Obstructive Sleep ApneaNCT00458406
Evaluation of Adherence and Therapeutic Effectiveness of Bi-Flex Versus CPAP in Children With OSA
A study testing Bi-Flex and CPAP in people with Obstructive Sleep Apnea, run by Children's Hospital of Philadelphia at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Context: The obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS), i.e., snoring with difficulty breathing during sleep, is common in children. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy is the usual treatment for children who do not improve following surgery. However, CPAP is uncomfortable and is often not tolerated. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 2 to 16 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Obstructive Sleep Apnea
- What is being tested?
- Bi-Flex and CPAP
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- May 2007to Apr 2012
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 2 to 16 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Males or females aged 2 to 16 years.
- OSAS diagnosed on polysomnography.
- Positive airway pressure therapy indicated by patient's physician because surgery was either contraindicated or ineffective.
- No plans for upper airway surgery in the next 3 months.
Who cannot join
- Age less than 2 years, as infants and toddlers have different pulmonary mechanics from older children, and may require intense behavioral modification programs prior to CPAP use.
- Age greater or equal to 16 years, as results may be similar to adult studies in these older patients.
- Previous use of CPAP / bilevel ventilation.
- Unable to read / understand English. -
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of Adherence and Therapeutic Effectiveness of BiPAP With Bi-Flex Versus CPAP in Children With Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Context: The obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS), i.e., snoring with difficulty breathing during sleep, is common in children. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy is the usual treatment for children who do not improve following surgery. However, CPAP is uncomfortable and is often not tolerated. We therefore plan to study a modification of bilevel positive airway pressure therapy, BiPAP with Bi-Flex that may be more comfortable.
Objectives: The primary objective of this study is to determine whether BiPAP with Bi-Flex results in improvement in adherence as compared to CPAP. The secondary objective is to determine whether Bi-Flex has similar therapeutic efficacy compared to CPAP, as determined by sleep study. Additional objectives include comparing CPAP and Bi-Flex effects on comfort and determining which parameters predict adherence.
Read more
Study Design/Setting/Participants: A single center, randomized controlled double-blind study of Bi-Flex vs CPAP use in children with OSAS over a 3 month period.
Intervention: Bi-Flex vs CPAP Study Measures: Objective compliance recordings, sleep study results, subjective questionnaire results. .
Read the detailed description
STUDY RATIONALE The obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) affects approximately 2% of children and results in significant morbidity. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the standard therapy for children who fail tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy, or for those in whom surgery is not indicated. However, CPAP is uncomfortable and is often not tolerated by children. Thus, a more comfortable technology that would enhance adherence would be highly desirable. This proposal aims to compare a new technology, Bi-Flex, to standard CPAP therapy.
Bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP): Whereas conventional CPAP therapy delivers a constant, steady pressure during inspiration and expiration, BiPAP therapy is intended to respond to both inspiration and expiration by the patient and to deliver a set amount of pressure when the patient begins spontaneous inhalation, and decreasing pressure when exhalation begins. Exhaling against lower pressure is thought to be more comfortable for most patients than the continuous pressure delivered by conventional CPAP therapy, although it has not been shown objectively to improve adherence. The BiPAP waveform is fixed in that it provides for set inspiratory and expiratory pressures. For example, the patient's clinically prescribed BiPAP pressures may be set at an Inspiratory Positive Airway Pressure (IPAP) =12 cm water (H2O), and Expiratory Positive Airway Pressure (EPAP) = 8 cm H2O.
The Bi-Flex® feature provides a variation of conventional BiPAP that provides a reduction in the inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) provided toward the end of the inspiratory portion of the breathing cycle when the patient's inspiratory airflow normally diminishes, compared with the level of pressure provided during the majority of inspiration, and also allows reduction in the expiratory positive airway pressure (EPAP) during the initial portion of exhalation compared with that provided during the latter portion of expiration. The purpose of this modification is to provide pressure relief for the patient to smooth the transition period between the end of IPAP and the beginning of EPAP to allow for a more comfortable delivery of PAP therapy. Because Bi-Flex provides both a lower expiratory pressure and pressure relief, it has the potential to be the most comfortable mode of positive pressure therapy delivery available, and therefore to improve adherence. However, there have been no studies of adherence to therapy using Bi-Flex in either children or adults.
