Combination aerosol therapy to treat Burkholderia cepacia complex

Burkholderia cepacia infection in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, yet no definitive treatment is currently available. This report describes a new approach to treat B. cepacia infection in CF patients, using a combination of amiloride and tobramycin aerosols. Four adults with the typical clinical syndrome of CF were recruited after repeated positive sputum cultures for B. cepacia. Aerosols of amiloride and tobramycin were given three times daily for 1-6 months, and repeated sputum cultures were collected to assess efficacy. Three of the four patients treated with the combined therapy eradicated B. cepacia from their sputum cultures for at least 2 yrs, and there were no adverse events. This novel combination may provide a new therapeutic option for Burkholderia cepacia infections. Furthermore, the strategy of combining antibiotics with ion transport agents may have ramifications for the treatment of other multi-resistant organisms.

Latanoprost for open-angle glaucoma (UKGTS): a randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial

Background
Treatments for open-angle glaucoma aim to prevent vision loss through lowering of intraocular pressure, but to our knowledge no placebo-controlled trials have assessed visual function preservation, and the observation periods of previous (unmasked) trials have typically been at least 5 years. We assessed vision preservation in patients given latanoprost compared with those given placebo.

Methods
In this randomised, triple-masked, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled patients with newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma at ten UK centres (tertiary referral centres, teaching hospitals, and district general hospitals). Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) with a website-generated randomisation schedule, stratified by centre and with a permuted block design, to receive either latanoprost 0·005% (intervention group) or placebo (control group) eye drops. Drops were administered from identical bottles, once a day, to both eyes. The primary outcome was time to visual field deterioration within 24 months. Analyses were done in all individuals with follow-up data. The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) recommended stopping the trial on Jan 6, 2011 (last patient visit July, 2011), after an interim analysis, and suggested a change in primary outcome from the difference in proportions of patients with incident progression between groups to time to visual field deterioration within 24 months. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN96423140.

Findings
We enrolled 516 individuals between Dec 1, 2006, and March 16, 2010. Baseline mean intraocular pressure was 19·6 mm Hg (SD 4·6) in 258 patients in the latanoprost group and 20·1 mm Hg (4·8) in 258 controls. At 24 months, mean reduction in intraocular pressure was 3·8 mm Hg (4·0) in 231 patients assessed in the latanoprost group and 0·9 mm Hg (3·8) in 230 patients assessed in the placebo group. Visual field preservation was significantly longer in the latanoprost group than in the placebo group: adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0·44 (95% CI 0·28–0·69; p=0·0003). We noted 18 serious adverse events, none attributable to the study drug.

Interpretation
This is the first randomised placebo-controlled trial to show preservation of the visual field with an intraocular-pressure-lowering drug in patients with open-angle glaucoma. The study design enabled significant differences in vision to be assessed in a relatively short observation period

Tiotropium and olodaterol fixed-dose combination versus mono-components in COPD (GOLD 2-4)

Efficacy and safety of tiotropium+olodaterol fixed-dose combination (FDC) compared with the mono-components was evaluated in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in two replicate, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase III trials. Patients received tiotropium+olodaterol FDC 2.5/5 μg or 5/5 μg, tiotropium 2.5 μg or 5 μg, or olodaterol 5 μg delivered once-daily via Respimat inhaler over 52 weeks. Primary end points were forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) area under the curve from 0 to 3 h (AUC0-3) response, trough FEV1 response and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at 24 weeks. In total, 5162 patients (2624 in Study 1237.5 and 2538 in Study 1237.6) received treatment. Both FDCs significantly improved FEV1 AUC0-3 and trough FEV1 response versus the mono-components in both studies. Statistically significant improvements in SGRQ total score versus the mono-components were only seen for tiotropium+olodaterol FDC 5/5 μg. Incidence of adverse events was comparable between the FDCs and the mono-components. These studies demonstrated significant improvements in lung function and health-related quality of life with once-daily tiotropium+olodaterol FDC versus mono-components over 1 year in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

Pharmacological interventions for dementia in people with Down Syndrome (Protocol).

