroups.ConclusionsDuring B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance, IC adults received moderate protection against COVID-19–associated medical events from three mRNA doses, or one viral-vector dose plus a second dose of any product. However, protection was lower in IC versus non-IC patients, especially among transplant recipients, underscoring the need for additional protection among IC adults.Key pointsDuring Delta variant predominance, immunocompromised (IC) adults received moderate protection against COVID-19-associated medical events from three mRNA doses, but IC patients, especially transplant recipients, were less protected than non-IC patients, underscoring the need for additional protection beyond the primary series.

Persons with moderate-to-severe immunocompromising conditions might have reduced protection after COVID-19 vaccination, compared with persons without immunocompromising conditions (1-3). On August 13, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended that adults with immunocompromising conditions receive an expanded primary series of 3 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. ACIP followed with recommendations on September 23, 2021, for a fourth (booster) dose and on September 1, 2022, for a new bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster dose, containing components of the BA.4 and BA.5 sublineages of the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant (4). Data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) of monovalent COVID-19 vaccines among persons with immunocompromising conditions since the emergence of the Omicron variant in December 2021 are limited. In the multistate VISION Network

Objective To estimate the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against moderate and severe covid-19 in adults by time since second, third, or fourth doses, and by age and immunocompromised status. Design Test negative case-control study. Setting Hospitals, emergency departments, and urgent care clinics in 10 US states, 17 January 2021 to 12 July 2022. Participants 893 461 adults (≥18 years) admitted to one of 261 hospitals or to one of 272 emergency department or 119 urgent care centers for covid-like illness tested for SARS-CoV-2. Main outcome measures The main outcome was waning of vaccine effectiveness with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine during the omicron and delta periods, and the period before delta was dominant using logistic regression conditioned on calendar week and geographic area while adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, local virus circulation, immunocompromised status, and likelihood of being vaccinated. Results 45 903 people admitted to hospital with covid-19 (cases) were compared with 213 103 people with covid-like illness who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (controls), and 103 287 people admitted to emergency department or urgent care with covid-19 (cases) were compared with 531 168 people with covid-like illness who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. In the omicron period, vaccine effectiveness against covid-19 requiring admission to hospital was 89% (95% confidence interval 88% to 90%) within two months after dose 3 but waned to 66% (63% to 68%) by four to five months. Vaccine effectiveness of three doses against emergency department or urgent care visits was 83% (82% to 84%) initially but waned to 46% (44% to 49%) by four to five months. Waning was evident in all subgroups, including young adults and individuals who were not immunocompromised; although waning was morein people who were immunocompromised. Vaccine effectiveness increased among most groups after a fourth dose in whom this booster was recommended. Conclusions Effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against moderate and severe covid-19 waned with time after vaccination. The findings support recommendations for a booster dose after a primary series and consideration of additional booster doses.

BACKGROUND: Many persons with a history of smoking tobacco have clinically significant respiratory symptoms despite an absence of airflow obstruction as assessed by spirometry. They are often treated with medications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but supporting evidence for this treatment is lacking. METHODS: We randomly assigned persons who had a tobacco-smoking history of at least 10 pack-years, respiratory symptoms as defined by a COPD Assessment Test score of at least 10 (scores range from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms), and preserved lung function on spirometry (ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)] to forced vital capacity [FVC] ≥0.70 and FVC ≥70% of the predicted value after bronchodilator use) to receive either indacaterol (27.5 μg) plus glycopyrrolate (15.6 μg) or placebo twice daily for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was at least a 4-point decrease (i.e., improvement) in the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating worse health status) after 12 weeks without treatment failure (defined as an increase in lower respiratory symptoms treated with a long-acting inhaled bronchodilator, glucocorticoid, or antibiotic agent). RESULTS: A total of 535 participants underwent randomization. In the modified intention-to-treat population (471 participants), 128 of 227 participants (56.4%) in the treatment group and 144 of 244 (59.0%) in the placebo group had at least a 4-point decrease in the SGRQ score (difference, −2.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], −11.6 to 6.3; adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.37; P=0.65). The mean change in the percent of predicted FEV(1) was 2.48 percentage points (95% CI, 1.49 to 3.47) in the treatment group and −0.09 percentage points (95% CI, −1.06 to 0.89) in the placebo group, and the mean change in the inspiratory capacity was 0.12 liters (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.18) in the treatment group and 0.02 liters (95% CI, −0.03 to 0.08) in the placebo group. Four serious adverse events occurred in the treatment group, and 11 occurred in the placebo group; none were deemed potentially related to the treatment or placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled dual bronchodilator therapy did not decrease respiratory symptoms in symptomatic, tobacco-exposed persons with preserved lung function as assessed by spirometry. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; RETHINC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02867761.)

We assessed COVID-19 vaccination impact on illness severity among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 August 2021-March 2022.We evaluated differences in intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital death, and length of stay among vaccinated (2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses) versus unvaccinated patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for ≥24 hours with COVID-19-like illness (CLI) and positive SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing. We calculated odds ratios for ICU admission and death and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) for time to hospital discharge adjusted for age, geographic region, calendar time, and local virus circulation.We included 27,149 SARS-CoV-2 positive hospitalizations. During both Delta and Omicron-predominant periods, protection against ICU admission was strongest among 3-dose vaccinees compared with unvaccinated patients (Delta OR [CI]: 0.52 [0.28-0.96]); Omicron OR [CI]: 0.69 [0.54-0.87]). During both periods, risk of in-hospital of death was lower among vaccinated compared with unvaccinated but ORs were overlapping; during Omicron, lowest among 3-dose vaccinees (OR [CI] 0.39 [0.28-0.54]). We observed SHR1 across all vaccination strata in both periods indicating faster discharge for vaccinated patients.COVID-19 vaccination was associated with lower rates of ICU admission and in-hospital death in both Delta and Omicron periods compared with being unvaccinated.