STUDY OBJECTIVES
- To determine whether BiPAP with Bi-Flex as compared to CPAP results in improvement in adherence of > 30 minutes a night averaged over 3 months of home use.
- To determine whether BiPAP with Bi-Flex as compared to CPAP results in a lower study dropout rate.
- To determine whether Bi-Flex has similar therapeutic efficacy compared to CPAP, as determined by polysomnographic measurements of OSAS.
- To determine whether Bi-Flex, compared to CPAP, results in improved subjective comfort and improved quality of life.
- To determine whether objective parameters (including demographic and polysomnographic variables) or subjective parameters predict adherence.
STUDY DESIGN This will be a 3-month, double-blinded, randomized trial of BiPAP with Bi-Flex vs CPAP in children with OSAS in whom CPAP is medically indicated Subjects will undergo a baseline diagnostic sleep study as part of their routine clinical care, prior to study enrollment. Those who agree to participate will then be consented and assented to participate in this study. They will be randomized to either a Bi-Flex or CPAP treatment arm, in a three to one fashion. In each arm, each subject will undergo a clinical Bi-Flex or CPAP titration sleep study.
Following these studies, the subjects in both arms will be asked to use their respective machines, in either the BiPAP with Bi-Flex or CPAP mode, at home for 3 months. During that time, they will have monthly visits to assess adherence as well as subjective measures of comfort and quality of life. A repeat sleep study will be performed at the end of 3 months on the mode assigned (Bi-Flex or CPAP). Subjects will complete standardized questionnaires regarding symptoms and quality of life throughout the study.
EFFICACY EVALUATIONS Adherence will be assessed by the mean nightly usage as determined by the equipment compliance recording. Drop-out will be assessed by determining which subjects are using the device < 2 hours a night. Efficacy of treatment will be assessed using polysomnographic parameters such as the apnea hypopnea index.
SAFETY EVALUATIONS Polysomnographic parameters such as the apnea hypopnea index, arterial oxygen saturation and end-tidal PCO2 will be monitored.
STATISTICAL AND ANALYTIC PLAN The primary effectiveness endpoint is the hours of device use per night over a three month period, as determined from the equipment software.
Analysis Populations
Two analysis populations will be evaluated. An intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis will include all patients in the trial by their assigned treatment and will be used for effectiveness and safety. For patients with missing data, values will be imputed as described below. A second analysis will be done on evaluable patients, i.e., those who have complete data and these patients will be evaluated for effectiveness.
Primary Safety Analysis
The rate of adverse events will be compared between the two groups by assessing the proportion of subjects who experience at least one adverse event by Fisher's exact test. If the test is statistically significant, then this univariate analysis will be followed by a multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Screening of possible covariates will be done by a method similar to that described in Hosmer and Lemeshow 25 for logistic regression models. A complete list of clinically relevant variables to be screened will be provided in a detailed statistical analysis plan formulated prior to database lock but will include age, gender, height, weight, and others. The variables on this list will be augmented with variables found to be out of balance between the treatment groups from the comparability analysis described above. Models will be fit for each possible covariate to include treatment, the covariate, and the interaction between the covariate and treatment will be used. Any covariate or interaction significant at a P-value of 0.15 or lower from the screening analysis will allow the variable to enter the backward elimination procedure for the final model. If the interaction is significant, then both the covariate and its interaction need to be included in the model.
The backward elimination will be done manually starting with the interaction with the highest P-value. Interaction terms will be removed from the model first and then non-significant main effects. Variables will be retained in the model if the P-value for the variable or its interaction is 0.05 or less. This analysis is intended to demonstrate that the treatment affect adjusted for possible covariates is still statistically significant.
Secondary Safety Analyses The secondary safety analysis will include a descriptive presentation of individual adverse events each tested with Fisher's exact test. Serious adverse events will be presented separately with narratives of the events.
Primary Effectiveness Analysis
The primary effectiveness variable is the hours of use per night over three months. This variable will be summarized with mean, median, standard deviation, minimum and maximum. The one-sided lower 95% confidence interval will be computed for the Bi-Flex treated subjects and the upper one-sided 95% confidence interval will be computed for the CPAP treated subjects. These two intervals will be visually compared to determine if either interval excludes the mean of the other treatment. Such exclusion will provide suggestive evidence that the Bi-Flex treatment leads to higher compliance than the CPAP treatment.