Background: People with Down syndrome are vulnerable to developing dementia at an earlier age than the general population. Alzheimer’s disease and cognitive decline in people with Down syndrome can place a significant burden on both the person with Down syndrome and their family and carers. Various pharmacological interventions, including donepezil, galantamine, memantine and rivastigmine, appear to have some effect in treating cognitive decline in people without Down syndrome, but their effectiveness for those with Down syndrome remains unclear. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of anti-dementia pharmacological interventions and nutritional supplements for treating cognitive decline in people with Down syndrome. Search methods In January 2015, we searched CENTRAL, ALOIS (the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, seven other databases, and two trials registers. In addition, we checked the references of relevant reviews and studies and contacted study authors, other researchers and relevant drug manufacturers to identify additional studies. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-dementia pharmacological interventions or nutritional supplements for adults (aged 18 years and older) with Down syndrome, in which treatment was administered and compared with either placebo or no treatment. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of included trials and extracted the relevant data. Review authors contacted study authors to obtain missing information where necessaryMain results Only nine studies (427 participants) met the inclusion criteria for this review. Four of these (192 participants) assessed the effectiveness of donepezil, two (139 participants) assessed memantine, one (21 participants) assessed simvastatin, one study (35 participants) assessed antioxidants, and one study (40 participants) assessed acetyl-L-carnitine. Five studies focused on adults aged 45 to 55 years, while the remaining four studies focused on adults aged 20 to 29 years. Seven studies were conducted in either the USA or UK, one between Norway and the UK, and one in Japan. Follow-up periods in studies ranged from four weeks to two years. The reviewers judged all included studies to be at low or unclear risk of bias. Analyses indicate that for participants who received donepezil, scores in measures of cognitive functioning (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.27 to 1.13) and measures of behaviour (SMD 0.42, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.89) were similar to those who received placebo. However, participants who received donepezil were significantly more likely to experience an adverse event (odds ratio (OR) 0.32, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.62). The quality of this body of evidence was low. None of the included donepezil studies reported data for carer stress, institutional/home care, or death. For participants who received memantine, scores in measures of cognitive functioning (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.52), behaviour (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.11), and occurrence of adverse events (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.17) were similar to those who received placebo. The quality of this body of evidence was low. None of the included memantine studies reported data for carer stress, institutional/home care, or death. Due to insufficient data, it was possible to provide a narrative account only of the outcomes for simvastatin, antioxidants, and acetylL-carnitine. Results from one pilot study suggest that participants who received simvastatin may have shown a slight improvement in cognitive measures. Authors’ conclusions Due to the low quality of the body of evidence in this review, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of any pharmacological intervention for cognitive decline in people with Down syndrome.

One-Year Safety of Olodaterol Once Daily via Respimat® in Patients with GOLD 2-4 Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Results of a Pre-Specified Pooled Analysis

The novel long-acting β2-agonist olodaterol demonstrated an acceptable safety profile in short-term phase II clinical studies. This analysis of four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase III studies (1222.11, NCT00782210; 1222.12, NCT00782509; 1222.13, NCT00793624; 1222.14, NCT00796653) evaluated the long-term safety of olodaterol once daily (QD) in a large cohort of patients with moderate to very severe (Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2-4) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The studies compared olodaterol (5 or 10 μg) QD via Respimat®, formoterol 12 μg twice daily (BID) via Aerolizer® (1222.13 and 1222.14), and placebo for 48 weeks. Patients continued receiving background maintenance therapy, with ∼60% receiving concomitant cardiovascular therapy and 25% having a history of concomitant cardiac disease. Pre-specified analyses of pooled data assessed the adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs in the whole population, and in subgroups with cardiac disease, along with in-depth electrocardiogram and Holter monitoring. In total, 3104 patients were included in the safety analysis: 876 received olodaterol 5 μg, 883 received olodaterol 10 μg, 885 received placebos, and 460 received formoterol 12 μg BID. Overall incidence of on-treatment AEs (71.2%), serious AEs (16.1%), and deaths (1.7%) were balanced across treatment groups. Respiratory and cardiovascular AEs, including major adverse cardiac events, were reported at similar frequencies in placebo and active treatment groups. The safety profiles of both olodaterol 5 μg (marketed and registered dose) and 10 μg QD delivered via Respimat® are comparable to placebo and formoterol BID in this population, with no safety signals identified.

