Review series: Aspects of interstitial lung disease: connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease: how does it differ from IPF? How should the clinical approach differ?

The lung is frequently involved in connective tissue diseases (CTDs), although the frequency of lung manifestations varies according to the type of CTD. Interstitial lung diseases (ILD) are frequently seen in CTDs, particularly systemic sclerosis (SSc), polymyositis/dermatomyositis (PM/DM) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), accounting for a significant proportion of deaths. A large percentage of patients with CTD-associated ILD has limited and stable disease, not requiring treatment. However, a significant minority has severe and/or progressive disease, necessitating prompt initiation of treatment. CTD-ILD histological patterns include non-specific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP), usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP), organizing pneumonia (OP), diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) and lymphocytic interstitial pneumonia (LIP). NSIP is the most common pattern in all CTDs, except for RA, characterized by a higher frequency of UIP. ILD can present acutely or chronically, with acute presentations being more common in systemic lupus erythematosus and PM/DM. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressively worsening ILD characterized by inflammation and fibrosis. The characteristic histological pattern of IPF is UIP. Interestingly, a UIP pattern is associated with a significantly better survival in CTD-related disease compared to the idiopathic variety. Prognosis in IPF is dismal, with a median survival since diagnosis of 2-3 years. No treatment regimen has been shown to improve survival in IPF. By contrast, although there have been only two randomized placebo-controlled trials investigating the effect of immunosuppressive treatment in SSc-associated ILD, clinical experience suggests that immunosuppressive drugs in CTD-related ILDs are capable of benefiting a significant proportion of patients, particularly those with certain histological patterns of disease. This review will essentially focus on CTD-associated ILD and will compare aspects of clinical presentation and management to those of IPF

Morphometric analysis of lymphatics vessels in fibrotic human lung

In pulmonary fibrosis, the usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern is characterised by heterogeneous, patchy fibrosis, with areas of normal lung adjacent to areas of complete destruction (honeycombing) and by fibroblastic foci (FF). The NSIP pattern which is characteristic of systemic sclerosis, is characterised by a more homogeneous involvement of the lung without honeycombing and FF. Little is known on lymphatic vessels in lung fibrosis. Defective lymphatic clearance could lead to prolonged exposure to pathogenic antigens and/or pro-inflammatory/pro-fibrotic mediators. We evaluated the distribution and morphology of lymphatic vessels in lung biopsies of 6 patients with UIP, 6 NSIP and 5 controls. Consecutive sections were stained with Movat’s pentachrome and with double immunostaining for von Willebrand factor and podoplanin (D2-40). Area, perimeter and position were recorded for vessels with a diameter > 5µm. We investigated separately in lintralobular, sub-pleural, and interlobular spaces. Lymphatics were consistently larger in subpleural spaces and in interlobular septa than in intralobular tissue. In the latter, the density of lymphatic vessels was significantly reduced in NSIP and in UIP (both 21±1 mm-2) compared to controls (35±4 mm-2) . In controls, 85±6% of the intralobular lymphatics were close (< 100 µm) to a blood vessel, and only 5±4% were in the proximity of bronchoalveolar spaces, while in the disease groups they were less frequently perivascular (NSIP 55 ±3%, UIP 56 ±2%) and more frequently associated with the bronchoalveolar lumen (NSIP 85 ±3%, UIP 69 ±2%). By contrast, in interlobular septa, lymphatic density was significantly increased in NSIP (303±28 mm-2) and in UIP (286±124 mm-2) compared to controls (96±69 mm-2). No differences in lymphatic density was seen in subpleural spaces. Thus, our data show a marked redistribution of lymphatic vessels within the lung in pulmonary fibrosis, without noticeable differences between the NSIP and UIP patterns

Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Treatments for Systemic Sclerosis-Related Interstitial Lung Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: There is a paucity of head-to-head comparisons of the efficacy and harms of pharmacological treatments for systemic sclerosis-related interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD). Methods: We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) in order to compare the effects of different treatments with the placebo on change in forced vital capacity (FVC), change in diffusion lung capacity for CO (DLCO), serious adverse events (SAEs), discontinuation for adverse events and mortality in SSc-ILD. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and log odds ratio were estimated using NMA with fixed effects. Results: Nine randomized clinical trials (926 participants) comparing eight interventions and the placebo for an average follow-up of one year were included. Compared to the placebo, only rituximab significantly reduced FVC decline (SMD (95% CI) = 1.00 (0.39 to 1.61)). Suitable data on FVC outcome for nintedanib were not available for the analysis. No treatments influenced DLCO. Safety and mortality were also not different across treatments and the placebo, although there were few reported events. Cyclophosphamide and pomalidomide were less tolerated than the placebo, mycophenolate, and nintedanib. Conclusion: Only rituximab significantly reduced lung function decline compared to the placebo. However, direct head-to-head comparison studies are required to confirm these findings and to better determine the safety profile of various treatments