Further, a mixed models analysis of hours of use will be done through three months. This multivariate analysis incorporating clinically important covariates will screen variables for inclusion in a manner similar to that described above. Screening of possible covariates will be done by a method similar to that described in Hosmer and Lemeshow 25 for logistic regression models as discussed above. The same set of potential covariates as described in the safety analysis above will be screened. Models will be fit for each possible covariate to include treatment, the covariate, and the interaction between the covariate and treatment will be used. Any covariate or interaction significant at a P-value of 0.15 or lower from the screening analysis will allow the variable to enter the backward elimination procedure for the final model. If the interaction is significant, then both the covariate and its interaction need to be included in the model.
The backward elimination will be done manually starting with the interaction with the highest P-value. Interaction terms will be removed from the model first and then non-significant main effects. Variables will be retained in the model if the P-value for the variable or its interaction is 0.05 or less. This analysis is intended to demonstrate that the treatment affect adjusted for possible covariates is still statistically significant.
Secondary Effectiveness Analyses The drop out rate will be compared between the two groups will be estimated. The rate for each group will be tabulated and computed with 95% exact binomial confidence intervals.
The objective sleep parameters of Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI), arterial oxygen saturation nadir, time with elevated end-tidal partial pressure of Carbon Dioxide (PCO2) and the arousal index will be presented descriptively by treatment group. The tables will include the mean, standard deviation, median, minimum and maximum.
The subjective sleep measures of OSA 18 score, modified Epworth Sleepiness Scale, the NOSE, and pediatric quality of life index (PedQL) will be presented descriptively by treatment group. The tables will include the mean, standard deviation, median, minimum and maximum.
Additional Analysis Exploratory analyses of the relationships of study variables to outcomes will be done to determine if there is the treatment difference is particularly strong is specific sub-groups.
Patient Accountability and Missing Data The number and proportion of patients eligible for and compliant with each follow-up examination will be presented. Patients who withdraw from the study will be tabulated with the reasons for the withdrawal. If the proportion of patients withdrawn is larger than the 15% from either arm, an analysis of the demographic and prognostic characteristics will be made between patients who withdraw and those who remain in the study. For continuous variables, parametric or non-parametric analysis of variance will be used. For categorical variables, Chi-square or Fisher's exact test will be applied.
The evaluation of withdrawn patients presents a special concern. All clinical studies analyze the results based on the evaluable patients, i.e., those who complete the study. Because withdrawn patients do not have final data, they present a problem. The statistical community 26-29 recommends that multiple sensitivity analyses be conducted to determine the robustness of the result in patients who complete the study. The intention of these analyses is to demonstrate that the results obtained from the evaluable patients are not biased.
As a result, sensitivity analyses using multiple imputation analyses will be conducted to evaluate the robustness of the study result accounting for missing observations. The imputation will be a non-parametric multiple imputation in which patients withdrawn from the study will be randomly assigned outcomes by grouping on demographic and prognostic characteristics including treatment assignment maintaining masking, matching the characteristics to the withdrawn patients, and randomly selecting the result for the missed observation from the results for patients with similar characteristics by method such as "hot deck" imputation or imputation by regression 30. All imputations will be stochastic imputations to preserve the variability of the imputed value. Also, imputations will be done in a manner that is consistent with the assumptions of multiple imputation theory including missing at random to the extent possible. If the missing at random assumption is clearly violated by the data, other procedures including selection modeling and pattern mixture modeling will be considered.
Detailed Analysis Plan Prior to database lock a detailed statistical analysis plan will be written to provide a detailed description of the statistical analysis to be used in the final analysis. This plan will incorporate lists of relevant clinical variables to be tested as possible covariates and will incorporate any protocol changes that would affect the analysis.
Statistical Software
The statistical analyses will be done using SAS version 9.1 or later, statistical software (StatXact Version 7 or later, and Systat 10 or later). Each of these software packages provides special features that will be exploited to provide a comprehensive analysis with excellent graphics support.
- Conditions
- Obstructive Sleep Apnea
- Being tested
- Bi-Flex, CPAP
- Keywords
- obstructive sleep apnea, child, CPAP
- Medical subject headings
- Sleep Apnea, Obstructive
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Bi-FlexDevice
Also called BiPAP with Bi-Flex
Bi-Flex: Subjects in this arm undergo bilevel positive airway pressure with pressure release technology (Bi-Flex) therapy.
