A RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF BILEVEL POSITIVE AIRWAY PRESSURE DEVICE AND HIGH FLOW OXYGEN FOR PERSISTENT DYSPNEA IN

Background: Dyspnea is a common and distressing symptom among patients with advanced cancer. The role of bilevel positive airway pressure (BIPAP) and Vapotherm in the relief of dyspnea have not been well defined. We aimed to determine and to compare the efficacy of BIPAP and VapoTherm for cancer related dyspnea. Methods: In this randomized, open-label, crossover study, we randomly assigned advanced cancer patients with persistent dyspnea >=3/10 to either Vapotherm for 2 hours followed by BiPAP for 2 hours, or BiPAP followed by Vaptherm. A variable washout period was instituted between interventions. The primary end point was change in numeric rating scale before and after each intervention. We planned to enroll 50 patients in total. Results: Among the 803 patients screened over the last 8 months, 62 (26%) were eligible, and 16 (2%) were enrolled so far. Five patients completed the entire study successfully, 4 discontinued the study prematurely due to prolonged relief of dyspnea, and 7 dropped out for various reasons, including inability to tolerate BiPAP (N=3), anxiety (N=2), fatigue (N=1) and pain requiring opioids (N=1). The median baseline numeric rating score for dyspnea was 7/10 (interquartile range (IQR) 5-8), and the median baseline Borg score was 4/10 (3-7). Interim analysis revealed that BiPAP was associated with a median change in numeric rating score of -3 (N=10, IQR -6.3 to -1, p=0.007) and modified Borg score of -1 (N=10, IQR -3 to 0.3, p=0.058), while Vapotherm was associated with a median change in numeric rating score of -2 (N=9, IQR -3 to -1, p=0.011) and modified Borg score of -2.5 (N=8, IQR -5.5 to -0.1, p=0.051). Among the 5 individuals who completed the entire study, 2 preferred Vapotherm, 2 favored BiPAP, and 1 liked both. The respiratory rate decreased and the oxygen saturation improved with both interventions. No significant toxicities were observed. Conclusions: We were successfully able to enroll patients onto this clinic trial. Our preliminary results suggest that BiPAP and Vapotherm are highly efficacious in providing relief for patients with persistent refractory dyspnea. A direct comparison of the two interventions will be done upon study completion. Further research is necessary to confirm our findings.

Devices in heart failure: potential methods for device-based monitoring of congestive heart failure.

Congestive heart failure has long been one of the most serious medical conditions in the United States; in fact, in the United States alone, heart failure accounts for 6.5 million days of hospitalization each year. One important goal of heart-failure therapy is to inhibit the progression of congestive heart failure through pharmacologic and device-based therapies. Therefore, there have been efforts to develop device-based therapies aimed at improving cardiac reserve and optimizing pump function to meet metabolic requirements. The course of congestive heart failure is often worsened by other conditions, including new-onset arrhythmias, ischemia and infarction, valvulopathy, decompensation, end-organ damage, and therapeutic refractoriness, that have an impact on outcomes. The onset of such conditions is sometimes heralded by subtle pathophysiologic changes, and the timely identification of these changes may promote the use of preventive measures. Consequently, device-based methods could in the future have an important role in the timely identification of the subtle pathophysiologic changes associated with congestive heart failure.

Development of automated image analysis tools for verification of radiotherapy field accuracy with an electronic portal imaging device

The successful management of cancer with radiation relies on the accurate deposition of a prescribed dose to a prescribed anatomical volume within the patient. Treatment set-up errors are inevitable because the alignment of field shaping devices with the patient must be repeated daily up to eighty times during the course of a fractionated radiotherapy treatment. With the invention of electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs), patient's portal images can be visualized daily in real-time after only a small fraction of the radiation dose has been delivered to each treatment field. However, the accuracy of human visual evaluation of low-contrast portal images has been found to be inadequate. The goal of this research is to develop automated image analysis tools to detect both treatment field shape errors and patient anatomy placement errors with an EPID. A moments method has been developed to align treatment field images to compensate for lack of repositioning precision of the image detector. A figure of merit has also been established to verify the shape and rotation of the treatment fields. Following proper alignment of treatment field boundaries, a cross-correlation method has been developed to detect shifts of the patient's anatomy relative to the treatment field boundary. Phantom studies showed that the moments method aligned the radiation fields to within 0.5mm of translation and 0.5$\sp\circ$ of rotation and that the cross-correlation method aligned anatomical structures inside the radiation field to within 1 mm of translation and 1$\sp\circ$ of rotation. A new procedure of generating and using digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) at megavoltage energies as reference images was also investigated. The procedure allowed a direct comparison between a designed treatment portal and the actual patient setup positions detected by an EPID. Phantom studies confirmed the feasibility of the methodology. Both the moments method and the cross-correlation technique were implemented within an experimental radiotherapy picture archival and communication system (RT-PACS) and were used clinically to evaluate the setup variability of two groups of cancer patients treated with and without an alpha-cradle immobilization aid. The tools developed in this project have proven to be very effective and have played an important role in detecting patient alignment errors and field-shape errors in treatment fields formed by a multileaf collimator (MLC). ^

