Cargando…

A systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults

Bronchiectasis is an increasing clinical problem, but multiple recent clinical trials have failed to reach their primary end-point. Difficulties in achieving “positive” bronchiectasis trials is reflected in a lack of agreement from trialists and regulators on what are the optimal end-points. To eval...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Crichton, Megan L., Aliberti, Stefano, Chalmers, James D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Respiratory Society 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9488648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30872400
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0108-2018
_version_ 1784792704982450176
author Crichton, Megan L.
Aliberti, Stefano
Chalmers, James D.
author_facet Crichton, Megan L.
Aliberti, Stefano
Chalmers, James D.
author_sort Crichton, Megan L.
collection PubMed
description Bronchiectasis is an increasing clinical problem, but multiple recent clinical trials have failed to reach their primary end-point. Difficulties in achieving “positive” bronchiectasis trials is reflected in a lack of agreement from trialists and regulators on what are the optimal end-points. To evaluate the use of end-points in bronchiectasis trials, we conducted a systematic review of published bronchiectasis trials from 2008 to 2018 and extracted end-points used, definitions, methods of analysis and responsiveness. Our analysis shows that quality of life and exacerbation end-points are most frequently used. Trials using exacerbation end-points have been characterised by varying definitions, multiple methods of analysis and durations of follow-up. There are multiple quality of life tools for bronchiectasis (Quality of Life – Bronchiectasis questionnaire, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, etc.). The majority of studies measure lung function (e.g. forced expiratory volume in 1 s), but this is shown to be nonresponsive to the majority of interventions. Microbiology end-points frequently show statistically significant differences in phase 2 antibiotic studies but their correlation with clinical end-points is unknown. This systematic review demonstrates a need for guidance to standardise definitions and design features to improve reproducibility and increase the likelihood of demonstrating statistically significant benefits with new therapies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9488648
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher European Respiratory Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94886482022-11-14 A systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults Crichton, Megan L. Aliberti, Stefano Chalmers, James D. Eur Respir Rev Review Bronchiectasis is an increasing clinical problem, but multiple recent clinical trials have failed to reach their primary end-point. Difficulties in achieving “positive” bronchiectasis trials is reflected in a lack of agreement from trialists and regulators on what are the optimal end-points. To evaluate the use of end-points in bronchiectasis trials, we conducted a systematic review of published bronchiectasis trials from 2008 to 2018 and extracted end-points used, definitions, methods of analysis and responsiveness. Our analysis shows that quality of life and exacerbation end-points are most frequently used. Trials using exacerbation end-points have been characterised by varying definitions, multiple methods of analysis and durations of follow-up. There are multiple quality of life tools for bronchiectasis (Quality of Life – Bronchiectasis questionnaire, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, etc.). The majority of studies measure lung function (e.g. forced expiratory volume in 1 s), but this is shown to be nonresponsive to the majority of interventions. Microbiology end-points frequently show statistically significant differences in phase 2 antibiotic studies but their correlation with clinical end-points is unknown. This systematic review demonstrates a need for guidance to standardise definitions and design features to improve reproducibility and increase the likelihood of demonstrating statistically significant benefits with new therapies. European Respiratory Society 2019-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9488648/ /pubmed/30872400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0108-2018 Text en Copyright ©ERS 2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ERR articles are open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.
spellingShingle Review
Crichton, Megan L.
Aliberti, Stefano
Chalmers, James D.
A systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults
title A systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults
title_full A systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults
title_fullStr A systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults
title_short A systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults
title_sort systematic review of pharmacotherapeutic clinical trial end-points for bronchiectasis in adults
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9488648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30872400
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0108-2018
work_keys_str_mv AT crichtonmeganl asystematicreviewofpharmacotherapeuticclinicaltrialendpointsforbronchiectasisinadults
AT alibertistefano asystematicreviewofpharmacotherapeuticclinicaltrialendpointsforbronchiectasisinadults
AT chalmersjamesd asystematicreviewofpharmacotherapeuticclinicaltrialendpointsforbronchiectasisinadults
AT crichtonmeganl systematicreviewofpharmacotherapeuticclinicaltrialendpointsforbronchiectasisinadults
AT alibertistefano systematicreviewofpharmacotherapeuticclinicaltrialendpointsforbronchiectasisinadults
AT chalmersjamesd systematicreviewofpharmacotherapeuticclinicaltrialendpointsforbronchiectasisinadults