Methods BT10+ was an international, multicentre, follow-up study of participants who were previously enrolled in the AIR, RISA, and AIR2 trials and who had 10 or more years of follow-up since bronchial thermoplasty treatment. Data on patient demographics, quality of life, lung function, CT scans (AIR2 participants only), severe exacerbations, and health-care use during the previous year were collected at the BT10+ 10-year outcomes study visit. The primary effectiveness endpoint was durability of the thermoplasty treatment effect, determined by comparing the proportion of participants who had severe exacerbations during the first and fifth years after bronchial thermoplasty treatment with the proportion of participants who had severe exacerbations during the 12-month period before the BT10+ visit. The primary safety endpoint was the absence of clinically significant post-treatment respiratory image changes after bronchial thermoplasty, defined as bronchiectasis or bronchial stenosis as confirmed by pulmonary volumetric highresolution CT scan at the BT10+ visit (AIR2 participants only). All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03243292. The last patient was enrolled on Dec 11, 2018. The last patient completed follow-up on Jan 10, 2019.Findings The BT10+ study enrolled 192 (45%) of the 429 participants who were enrolled in the AIR, RISA, and AIR2 trials. The BT10+ participants comprised 136 who received bronchial thermoplasty (52% of the 260 participants who received bronchial thermoplasty in the original trials), and 56 sham or control participants (33% of 169 from the original trials). 18 (32%) sham or control participants received bronchial thermoplasty after the previous trials concluded. The participants included in BT10+ were followed for 10?8?15?6 years (median 12?1 years) post-treatment. Baseline characteristics were similar between participants enrolled in BT10+ and those not enrolled. Participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty had similar proportions of severe exacerbations at the BT10+ visit (34 [25%] of 136 participants) compared with 1 year (33 [24%] of 135 participants; difference 0?6%, 95% CI ?9?7 to 10?8) and 5 years (28 [22%] of 130 participants; difference 3?5%, ?6?7% to 13?6) after treatment. Quality of life measurements and spirometry were similar between year 1, year 5, and the BT10+ visit. At the BT10+ study visit, pulmonary high-resolution CT scans from AIR2 participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty showed that 13 (13%) of 97 participants had bronchiectasis. When compared with baseline high-resolution CT scans, six (7%) of 89 participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty who did not have bronchiectasis at baseline had developed bronchiectasis after treatment (5 classified as mild, 1 classified as moderate). Participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty after the original study and participants in the sham or control group also had reductions in severe exacerbations at the BT10+ visit compared with baseline.Summary Background Bronchial thermoplasty is an endoscopic treatment for uncontrolled asthma. Previous randomised clinical trials have shown that bronchial thermoplasty reduces severe exacerbations in people with asthma. However, the long-term efficacy and safety of bronchial thermoplasty beyond 5 years is unknown. The BT10+ study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of bronchial thermoplasty after 10 or more years of follow-up. Methods BT10+ was an international, multicentre, follow-up study of participants who were previously enrolled in the AIR, RISA, and AIR2 trials and who had 10 or more years of follow-up since bronchial thermoplasty treatment. Data on patient demographics, quality of life, lung function, CT scans (AIR2 participants only), severe exacerbations, and health-care use during the previous year were collected at the BT10+ 10-year outcomes study visit. The primary effectiveness endpoint was durability of the thermoplasty treatment effect, determined by comparing the proportion of participants who had severe exacerbations during the first and fifth years after bronchial thermoplasty treatment with the proportion of participants who had severe exacerbations during the 12-month period before the BT10+ visit. The primary safety endpoint was the absence of clinically significant post-treatment respiratory image changes after bronchial thermoplasty, defined as bronchiectasis or bronchial stenosis as confirmed by pulmonary volumetric high resolution CT scan at the BT10+ visit (AIR2 participants only). All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03243292. The last patient was enrolled on Dec 11, 2018. The last patient completed follow-up on Jan 10, 2019. Findings The BT10+ study enrolled 192 (45%) of the 429 participants who were enrolled in the AIR, RISA, and AIR2 trials. The BT10+ participants comprised 136 who received bronchial thermoplasty (52% of the 260 participants who received bronchial thermoplasty in the original trials), and 56 sham or control participants (33% of 169 from the original trials). 18 (32%) sham or control participants received bronchial thermoplasty after the previous trials concluded. The participants included in BT10+ were followed for 10middot8-15middot6 years (median 12middot1 years) post-treatment. Baseline characteristics were similar between participants enrolled in BT10+ and those not enrolled. Participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty had similar proportions of severe exacerbations at the BT10+ visit (34 [25%] of 136 participants) compared with 1 year (33 [24%] of 135 participants; difference 0middot6%, 95% CI -9middot7 to 10middot8) and 5 years (28 [22%] of 130 participants; difference 3middot5%, -6middot7% to 13middot6) after treatment. Quality of life measurements and spirometry were similar between year 1, year 5, and the BT10+ visit. At the BT10+ study visit, pulmonary high-resolution CT scans from AIR2 participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty showed that 13 (13%) of 97 participants had bronchiectasis. When compared with baseline high-resolution CT scans, six (7%) of 89 participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty who did not have bronchiectasis at baseline had developed bronchiectasis after treatment (5 classified as mild, 1 classified as moderate). Participants treated with bronchial thermoplasty after the original study and participants in the sham or control group also had reductions in severe exacerbations at the BT10+ visit compared with baseline.Interpretation Our findings suggest that efficacy of bronchial thermoplasty is sustained for 10 years or more, with an acceptable safety profile. Therefore, bronchial thermoplasty is a long-acting therapeutic option for patients with asthma that remains uncontrolled despite optimised medical treatment. Funding Boston Scientific. Copyright (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND Electronic health record (EHR) data provide a unique opportunity to study COVID-19 and vaccine effectiveness but require a well-defined computable phenotype of COVID-19-like illness (CLI). OBJECTIVE We evaluated the performance of diagnostic codes in identifying COVID-19 cases in emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) and inpatient settings. METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study using EHR, claims, and laboratory data from four U.S. health systems. Patients aged ≥18 years with an ED/UC or inpatient acute respiratory illness (ARI) encounter and SARS-CoV-2 PCR test during March 2020-March 2021 were included. We evaluated CLI definitions using combinations of ICD codes as follows: COVID-19-specific codes; CLI definition used in VISION network studies (VISION CLI); ARI signs, symptoms and diagnosis codes only; signs and symptoms of ARI only; random forest model definitions. We evaluated sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) using a positive test reference standard. RESULTS Among 90,952 hospitalizations and 137,067 ED/UC visits, 5,627 (6.2%) and 9,866 (7.2%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. COVID-19-specific codes had high sensitivity (91.6%) and specificity (99.6%) for hospitalized patients. The VISION CLI definition maintained high sensitivity (95.8%) but lowered specificity (45.5%). All CLI definitions had lowered sensitivity for ED/UC encounters. Random forest approaches identified distinct CLI definitions with high performance for hospital encounters and moderate performance for ED/UC encounters. CONCLUSIONS COVID-19-specific codes have high sensitivity and specificity for identifying SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Separate combinations of COVID-19-specific codes and ARI codes enhance the utility of CLI definitions for studies using EHR data in hospital and ED/UC settings. CLINICALTRIAL n/a