Appointment keeping for medical review among patients with selected chronic diseases in an urban area of Uganda

Introduction: proper management of chronic diseases is important for prevention of disease complications and yet some patients miss appointments for medical review thereby missing the opportunity for proper monitoring of their disease conditions. There is limited information on missed appointments among chronic disease patients in resource limited settings. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of missed appointments for medical review and associated factors among chronic disease patients in an urban area of Uganda.

Methods: patients or caregivers of children with chronic diseases were identified as they bought medicines from a community pharmacy. They were visited at home to access their medical documents and those whose chronic disease status was ascertained were enrolled. The data was collected using: questionnaires, review of medical documents, and in-depth interviews with chronic disease patients.

Results: the prevalence of missed appointments was 42% (95%CI=35-49%). The factors associated with missed appointments were: monthly income ?30US Dollars (OR=2.56, CI=1.25–5.26), affording less than half of prescribed drugs (OR=3.92, CI=1.64–9.40), not experiencing adverse events (OR=2.66, CI=1.26–5.61), not sure if treatment helps (OR=2.84, CI=1.047.77), not having a medicines administration schedule (OR=6.77, CI=2.11–21.68), and increasing number of drugs (OR=0.72, CI=0.53–0.98). Conclusion: patients missed appointments mainly due to: financial and health system barriers, conflicting commitments with appointments, and perceptions of the disease condition. Patients should be supported with accessible and affordable health services.

Tiotropium Respimat® in cystic fibrosis: Phase 3 and Pooled phase 2/3 randomized trials

Background: Tiotropium Respimat® improved lung function in a phase 2 trial in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). We investigated its efficacy and safety in a phase 3 trial, including a pre-specified pooled analysis of the phase 2 and 3 trials. 

Methods: 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of tiotropium Respimat® 5. μg once daily in patients with CF (N = 463). 

Results: Co-primary efficacy endpoints showed no statistical difference between tiotropium and placebo: percent-predicted forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV₁) area under the curve from 0-4h (AUC_0-4h) (95% CI): 1.64% (0.27,3.55; p=0.092); percent-predicted trough FEV₁ (95% CI) 1.40% (0.50,3.30; p=0.15). Adverse events were similar between groups. Pooled phase 2/3 trial results showed a treatment difference in favor of tiotropium: percent-predicted FEV₁ AUC_0-4h (95% CI): 2.62% (1.34,3.90). 

Conclusion: Tiotropium was well tolerated in patients with CF; lung function improvements compared with placebo were not statistically significant in the phase 3 trial. Clinical trials: These studies are registered with clinical trial identifier numbers NCT00737100 and NCT01179347NCT00737100NCT01179347. These studies are also registered with the EudraCT number: 2008-001156-43 and 2010-019802-17.

Ataluren for the treatment of nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Background: Ataluren was developed to restore functional protein production in genetic disorders caused by nonsense mutations, which are the cause of cystic fibrosis in 10% of patients. This trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of ataluren in patients with nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis. 

