Prevalence of reduced lung diffusing capacity and CT scan findings in smokers without airflow limitation: a population-based study

Exercise; Lung Physiology; Tobacco and the lungEjercicio; Fisiología Pulmonar; Tabaco y pulmónExercici; Fisiologia pulmonar; Tabac i pulmóBackground Population distribution of reduced diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO) in smokers and main consequences are not properly recognised. The objectives of this study were to describe the prevalence of reduced DLCO in a population-based sample of current and former smoker subjects without airflow limitation and to describe its morphological, functional and clinical implications. Methods A sample of 405 subjects aged 40 years or older with postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity (FVC) >0.70 was obtained from a random population-based sample of 9092 subjects evaluated in the EPISCAN II study. Baseline evaluation included clinical questionnaires, exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) measurement, spirometry, DLCO determination, 6 min walk test, routine blood analysis and low-dose CT scan with evaluation of lung density and airway wall thickness. Results In never, former and current smokers, prevalence of reduced DLCO was 6.7%, 14.4% and 26.7%, respectively. Current and former smokers with reduced DLCO without airflow limitation were younger than the subjects with normal DLCO, and they had greater levels of dyspnoea and exhaled CO, greater pulmonary artery diameter and lower spirometric parameters, 6 min walk distance, daily physical activity and plasma albumin levels (all p<0.05), with no significant differences in other chronic respiratory symptoms or CT findings. FVC and exhaled CO were identified as independent risk factors for low DLCO. Conclusion Reduced DLCO is a frequent disorder among smokers without airflow limitation, associated with decreased exercise capacity and with CT findings suggesting that it may be a marker of smoking-induced early vascular damage.The EPISCAN II study has been a GlaxoSmithKline sponsored study (grant number: not applicable)

Unravelling young COPD and pre-COPD in the general population

COPD; General populationMPOC; Població generalEPOC; Población generalBackground Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is commonly diagnosed when the airflow limitation is well established and symptomatic. We aimed to identify individuals at risk of developing COPD according to the concept of pre-COPD and compare their clinical characteristics with 1) those who have developed the disease at a young age, and 2) the overall population with and without COPD. Methods The EPISCAN II study is a cross-sectional, population-based study that aims to investigate the prevalence of COPD in Spain in subjects ≥40 years of age. Pre-COPD was defined as the presence of emphysema >5% and/or bronchial thickening by computed chromatography (CT) scan and/or diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) 0.70. Young COPD was defined as FEV1/FVC <0.70 in a subject ≤50 years of age. Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared among pre-COPD, young COPD and the overall population with and without COPD. Results Among the 1077 individuals with FEV1/FVC 0.70, 350 underwent both DLCO testing and chest CT scanning. Of those, 78 (22.3%) subjects fulfilled the definition of pre-COPD. Subjects with pre-COPD were older, predominantly women, less frequently active or ex-smokers, with less frequent previous diagnosis of asthma but with higher symptomatic burden than those with young COPD. Conclusions 22.3% of the studied population was at risk of developing COPD, with similar symptomatic and structural changes to those with well-established disease without airflow obstruction. This COPD at-risk population is different from those that develop COPD at a young age.The EPISCAN II study was sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline

Distribution and Outcomes of a Phenotype- Based Approach to Guide COPD Management: Results from the CHAIN Cohort

Rationale The Spanish guideline for COPD (GesEPOC) recommends COPD treatment according to four clinical phenotypes: non-exacerbator phenotype with either chronic bronchitis or emphy- sema (NE), asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS), frequent exacerbator phenotype with emphysema (FEE) or frequent exacerbator phenotype with chronic bronchitis (FECB). How- ever, little is known on the distribution and outcomes of the four suggested phenotypes. Objective We aimed to determine the distribution of these COPD phenotypes, and their relation with one-year clinical outcomes. Methods We followed a cohort of well-characterized patients with COPD up to one-year. Baseline characteristics, health status (CAT), BODE index, rate of exacerbations and mortality up to one year of follow-up were compared between the four phenotypes. Results Overall, 831 stable COPD patients were evaluated. They were distributed as NE, 550 (66.2%); ACOS, 125 (15.0%); FEE, 38 (4.6%); and FECB, 99 (11.9%); additionally 19 (2.3%) COPD patients with frequent exacerbations did not fulfill the criteria for neither FEE nor FECB. At baseline, there were significant differences in symptoms, FEV 1 and BODE index (all p<0.05). The FECB phenotype had the highest CAT score (17.1±8.2, p<0.05 compared to the other phenotypes). Frequent exacerbator groups (FEE and FECB) were receiving more pharmacological treatment at baseline, and also experienced more exacer- bations the year after (all p<0.05) with no differences in one-year mortality. Most of NE (93%) and half of exacerbators were stable after one year. Conclusions There is an uneven distribution of COPD phenotypes in stable COPD patients, with signifi- cant differences in demographics, patient-centered outcomes and health care resources use