Estimates of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) have declined in recent months (1,2) because of waning vaccine induced immunity over time,* possible increased immune evasion by SARS-CoV-2 variants (3), or a combination of these and other factors. CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a third dose (booster) of an mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after receipt of the second mRNA vaccine dose and that immunocompromised individuals receive a third primary dose.

RATIONALE: Multiple studies have demonstrated an increased risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in heterozygous carriers of the AAT (alpha-1 antitrypsin) Z allele. However, it is not known if MZ subjects with COPD are phenotypically different from noncarriers (MM genotype) with COPD. OBJECTIVES: To assess if MZ subjects with COPD have different clinical features compared with MM subjects with COPD. METHODS: Genotypes of SERPINA1 were ascertained by using whole-genome sequencing data in three independent studies. We compared outcomes between MM subjects with COPD and MZ subjects with COPD in each study and combined the results in a meta-analysis. We performed longitudinal and survival analyses to compare outcomes in MM and MZ subjects with COPD over time. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We included 290 MZ subjects with COPD and 6,184 MM subjects with COPD across the three studies. MZ subjects had a lower FEV(1)% predicted and greater quantitative emphysema on chest computed tomography scans compared with MM subjects. In a meta-analysis, the FEV(1) was 3.9% lower (95% confidence interval [CI], −6.55% to −1.26%) and emphysema (the percentage of lung attenuation areas

Background The safety and efficacy of the AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) vaccine in a large, diverse population at increased risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the United States, Chile, and Peru has not been known. Methods In this ongoing, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial, we investigated the safety, vaccine efficacy, and immunogenicity of two doses of AZD1222 as compared with placebo in preventing the onset of symptomatic and severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) 15 days or more after the second dose in adults, including older adults, in the United States, Chile, and Peru. Results A total of 32,451 participants underwent randomization, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive AZD1222 (21,635 participants) or placebo (10,816 participants). AZD1222 was safe, with low incidences of serious and medically attended adverse events and adverse events of special interest; the incidences were similar to those observed in the placebo group. Solicited local and systemic reactions were generally mild or moderate in both groups. Overall estimated vaccine efficacy was 74.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.3 to 80.5; P

Bronchial thermoplasty is a device-based treatment for subjects ≥ 18 years of age with severe asthma poorly controlled with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. The Post-FDA Approval Clinical Trial Evaluating Bronchial Thermoplasty in Severe Persistent Asthma (PAS2) study collected data on patients with severe asthma undergoing this procedure.What are the 5-year efficacy and safety results in patients with severe asthma who have undergone bronchial thermoplasty?This was a prospective, open-label, observational, multicenter study conducted in the United States and Canada. Subjects 18 to 65 years of age who were taking inhaled corticosteroids ≥ 1,000 μg/d (beclomethasone or equivalent) and long-acting beta-agonists ≥ 80 μg/d (salmeterol or equivalent) were included. Severe exacerbations, hospitalization, ED visits, and medication usage were evaluated for the 12 months prior to and at years 1 through 5 posttreatment. Spirometry was evaluated at baseline and at years 1 through 5 posttreatment.A total of 284 subjects were enrolled at 27 centers; 227 subjects (80%) completed 5 years of follow-up. By year 5 posttreatment, the proportion of subjects with severe exacerbations, ED visits, and hospitalizations was 42.7%, 7.9%, and 4.8%, respectively, compared with 77.8%, 29.4%, and 16.1% in the 12 months prior to treatment. The proportion of subjects on maintenance oral corticosteroids decreased from 19.4% at baseline to 9.7% at 5 years. Analyses of subgroups based on baseline clinical and biomarker characteristics revealed a statistically significant clinical improvement among all subgroups.Five years after treatment, subjects experienced decreases in severe exacerbations, hospitalizations, ED visits, and corticosteroid exposure. All subgroups demonstrated clinically significant improvement, suggesting that bronchial thermoplasty improves asthma control in different asthma phenotypes.ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01350336; URL: www.gov.

