Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1U24HL166784 | U.S. NIH Grant/Contract | View source | |
| 1UG3HL166785 | U.S. NIH Grant/Contract | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| NYU Langone Health | OTHER |
| Massachusetts General Hospital | OTHER |
| National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) | NIH |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The goal of this interventional study is to compare standard mechanical ventilation to a lung-stress oriented ventilation strategy in patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Participants will be ventilated according to one of two different strategies. The main question the study hopes to answer is whether the personalized ventilation strategy helps improve survival.
ARDS is a devastating condition that places a heavy burden on public health resources. Recent changes in the practice of mechanical ventilation have improved survival in ARDS, but mortality remains unacceptably high.
This application is for support of a phase III multi-centered, randomized controlled trial of mechanical ventilation, directed by driving pressure and esophageal manometry, in patients with ARDS. The primary hypothesis is that precise ventilator titration to maintain lung stress within 0-12 centimeters of water (cm H2O), the normal physiological range experienced during relaxed breathing, will improve 60-day mortality, compared to guided usual care.
Specific Aim 1: To determine the effect on mortality of the precision ventilation strategy, compared to guided usual care, in patients with ARDS.
• Hypothesis 1: The precision ventilation strategy will decrease 60-day mortality (primary trial endpoint).
Specific Aim 2: To evaluate the effects on lung injury of the precision ventilation strategy, compared to guided usual care, in patients with ARDS.
Specific Aim 3: To evaluate the hemodynamic safety profile of the precision ventilation strategy, compared to guided usual care, in patients with ARDS.
• Hypothesis 3: The precision ventilation strategy will decrease hemodynamic instability, measured as shock-free days through Day 14.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Precision ventilation | Experimental | Ventilator support will be calibrated to maintain the range of lung stress typical of relaxed breathing in healthy adults. The ventilator management protocol takes into account pleural pressure, tidal volume and driving pressure, fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and oxygen saturation (SpO2), and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration. |
|
| Guided usual care | Active Comparator | Ventilator support will be managed by the clinical team per usual care with select protocol-based guard rails to avoid practice extremes beyond the current body of evidence. PEEP titration will be performed by the clinical team within the limits set in. The allowable combinations of PEEP and FiO2 in the control arm reflect pre-intervention usual care observed at baseline in the recent large federally-funded multicenter ARDS trials. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precision ventilation | Other | The intervention arm prioritizes mitigation of ventilator-induced-lung-injury by individualizing support to patient-specific mechanics in an integrated approach to limit overdistension and atelectrauma. This is accomplished in this arm by titration of tidal volume to limitation of driving pressure at 12 centimeters of water (cmH2O) or less and using esophageal manometry to titrate PEEP to a transpulmonary pressure of 0 cmH2O with adjustments in respiratory rate to allow for permissive hypercapnia and FiO2 adjustments to assure adequate oxygenation. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| 60-day mortality | All-cause, all-location mortality | 60 days from randomization |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| 28-day mortality | All-cause, all-location mortality | 28 days from randomization |
| Alive and ventilator-free through 28 days | A composite outcome that incorporates survival for the defined follow-up interval and time to successful liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) among survivors. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Hemodynamic Instability Index through Hour 4 and daily through Day 7 | A hemodynamic instability index will be computed per a six-level ordinal scale | From hour 4 through Day 7 from randomization |
| Shock-free days through Day 28 |
Inclusion Criteria:
Age ≥ 18 years
Ventilator-dependent ARDS, with all of the following (a-e):
Invasive ventilation with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) ≥ 8 cm H2O or FiO2 ≥ 0.5
Hypoxemia as characterized by: • If arterial blood gas (ABG) available: the partial pressure of oxygen in the arterial blood (PaO2)/FiO2 ≤ 300 mm Hg, or, • if ABG not available OR overt clinical deterioration in oxygenation since last ABG: SpO2/FiO2 ≤ 316 with SpO2 ≤ 97% (both conditions) on two representative assessments between 1 to 6 hours apart. • If patient is positioned prone or receiving inhaled pulmonary vasodilator at time of screening:
Qualifying PaO2/FiO2 or SpO2/FiO2 (as defined above) that was recorded within the 6 hours immediately prior to initiating either of these therapies may be used for eligibility determination. • If PEEP has been increased by > 5 cm H2O within the last 12 hours immediately prior to screening:
Qualifying PaO2/FiO2 or SpO2/FiO2 (as defined above) prior to PEEP increase may be used for eligibility determination if recorded within this 12-hour window.