Work absence in patients with asthma and/or COPD:a population-based study

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma impact on work productivity, but their population-based burden and clinical predictors are understudied. In this observational, real-life study, work absence of 14,383 asthma and/or COPD patients present in the MAJORICA cohort (Spain) was compared with the general population. Using multivariable regression, we studied the association of work absence with demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients with asthma and/or COPD had more work absence than the general population (15.2% vs 8.9%, p <0.0001). Patients with asthma had more often periods of work absence compared to patients with COPD (16.0% vs 12.8%, p <0.0001). The number of days absent were, however, less in asthma than in COPD (median: 15 days [IQR: 5-51] vs 39 days [IQR: 13-134], p <0.001). Patients with asthma-COPD overlap were in between (14.5% with absence; median: 27 days [IQR: 10-82]). Comorbid anxiety, allergic rhinitis, and sleep apnoea were independently associated with more work absence

Mixed Th2 and non-Th2 inflammatory pattern in the asthma-COPD overlap : a network approach

Altres ajuts: The authors are grateful to all the patients who participated in the study. A number of investigators contributed to the study logistics and they are listed in the Supplementary materials. The project was endorsed by the COPD and Asthma Research Board (PII de EPOC y asma) of the Spanish Society of Pneumology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR).The asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) overlap (ACO) is a clinical condition that combines features of those two diseases, and that is difficult to define due to the lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms. Determining systemic mediators may help clarify the nature of inflammation in patients with ACO. We aimed at investigating the role and interaction of common markers of systemic inflammation (IL-6, IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor-α), Th2-related markers (periostin, IL-5, and IL-13), and IL-17 in asthma, COPD, and ACO. This is a cross-sectional study of patients aged ≥40 years with a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in the first second/forced vital capacity 10 pack-years in a patient with a previous diagnosis of asthma or by the presence of eosinophilia in a patient with a previous diagnosis of COPD. Clinical, functional, and inflammatory parameters were compared between categories using discriminant and network analysis. In total, 109 ACO, 89 COPD, and 94 asthma patients were included. Serum levels (median [interquartile range]) of IL-5 were higher in asthma patients than in COPD patients (2.09 [0.61-3.57] vs 1.11 [0.12-2.42] pg/mL, respectively; p =0.03), and IL-8 levels (median [interquartile range]) were higher in COPD patients than in asthma patients (9.45 [6.61-13.12] vs 7.03 [4.69-10.44] pg/mL, respectively; p <0.001). Their values in ACO were intermediate between those in asthma and in COPD. Principal component and network analysis showed a mixed inflammatory pattern in ACO in between asthma and COPD. IL-13 was the most connected node in the network, with different weights among the three conditions. Asthma and COPD are two different inflammatory conditions that may overlap in some patients, leading to a mixed inflammatory pattern. IL-13 could be central to the regulation of inflammation in these conditions

Hospital Epidemics Tracker (HEpiTracker): Description and pilot study of a mobile app to track COVID-19 in hospital workers

Background: Hospital workers have been the most frequently and severely affected professional group during the COVID-19 pandemic, and have a big impact on transmission. In this context, innovative tools are required to measure the symptoms compatible with COVID-19, the spread of infection, and testing capabilities within hospitals in real time. Objective: We aimed to develop and test an effective and user-friendly tool to identify and track symptoms compatible with COVID-19 in hospital workers. Methods: We developed and pilot tested Hospital Epidemics Tracker (HEpiTracker), a newly designed app to track the spread of COVID-19 among hospital workers. Hospital staff in 9 hospital centers across 5 Spanish regions (Andalusia, Balearics, Catalonia, Galicia, and Madrid) were invited to download the app on their phones and to register their daily body temperature, COVID-19-compatible symptoms, and general health score, as well as any polymerase chain reaction and serological test results. Results: A total of 477 hospital staff participated in the study between April 8 and June 2, 2020. Of note, both health-related (n=329) and non-health-related (n=148) professionals participated in the study; over two-thirds of participants (68.8%) were health workers (43.4% physicians and 25.4% nurses), while the proportion of non-health-related workers by center ranged from 40% to 85%. Most participants were female (n=323, 67.5%), with a mean age of 45.4 years (SD 10.6). Regarding smoking habits, 13.0% and 34.2% of participants were current or former smokers, respectively. The daily reporting of symptoms was highly variable across participating hospitals; although we observed a decline in adherence after an initial participation peak in some hospitals, other sites were characterized by low participation rates throughout the study period. Conclusions: HEpiTracker is an already available tool to monitor COVID-19 and other infectious diseases in hospital workers. This tool has already been tested in real conditions. HEpiTracker is available in Spanish, Portuguese, and English. It has the potential to become a customized asset to be used in future COVID-19 pandemic waves and other environments

Sex differences between women and men with COPD: A new analysis of the 3CIA study