BackgroundBody composition measures, specifically low weight or reduced muscle mass, are associated with mortality in COPD, but the effect of longitudinal body composition changes is undefined.Research questionIs the longitudinal loss of fat-free mass (FFM) associated with increased mortality, including in those with initially normal or elevated body composition metrics?Study design and methodsParticipants with complete data for at least one visit in the COPDGene study (n= 9,268) and the ECLIPSE study (n= 1,760) were included and monitored for 12 and 8 years, respectively. Pectoralis muscle area (PMA) was derived from thoracic CT scans and used as a proxy for FFM. A longitudinal mixed submodel for PMA and a Cox proportional hazards submodel for survival were fitted on a joint distribution, using a shared random intercept parameter and Markov chain Monte Carlo parameter estimation.ResultsBoth cohorts demonstrated a left-shifted distribution of baseline FFM, not reflected in BMI, and an increase in all-cause mortality risk associated with longitudinal loss of PMA. For each 1-cm2 PMA loss, mortality increased 3.1%(95%CI, 2.4%-3.7%; P< .001) in COPDGene, and 2.4%(95%CI, 0.9%-4.0%; P< .001) in ECLIPSE. Increased mortality risk was independent of enrollment values for BMI and disease severity [BODE (body mass, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity) index quartiles] and was significant even in participants with initially greater than average PMA.InterpretationLongitudinal loss of PMA is associated with increased all-cause mortality, regardless of BMI or initial muscle mass. Consideration of novel screening tests and further research into mechanisms contributing to muscle decline may improve risk stratification and identify novel therapeutic targets in ever smokers.

Rationale: Increasing awareness of the prevalence and significance of Preserved Ratio Impaired Spirometry (PRISm), alternatively known as restrictive or Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lu...

Background Attenuation of transforming growth factor β by blocking angiotensin II has been shown to reduce emphysema in a murine model. General population studies have demonstrated that the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) is associated with reduction of emphysema progression in former smokers and that the use of ACEis is associated with reduction of FEV1 progression in current smokers. Research Question Is use of ACEi and ARB associated with less progression of emphysema and FEV1 decline among individuals with COPD or baseline emphysema? Methods Former and current smokers from the Genetic Epidemiology of COPD Study who attended baseline and 5-year follow-up visits, did not change smoking status, and underwent chest CT imaging were included. Adjusted linear mixed models were used to evaluate progression of adjusted lung density (ALD), percent emphysema (%total lung volume Results Over 5 years of follow-up, compared with nonusers, ACEi and ARB users with COPD showed slower ALD progression (adjusted mean difference [aMD], 1.6; 95% CI, 0.34-2.9). Slowed lung function decline was not observed based on phase 1 medication (aMD of FEV1 % predicted, 0.83; 95% CI, –0.62 to 2.3), but was when analysis was limited to consistent ACEi and ARB users (aMD of FEV1 % predicted, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.14-3.6). No effect modification by smoking status was found for radiographic outcomes, and the lung function effect was more pronounced in former smokers. Results were similar among participants with baseline emphysema. Interpretation Among participants with spirometry-confirmed COPD or baseline emphysema, ACEi and ARB use was associated with slower progression of emphysema and lung function decline. Trial Registry ClinicalTrials.gov ; No.: NCT00608764; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov

Contains fulltext : 220761.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Rationale: The decades-long progression of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) renders identifying different trajectories of disease progression challenging.Objectives: To identify subtypes of patients with COPD with distinct longitudinal progression patterns using a novel machine-learning tool called "Subtype and Stage Inference" (SuStaIn) and to evaluate the utility of SuStaIn for patient stratification in COPD.Methods: We applied SuStaIn to cross-sectional computed tomography imaging markers in 3,698 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 1-4 patients and 3,479 controls from the COPDGene (COPD Genetic Epidemiology) study to identify subtypes of patients with COPD. We confirmed the identified subtypes and progression patterns using ECLIPSE (Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints) data. We assessed the utility of SuStaIn for patient stratification by comparing SuStaIn subtypes and stages at baseline with longitudinal follow-up data.Measurements and Main Results: We identified two trajectories of disease progression in COPD: a "Tissue-->Airway" subtype (n = 2,354, 70.4%), in which small airway dysfunction and emphysema precede large airway wall abnormalities, and an "Airway-->Tissue" subtype (n = 988, 29.6%), in which large airway wall abnormalities precede emphysema and small airway dysfunction. Subtypes were reproducible in ECLIPSE. Baseline stage in both subtypes correlated with future FEV1/FVC decline (r = -0.16 [P < 0.001] in the Tissue-->Airway group; r = -0.14 [P = 0.011] in the Airway-->Tissue group). SuStaIn placed 30% of smokers with normal lung function at elevated stages, suggesting imaging changes consistent with early COPD. Individuals with early changes were 2.5 times more likely to meet COPD diagnostic criteria at follow-up.Conclusions: We demonstrate two distinct patterns of disease progression in COPD using SuStaIn, likely representing different endotypes. One third of healthy smokers have detectable imaging changes, suggesting a new biomarker of "early COPD."