Positive pressure used during sleep for 3 months
CPAPDevice
Also called Continuous positive airway pressure
CPAP: Subjects in this arm undergo standard continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy.
Positive pressure used during sleep for 3 months.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Bi-Flex | Active comparator | Subjects randomized to this arm will undergo a clinical Bi-Flex sleep study. Following a baseline polysomnography, subjects in this arm will undergo bilevel positive airway pressure with pressure release technology (Bi-Flex) therapy.
In this randomized, double-blinded clinical trial, patients with obstructive sleep apnea will be randomized to Bi-Flex or CPAP, and repeat polysomnography will be performed on pressure at 3 months. Objective adherence data will be obtained at 1 and 3 months. Receives: Device: Bi-Flex |
| CPAP | Active comparator | Subjects randomized to this arm will undergo a clinical CPAP titration sleep study.
Subjects in this arm received standard continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy.
In this randomized, double-blinded clinical trial, patients with obstructive sleep apnea will randomized to CPAP or Bi-Flex, and repeat polysomnography will be performed on pressure at 3 months. Objective adherence data will be obtained at 1 and 3 months. Receives: Device: CPAP |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Minutes of Use Per Night at Month 1
The number of minutes of use per night at month 1.
Measured: 1 month
Minutes of Use Per Night at Month 3
The number of minutes of use per night at Month 3.
Measured: 3 Months
Change in Minutes of Use Per Night From Month 1 to Month 3
minutes of use per night at Month 3 minus minutes of use per night at Month 1
Measured: month 1, month 3
Secondary outcomes (6)
Drop Out Rate
Number of drop-outs included subjects in which investigators were unable to obtain a final download from the device.
Measured: 3 months
Change in Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI; Number of Apneas and Hypopneas Per Hour of Sleep) From Month 1 to Month 3
Change in Apnea Hypopnea Index from Month 1 to Month 3. AHI at Month 3 minus AHI at Month 1.
Measured: 3 months
Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) 18 Score
Polysomnographic measurements of sleep quality using the OSA 18 score at 3 months
Measured: 3 months
Change in ESS From Month 1 to Month 3
Change in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score from Month 1 to Month 3: (Score at Month 3 minus Score at Month 1). The ESS measures daytime sleepiness in certain situations e.g. sitting/reading, watching television, sitting inactive in public, as a passenger in a car for an hour without a break, lying down to rest in the afternoon when circumstances permit, sitting/talking with someone, sitting quietly after lunch, or in a car, while stopped for a few minutes in traffic. The scale ranges from a minimum of zero to 24, with higher scores indicating greater daytime sleepiness.
Measured: 3 months
Change in NOSE Scale Score From Month 1 to Month 3
Change in the total Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale score (Score at Month 3 minus Score at Month 1). This scale evaluates the severity of nasal obstructive symptoms. The scale ranges from 0-20, with a higher score indicating more nasal obstruction.
Measured: 3 months
Pediatric Quality of Life (PedQL)
Change in quality of life from baseline to 3 months
Measured: 3 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted10 Apr 2007 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2007
- Primary completionApr 2012
- Study completionApr 2012
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Obstructive Sleep ApneaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Children's Hospital of PhiladelphiaThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Philips Respironics
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ignacio Tapia, MD, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
- Investigators
- Carole L Marcus, M.B.B.Ch., Principal investigator, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00458406
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2007-1-5190
- Status last verified
- Sep 2019
- First submitted
- 6 Apr 2007
- Last updated
- 2 Oct 2019
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Marcus CL, Beck SE, Traylor J, Cornaglia MA, Meltzer LJ, DiFeo N, Karamessinis LR, Samuel J, Falvo J, DiMaria M, Gallagher PR, Beris H, Menello MK. Randomized, double-blind clinical trial of two different modes of positive airway pressure therapy on adherence and efficacy in children. J Clin Sleep Med. 2012 Feb 15;8(1):37-42. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.1656.
PubMed 22334807Marcus CL, Radcliffe J, Konstantinopoulou S, Beck SE, Cornaglia MA, Traylor J, DiFeo N, Karamessinis LR, Gallagher PR, Meltzer LJ. Effects of positive airway pressure therapy on neurobehavioral outcomes in children with obstructive sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012 May 1;185(9):998-1003. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201112-2167OC. Epub 2012 Feb 9.