Managing the risks of medical technology: Do hazard surveillance systems provide an early warning of medical device problems?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for risk assessment and risk management in the post-market surveillance of the U.S. medical device industry. One of the FDA regulatory mechanisms, the Medical Device Reporting System (MDR) is an adverse event reporting system intended to provide the FDA with advance warning of device problems. It includes voluntary reporting for individuals, and mandatory reporting for device manufacturers. ^ In a study of alleged breast implant safety problems, this research examines the organizational processes by which the FDA gathers data on adverse events and uses adverse event reporting systems to assess and manage risk. The research reviews the literature on problem recognition, risk perception, and organizational learning to understand the influence highly publicized events may have on adverse event reporting. Understanding the influence of an environmental factor, such as publicity, on adverse event reporting can provide insight into the question of whether the FDA's adverse event reporting system operates as an early warning system for medical device problems. ^ The research focuses on two main questions. The first question addresses the relationship between publicity and the voluntary and mandatory reporting of adverse events. The second question examines whether government agencies make use of these adverse event reports. ^ Using quantitative and qualitative methods, a longitudinal study was conducted of the number and content of adverse event reports regarding breast implants filed with the FDA's medical device reporting system during 1985–1991. To assess variation in publicity over time, the print media were analyzed to identify articles related to breast implant failures. ^ The exploratory findings suggest that an increase in media activity is related to an increase in voluntary reporting, especially following periods of intense media coverage of the FDA. However, a similar relationship was not found between media activity and manufacturers' mandatory adverse event reporting. A review of government committee and agency reports on the FDA published during 1976–1996 produced little evidence to suggest that publicity or MDR information contributed to problem recognition, agenda setting, or the formulation of policy recommendations. ^ The research findings suggest that the reporting of breast implant problems to FDA may reflect the perceptions and concerns of the reporting groups, a barometer of the volume and content of media attention. ^

Barriers and facilitators to nurses' acceptance of and implications for injury rates of an IV catheter safety device

This study has the purpose of determining the barriers and facilitators to nurses' acceptance of the Johnson and Johnson Protectiv®* Plus IV catheter safety needle device and implications for needlestick injuries at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, Texas. A one-time cross-sectional survey of 620 responding nurses was conducted by this researcher during December, 2000. The study objectives were to: (1) describe the perceived (a) organizational and individual barriers and facilitators and (b) acceptance of implementation of the IV catheter device; (2) examine the relative importance of these predictors; (3) describe (a) perceived changes in needlestick injuries after implementation of the device; (b) the reported incidence of injuries; and (c) the extent of underreporting by nurses; and (4) examine the relative importance of (a) the preceding predictors and (b) acceptance of the device in predicting perceived changes in needlestick injuries. Safety climate and training were evaluated as organizational factors. Individual factors evaluated were experience with the device, including time using it and frequency of use, and background information, including nursing unit, and length of time as a nurse in this hospital and in total nursing career. The conceptual framework was based upon the safety climate model. Descriptive statistics and multiple and logistic regression were utilized to address the study objectives. ^ The findings showed widespread acceptance of the device and a strong perception that it reduced the number of needlesticks. Acceptance was notably predicted by adequate training, appropriate time between training and device use, solid safety climate, and short length of service, in that order. A barrier to acceptance was nurses' longtime of use of previous needle technologies. Over four-fifths of nurses were compliant in always using the device. Compliance had two facilitators: length of time using device and, to a lesser extent, safety climate. Rates of compliance tended to be lower among nurses in units in which the device was frequently used. ^ High quality training and an atmosphere of caring about nurse safety stand out as primary facilitators that other institutions would need to adopt in order to achieve maximum success in implementing safety programs involving utilization of new safety devices. ^

Effects of congressional modernization laws on public access to innovative medical device technologies

The Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) play key roles in making Class III, medical devices available to the public, and they are required by law to meet statutory deadlines for applications under review. Historically, both agencies have failed to meet their respective statutory requirements. Since these failures affect patient access and may adversely impact public health, Congress has enacted several “modernization” laws. However, the effectiveness of these modernization laws has not been adequately studied or established for Class III medical devices. ^ The aim of this research study was, therefore, to analyze how these modernization laws may have affected public access to medical devices. Two questions were addressed: (1) How have the FDA modernization laws affected the time to approval for medical device premarket approval applications (PMAs)? (2) How has the CMS modernization law affected the time to approval for national coverage decisions (NCDs)? The data for this research study were collected from publicly available databases for the period January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2008. These dates were selected to ensure that a sufficient period of time was captured to measure pre- and post-modernization effects on time to approval. All records containing original PMAs were obtained from the FDA database, and all records containing NCDs were obtained from the CMS database. Source documents, including FDA premarket approval letters and CMS national coverage decision memoranda, were reviewed to obtain additional data not found in the search results. Analyses were conducted to determine the effects of the pre- and post-modernization laws on time to approval. Secondary analyses of FDA subcategories were conducted to uncover any causal factors that might explain differences in time to approval and to compare with the primary trends. The primary analysis showed that the FDA modernization laws of 1997 and 2002 initially reduced PMA time to approval; after the 2002 modernization law, the time to approval began increasing and continued to increase through December 2008. The non-combined, subcategory approval trends were similar to the primary analysis trends. The combined, subcategory analysis showed no clear trends with the exception of non-implantable devices, for which time to approval trended down after 1997. The CMS modernization law of 2003 reduced NCD time to approval, a trend that continued through December 2008. This study also showed that approximately 86% of PMA devices do not receive NCDs. ^ As a result of this research study, recommendations are offered to help resolve statutory non-compliance and access issues, as follows: (1) Authorities should examine underlying causal factors for the observed trends; (2) Process improvements should be made to better coordinate FDA and CMS activities to include sharing data, reducing duplication, and establishing clear criteria for “safe and effective” and “reasonable and necessary”; (3) A common identifier should be established to allow tracking and trending of applications between FDA and CMS databases; (4) Statutory requirements may need to be revised; and (5) An investigation should be undertaken to determine why NCDs are not issued for the majority of PMAs. Any process improvements should be made without creating additional safety risks and adversely impacting public health. Finally, additional studies are needed to fully characterize and better understand the trends identified in this research study.^

Retrospective assesment of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device to treat complex atypical hyperplasia and early endometrioid endometrial cancer

Objective: The primary objective of this project was to describe the efficacy of the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine Device (LIUD) for treatment of Complex Endometrial Cancer (CAH) and Grade 1 Endometrial Cancer (G1EEC) in terms of rate of Complete Response (CR) and Partial Response (PR) after 6 months of therapy. Finally, we assessed if any clinical or pathologic features were associated with response to the LIUD. ^ Methods: This study was a retrospective case series designed to report the response rate of patients with CAH or G1EEC treated with LIUD therapy. In addition, this study has a laboratory component to assess molecular predictors of response to LIUD therapy. Retrospective data already collected from patients diagnosed with CAH or EEC grade 1 and treated with LIUD therapy at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) were used for this study. Patients from all ethnic and race groups were included. A Complete Response (CR) was defined in patients diagnosed with CAH if pathologic report at 6 months demonstrated either no evidence of hyperplasia or no atypia in the setting of simple or complex hyperplasia. Partial Response (PR) was recorded if disease downgraded to only CAH from G1EEC. No Response (NR) was recorded if pathologic report demonstrates no change (Stable Disease, SD) or progression to cancer (Progressive Disease, PD). We calculated the proportion of patients with complete response to LIUD therapy with 95% confidence interval. We compared the response rates (CR/PR vs NR) by obesity status (Obese if BMI > 40 kg/m2 vs non-obese if BMI <= 40 kg/m2) as well as other clinical and pathologic factors, such as age, uterine size (median size), and presence of exogenous progesterone effect. ^ Results: There were 39 patients diagnosed with either CAH or G1EEC treated with the LIUD. Of 39 patients, 12 did not have pathological results of biopsy at 6months time period. Of 27 evaluable patients, 17 were diagnosed with CAH and 10 with G1EEC. Overall response rate (RR) was 78% (95% CI = 62-94%) at 6 months, 18 patients had CR (4 in G1EEC; 14 in CAH), 3 patients had PR (3 in G1EEC), 3 had SD (1 in CAH; 2 in G1EEC), 3 had PD (2 in CAH; 1 in G1EEC). After histology stratification, RR at 6 months was 82.35% (14/17; 95%CI = 67.4-97.3%) in CAH and 70% (7/10; 95% CI = 41-98.4%) in G1EEC. ^ There was no difference in response (R) and no response (NR) based on BMI (p=0.56). He observed a trend showing association between age with response (p=0.1). There was no association between uterine size and response to therapy (p=0.17). We recorded strong association between exogenous progesterone effect and response. ^ Conclusion: LIUD therapy for the treatment of CAH and G1EEC may be effective and safe. Presence of exogenous progesterone effect may predict the response to LIUD therapy at earlier time points. There is need of further studies with larger sample size to explore the relationship of response with other clinical and pathologic factors^