106 research outputs found
Research in progress: put the orphanage out of business
Paediatric interstitial lung disease (ILD) is rare and diverse, meaning no single centre will see sufficient children to perform the studies needed to make progress. This EU FP-7 grant will standardise the evaluation of these rare conditions by establishing pan-European multidisciplinary expert panels and establish consensus on treatment protocols and standard operating procedures across Europe. We will work with patient groups to determine optimal treatment end-points and biomarkers. A biobank will be established as a Europe-wide resource for mechanistic studies. Ultimately we aim to do the first randomised controlled trial of a pharmacological treatment in paediatric ILD
Acute cervical lymphadenitis and infections of the retropharyngeal and parapharyngeal spaces in children
Disaturated-phosphatidylcholine and Surfactant protein-B turnover in human acute lung injury and in control patients
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients with Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and Acute Lung Injury (ALI) have low concentrations of disaturated-phosphatidylcholine and surfactant protein-B in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. No information is available on their turnover.</p> <p>Objectives</p> <p>To analyze disaturated-phosphatidylcholine and surfactant protein-B turnover in patients with ARDS/ALI and in human adults with normal lungs (controls).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p><sup>2</sup>H<sub>2</sub>O as precursor of disaturated-phosphatidylcholine-palmitate and 1<sup>13</sup>C-Leucine as precursor of surfactant protein-B were administered intravenously to 12 patients with ARDS/ALI and to 8 controls. Disaturated-phosphatidylcholine and surfactant protein-B were isolated from serial tracheal aspirates, and their fractional synthetic rate was derived from the <sup>2</sup>H and <sup>13</sup>C enrichment curves, obtained by gas chromatography mass spectrometry. Disaturated-phosphatidylcholine, surfactant protein-B, and protein concentrations in tracheal aspirates were also measured.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>1) Surfactant protein-B turned over at faster rate than disaturated-phosphatidylcholine both in ARDS/ALI patients and in controls. 2) In patients with ARDS/ALI the fractional synthesis rate of disaturated-phosphatidylcholine was 3.1 times higher than in controls (p < 0.01), while the fractional synthesis rate of surfactant protein-B was not different. 3) In ARDS/ALI patients the concentrations of disaturated-phosphatidylcholine and surfactant protein-B in tracheal aspirates were markedly and significantly reduced (17% and 40% of the control values respectively).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>1) Disaturated-phosphatidylcholine and surfactant protein-B have a different turnover both in healthy and diseased lungs. 2) In ARDS/ALI the synthesis of these two surfactant components may be differently regulated.</p
Vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor versus elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor in individuals with cystic fibrosis aged 12 years and older (SKYLINE Trials VX20-121-102 and VX20-121-103): results from two randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trials
Background
The goal of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators is to reach normal CFTR function in people with cystic fibrosis. Vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor restored CFTR function in vitro and in phase 2 trials in participants aged 18 years and older resulting in improvements in CFTR function, as measured by sweat chloride concentrations and lung function as measured by spirometry. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor compared with standard of care elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor in individuals with cystic fibrosis aged 12 years and older.
Methods
In two randomised, active-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trials, individuals aged 12 years and older with stable cystic fibrosis with F508del-minimal function (SKYLINE Trial VX20-121-102) or with F508del-F508del, F508del-residual function, F508del-gating, or elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor-responsive-non-F508del genotypes (SKYLINE Trial VX20-121-103) were enrolled at 126 and 159 international sites, respectively. Eligible individuals were entered into a 4-week run-in period, during which they received elexacaftor (200 mg once daily), tezacaftor (100 mg once daily), and ivacaftor (150 mg once every 12 h) as two fixed-dose combination tablets in the morning and one ivacaftor tablet in the evening. They were then randomly assigned (1:1) to either elexacaftor (200 mg once daily), tezacaftor (100 mg once daily), and ivacaftor (150 mg once every 12 h) as two fixed-dose combination tablets in the morning and one ivacaftor tablet in the evening, or vanzacaftor (20 mg once daily), tezacaftor (100 mg once daily), and deutivacaftor (250 mg once daily) as two fixed-dose combination tablets in the morning, for the 52-week treatment period. All participants received matching placebo tablets to maintain the treatment blinding. Randomisation was done using an interactive web-response system and stratified by age, FEV1 % predicted, sweat chloride concentration, and previous CFTR modulator use, and also by genotype for Trial VX20-121-103. The primary endpoint for both trials was absolute change in FEV1 % predicted from baseline (most recent value before treatment on day 1) through week 24 (with non-inferiority of vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor shown if the lower bound of the 95% CI for the primary endpoint was –3·0 or higher). Efficacy was assessed in all participants with the intended CFTR genotype who were randomly assigned to treatment and received at least one dose of study treatment during the treatment period. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the treatment period. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05033080 (Trial VX20-121-102) and NCT05076149 (Trial VX20-121-103), and are now complete.
Findings
In Trial VX20-121-102 between Sept 14, 2021, and Oct 18, 2022, 488 individuals were screened, of whom 435 entered the 4-week run-in period, and subsequently 398 were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor (n=202) or vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor (n=196). Median age was 31·0 years (IQR 22·6–38·5), 163 (41%) of 398 participants were female, 235 (59%) were male, and 388 (97%) were White. In Trial VX20-121-103, between Oct 27, 2021, and Oct 26, 2022, 699 individuals were screened, of whom 597 entered the 4-week run-in period, and subsequently 573 participants were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor (n=289) or vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor (n=284). Median age was 33·1 years (IQR 24·5–42·2), 280 (49%) of 573 participants were female, 293 (51%) were male, and 532 (93%) were White. The absolute change in least squares mean FEV1 % predicted from baseline through week 24 for Trial VX20-121-102 was 0·5 (SE 0·3) percentage points in the vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor group versus 0·3 (0·3) percentage points in the elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor group (least squares mean treatment difference of 0·2 percentage points [95% CI –0·7 to 1·1]; p<0·0001), and for Trial VX20-121-103, was 0·2 (SE 0·3) percentage points in the vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor group versus 0·0 (0·2) percentage points in the elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor group (least squares mean treatment difference 0·2 percentage points [95% CI –0·5 to 0·9]; p<0·0001). Most adverse events were mild or moderate, with the most common being infective pulmonary exacerbation (133 [28%] of 480 participants in the pooled vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor group vs 158 [32%] of 491 in the pooled elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor group), cough (108 [23%] vs 101 [21%]), COVID-19 (107 [22%] vs 127 [26%]), and nasopharyngitis (102 [21%] vs 95 [19%]).
Interpretation
Vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor is non-inferior to elexacaftor–tezacaftor–ivacaftor in terms of FEV1 % predicted, and is safe and well tolerated. Once daily dosing with vanzacaftor–tezacaftor–deutivacaftor reduces treatment burden, potentially improving adherence, compared with the twice daily regimen of the current standard of care. The restoration of CFTR function and the potential variants treated are also considerations that should be compared with currently available CFTR modulators.
Funding
Vertex Pharmaceuticals
Evaluation de l'impact de la création d'un centre de maladies respiratoires rares sur le parcours de soins de la dyskinésite ciliaire primitive
Stratégie antibiotique dans les pleurésies purulentes en pédiatrie : recherche d’un consensus par méthode DELPHI
Is early identification of asymptomatic infants with ‘mild’ CFTR genotypes clinically useful?
- …