PubMed 22323303DiFeo N, Meltzer LJ, Beck SE, Karamessinis LR, Cornaglia MA, Traylor J, Samuel J, Gallagher PR, Radcliffe J, Beris H, Menello MK, Marcus CL. Predictors of positive airway pressure therapy adherence in children: a prospective study. J Clin Sleep Med. 2012 Jun 15;8(3):279-86. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.1914.
PubMed 22701385
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 2 Oct 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of Adherence and Therapeutic Effectiveness of BiPAP With Bi-Flex Versus CPAP in Children With Obstructive Sleep Apnea
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00458406
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2007-1-5190
- Conditions
- Obstructive Sleep Apnea
- Keywords
- obstructive sleep apnea, child, CPAP
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Children's Hospital of PhiladelphiaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Philips Respironics
- Study start
- May 2007
- Primary completion
- Apr 2012 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 10 Apr 2007 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 1 Apr 2014
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Context: The obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS), i.e., snoring with difficulty breathing during sleep, is common in children. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy is the usual treatment for children who do not improve following surgery. However, CPAP is uncomfortable and is often not tolerated. We therefore plan to study a modification of bilevel positive airway pressure therapy, BiPAP with Bi-Flex that may be more comfortable.
Objectives: The primary objective of this study is to determine whether BiPAP with Bi-Flex results in improvement in adherence as compared to CPAP. The secondary objective is to determine whether Bi-Flex has similar therapeutic efficacy compared to CPAP, as determined by sleep study. Additional objectives include comparing CPAP and Bi-Flex effects on comfort and determining which parameters predict adherence.
Study Design/Setting/Participants: A single center, randomized controlled double-blind study of Bi-Flex vs CPAP use in children with OSAS over a 3 month period.
Intervention: Bi-Flex vs CPAP Study Measures: Objective compliance recordings, sleep study results, subjective questionnaire results. .
Detailed description
STUDY RATIONALE The obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) affects approximately 2% of children and results in significant morbidity. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the standard therapy for children who fail tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy, or for those in whom surgery is not indicated. However, CPAP is uncomfortable and is often not tolerated by children. Thus, a more comfortable technology that would enhance adherence would be highly desirable. This proposal aims to compare a new technology, Bi-Flex, to standard CPAP therapy.
Bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP): Whereas conventional CPAP therapy delivers a constant, steady pressure during inspiration and expiration, BiPAP therapy is intended to respond to both inspiration and expiration by the patient and to deliver a set amount of pressure when the patient begins spontaneous inhalation, and decreasing pressure when exhalation begins. Exhaling against lower pressure is thought to be more comfortable for most patients than the continuous pressure delivered by conventional CPAP therapy, although it has not been shown objectively to improve adherence. The BiPAP waveform is fixed in that it provides for set inspiratory and expiratory pressures. For example, the patient's clinically prescribed BiPAP pressures may be set at an Inspiratory Positive Airway Pressure (IPAP) =12 cm water (H2O), and Expiratory Positive Airway Pressure (EPAP) = 8 cm H2O.
The Bi-Flex® feature provides a variation of conventional BiPAP that provides a reduction in the inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) provided toward the end of the inspiratory portion of the breathing cycle when the patient's inspiratory airflow normally diminishes, compared with the level of pressure provided during the majority of inspiration, and also allows reduction in the expiratory positive airway pressure (EPAP) during the initial portion of exhalation compared with that provided during the latter portion of expiration. The purpose of this modification is to provide pressure relief for the patient to smooth the transition period between the end of IPAP and the beginning of EPAP to allow for a more comfortable delivery of PAP therapy. Because Bi-Flex provides both a lower expiratory pressure and pressure relief, it has the potential to be the most comfortable mode of positive pressure therapy delivery available, and therefore to improve adherence. However, there have been no studies of adherence to therapy using Bi-Flex in either children or adults.
STUDY OBJECTIVES
- To determine whether BiPAP with Bi-Flex as compared to CPAP results in improvement in adherence of > 30 minutes a night averaged over 3 months of home use.
- To determine whether BiPAP with Bi-Flex as compared to CPAP results in a lower study dropout rate.
- To determine whether Bi-Flex has similar therapeutic efficacy compared to CPAP, as determined by polysomnographic measurements of OSAS.
- To determine whether Bi-Flex, compared to CPAP, results in improved subjective comfort and improved quality of life.
- To determine whether objective parameters (including demographic and polysomnographic variables) or subjective parameters predict adherence.