Bilateral lung opacities on chest imaging not fully explained by effusions, lobar collapse, or nodules
Respiratory failure not fully explained by heart failure or fluid overload
Onset within 1 week of clinical insult or new/worsening symptoms
Early in ARDS course
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valerie Goodspeed, MPH | Contact | 6176328055 | vgoodspe@bidmc.harvad.edu | |
| Nancy Ringwood, RN | Contact | 617-724-9836 | nringwood@mgh.harvard.edu |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Daniel Talmor, MD MPH | Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Arizona | Recruiting | Tucson | Arizona | 85724 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30776290 | Background | Beitler JR, Sarge T, Banner-Goodspeed VM, Gong MN, Cook D, Novack V, Loring SH, Talmor D; EPVent-2 Study Group. Effect of Titrating Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) With an Esophageal Pressure-Guided Strategy vs an Empirical High PEEP-Fio2 Strategy on Death and Days Free From Mechanical Ventilation Among Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2019 Mar 5;321(9):846-857. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.0555. | |
| 31112383 |
Not provided
Not provided
Data will be made publicly available via the NHLBI Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center (BioLINCC) repository. As per BioLINCC policy, data will be submitted within one year of completion of the final follow up assessment, or within one year of primary manuscript publication, whichever comes first.
Data will become available within one year of completion of the final follow up assessment, or within one year of primary manuscript publication, whichever comes first. Data will be available for 10 years.
Outside investigators who wish to use data will submit a formal request, including rationale, analysis plan, and local Institutional Review Board (IRB) determination. The PREVENT VILI Executive Committee will review and respond to all requests. All data sharing will be codified by the appropriate contract / data use agreement. Recipient researchers must promise in writing to never attempt to access identifiable health/medical information or to attempt to identify the subject(s) who provided the specimen/data. Any intent to use materials or data for commercial purposes must be clearly disclosed as part of the request.
Not provided
Not provided
Participants will be randomized to the intervention arm or control arm.
Participants in the intervention group (precision ventilation), will have mechanical ventilation using settings directed by the amount of air pressure in the chest and lungs, using esophageal manometry. The treating clinical team is not masked to esophageal and transpulmonary pressure values and can view these data throughout the period of protocol-directed ventilation.
Participants in the control group (guided usual care), will have ventilator support (low tidal volume mechanical ventilation) managed by the clinical team per usual care. The treating clinical team is masked to esophageal and transpulmonary pressure values and cannot view or be informed of these data at any time during the period of protocol-directed ventilation. An esophageal catheter will be inserted strictly for monitoring of respiratory mechanics by study staff, but values will not be used to titrate the ventilator.
Not provided
Not provided
Study team and leadership will be blinded to all analyses throughout the study. Unblinded statistician will perform analyses for the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) and be sequestered from the remainder of the team.
|
| Guided usual care ventilation | Other | The comparison arm allows clinician discretion when titrating PEEP and tidal volume, while setting general targets for allowable PEEP/FiO2 combinations, target range for SpO2, and target range for tidal volume. This arm applies routine best-practice guidelines. This includes maintenance of tidal volumes of 6-8 cc/kg of ideal body weight, limiting plateau pressures to 30 cmH2O or less and application of PEEP-FiO2 combinations which include a wide range of typical usual care with esophageal manometry only for data collection and not clinical adjustment. |
|
| 28 days from randomization |
| Alive and Respiratory Support-Free | A composite outcome that incorporates survival for the defined follow-up interval and time to successful liberation from advanced respiratory support among survivors. Advanced respiratory support is defined in Section 1.2. This outcome will be formulated as a win ratio and separately as a time-to-event competing risk endpoint. | 28 days from randomization |
| Barotrauma through Day 14 | Any occurrence of pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema, or chest tube insertion for barotrauma through Day 14 or until successful liberation from IMV, whichever occurs first. | 14 days from randomization |
The number of days, regardless of consecutiveness, during which vasopressors have not been administered for at least 1 uninterrupted hour, through Day 28.