Contains fulltext : 194255.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Emphysema has considerable variability in its regional distribution. Craniocaudal emphysema distribution is an important predictor of the response to lung volume reduction. However, there is little consensus regarding how to define upper lobe-predominant and lower lobe-predominant emphysema subtypes. Consequently, the clinical and genetic associations with these subtypes are poorly characterized. METHODS: We sought to identify subgroups characterized by upper-lobe or lower-lobe emphysema predominance and comparable amounts of total emphysema by analyzing data from 9,210 smokers without alpha-1-antitrypsin deficiency in the Genetic Epidemiology of COPD (COPDGene) cohort. CT densitometric emphysema was measured in each lung lobe. Random forest clustering was applied to lobar emphysema variables after regressing out the effects of total emphysema. Clusters were tested for association with clinical and imaging outcomes at baseline and at 5-year follow-up. Their associations with genetic variants were also compared. RESULTS: Three clusters were identified: minimal emphysema (n = 1,312), upper lobe-predominant emphysema (n = 905), and lower lobe-predominant emphysema (n = 796). Despite a similar amount of total emphysema, the lower-lobe group had more severe airflow obstruction at baseline and higher rates of metabolic syndrome compared with subjects with upper-lobe predominance. The group with upper-lobe predominance had greater 5-year progression of emphysema, gas trapping, and dyspnea. Differential associations with known COPD genetic risk variants were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Subgroups of smokers defined by upper-lobe or lower-lobe emphysema predominance exhibit different functional and radiological disease progression rates, and the upper-lobe predominant subtype shows evidence of association with known COPD genetic risk variants. These subgroups may be useful in the development of personalized treatments for COPD.

BackgroundObservational studies suggest that beta-blockers may reduce the risk of exacerbations and death in patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but these findings have not been confirmed in randomized trials.MethodsIn this prospective, randomized trial, we assigned patients between the ages of 40 and 85 years who had COPD to receive either a beta-blocker (extended-release metoprolol) or placebo. All the patients had a clinical history of COPD, along with moderate airflow limitation and an increased risk of exacerbations, as evidenced by a history of exacerbations during the previous year or the prescribed use of supplemental oxygen. We excluded patients who were already taking a beta-blocker or who had an established indication for the use of such drugs. The primary end point was the time until the first exacerbation of COPD during the treatment period, which ranged from 336 to 350 days, depending on the adjusted dose of metoprolol.ResultsA total of 532 patients underwent randomization. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 65.0±7.8 years; the mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 41.1±16.3% of the predicted value. The trial was stopped early because of futility with respect to the primary end point and safety concerns. There was no significant between-group difference in the median time until the first exacerbation, which was 202 days in the metoprolol group and 222 days in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metoprolol vs. placebo, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.32; P = 0.66). Metoprolol was associated with a higher risk of exacerbation leading to hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.83). The frequency of side effects that were possibly related to metoprolol was similar in the two groups, as was the overall rate of nonrespiratory serious adverse events. During the treatment period, there were 11 deaths in the metoprolol group and 5 in the placebo group.ConclusionsAmong patients with moderate or severe COPD who did not have an established indication for beta-blocker use, the time until the first COPD exacerbation was similar in the metoprolol group and the placebo group. Hospitalization for exacerbation was more common among the patients treated with metoprolol. (Funded by the Department of Defense; BLOCK COPD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02587351.).

Background: BT is an endoscopic treatment for uncontrolled asthma. The long-term efficacy and safety of BT beyond 5 years is not known. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of BT at 10+ years follow-up. Methods: BT10+ is an international, multi-center, ≥10yrs follow-up study on subjects who were previously enrolled in the AIR, RISA and AIR2 trials. Demographics, quality of life, lung function, severe exacerbations (SE, defined as exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids) and healthcare utilisation for the previous year were collected. Results: Of the 429 subjects enrolled in the previous studies, 192 subjects had a follow-up at 10.6-15.8 years (12.1 median) post-treatment at 16 centers: 137 treated with BT during a previous study, 18 control/sham treated with BT post-study, and 37 control/sham only. Rates for hospitalisations, emergency visits and SE for BT subjects from the year prior to BT to the year prior to the BT 10+ visit are shown in Figure 1. No increases in hospitalisations or ER visits were observed compared to baseline and SE were stable compared to Year 1. No deterioration in rates were shown for control/sham only and post-study BT patients. Quality of life and spirometry results were comparable between Years 1, 5, and 10+ for all groups. Conclusion: The BT10+ study suggests that efficacy of bronchial thermoplasty is sustained over 10 years. Funding: Boston Scientific