STUDY DESIGN This will be a 3-month, double-blinded, randomized trial of BiPAP with Bi-Flex vs CPAP in children with OSAS in whom CPAP is medically indicated Subjects will undergo a baseline diagnostic sleep study as part of their routine clinical care, prior to study enrollment. Those who agree to participate will then be consented and assented to participate in this study. They will be randomized to either a Bi-Flex or CPAP treatment arm, in a three to one fashion. In each arm, each subject will undergo a clinical Bi-Flex or CPAP titration sleep study.
Following these studies, the subjects in both arms will be asked to use their respective machines, in either the BiPAP with Bi-Flex or CPAP mode, at home for 3 months. During that time, they will have monthly visits to assess adherence as well as subjective measures of comfort and quality of life. A repeat sleep study will be performed at the end of 3 months on the mode assigned (Bi-Flex or CPAP). Subjects will complete standardized questionnaires regarding symptoms and quality of life throughout the study.
EFFICACY EVALUATIONS Adherence will be assessed by the mean nightly usage as determined by the equipment compliance recording. Drop-out will be assessed by determining which subjects are using the device < 2 hours a night. Efficacy of treatment will be assessed using polysomnographic parameters such as the apnea hypopnea index.
SAFETY EVALUATIONS Polysomnographic parameters such as the apnea hypopnea index, arterial oxygen saturation and end-tidal PCO2 will be monitored.
STATISTICAL AND ANALYTIC PLAN The primary effectiveness endpoint is the hours of device use per night over a three month period, as determined from the equipment software.
Analysis Populations
Two analysis populations will be evaluated. An intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis will include all patients in the trial by their assigned treatment and will be used for effectiveness and safety. For patients with missing data, values will be imputed as described below. A second analysis will be done on evaluable patients, i.e., those who have complete data and these patients will be evaluated for effectiveness.
Primary Safety Analysis
The rate of adverse events will be compared between the two groups by assessing the proportion of subjects who experience at least one adverse event by Fisher's exact test. If the test is statistically significant, then this univariate analysis will be followed by a multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Screening of possible covariates will be done by a method similar to that described in Hosmer and Lemeshow 25 for logistic regression models. A complete list of clinically relevant variables to be screened will be provided in a detailed statistical analysis plan formulated prior to database lock but will include age, gender, height, weight, and others. The variables on this list will be augmented with variables found to be out of balance between the treatment groups from the comparability analysis described above. Models will be fit for each possible covariate to include treatment, the covariate, and the interaction between the covariate and treatment will be used. Any covariate or interaction significant at a P-value of 0.15 or lower from the screening analysis will allow the variable to enter the backward elimination procedure for the final model. If the interaction is significant, then both the covariate and its interaction need to be included in the model.
The backward elimination will be done manually starting with the interaction with the highest P-value. Interaction terms will be removed from the model first and then non-significant main effects. Variables will be retained in the model if the P-value for the variable or its interaction is 0.05 or less. This analysis is intended to demonstrate that the treatment affect adjusted for possible covariates is still statistically significant.
Secondary Safety Analyses The secondary safety analysis will include a descriptive presentation of individual adverse events each tested with Fisher's exact test. Serious adverse events will be presented separately with narratives of the events.
Primary Effectiveness Analysis
The primary effectiveness variable is the hours of use per night over three months. This variable will be summarized with mean, median, standard deviation, minimum and maximum. The one-sided lower 95% confidence interval will be computed for the Bi-Flex treated subjects and the upper one-sided 95% confidence interval will be computed for the CPAP treated subjects. These two intervals will be visually compared to determine if either interval excludes the mean of the other treatment. Such exclusion will provide suggestive evidence that the Bi-Flex treatment leads to higher compliance than the CPAP treatment.
Further, a mixed models analysis of hours of use will be done through three months. This multivariate analysis incorporating clinically important covariates will screen variables for inclusion in a manner similar to that described above. Screening of possible covariates will be done by a method similar to that described in Hosmer and Lemeshow 25 for logistic regression models as discussed above. The same set of potential covariates as described in the safety analysis above will be screened. Models will be fit for each possible covariate to include treatment, the covariate, and the interaction between the covariate and treatment will be used. Any covariate or interaction significant at a P-value of 0.15 or lower from the screening analysis will allow the variable to enter the backward elimination procedure for the final model. If the interaction is significant, then both the covariate and its interaction need to be included in the model.