Methods: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study enrolled patients from 36 sites in 11 countries in North America and Europe. Eligible patients with nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis (aged ≥6 years; abnormal nasal potential difference; sweat chloride >40 mmol/L; forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV₁] ≥40% and ≤90%) were randomly assigned by interactive response technology to receive oral ataluren (10 mg/kg in morning, 10 mg/kg midday, and 20 mg/kg in evening) or matching placebo for 48 weeks. Randomisation used a block size of four, stratified by age, chronic inhaled antibiotic use, and percent-predicted FEV₁. The primary endpoint was relative change in percent-predicted FEV₁ from baseline to week 48, analysed in all patients with a post-baseline spirometry measurement. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00803205. 

Findings: Between Sept 8, 2009, and Nov 30, 2010, 238 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 116 in each treatment group had a valid post-baseline spirometry measurement. Relative change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV₁ did not differ significantly between ataluren and placebo at week 48 (-2·5% vs -5·5%; difference 3·0% [95% CI -0·8 to 6·3]; p=0·12). The number of pulmonary exacerbations did not differ significantly between treatment groups (rate ratio 0·77 [95% CI 0·57-1·05]; p=0·0992). However, post-hoc analysis of the subgroup of patients not using chronic inhaled tobramycin showed a 5·7% difference (95% CI 1·5-10·1) in relative change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV₁ between the ataluren and placebo groups at week 48 (-0·7% [-4·0 to 2·1] vs -6·4% [-9·8 to -3·7]; nominal p=0·0082), and fewer pulmonary exacerbations in the ataluern group (1·42 events [0·9-1·9] vs 2·18 events [1·6-2·7]; rate ratio 0·60 [0·42-0·86]; nominal p=0·0061). Safety profiles were generally similar for ataluren and placebo, except for the occurrence of increased creatinine concentrations (ie, acute kidney injury), which occurred in 18 (15%) of 118 patients in the ataluren group compared with one (<1%) of 120 patients in the placebo group. No life-threatening adverse events or deaths were reported in either group. I

nterpretation: Although ataluren did not improve lung function in the overall population of nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis patients who received this treatment, it might be beneficial for patients not taking chronic inhaled tobramycin. 

Funding: PTC Therapeutics, Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, US Food and Drug Administration's Office of Orphan Products Development, and the National Institutes of Health. 

Assessment of clinical response to ivacaftor with lung clearance index in cystic fibrosis patients with a G551D-CFTR mutation and preserved spirometry:A randomised controlled trial

Background: Ivacaftor has shown a clinical benefit in patients with cystic fibrosis who have the G551D-CFTR mutation and reduced lung function. Lung clearance index (LCI) using multiple-breath washout might be an alternative to and more sensitive method than forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) to assess treatment response in the growing number of children and young adults with cystic fibrosis who have normal spirometry. The aim of the study was to assess the treatment effects of ivacaftor on LCI in patients with cystic fibrosis, a G551D-CFTR mutation, and an FEV₁ >90% predicted. Methods: This phase 2, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind 2×2 crossover study of ivacaftor treatment was conducted in patients with cystic fibrosis, at least one G551D-CFTR allele, and an FEV₁ >90% predicted. Patients also had to have an LCI higher than 7·4 at screening, age of 6 years or older, and a weight higher than or equal to 15 kg. Eligible patients were randomly allocated to receive one of two treatment sequences (placebo first followed by ivacaftor 150 mg twice daily [sequence 1] or ivacaftor 150 mg twice daily first followed by placebo [sequence 2]) of 28 days' treatment in each period, with a 28-day washout between the two treatment periods. Randomisation (ratio 1:1) was done with block sizes of 4, and all site personnel including the investigator, the study monitor, and the Vertex study team were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome measure was change from baseline in LCI. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01262352. Findings: Between February and November, 2011, 21 patients were enrolled, of which 11 were assigned to the sequence 1 group, and 10 to the sequence 2 group. 20 of these patients received treatment and 17 completed the trial (eight in sequence 1 group and 9 in sequence 2 group). Treatment with ivacaftor led to significant improvements compared with placebo in LCI (difference between groups in the average of mean changes from baseline at days 15 and 29 was -2·16 [95% CI -2·88 to -1·44]; p<0·0001). Adverse events experienced by study participants were similar between treatment groups; at least one adverse event was reported by 15 (79%) of 19 patients who received placebo and 13 (72%) of 18 patients who received ivacaftor. No deaths occurred during study period. Interpretation: In patients with cystic fibrosis aged 6 years or older who have at least one G551D-CFTR allele, ivacaftor led to improvements in LCI. LCI might be a more sensitive alternative to FEV₁ in detecting response to intervention in these patients with mild lung disease. Funding: Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

Topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers for treating seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: Seasonal/perennial allergic conjunctivitis is the most common allergic conjunctivitis, usually with acute manifestations when a person is exposed to allergens and with typical signs and symptoms including itching, redness, and tearing. The clinical signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis are mediated by the release of histamine by mast cells. Histamine antagonists (also called antihistamines) inhibit the action of histamine by blocking histamine H1 receptors, antagonising the vasoconstrictor, and to a lesser extent, the vasodilator effects of histamine. Mast cell stabilisers inhibit degranulation and consequently the release of histamine by interrupting the normal chain of intracellular signals. Topical treatments include eye drops with antihistamines, mast cell stabilisers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, combinations of the previous treatments, and corticosteroids. Standard treatment is based on topical antihistamines alone or topical mast cell stabilisers alone or a combination of treatments. There is clinical uncertainty about the relative efficacy and safety of topical treatment.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers, alone or in combination, for use in treating seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis.

SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2014, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to July 2014), EMBASE (January 1980 to July 2014), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 17 July 2014. We also searched the reference lists of review articles and relevant trial reports for details of further relevant publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing topical antihistamine and mast cell stabilisers, alone or in combination, with placebo, no treatment or to any other antihistamine or mast cell stabiliser, or both, that examined people with seasonal or perennial allergic conjunctivitis, or both. The primary outcome was any participant-reported evaluation (by questionnaire) of severity of four main ocular symptoms: itching, irritation, watering eye (tearing), and photophobia (dislike of light), both separately and, if possible, by an overall symptom score. We considered any follow-up time between one week and one year.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Disagreements were resolved by discussion among review authors and the involvement of a third review author. We followed standard methodological approaches used by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS: We identified 30 trials with a total of 4344 participants randomised, with 17 different drugs or treatment comparisons. The following antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers were evaluated in at least one RCT: nedocromil sodium or sodium cromoglycate, olopatadine, ketotifen, azelastine, emedastine, levocabastine (or levocabastine), mequitazine, bepotastine besilate, combination of antazoline and tetryzoline, combination of levocabastine and pemirolast potassium. The most common comparison was azelastine versus placebo (nine studies).We observed a large variability in reporting outcomes. The quality of the studies and reporting was variable, but overall the risk of bias was low. Trials evaluated only short-term effects, with a range of treatment of one to eight weeks. Meta-analysis was only possible in one comparison (olopatadine versus ketotifen). There was some evidence to support that topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers reduce symptoms and signs of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis when compared with placebo. There were no reported serious adverse events related to the use of topical antihistamine and mast cell stabilisers treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It seems that all reported topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers reduce symptoms and signs of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis when compared with placebo in the short term. However, there is no long-term data on their efficacy. Direct comparisons of different antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers need to be interpreted with caution. Overall, topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers appear to be safe and well tolerated. We observed a large variability in outcomes reported. Poor quality of reporting challenged the synthesis of evidence.

“It’s very complicated”: a qualitative study of medicines management in intermediate care facilities in Northern Ireland

Background: Intermediate care (IC) describes a range of services targeted at older people, aimed at preventing unnecessary hospitalisation, promoting faster recovery from illness and maximising independence. Older people are at increased risk of medication-related adverse events, but little is known about the provision of medicines management services in IC facilities. This study aimed to describe the current provision of medicines management services in IC facilities in Northern Ireland (NI) and to explore healthcare workers' (HCWs) and patients' views of, and attitudes towards these services and the IC concept. 