Background: There is partial evidence that COPD is expressed differently in women than in men, namely on symptoms, pulmonary function, exacerbations, comorbidities or prognosis. There is a need to improve the characterization of COPD in females. Methods: We obtained and pooled data of 17 139 patients from 22 COPD cohorts and analysed the clinical differences by sex, establishing the relationship between these characteristics in women and the prognosis and severity of the disease. Comparisons were established with standard statistics and survival analysis, including crude and multivariate Cox-regression analysis. Results: Overall, 5355 (31.2%) women were compared with men with COPD. Women were younger, had lower pack-years, greater FEV1%, lower BMI and a greater number of exacerbations (all p &lt; 0.05). On symptoms, women reported more dyspnea, equal cough but less expectoration (p &lt; 0.001). There were no differences in the BODE index score in women (2.4) versus men (2.4) (p = 0.5), but the distribution of all BODE components was highly variable by sex within different thresholds of BODE. On prognosis, 5-year survival was higher in COPD females (86.9%) than in males (76.3%), p &lt; 0.001, in all patients and within each of the specific comorbidities that we assessed. The crude and adjusted RR and 95% C.I. for death in males was 1.82 (1.69–1.96) and 1.73 (1.50–2.00), respectively. Conclusions: COPD in women has some characteristic traits expressed differently than compared to men, mainly with more dyspnea and COPD exacerbations and less phlegm, among others, although long-term survival appears better in female COPD patients

Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021: Updated Pharmacological treatment of stable COPD

The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) were first published in 2012, and since then have undergone a series of updates incorporating new evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD. GesEPOC was drawn up in partnership with scientific societies involved in the treatment of COPD and the Spanish Patients' Forum. Their recommendations are based on an evaluation of the evidence using GRADE methodology, and a narrative description of the evidence in areas in which GRADE cannot be applied. In this article, we summarize the recommendations on the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD based on 9 PICO questions. COPD treatment is a 4-step process: 1) diagnosis, 2) determination of the risk level, 3) initial and subsequent inhaled therapy, and 4) identification and management of treatable traits. For the selection of inhaled therapy, high-risk patients are divided into 3 phenotypes: non-exacerbator, eosinophilic exacerbator, and non-eosinophilic exacerbator. Some treatable traits are general and should be investigated in all patients, such as smoking or inhalation technique, while others affect severe patients in particular, such as chronic hypoxemia and chronic bronchial infection. COPD treatment is based on long-acting bronchodilators with single agents or in combination, depending on the patient's risk level. Eosinophilic exacerbators must receive inhaled corticosteroids, while non-eosinophilic exacerbators require a more detailed evaluation to choose the best therapeutic option. The new GesEPOC also includes recommendations on the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids and on indications for alpha-1 antitrypsin treatment. GesEPOC offers a more individualized approach to COPD treatment tailored according to the clinical characteristics of patients and their level of complexity.Peer reviewe

Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021 Update Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD Exacerbation Syndrome

[ES] En este artículo se presentan las recomendaciones sobre el diagnóstico y tratamiento del síndrome de agudización de la enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) (SAE) de GesEPOC 2021. Como principales novedades, la guía propone una definición y aproximación sindrómica, una nueva clasificación de gravedad y el reconocimiento de diferentes rasgos tratables (RT), lo que supone un nuevo paso hacia la medicina personalizada. La evaluación de la evidencia se realiza mediante la metodología Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), con la incorporación de seis nuevas preguntas con enfoque paciente, intervención, comparación y resultados (PICO). El proceso diagnóstico comprende cuatro etapas: 1) establecer el diagnóstico del SAE, 2) valorar la gravedad del episodio, 3) identificar el factor desencadenante y 4) abordar los RT. En este proceso diagnóstico se diferencia una aproximación ambulatoria, en la que se recomienda incluir una batería básica de pruebas y una hospitalaria, más exhaustiva, en la que se contempla el estudio de diferentes biomarcadores y pruebas de imagen. El tratamiento broncodilatador destinado al alivio inmediato de los síntomas se considera esencial para todos los pacientes, mientras que el uso de antibióticos, corticoides sistémicos, oxigenoterapia, ventilación asistida o el tratamiento de las comorbilidades variará en función de la gravedad y de los posibles RT. El empleo de antibióticos estará especialmente indicado ante un cambio en el color del esputo, cuando se requiera asistencia ventilatoria, en los casos que cursen con neumonía y también para aquellos con proteína-C reactiva elevada (≥ 20 mg/L). Los corticoides sistémicos se recomiendan en el SAE que necesita ingreso y se sugieren en el SAE moderado. La eficacia de estos fármacos es mayor en pacientes con recuento de eosinófilos en sangre ≥ 300 células/mm3. La ventilación mecánica no invasiva en fase aguda se establece fundamentalmente para pacientes con SAE que cursen con acidosis respiratoria, a pesar del tratamiento inicial.[EN] This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (≥ 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/mm3. Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment.Peer reviewe