The backward elimination will be done manually starting with the interaction with the highest P-value. Interaction terms will be removed from the model first and then non-significant main effects. Variables will be retained in the model if the P-value for the variable or its interaction is 0.05 or less. This analysis is intended to demonstrate that the treatment affect adjusted for possible covariates is still statistically significant.
Secondary Effectiveness Analyses The drop out rate will be compared between the two groups will be estimated. The rate for each group will be tabulated and computed with 95% exact binomial confidence intervals.
The objective sleep parameters of Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI), arterial oxygen saturation nadir, time with elevated end-tidal partial pressure of Carbon Dioxide (PCO2) and the arousal index will be presented descriptively by treatment group. The tables will include the mean, standard deviation, median, minimum and maximum.
The subjective sleep measures of OSA 18 score, modified Epworth Sleepiness Scale, the NOSE, and pediatric quality of life index (PedQL) will be presented descriptively by treatment group. The tables will include the mean, standard deviation, median, minimum and maximum.
Additional Analysis Exploratory analyses of the relationships of study variables to outcomes will be done to determine if there is the treatment difference is particularly strong is specific sub-groups.
Patient Accountability and Missing Data The number and proportion of patients eligible for and compliant with each follow-up examination will be presented. Patients who withdraw from the study will be tabulated with the reasons for the withdrawal. If the proportion of patients withdrawn is larger than the 15% from either arm, an analysis of the demographic and prognostic characteristics will be made between patients who withdraw and those who remain in the study. For continuous variables, parametric or non-parametric analysis of variance will be used. For categorical variables, Chi-square or Fisher's exact test will be applied.
The evaluation of withdrawn patients presents a special concern. All clinical studies analyze the results based on the evaluable patients, i.e., those who complete the study. Because withdrawn patients do not have final data, they present a problem. The statistical community 26-29 recommends that multiple sensitivity analyses be conducted to determine the robustness of the result in patients who complete the study. The intention of these analyses is to demonstrate that the results obtained from the evaluable patients are not biased.
As a result, sensitivity analyses using multiple imputation analyses will be conducted to evaluate the robustness of the study result accounting for missing observations. The imputation will be a non-parametric multiple imputation in which patients withdrawn from the study will be randomly assigned outcomes by grouping on demographic and prognostic characteristics including treatment assignment maintaining masking, matching the characteristics to the withdrawn patients, and randomly selecting the result for the missed observation from the results for patients with similar characteristics by method such as "hot deck" imputation or imputation by regression 30. All imputations will be stochastic imputations to preserve the variability of the imputed value. Also, imputations will be done in a manner that is consistent with the assumptions of multiple imputation theory including missing at random to the extent possible. If the missing at random assumption is clearly violated by the data, other procedures including selection modeling and pattern mixture modeling will be considered.
Detailed Analysis Plan Prior to database lock a detailed statistical analysis plan will be written to provide a detailed description of the statistical analysis to be used in the final analysis. This plan will incorporate lists of relevant clinical variables to be tested as possible covariates and will incorporate any protocol changes that would affect the analysis.
Statistical Software
The statistical analyses will be done using SAS version 9.1 or later, statistical software (StatXact Version 7 or later, and Systat 10 or later). Each of these software packages provides special features that will be exploited to provide a comprehensive analysis with excellent graphics support.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, care provider, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Bi-Flex | Active comparator | Device: Bi-FlexSubjects randomized to this arm will undergo a clinical Bi-Flex sleep study. Following a baseline polysomnography, subjects in this arm will undergo bilevel positive airway pressure with pressure release technology (Bi-Flex) therapy. In this randomized, double-blinded clinical trial, patients with obstructive sleep apnea will be randomized to Bi-Flex or CPAP, and repeat polysomnography will be performed on pressure at 3 months. Objective adherence data will be obtained at 1 and 3 months. |
| CPAP | Active comparator | Device: CPAPSubjects randomized to this arm will undergo a clinical CPAP titration sleep study. Subjects in this arm received standard continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy. In this randomized, double-blinded clinical trial, patients with obstructive sleep apnea will randomized to CPAP or Bi-Flex, and repeat polysomnography will be performed on pressure at 3 months. Objective adherence data will be obtained at 1 and 3 months. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 2 to 16 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Males or females aged 2 to 16 years.
- OSAS diagnosed on polysomnography.