BACKGROUND: Self-management of patients with COPD has received increasing attention in recent years given its association with improved outcomes. There is a scarcity of feasible interventions that can improve self-management abilities. We recently reported the positive effect of health coaching, started at the time of hospital discharge, on re-hospitalizations and emergency department visits for patients with COPD admitted for an exacerbation. In this substudy, we aimed to investigate the effects of health coaching delivered by a respiratory therapist or a nurse compared with guideline-based usual care on self-management abilities in COPD. METHODS: Self-management was measured by using the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire mastery domain and was assessed at baseline, at 6 months, and at 12 months after hospitalization. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifteen subjects hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation were randomized to the intervention or the control. The mean change in the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire mastery score from baseline to month 6 was Δ0.58 32 ± 1.29 on the intervention arm and Δ0.17 32 ± 1.14 on the control arm (P = .02). Of the intervention subjects, 55% had at least a 0.5-point increase in Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire mastery (minimum clinically important difference) compared with 38% in the control group. Health coaching was an independent predictor of the minimum clinically important difference or greater change in the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire mastery score at 6 months after initiation of the intervention (odds ratio 1.95, 95% CI 1.01–3.79). The changes in the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire mastery score at 12 months showed a trend but did not attain statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Health coaching delivered by a respiratory therapist or a nurse improved self-management abilities when applied to subjects with COPD after hospital discharge for an exacerbation. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01058486, Mayo IRB 09–004341).

Rationale: The American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society defines a positive bronchodilator response (BDR) by a composite of BDR in either forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) and/or forced vital capacity (FVC) greater than or equal to 12% and 200 ml (ATS-BDR). We hypothesized that ATS-BDR components would be differentially associated with important chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) outcomes. Objectives: To examine whether ATS-BDR components are differentially associated with clinical, functional, and radiographic features in COPD. Methods: We included subjects with COPD enrolled in the COPDGene study. In the main analysis, we excluded subjects with self-reported asthma. We categorized BDR into the following: 1) No-BDR, no BDR in either FEV(1) or FVC; 2) FEV(1)-BDR, BDR in FEV(1) but no BDR in FVC; 3) FVC-BDR, BDR in FVC but no BDR in FEV(1); and 4) Combined-BDR, BDR in both FEV(1) and FVC. We constructed multivariable logistic, linear, zero-inflated negative binomial, and Cox hazards models to examine the association of BDR categories with symptoms, computed tomography findings, change in FEV(1) over time, respiratory exacerbations, and mortality. We also created models using the ATS BDR definition (ATS-BDR) as the main independent variable. Results: Of 3,340 COPD subjects included in the analysis, 1,083 (32.43%) had ATS-BDR, 182 (5.45%) had FEV(1)-BDR, 522 (15.63%) had FVC-BDR, and 379 (11.34%) had Combined-BDR. All BDR categories were associated with FEV(1) decline compared with No-BDR. Compared with No-BDR, both ATS-BDR and Combined-BDR were associated with higher functional residual capacity %predicted, greater internal perimeter of 10 mm, and greater 6-minute-walk distance. In contrast to ATS-BDR, Combined-BDR was independently associated with less emphysema (adjusted beta regression coefficient, −1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], −2.68 to −0.65; P = 0.001), more frequent respiratory exacerbations (incidence rate ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.03–1.50; P = 0.02) and severe exacerbations (incidence rate ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.05–1.71; P = 0.02), and lower mortality (adjusted hazards ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58–0.99; P = 0.046). Sensitivity analysis that included subjects with self-reported history of asthma showed similar findings. Conclusions: BDR in both FEV(1) and FVC indicates a COPD phenotype with asthma-like characteristics, and provides clinically more meaningful information than current definitions of BDR.

Benralizumab is an interleukin-5 receptor α-directed cytolytic monoclonal antibody that has been shown to safely reduce exacerbations and improve lung function for patients with asthma. We assessed the long-term safety and efficacy of benralizumab for patients with severe, uncontrolled eosinophilic asthma.We conducted a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 extension study at 447 sites in 24 countries. Eligible patients had to have completed the SIROCCO or CALIMA trials and remained on subcutaneous benralizumab 30 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) or every 8 weeks (Q8W). Patients who had received placebo in those trials were re-randomised in a 1:1 ratio, using an interactive web-based system, to benralizumab 30 mg either Q4W or Q8W (first three doses 4 weeks apart). Treatment lasted for 56 weeks for adult patients (age ≥18 years) and 108 weeks for adolescent patients (age 12-17 years). The primary endpoint was the safety and tolerability of the two dosing regimens of benralizumab up to 68 weeks for adult patients (including the follow-up visit post-treatment) and up to 56 weeks for adolescent patients. This endpoint was assessed in the full analysis set, which included all patients from the SIROCCO and CALIMA predecessor studies who received at least one dose of study treatment in BORA and did not continue into another trial. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02258542).Between Nov 19, 2014, and July 6, 2016, we enrolled 1926 patients, of whom 633 had received benralizumab Q4W and 639 had received benralizumab Q8W in SIROCCO or CALIMA. The remaining 654 patients had received placebo in those trials and were randomly re-assigned in this trial to receive benralizumab Q4W (n=320) or Q8W (n=334). 1576 patients, including 783 who received benralizumab Q4W (265 newly assigned) and 793 who received benralizumab Q8W (281 newly assigned), were included in the full analysis set. The most common adverse events in all groups were viral upper respiratory tract infection (14-16%) and worsening asthma (7-10%). The most common serious adverse events were worsening asthma (3-4%), pneumonia (1% to 1%), and pneumonia caused by bacterial infection (0-1%). The percentages of patients who had any on-treatment adverse event, any serious adverse event, or any adverse event leading to treatment discontinuation during BORA were similar between patients originally assigned benralizumab and those originally assigned placebo and between benralizumab treatment regimens. The percentage of patients who had any adverse event was similar between SIROCCO or CALIMA (71-75%; benralizumab group only) and BORA (65-71%), as was the percentage of patients who had an adverse event that led to treatment discontinuation (2% in SIROCCO and CALIMA vs 2-3% in BORA).The 2 years of safety results validate that observations observed in the first year of benralizumab continued through a second year of treatment. No new consequences of long-term eosinophil depletion occurred, and the incidence of other adverse events, including opportunistic infections, were similar during the second year.AstraZeneca and Kyowa Hakko Kirin.