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a constant comparative approach with HCWs and patients from IC facilities in NI. 

Results: Interviews were conducted with 25 HCWs and 18 patients from 12 IC facilities in NI. Three themes were identified: 'concept and reality', 'setting and supply' and 'responsibility and review'. A mismatch between the concept of IC and the reality was evident. The IC facility setting dictated prescribing responsibilities and the supply of medicines, presenting challenges for HCWs. A lack of a standardised approach to responsibility for the provision of medicines management services including clinical review was identified. Whilst pharmacists were not considered part of the multidisciplinary team, most HCWs recognised a need for their input. Medicines management was not a concern for the majority of IC patients. 

Conclusions: Medicines management services are not integral to IC and medicine-related challenges are frequently encountered. Integration of pharmacists into the multidisciplinary team could potentially improve medicines management in IC.

Randomized comparison of unfractionated heparin with corticosteroids in severe active inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND: Heparin therapy may be effective in steroid resistant inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM: A randomized pilot study, to compare unfractionated heparin as a first-line therapy with corticosteroids in colonic inflammatory bowel disease.

METHODS: Twenty patients with severe inflammatory bowel disease (ulcerative colitis, n=17; Crohn's colitis, n=3) were randomized to either intravenous heparin for 5 days, followed by subcutaneous heparin for 5 weeks (n=8), or high-dose intravenous hydrocortisone for 5 days followed by oral prednisolone 40 mg daily, reducing by 5 mg per day each week (n=12). After 5 days, non-responders in each treatment group were commenced on combination therapy. Response to therapy was monitored by: clinical disease activity (ulcerative colitis: Truelove and Witt Index; Crohn's colitis: Harvey and Bradshaw Index), stool frequency, serum C-reactive protein and alpha1 acid glycoprotein, endoscopic and histopathological grading.

RESULTS: The response rates were similar in both treatment groups: clinical activity index (heparin vs. steroid; 75% vs. 67%; P=0.23), stool frequency (75% vs. 67%; P=0.61), endoscopic (75% vs. 67%; P=0.4) and histopathological grading (63% vs. 50%; P=0.67). Both treatments were well-tolerated with no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION: Heparin as a first line therapy is as effective as corticosteroids in the treatment of colonic inflammatory bowel disease. Large multicentre randomized comparative studies are required to determine the role of heparin in the management of inflammatory bowel disease.

Testing two different doses of tiotropium Respimat® in cystic fibrosis: Phase 2 randomized trial results

Background: Tiotropium is a once-daily, long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator with the potential to alleviate airway obstruction in cystic fibrosis. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2.5 and 5 μg once-daily tiotropium delivered via the Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler vs. placebo in people with cystic fibrosis. Methods: This phase 2, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study of tiotropium Respimat as add-on to usual cystic fibrosis maintenance therapy included people with cystic fibrosis with pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) ≥25% predicted. Co-primary efficacy end points were change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV₁area under the curve from 0 to 4 hours (FEV₁AUC_0-4h), and trough FEV₁at the end of week 12. Findings: A total of 510 subjects with cystic fibrosis aged 5-69 years were randomized. Both doses of tiotropium resulted in significant improvement compared with placebo in the co-primary efficacy end points at the end of week 12 (change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV₁AUC_0-4h: 2.5 μg: 2.94%, 95% confidence interval 1.19-4.70, p = 0.001; 5 μg: 3.39%, 95% confidence interval 1.67-5.12, p = 0.0001; in percent-predicted trough FEV₁:2.5 μg: 2.24%, p = 0.2; 5 μg: 2.22%, p = 0.02). There was a greater benefit with tiotropium 5 vs. 2.5 μg. No treatment-related adverse events or unexpected safety findings were observed in patients taking tiotropium. Conclusions: Tiotropium significantly improved lung function in people with cystic fibrosis. The improvement was greater with the higher dose than the lower dose, with no difference in adverse events.