- Positive airway pressure therapy indicated by patient's physician because surgery was either contraindicated or ineffective.
- No plans for upper airway surgery in the next 3 months.
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Age less than 2 years, as infants and toddlers have different pulmonary mechanics from older children, and may require intense behavioral modification programs prior to CPAP use.
- Age greater or equal to 16 years, as results may be similar to adult studies in these older patients.
- Previous use of CPAP / bilevel ventilation.
- Unable to read / understand English. -
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Bi-FlexAlso: BiPAP with Bi-FlexBi-Flex: Subjects in this arm undergo bilevel positive airway pressure with pressure release technology (Bi-Flex) therapy. Positive pressure used during sleep for 3 months | Device | Bi-Flex |
| CPAPAlso: Continuous positive airway pressureCPAP: Subjects in this arm undergo standard continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy. Positive pressure used during sleep for 3 months. | Device | CPAP |
Primary outcome
Minutes of Use Per Night at Month 1
Time frame: 1 month
The number of minutes of use per night at month 1.
Minutes of Use Per Night at Month 3
Time frame: 3 Months
The number of minutes of use per night at Month 3.
Change in Minutes of Use Per Night From Month 1 to Month 3
Time frame: month 1, month 3
minutes of use per night at Month 3 minus minutes of use per night at Month 1
6 secondary outcomes
Drop Out Rate
Time frame: 3 months
Change in Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI; Number of Apneas and Hypopneas Per Hour of Sleep) From Month 1 to Month 3
Time frame: 3 months
Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) 18 Score
Time frame: 3 months
Change in ESS From Month 1 to Month 3
Time frame: 3 months
Change in NOSE Scale Score From Month 1 to Month 3
Time frame: 3 months
Pediatric Quality of Life (PedQL)
Time frame: 3 months
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 2 Oct 2019.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Results publication: PubMed 22334807Marcus CL, Beck SE, Traylor J, Cornaglia MA, Meltzer LJ, DiFeo N, Karamessinis LR, Samuel J, Falvo J, DiMaria M, Gallagher PR, Beris H, Menello MK. Randomized, double-blind clinical trial of two different modes of positive airway pressure therapy on adherence and efficacy in children. J Clin Sleep Med. 2012 Feb 15;8(1):37-42. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.1656.
- Results publication: PubMed 22323303Marcus CL, Radcliffe J, Konstantinopoulou S, Beck SE, Cornaglia MA, Traylor J, DiFeo N, Karamessinis LR, Gallagher PR, Meltzer LJ. Effects of positive airway pressure therapy on neurobehavioral outcomes in children with obstructive sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012 May 1;185(9):998-1003. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201112-2167OC. Epub 2012 Feb 9.
- Results publication: PubMed 22701385DiFeo N, Meltzer LJ, Beck SE, Karamessinis LR, Cornaglia MA, Traylor J, Samuel J, Gallagher PR, Radcliffe J, Beris H, Menello MK, Marcus CL. Predictors of positive airway pressure therapy adherence in children: a prospective study. J Clin Sleep Med. 2012 Jun 15;8(3):279-86. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.1914.
Related trials for Obstructive Sleep Apnea
RecruitingObservational study
Development and Validation of a Multimodal Deep Learning Model Using Peripheral Oxygen Saturation and Ballistocardiography Signals for Predicting Apnea-Hypopnea Index in Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Obstructive Sleep Apnea
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Learn About the Monthly Dosing Study Medicine Called Berobenatide in Adults With Breathing Problems During Sleep and Overweight or Obesity Who Do Not Use a Breathing Machine (PAP) (VESPER-OSA 2)
Apnea, Sleep Disorders
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Supplemental Oxygen for Sleep-Disordered Breathing in Adults With Chronic Opioid Use.
Sleep-disordered Breathing, Chronic Opioid Use
Recruiting
Nightly Wearable Monitoring During Home-Based Submental Electrical Stimulation for Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Obstructive Sleep Apnea
RecruitingPhase 1/2
DRonabinol Treatment of OSA
Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Carole L Marcus, M.B.B.Ch. principal investigator
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Bi-Flex and CPAP in people with Obstructive Sleep Apnea, run by Children's Hospital of Philadelphia at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 2 Oct 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 1 Apr 2014). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Minutes of Use Per Night at Month 1 (time frame: 1 month). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00458406, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 2 Oct 2019.