Anthony De Soyza

The Bronchiectasis Severity Index. An International Derivation and Validation Study

RATIONALE There are no risk stratification tools for morbidity and mortality in bronchiectasis. Identifying patients at risk of exacerbations, hospital admissions, and mortality is vital for future research. OBJECTIVES This study describes the derivation and validation of the Bronchiectasis Severity Index (BSI). METHODS Derivation of the BSI used data from a prospective cohort study (Edinburgh, UK, 2008-2012) enrolling 608 patients. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to identify independent predictors of mortality and hospitalization over 4-year follow-up. The score was validated in independent cohorts from Dundee, UK (n = 218); Leuven, Belgium (n = 253); Monza, Italy (n = 105); and Newcastle, UK (n = 126). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Independent predictors of future hospitalization were prior hospital admissions, Medical Research Council dyspnea score greater than or equal to 4, FEV1 < 30% predicted, Pseudomonas aeruginosa colonization, colonization with other pathogenic organisms, and three or more lobes involved on high-resolution computed tomography. Independent predictors of mortality were older age, low FEV1, lower body mass index, prior hospitalization, and three or more exacerbations in the year before the study. The derived BSI predicted mortality and hospitalization: area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.86) for mortality and AUC 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.84-0.91) for hospitalization, respectively. There was a clear difference in exacerbation frequency and quality of life using the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire between patients classified as low, intermediate, and high risk by the score (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). In the validation cohorts, the AUC for mortality ranged from 0.81 to 0.84 and for hospitalization from 0.80 to 0.88. CONCLUSIONS The BSI is a useful clinical predictive tool that identifies patients at risk of future mortality, hospitalization, and exacerbations across healthcare systems.

Inhaled, dual release liposomal ciprofloxacin in non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis (ORBIT-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background The delivery of antipseudomonal antibiotics by inhalation to Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected subjects with non-cystic fibrosis (CF) bronchiectasis is a logical extension of treatment strategies successfully developed in CF bronchiectasis. Dual release ciprofloxacin for inhalation (DRCFI) contains liposomal ciprofloxacin, formulated to optimise airway antibiotic delivery. Methods Phase II, 24-week Australian/New Zealand multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 42 adult bronchiectasis subjects with ≥2 pulmonary exacerbations in the prior 12 months and ciprofloxacin-sensitive P aeruginosa at screening. Subjects received DRCFI or placebo in three treatment cycles of 28 days on/28 days off. The primary outcome was change in sputum P aeruginosa bacterial density to the end of treatment cycle 1 (day 28), analysed by modified intention to treat (mITT). Key secondary outcomes included safety and time to first pulmonary exacerbation—after reaching the pulmonary exacerbation endpoint subjects discontinued study drug although remained in the study. Results DRCFI resulted in a mean (SD) 4.2 (3.7) log10 CFU/g reduction in P aeruginosa bacterial density at day 28 (vs −0.08 (3.8) with placebo, p=0.002). DRCFI treatment delayed time to first pulmonary exacerbation (median 134 vs 58 days, p=0.057 mITT, p=0.046 per protocol). DRCFI was well tolerated with a similar incidence of systemic adverse events to the placebo group, but fewer pulmonary adverse events. Conclusions Once-daily inhaled DRCFI demonstrated potent antipseudomonal microbiological efficacy in adults with non-CF bronchiectasis and ciprofloxacin-sensitive P aeruginosa. In this modest-sized phase II study, DRCFI was also well tolerated and delayed time to first pulmonary exacerbation in the per protocol population.

Ciprofloxacin dry powder for inhalation in non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis: a phase II randomised study

This phase II, randomised, double-blind, multicentre study (NCT00930982) investigated the safety and efficacy of ciprofloxacin dry powder for inhalation (DPI) in patients with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis. Adults who were culture positive for pre-defined potential respiratory pathogens (including Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Haemophilus influenzae) were randomised to ciprofloxacin DPI 32.5 mg or placebo administered twice daily for 28 days (with 56 days of follow-up). Bacterial density in sputum (primary end-point), pulmonary function tests, health-related quality of life and safety were monitored throughout the study. 60 subjects received ciprofloxacin DPI 32.5 mg and 64 received placebo. Subjects on ciprofloxacin DPI had a significant reduction (p<0.001) in total sputum bacterial load at the end of treatment (-3.62 log10 CFU·g−1 (range -9.78–5.02 log10 CFU·g−1)) compared with placebo (-0.27 log10 CFU·g−1 (range -7.96–5.25 log10 CFU·g−1)); the counts increased thereafter. In the ciprofloxacin DPI group, 14 (35%) out of 40 subjects reported pathogen eradication at end of treatment versus four (8%) out of 49 in the placebo group (p=0.001). No abnormal safety results were reported and rates of bronchospasm were low. Ciprofloxacin DPI 32.5 mg twice daily for 28 days was well tolerated and achieved significant reductions in total bacterial load compared with placebo in subjects with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis.