Randomized Phase II trial of nintedanib, afatinib and sequential combination in castration-resistant prostate cancer

AIMS: The aim of this article was to evaluate afatinib (BIBW 2992), an ErbB family blocker, and nintedanib (BIBF 1120), a triple angiokinase inhibitor, in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.

PATIENTS & METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive nintedanib (250 mg twice daily), afatinib (40 mg once daily [q.d.]), or alternating sequential 7-day nintedanib (250 mg twice daily) and afatinib (70 mg q.d. [Combi70]), which was reduced to 40 mg q.d. (Combi40) due to adverse events. The primary end point was progression-free rate at 12 weeks.

RESULTS: Of the 85 patients treated 46, 20, 16 and three received nintedanib, afatinib, Combi40 and Combi70, respectively. At 12 weeks, the progression-free rate was 26% (seven out of 27 patients) for nintedanib, and 0% for afatinib and Combi40 groups. Two patients had a ≥50% decline in PSA (nintedanib and the Combi40 groups). The most common drug-related adverse events were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting and lethargy.

CONCLUSION: Nintedanib and/or afatinib demonstrated limited anti-tumor activity in unselected advanced castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.

A realistic evaluation of track and trigger systems and acute care training for early recognition and treatment of deteriorating ward-based patients: research protocol.

Aim The aim of the study is to evaluate factors that enable or constrain the implementation and service delivery of early warnings systems or acute care training in practice. Background To date there is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of acute care initiatives (early warning systems, acute care training, outreach) in reducing the number of adverse events (cardiac arrest, death, unanticipated Intensive Care admission) through increased recognition and management of deteriorating ward based patients in hospital [1-3]. The reasons posited are that previous research primarily focused on measuring patient outcomes following the implementation of an intervention or programme without considering the social factors (the organisation, the people, external influences) which may have affected the process of implementation and hence measured end-points. Further research which considers the social processes is required in order to understand why a programme works, or does not work, in particular circumstances [4]. Method The design is a multiple case study approach of four general wards in two acute hospitals where Early Warning Systems (EWS) and Acute Life-threatening Events Recognition and Treatment (ALERT) course have been implemented. Various methods are being used to collect data about individual capacities, interpersonal relationships and institutional balance and infrastructures in order to understand the intended and unintended process outcomes of implementing EWS and ALERT in practice. This information will be gathered from individual and focus group interviews with key participants (ALERT facilitators, nursing and medical ALERT instructors, ward managers, doctors, ward nurses and health care assistants from each hospital); non-participant observation of ward organisation and structure; audit of patients' EWS charts and audit of the medical notes of patients who deteriorated during the study period to ascertain whether ALERT principles were followed. Discussion & progress to date This study commenced in January 2007. Ethical approval has been granted and data collection is ongoing with interviews being conducted with key stakeholders. The findings from this study will provide evidence for policy-makers to make informed decisions regarding the direction for strategic and service planning of acute care services to improve the level of care provided to acutely ill patients in hospital. References 1. Esmonde L, McDonnell A, Ball C, Waskett C, Morgan R, Rashidain A et al. Investigating the effectiveness of Critical Care Outreach Services: A systematic review. Intensive Care Medicine 2006; 32: 1713-1721 2. McGaughey J, Alderdice F, Fowler R, Kapila A, Mayhew A, Moutray M. Outreach and Early Warning Systems for the prevention of Intensive Care admission and death of critically ill patients on general hospital wards. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 3. www.thecochranelibrary.com 3. Winters BD, Pham JC, Hunt EA, Guallar E, Berenholtz S, Pronovost PJ (2007) Rapid Response Systems: A systematic review. Critical Care Medicine 2007; 35 (5): 1238-43 4. Pawson R and Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London; Sage: 1997