| 28 days from randomization |
| Renal failure-free days through Day 28 | The number of days between successful liberation from renal replacement therapy and Day 28. | 28 days from randomization |
| Refractory hypoxemia through Day 14 | Any occurrence of SpO2 < 88% continuously for at least 30 minutes' duration despite valid pulse-oximetry waveform and protocol-directed ventilatory support, through Day 28 or until successful liberation from IMV, whichever occurs first. | 14 days from randomization |
| Refractory acidemia through Day 14 | Any occurrence of arterial pH < 7.15 on two consecutive measures at least 30 minutes apart despite protocol-directed ventilatory support, through Day 28 or until successful liberation from IMV, whichever occurs first. | 14 days from randomization |
| Daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) through Day 7 | SOFA will be computed daily for live patients through Day 7, omitting Glasgow Coma Scale element. | 7 days from randomization |
| ICU length of stay | Number of days in the ICU from enrollment until the last transfer out of ICU, hospital discharge, death, or Day 60, whichever occurs first. The "last day" method will be used: if a participant leaves the ICU but is then transferred back into the ICU during the same hospitalization within the 60-day follow up period, the brief time interval outside the ICU will count toward ICU length of stay. | 60 days |
| Hospital length of stay | Number of days in the hospital from enrollment until hospital discharge, death, or Day 60, whichever occurs first. | 60 days |
| Alveolar epithelial injury biomarkers | The change in plasma levels of Plasma Soluble Receptor for Advanced glycation end-products (sRAGE) and surfactant protein D (SP-D) will be compared between baseline and Day 2. | 2 days from randomization |
| Pro-fibrosis biomarkers | The change in plasma levels of Plasma procollagen-III N-terminal peptide (P3NP) and matrix metalloproteinase-7 (MMP7) will be compared between baseline and Day 2. | 2 days from randomization |
| Endothelial barrier function biomarkers | The change in plasma levels of Plasma angiopoietin-2 and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 (VEGFR1, also known as FLT1) will be compared between baseline and Day 2. | 2 days from randomization |
| Inflammatory biomarkers | The change in plasma levels of Plasma interleukin-6 (IL6) and interleukin-8 (IL8) will be compared between baseline and Day 2. | 2 days from randomization |
| University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences | Recruiting | Little Rock | Arkansas | 72205 | United States |
|
| University of California, San Diego | Recruiting | La Jolla | California | 92093 | United States |
|
| University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center | Recruiting | Los Angeles | California | 90024 | United States |
|
| Cedar-Sinai Medical Center | Recruiting | Los Angeles | California | 90048 | United States |
|
| Stanford University | Recruiting | Palo Alto | California | 94305 | United States |
|
| University of California, San Francisco | Recruiting | San Franciso | California | 94143 | United States |
|
| University of Miami | Recruiting | Miami | Florida | 33136 | United States |
|
| Emory University / Grady Health System | Not yet recruiting | Atlanta | Georgia | 30322 | United States |
|
| University of Chicago | Recruiting | Chicago | Illinois | 60637 | United States |
|
| Tufts Medical Center | Recruiting | Boston | Massachusetts | 02111 | United States |
|
| Massachusetts General Hospital | Recruiting | Boston | Massachusetts | 02114 | United States |
|
| Brigham and Women's Hospital | Recruiting | Boston | Massachusetts | 02115 | United States |
|
| Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center | Recruiting | Boston | Massachusetts | 02215 | United States |
|
| Lowell General Hospital | Not yet recruiting | Lowell | Massachusetts | 01854 | United States |
|
| University of Michigan | Recruiting | Ann Arbor | Michigan | 48109 | United States |
|
| Mayo Clinic | Recruiting | Rochester | Minnesota | 55905 | United States |
|
| NYU Lagone Health | Recruiting | New York | New York | 02114 | United States |
|
| New York City Health + Hospitals/ Bellevue | Recruiting | New York | New York | 10016 | United States |
|
| Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Montefiore Medical Center | Recruiting | The Bronx | New York | 10461 | United States |
|
| Duke University Medical Center | Recruiting | Durham | North Carolina | 27710 | United States |
|
| Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist | Recruiting | Winston-Salem | North Carolina | 27157 | United States |
|
| University of Cincinnati | Recruiting | Cincinnati | Ohio | 45267 | United States |
|
| Cleveland Clinic Foundation | Recruiting | Cleveland | Ohio | 44195 | United States |
|
| Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center | Recruiting | Columbus | Ohio | 43210 | United States |
|
| University of Oklahoma Health Sciences | Not yet recruiting | Oklahoma City | Oklahoma | 73104 | United States |
|
| Oregon Health & Science University | Recruiting | Portland | Oregon | 97239 | United States |
|
| Thomas Jefferson University | Recruiting | Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | 19107 | United States |
|
| Baylor College of Medicine / St. Luke's Medical Center | Recruiting | Houston | Texas | 77030 | United States |
|
| Intermountain Health | Recruiting | Murray | Utah | 84107 | United States |
|
| University of Utah | Recruiting | Salt Lake City | Utah | 84132 | United States |
|
| University of Virginia | Recruiting | Charlottesville | Virginia | 22908 | United States |
|
| University of Washingont/Harborview Medical Center | Recruiting | Seattle | Washington | 98104 | United States |
|
| National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PETAL Clinical Trials Network; Moss M, Huang DT, Brower RG, Ferguson ND, Ginde AA, Gong MN, Grissom CK, Gundel S, Hayden D, Hite RD, Hou PC, Hough CL, Iwashyna TJ, Khan A, Liu KD, Talmor D, Thompson BT, Ulysse CA, Yealy DM, Angus DC. Early Neuromuscular Blockade in the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2019 May 23;380(21):1997-2008. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1901686. Epub 2019 May 19. |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D012128 | Respiratory Distress Syndrome |
| D012131 | Respiratory Insufficiency |
| D016638 | Critical Illness |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D008171 | Lung Diseases |
| D012140 | Respiratory Tract Diseases |
| D012120 | Respiration Disorders |
| D020969 | Disease Attributes |
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
Not provided
Not provided