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Present-day diagnostic criteria are largely based solely on spirometric criteria. Accumulating evidence has identified a substantial number of individuals without spirometric evidence of COPD who suffer from respiratory symptoms and/or increased morbidity and mortality. There is a clear need for an expanded definition of COPD that is linked to physiologic, structural (computed tomography [CT]) and clinical evidence of disease. Using data from the COPD Genetic Epidemiology study (COPDGene®), we hypothesized that an integrated approach that includes environmental exposure, clinical symptoms, chest CT imaging and spirometry better defines disease and captures the likelihood of progression of respiratory obstruction and mortality. Methods: Four key disease characteristics – environmental exposure (cigarette smoking), clinical symptoms (dyspnea and/or chronic bronchitis), chest CT imaging abnormalities (emphysema, gas trapping and/or airway wall thickening), and abnormal spirometry – were evaluated in a group of 8784 current and former smokers who were participants in COPDGene® Phase 1. Using these 4 disease characteristics, 8 categories of participants were identified and evaluated for odds of spirometric disease progression (FEV1 > 350 ml loss over 5 years), and the hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was examined. Results: Using smokers without symptoms, CT imaging abnormalities or airflow obstruction as the reference population, individuals were classified as Possible COPD, Probable COPD and Definite COPD. Current Global initiative for obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) criteria would diagnose 4062 (46%) of the 8784 study participants with COPD. The proposed COPDGene® 2019 diagnostic criteria would add an additional 3144 participants. Under the new criteria, 82% of the 8784 study participants would be diagnosed with Possible, Probable or Definite COPD. These COPD groups showed increased risk of disease progression and mortality. Mortality increased in patients as the number of their COPD characteristics increased, with a maximum hazard ratio for all cause-mortality of 5.18 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.15–6.48) in those with all 4 disease characteristics. Conclusions: A substantial portion of smokers with respiratory symptoms and imaging abnormalities do not manifest spirometric obstruction as defined by population normals. These individuals are at significant risk of death and spirometric disease progression. We propose to redefine the diagnosis of COPD through an integrated approach using environmental exposure, clinical symptoms, CT imaging and spirometric criteria. These expanded criteria offer the potential to stimulate both current and future interventions that could slow or halt disease progression in patients before disability or irreversible lung structural changes develop.

Background Chronic bronchitis (CB) increases risk of COPD exacerbations. We have shown that the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) CB definition identifies patients with a similar clinical phenotype as classically defined CB. Whether the SGRQ CB definition is a predictor of future COPD exacerbations is unknown. Methods We analyzed 7,557 smokers with normal spirometry and Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease stage 1-4 COPD in the Genetic Epidemiology of COPD study with longitudinal follow-up data on exacerbations. Subjects were divided into classic CB+ or classic CB–, using the classic definition. In addition, subjects were divided into SGRQ CB+ or SGRQ CB–. Exacerbation frequency and severe exacerbation frequency were determined in each group. Multivariable linear regressions were performed for exacerbation frequency with either classic CB or SGRQ CB and relevant covariates. Results There were 1,434 classic CB+ subjects and 2,290 SGRQ CB+ subjects. The classic CB+ group had a greater exacerbation frequency compared with the classic CB– group (0.69 ± 1.26 vs 0.36 ± 0.90 exacerbations per patient per year; P Conclusions The SGRQ CB definition identified more subjects at risk for future exacerbations than the classic CB definition. SGRQ CB was at least a similar if not better predictor of future exacerbations than classic CB.

Kara Johnson,1,2 Charlene E McEvoy,3 Sakina Naqvi,1,4 Chris Wendt,1 Ronald A Reilkoff,4,5 Ken M Kunisaki,1 Erin E Wetherbee,1 David Nelson,6 Rabindra Tirouvanziam,7 Dennis E Niewoehner1 1Pulmonary Section, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN, 2Sanford Health, Fargo, ND, 3Pulmonary Section, HealthPartners Research Foundation, St Paul, 4HealthEast Maplewood Clinic, Maplewood, 5Pulmonary Section, University of Minnesota Medical Center, 6Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes Research, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN, 7Center for Cystic Fibrosis and Airways Disease Research, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA Background: Clinical outcomes are worse in patients with COPD and chronic bronchitis. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is commonly prescribed for such patients but with uncertain clinical benefits. We postulated that oral NAC, at much larger doses than those ordinarily prescribed, would improve clinical outcomes in a subset of patients with COPD and chronic bronchitis. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether very high-dose NAC would improve respiratory health status in patients with COPD and chronic bronchitis. Methods: Patients with COPD and chronic bronchitis were enrolled in a randomized, controlled, double-blinded trial. Patients received oral NAC (1,800mg) or matching placebo twice daily for 8weeks in addition to their usual respiratory medications. The primary outcome, respiratory health status, was assessed by changes in the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire. The effects of NAC on lung function and circulating markers of oxidative stress and inflammation were also evaluated. Results: We terminated the study prematurely because new external information suggested the possibility of a safety issue. Of the planned 130 patients, 51 were randomized and 45 (22 in the placebo arm and 23 in the NAC arm) completed the study. There was no statistically significant difference between changes in the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire total score, comparing NAC to placebo (adjusted mean difference, 0.1U; 95% CI, -7.8 to 8.18U; P=0.97). There were also no significant NAC-related improvements in any of the secondary outcomes. Conclusion: In this 8-week trial, we were unable to show any clinical benefit from a very high dose of NAC in patients with COPD and chronic bronchitis. Keywords: COPD, chronic bronchitis, N-acetylcysteine&nbsp

