Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA.
Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA; Dept. of Medicine, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA.
J Cyst Fibros. 2021 Nov;20(6):932-936. doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2021.02.012. Epub 2021 Mar 5.
Retrospective studies indicate that more cystic fibrosis (CF) pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) are treated with oral (PO) than with intravenous (IV) antimicrobials despite little knowledge of the relative effects of PO treatment on lung function recovery or long-term impacts on lung disease progression. Previous studies have suggested that PO treatment may be associated with slower lung function recovery compared with IV treatment. We used longitudinal home spirometry data from the eICE study (NCT01104402) to compare PO versus IV antimicrobial treatment responses for PEx diagnosed by home spirometry and symptom assessment.
Adolescent and adult eICE participants performed home spirometry twice weekly for one year. PEx were diagnosed by a protocol-defined algorithm of change in percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (ppFEV) and/or respiratory signs and symptoms. PO- and IV-treated PEx were grouped by initial ppFEV drop magnitude. Group ppFEV treatment responses were modeled with multivariate, repeat-measure linear regression.
Of 87 qualifying PEx from 56 participants, 62 were PO-treated and 25 were IV-treated. The average drop from best ppFEV to PEx start was 11.0 [95%CI: 8.5, 13.5] with similar treatment group means (p=0.72). Participants with IV-treated PEx averaged 0.72 [0.24, 1.20] ppFEV/day greater response than those treated with PO, who experienced minimal ppFEV1 recovery. Many PO-treated participants who had <10 ppFEV drop from baseline tended to worsen or show no ppFEV improvement.
These results suggest that, in this cohort, PO antimicrobial treatment of CF PEx were less effective than IVs at improving ppFEV during treatment.
回顾性研究表明,尽管对于口服治疗对肺功能恢复的相对效果或对肺部疾病进展的长期影响知之甚少,但囊性纤维化(CF)肺部加重(PEx)的治疗中,口服(PO)药物的使用比静脉内(IV)药物更为普遍。先前的研究表明,与 IV 治疗相比,PO 治疗可能与肺功能恢复较慢相关。我们使用 eICE 研究(NCT01104402)中的纵向家庭肺活量计数据,比较了通过家庭肺活量计和症状评估诊断为 PEx 的 PO 与 IV 抗菌药物治疗反应。
eICE 的青少年和成年参与者在一年中每周两次在家中进行肺活量计测量。PEx 通过预测的 1 秒用力呼气量百分比(ppFEV)变化的协议定义算法和/或呼吸体征和症状来诊断。根据初始 ppFEV 下降幅度对 PO 和 IV 治疗的 PEx 进行分组。采用多元、重复测量线性回归对组内 ppFEV 治疗反应进行建模。
在 56 名参与者的 87 例符合条件的 PEx 中,62 例接受 PO 治疗,25 例接受 IV 治疗。最佳 ppFEV 至 PEx 开始时的平均下降为 11.0[95%CI:8.5,13.5],治疗组平均值相似(p=0.72)。与接受 PO 治疗的患者相比,接受 IV 治疗的患者的 ppFEV 反应平均每天增加 0.72[0.24,1.20],他们的 ppFEV1 恢复程度较小。许多 PO 治疗的参与者,其基线 ppFEV 下降幅度<10,往往会恶化或无明显的 ppFEV 改善。
这些结果表明,在该队列中,与 IV 相比,PO 抗菌药物治疗 CF PEx 在治疗期间改善 ppFEV 的效果较差。