Abstract
IntroductionRecent randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in Bronchiectasis have failed to reach their primary endpoints, suggesting a need to reassess how we measure treatment response. Exacerbations, quality of life (QOL) and lung function are the most common endpoints evaluated in bronchiectasis clinical trials. We aimed to determine the relationship between responses in terms of reduced exacerbations, improved symptoms and lung function in bronchiectasis.MethodsWe evaluated treatment response in 3 RCTs that evaluated mucoactive therapy (inhaled Mannitol), an oral anti-inflammatory/antibiotic (Azithromycin) and an inhaled antibiotic (Aztreonam). Treatment response was defined by absence of exacerbations during follow-up, an improvement of QOL above the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and an improvement in FEV1 of ≥100 mL from baseline.Measurements and main resultsCumulatively the three trials included 984 patients. Changes in FEV1, QOL and exacerbations were heterogeneous in all trials analysed. Improvements in QOL were not correlated to changes in FEV1 in the azithromycin and aztreonam trials (r=−0.17, p=0.1 and r=0.04, p=0.4) and weakly correlated in the mannitol trial (r=0.22, p<0.0001). An important placebo effect was observed in all trials, especially regarding improvements in QOL. Clinical meaningful lung function improvements were rare across all trials evaluated, suggesting that FEV1 is not a responsive measure in bronchiectasis.ConclusionsImprovements in lung function, symptoms and exacerbation frequency are dissociated in bronchiectasis. FEV1 is poorly responsive and poorly correlated with other key outcome measures. Clinical parameters are poorly predictive of treatment response suggesting the need to develop biomarkers to identify responders
Funder
European Respiratory Society
Publisher
European Respiratory Society (ERS)
Subject
Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
Cited by
30 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献