Makani, Samir

Abstract Rationale Follow-up of patients with emphysema treated with endobronchial valves is limited to 3–12 months after treatment in prior reports. To date, no comparative data exist between treatment and control subjects with a longer follow-up. Objectives To assess the durability of the Spiration Valve System (SVS) in patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema over a 24-month period. Methods EMPROVE, a multicenter randomized controlled trial, presents a rigorous comparison between treatment and control groups for up to 24 months. Lung function, respiratory symptoms, and quality-of-life (QOL) measures were assessed. Results A significant improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second was maintained at 24 months in the SVS treatment group versus the control group. Similarly, significant improvements were maintained in several QOL measures, including the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire and the COPD Assessment Test. Patients in the SVS treatment group experienced significantly less dyspnea than those in the control group, as indicated by the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale score. Adverse events at 24 months did not significantly differ between the SVS treatment and control groups. Acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation rates in the SVS treatment and control groups were 13.7% (14 of 102) and 15.6% (7 of 45), respectively. Pneumothorax rates in the SVS treatment and control groups were 1.0% (1 of 102) and 0.0% (0 of 45), respectively. Conclusions SVS treatment resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful durable improvements in lung function, respiratory symptoms, and QOL, as well as a statistically significant reduction in dyspnea, for at least 24 months while maintaining an acceptable safety profile. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01812447).

Abstract The North American Airway Collaborative (NoAAC) previously published a 3‐year multi‐institutional prospective cohort study showing variation in treatment effectiveness between 3 primary surgical techniques for idiopathic subglottic stenosis (iSGS). In this report, we update these findings to include 5 years of data evaluating treatment effectiveness. Patients in the NoAAC cohort were re‐enrolled for 2 additional years and followed using the prespecified published protocol. Consistent with prior data, prospective observation of 487 iSGS patients for 5 years showed treatment effectiveness differed by modality. Cricotracheal resection maintained the lowest rate of recurrent operation (5%), followed by endoscopic resection with adjuvant medical therapy (30%) and endoscopic dilation (50%). These data support the initial observations and continue to provide value to providers and patients navigating longitudinal decision‐making. Level of evidence: 2—prospective cohort study.

Objectives: To examine whether social determinants of health (SDH) factors are associated with time to diagnosis, treatment selection, and time to recurrent surgical intervention in idiopathic subglottic stenosis (iSGS) patients. Methods: Adult patients with diagnosed iSGS were recruited prospectively (2015-2017) via clinical providers as part of the North American Airway Collaborative (NoAAC) and via an online iSGS support community on Facebook. Patient-specific SDH factors included highest educational attainment (self-reported), median household income (matched from home zip code via U.S. Census data), and number of close friends (self-reported) as a measure of social support. Main outcomes of interest were time to disease diagnosis (years from symptom onset), treatment selection (endoscopic dilation [ED] vs cricotracheal resection [CTR] vs endoscopic resection with adjuvant medical therapy [ERMT]), and time to recurrent surgical intervention (number of days from initial surgical procedure) as a surrogate for disease recurrence. Results: The total 810 participants were 98.5% female, 97.2% Caucasian, and had a median age of 50 years (IQR, 43-58). The cohort had a median household income of $62 307 (IQR, $50 345-$79 773), a median of 7 close friends (IQR, 4-10), and 64.7% of patients completed college or graduate school. Education, income, and number of friends were not associated with time to diagnosis via multivariable linear regression modeling. Univariable multinominal logistic regression demonstrated an association between education and income for selecting ED versus ERMT, but no associations were noted for CTR. No associations were noted for time to recurrent surgical procedure via Kaplan Meier modeling and Cox proportional hazards regression. Conclusions: Patient education, income, and social support were not associated with time to diagnosis or time to disease recurrence. This suggests additional patient, procedure, or disease-specific factors contribute to the observed variations in iSGS surgical outcomes.

Abstract Rationale Less invasive, nonsurgical approaches are needed to treat severe emphysema. Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the Spiration Valve System (SVS) versus optimal medical management. Methods In this multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial, subjects aged 40 years or older with severe, heterogeneous emphysema were randomized 2:1 to SVS with medical management (treatment) or medical management alone (control). Measurements and Main Results The primary efficacy outcome was the difference in mean FEV1 from baseline to 6 months. Secondary effectiveness outcomes included: difference in FEV1 responder rates, target lobe volume reduction, hyperinflation, health status, dyspnea, and exercise capacity. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of composite thoracic serious adverse events. All analyses were conducted by determining the 95% Bayesian credible intervals (BCIs) for the difference between treatment and control arms. Between October 2013 and May 2017, 172 participants (53.5% male; mean age, 67.4 yr) were randomized to treatment (n = 113) or control (n = 59). Mean FEV1 showed statistically significant improvements between the treatment and control groups—between-group difference at 6 and 12 months, respectively, of 0.101 L (95% BCI, 0.060–0.141) and 0.099 L (95% BCI, 0.048–0.151). At 6 months, the treatment group had statistically significant improvements in all secondary endpoints except 6-minute-walk distance. Composite thoracic serious adverse event incidence through 6 months was greater in the treatment group (31.0% vs. 11.9%), primarily due to a 12.4% incidence of serious pneumothorax. Conclusions In patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema, the SVS shows significant improvement in multiple efficacy outcomes, with an acceptable safety profile. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01812447).