Burkholderia cepacia complex genomovars and pulmonary transplantation outcomes in patients with cystic fibrosis

Burkholderia cepacia is a group of organisms that comprises seven genotypically distinct species (B cepacia genomovars I-VII), which are collectively known as the B cepacia complex. Preoperative infection with B cepacia is associated with a poor prognosis in lung transplant recipients with cystic fibrosis. Many centres do not, therefore, offer transplants to these individuals. Our aim was to ascertain whether or not post-transplant mortality is affected by pretransplant genomovar status. We studied archived isolates with PCR-based methods, and recorded excessive mortality in patients infected with B cepacia genomovar III, but not in those infected with other genomovars.

Lung transplantation for patients with cystic fibrosis and Burkholderia cepacia complex infection: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND Pre-operative infection with organisms from the Burkholderia cepacia complex (BCC), particularly B cenocepacia, has been linked with a poorer prognosis after transplantation compared to patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) without this infection. Therefore, many transplant centers do not list these patients for transplantation. METHODS We report the early and long-term results of a cohort of lung transplant recipients with CF and pre-operative BCC infection. Patients with pre-transplantation BCC infection were identified by case-note review. BCC species status was assigned by polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based techniques. Survival rates were compared to recipients with CF without BCC infection. Survival rates in BCC subgroups were also compared, and then further analyzed pre- and post-2001, when a new immunosuppressive and antibiotic regime was introduced for such patients. RESULTS Two hundred sixteen patients with CF underwent lung transplantation and 22 had confirmed pre-operative BCC infection, with 12 of these being B cenocepacia. Nine B cenocepacia-infected recipients died within the first year, and in 8 BCC sepsis was considered to be the cause of death. Despite instituting a tailored peri-operative immunosuppressive and microbiologic care approach for such patients, post-transplantation BCC septic deaths occurred frequently in those with pre-transplantation B cenocepacia infection. In contrast, recipients infected with other BCC species had significantly better outcomes, with post-transplantation survival comparable to other recipients with CF. CONCLUSIONS Mortality in patients with B cenocepacia infection was unacceptably high and has led to our center no longer accepting patients with this condition onto the lung transplant waiting list. Long-term survival in the non-B cenocepacia BCC group was excellent, without high rates of acute rejection or bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) longer term, and these patients continue to be considered for lung transplantation.

Etiology of Non–Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis in Adults and Its Correlation to Disease Severity

RATIONALE Testing for underlying etiology is a key part of bronchiectasis management, but it is unclear whether the same extent of testing is required across the spectrum of disease severity. OBJECTIVES The aim of the present study was to identify the etiology of bronchiectasis across European cohorts and according to different levels of disease severity. METHODS We conducted an analysis of seven databases of adult outpatients with bronchiectasis prospectively enrolled at the bronchiectasis clinics of university teaching hospitals in Monza, Italy; Dundee and Newcastle, United Kingdom; Leuven, Belgium; Barcelona, Spain; Athens, Greece; and Galway, Ireland. All the patients at every site underwent the same comprehensive diagnostic workup as suggested by the British Thoracic Society. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Among the 1,258 patients enrolled, an etiology of bronchiectasis was determined in 60%, including postinfective (20%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease related (15%), connective tissue disease related (10%), immunodeficiency related (5.8%), and asthma related (3.3%). An etiology leading to a change in patients management was identified in 13% of the cases. No significant differences in the etiology of bronchiectasis were present across different levels of disease severity, with the exception of a higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-related bronchiectasis (P < 0.001) and a lower prevalence of idiopathic bronchiectasis (P = 0.029) in patients with severe disease. CONCLUSIONS Physicians should not be guided by disease severity in suspecting specific etiologies in patients with bronchiectasis, although idiopathic bronchiectasis appears to be less common in patients with the most severe disease.

Aztreonam for inhalation solution in patients with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis (AIR-BX1 and AIR-BX2): Two randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND The clinical benefit of inhaled antibiotics in non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis has not been established in randomised controlled trials. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of aztreonam for inhalation solution (AZLI) in patients with non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis and Gram-negative bacterial colonisation. METHODS AIR-BX1 and AIR-BX2 were two double-blind, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials, which included patients aged 18 years or older who had bronchiectasis and history of positive sputum or bronchoscopic culture for target Gram-negative organisms. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either AZLI or placebo (1:1). Randomisation was done without stratification and the code was generated by a Gilead designee. In both studies, two 4-week courses of AZLI 75 mg or placebo (three-times daily; eFlow nebulizer) were each followed by a 4-week off-treatment period. Primary endpoint was change from baseline Quality of Life-Bronchiectasis Respiratory Symptoms scores (QOL-B-RSS) at 4 weeks. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers are NCT01313624 for AIR-BX1 and NCT01314716 for AIR-BX2. FINDINGS We recruited participants from 47 ambulatory clinics for AIR-BX1 and 65 ambulatory clinics for AIR-BX2; studies were done between April 25, 2011, and July 1, 2013. In AIR-BX1, of the 348 patients screened, 134 were randomly assigned to receive AZLI and 132 to receive placebo. In AIR-BX2, of the 404 patients screened, 136 were randomly assigned to receive AZLI and 138 to receive placebo. The difference between AZLI and placebo for adjusted mean change from baseline QOL-B-RSS was not significant at 4 weeks (0.8 [95% CI -3.1 to 4.7], p=0.68) in AIR-BX1, but was significant (4.6 [1.1 to 8.2], p=0.011) in AIR-BX2. The 4.6 point difference in QOL-B-RSS after 4 weeks in AIR-BX2 was not deemed clinically significant. In both studies, treatment-related adverse events were more common in the AZLI group than in the placebo group, as were discontinuations from adverse events. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events were dyspnea, cough, and increased sputum. Each was more common for AZLI-treated than for placebo-treated patients, but the incidences were more balanced in AIR-BX2. INTERPRETATION AZLI treatment did not provide significant clinical benefit in non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis, as measured by QOL-B-RSS, suggesting a continued need for placebo-controlled studies to establish the clinical benefit of inhaled antibiotics in patients with this disorder. FUNDING Gilead Sciences.