Spirometric Volumes and Breathlessness Across Levels of Airflow Limitation : The COPDGene Study.

BACKGROUND:Eosinophilic airway inflammation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with exacerbations and responsivity to steroids, suggesting potential shared mechanisms with eosinophilic asthma. However, there is no consistent blood eosinophil count that has been used to define the increased exacerbation risk. OBJECTIVE:We sought to investigate blood eosinophil counts associated with exacerbation risk in patients with COPD. METHODS:Blood eosinophil counts and exacerbation risk were analyzed in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD by using 2 independent studies of former and current smokers with longitudinal data. The Genetic Epidemiology of COPD (COPDGene) study was analyzed for discovery (n=1,553), and the Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints (ECLIPSE) study was analyzed for validation (n=1,895). Asubset of the ECLIPSE study subjects were used to assess the stability of blood eosinophil counts over time. RESULTS:COPD exacerbation risk increased with higher eosinophil counts. An eosinophil count threshold of 300cells/μL or greater showed adjusted incidence rate ratios for exacerbations of 1.32 in the COPDGene study (95% CI, 1.10-1.63). The cutoff of 300cells/μL or greater was validated for prospective risk of exacerbation in the ECLIPSE study, with adjusted incidence rate ratios of 1.22 (95% CI, 1.06-1.41) using 3-year follow-up data. Stratified analysis confirmed that the increased exacerbation risk associated with an eosinophil count of 300cells/μL or greater was driven by subjects with a history of frequent exacerbations in both the COPDGene and ECLIPSE studies. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and blood eosinophil counts of 300cells/μL or greater had an increased risk exacerbations in the COPDGene study, which was prospectively validated in the ECLIPSE study.

BACKGROUND: We recently demonstrated in a randomized study the feasibility and effectiveness of telephone-based health coaching using motivational interviewing on decreasing hospital readmissions and improving quality of life at 6 and 12 months after hospital discharge. In this qualitative study, we sought to explore the health-coaching intervention as seen from the perspective of the participants who received the intervention and the coaches who delivered it. METHODS: Semistructured participant interviews (n = 24) and a focus group of all health coaches (n = 3) who participated in this study were conducted. Interviews and focus group were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analyzed using coding and categorizing techniques and thematic analysis. Mixed-method triangulation was used to merge quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: Content analysis revealed 4 predominant themes of the coaching intervention: health-coaching relationship, higher participant confidence and reassurance (most related to improvement in physical quality of life), improved health-care system access (most related to decreased hospital readmissions), and increased awareness of COPD symptoms (most related to improvement in emotional quality of life). The strongest theme was the relationship with the health coach, including coach style and motivational interviewing approach. Health coaches9 focus group also noted the importance of the coaching relationship as the most significant theme. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided themes to further inform the delivery and implementation of health-coaching interventions in patients with COPD after hospital discharge. Health coaching forged partnerships and created a platform for patient engagement, which was confirmed by both participants and health coaches.

Bronchial thermoplasty is an endoscopic therapy for severe asthma. The previously reported, randomised sham-controlled AIR2 (Asthma Intervention Research 2) trial showed a significant reduction in severe asthma exacerbations, emergency department visits and hospitalisations after bronchial thermoplasty. More “real-world” clinical outcome data is needed. This article compares outcomes in bronchial thermoplasty subjects with 3 years of follow-up from the ongoing, post-market PAS2 (Post-FDA Approval Clinical Trial Evaluating Bronchial Thermoplasty in Severe Persistent Asthma) study with those from the AIR2 trial. 279 subjects were treated with bronchial thermoplasty in the PAS2 study. We compared the first 190 PAS2 subjects with the 190 bronchial thermoplasty-treated subjects in the AIR2 trial at 3 years of follow-up. The PAS2 subjects were older (mean age 45.9 versus 40.7 years) and more obese (mean body mass index 32.5 versus 29.3 kg·m−2) and took higher doses of inhaled corticosteroids (mean dose 2301 versus 1961 μg·day−1). More PAS2 subjects had experienced severe exacerbations (74% versus 52%) and hospitalisations (15.3% versus 4.2%) in the 12 months prior to bronchial thermoplasty. At year 3 after bronchial thermoplasty, the percentage of PAS2 subjects with severe exacerbations, emergency department visits and hospitalisations significantly decreased by 45%, 55% and 40%, respectively, echoing the AIR2 results. The PAS2 study demonstrates similar improvements in asthma control after bronchial thermoplasty compared with the AIR2 trial despite enrolling subjects who may have had poorer asthma control., A comparison of the results obtained thus far in PAS2 with AIR2 evaluating bronchial thermoplasty in severe asthma http://ow.ly/sB0X30csDuE