European Respiratory Society guidelines for the management of adult bronchiectasis

Bronchiectasis in adults is a chronic disorder associated with poor quality of life and frequent exacerbations in many patients. There have been no previous international guidelines. The European Respiratory Society guidelines for the management of adult bronchiectasis describe the appropriate investigation and treatment strategies determined by a systematic review of the literature. A multidisciplinary group representing respiratory medicine, microbiology, physiotherapy, thoracic surgery, primary care, methodology and patients considered the most relevant clinical questions (for both clinicians and patients) related to management of bronchiectasis. Nine key clinical questions were generated and a systematic review was conducted to identify published systematic reviews, randomised clinical trials and observational studies that answered these questions. We used the GRADE approach to define the quality of the evidence and the level of recommendations. The resulting guideline addresses the investigation of underlying causes of bronchiectasis, treatment of exacerbations, pathogen eradication, long term antibiotic treatment, anti-inflammatories, mucoactive drugs, bronchodilators, surgical treatment and respiratory physiotherapy. These recommendations can be used to benchmark quality of care for people with bronchiectasis across Europe and to improve outcomes. The publication of the first ERS guidelines for bronchiectasis http://ow.ly/wQSO30dU0nE

Research priorities in bronchiectasis: a consensus statement from the EMBARC Clinical Research Collaboration.

Bronchiectasis is a disease of renewed interest in light of an increase in prevalence and increasing burden on international healthcare systems. There are no licensed therapies, and large gaps in knowledge in terms of epidemiology, pathophysiology and therapy. The European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration (EMBARC) is a European Respiratory Society (ERS) Clinical Research Collaboration, funded by ERS to promote high-quality research in bronchiectasis. The objective of this consensus statement was to define research priorities in bronchiectasis. From 2014 to 2015, EMBARC used a modified Delphi process among European bronchiectasis experts to reach a consensus on 55 key research priorities in this field. During the same period, the European Lung Foundation collected 711 questionnaires from adult patients with bronchiectasis and their carers from 22 European countries reporting important research priorities from their perspective. This consensus statement reports recommendations for bronchiectasis research after integrating both physicians and patients priorities, as well as those uniquely identified by the two groups. Priorities identified in this consensus statement provide the clearest possible roadmap towards improving our understanding of the disease and the quality of care for patients with bronchiectasis. EMBARC consensus statement identifies research priorities in bronchiectasis as determined by physicians and patients http://ow.ly/lmcj300a2iS

Inhaled mannitol for non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis: a randomised, controlled trial

Rationale Bronchiectasis is characterised by excessive production of mucus and pulmonary exacerbations. Inhaled osmotic agents may enhance mucociliary clearance, but few long-term clinical trials have been conducted. Objectives To determine the impact of inhaled mannitol on exacerbation rates in patients with non-cystic fibrosis (CF) bronchiectasis. Secondary endpoints included time to first exacerbation, duration of exacerbations, antibiotic use for exacerbations and quality of life (QOL) (St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire, SGRQ). Methods Patients with non-CF bronchiectasis and a history of chronic excess production of sputum and ≥2 pulmonary exacerbations in the previous 12 months were randomised (1:1) to 52 weeks treatment with inhaled mannitol 400 mg or low-dose mannitol control twice a day. Patients were 18–85 years of age, baseline FEV1 ≥40% and ≤85% predicted and a baseline SGRQ score ≥30. Main results 461 patients (233 in the mannitol and 228 in the control arm) were treated. Baseline demographics were similar in the two arms. The exacerbation rate was not significantly reduced on mannitol (rate ratio 0.92, p=0.31). However, time to first exacerbation was increased on mannitol (HR 0.78, p=0.022). SGRQ score was improved on mannitol compared with low-dose mannitol control (−2.4 units, p=0.046). Adverse events were similar between groups. Conclusions Mannitol 400 mg inhaled twice daily for 12 months in patients with clinically significant bronchiectasis did not significantly reduce exacerbation rates. There were statistically significant improvements in time to first exacerbation and QOL. Mannitol therapy was safe and well tolerated. Trial registration number NCT00669331.