Holistic management of patients with progressive pulmonary fibrosis

Progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PF) is a complex interstitial lung disease that impacts substantially on patients’ daily lives, requiring personalised and integrated care. We summarise the main needs of patients with PF and their caregivers, and suggest a supportive care approach. Individualised care, education, emotional and psychological support, specialised treatments, and better access to information and resources are necessary. Management should start at diagnosis, be tailored to the patient’s needs, and consider end-of-life care. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions should be individualised, including oxygen therapy and pulmonary rehabilitation, with digital healthcare utilised as appropriate. Further research is needed to address technical issues related to oxygen delivery and digital healthcare.</p

Research highlights from the 2018 ERS International Congress: interstitial lung diseases

This article reviews a selection of the scientific presentations on interstitial lung disease (ILD)/diffuse parenchymal lung disease (DPLD) that were made at the 2018 European Respiratory Society (ERS) International Congress in Paris. A number of advances in the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of these disorders were presented and discussed by clinicians and researchers. The research topics span over all four groups of ERS Assembly 12: Interstitial Lung Diseases (Group 12.01: Idiopathic interstitial pneumonias; Group 12.02: ILD/DPLD of known origin; Group 12.03: Sarcoidosis and other granulomatous ILD/DPLD; Group 12.04: Rare ILD/DPLD)

Research highlights from the 2018 ERS International Congress: interstitial lung diseases

This article reviews a selection of the scientific presentations on interstitial lung disease (ILD)/diffuse parenchymal lung disease (DPLD) that were made at the 2018 European Respiratory Society (ERS) International Congress in Paris. A number of advances in the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of these disorders were presented and discussed by clinicians and researchers. The research topics span over all four groups of ERS Assembly 12: Interstitial Lung Diseases (Group 12.01: Idiopathic interstitial pneumonias; Group 12.02: ILD/DPLD of known origin; Group 12.03: Sarcoidosis and other granulomatous ILD/DPLD; Group 12.04: Rare ILD/DPLD)

Rituximab versus intravenous cyclophosphamide in patients with connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease in the UK (RECITAL): a double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, controlled, phase 2b trial

BACKGROUND: Rituximab is often used as rescue therapy in interstitial lung disease (ILD) associated with connective tissue disease (CTD), but has not been studied in clinical trials. This study aimed to assess whether rituximab is superior to cyclophosphamide as a treatment for severe or progressive CTD associated ILD. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 2b trial to assess the superiority of rituximab compared with cyclophosphamide. Patients aged 18-80 years with severe or progressive ILD related to scleroderma, idiopathic inflammatory myositis, or mixed CTD, recruited across 11 specialist ILD or rheumatology centres in the UK, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive rituximab (1000 mg at weeks 0 and 2 intravenously) or cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2 body surface area every 4 weeks intravenously for six doses). The primary endpoint was rate of change in forced vital capacity (FVC) at 24 weeks compared with baseline, analysed using a mixed-effects model with random intercepts, adjusted for baseline FVC and CTD type. Prespecified secondary endpoints reported in this Article were change in FVC at 48 weeks versus baseline; changes from baseline in 6 min walk distance, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), physician-assessed global disease activity (GDA) score, and quality-of-life scores on the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease (KBILD) questionnaire, and European Quality of Life Five-Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire at 24 and 48 weeks; overall survival, progression-free survival, and time to treatment failure; and corticosteroid use. All endpoints were analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01862926). FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2014, and March 31, 2020, we screened 145 participants, of whom 101 participants were randomly allocated: 50 (50%) to receive cyclophosphamide and 51 (50%) to receive rituximab. 48 (96%) participants in the cyclophosphamide group and 49 (96%) in the rituximab group received at least one dose of treatment and were included in analyses; 43 (86%) participants in the cyclophosphamide group and 42 (82%) participants in the rituximab group completed 24 weeks of treatment and follow-up. At 24 weeks, FVC was improved from baseline in both the cyclophosphamide group (unadjusted mean increase 99 mL [SD 329]) and the rituximab group (97 mL [234]); in the adjusted mixed-effects model, the difference in the primary endpoint at 24 weeks was -40 mL (95% CI -153 to 74; p=0·49) between the rituximab group and the cyclophosphamide group. KBILD quality-of-life scores were improved at 24 weeks by a mean 9·4 points (SD 20·8) in the cyclophosphamide group and 8·8 points (17·0) in the rituximab group. No significant differences in secondary endpoints were identified between the treatment groups, with the exception of change in GDA score at week 48, which favoured cyclophosphamide (difference 0·90 [95% CI 0·11 to 1·68]). Improvements in lung function and respiratory-related quality-of-life measures were observed in both treatment groups. Lower corticosteroid exposure over 48 weeks of follow-up was recorded in the rituximab group. Two (4%) of 48 participants who received cyclophosphamide and three (6%) of 49 who received rituximab died during the study, all due to complications of CTD or ILD. Overall survival, progression-free survival, and time to treatment failure did not significantly differ between the two groups. All participants reported at least one adverse event during the study. Numerically fewer adverse events were reported by participants receiving rituximab (445 events) than those receiving cyclophosphamide (646 events). Gastrointestinal and respiratory disorders were the most commonly reported adverse events in both groups. There were 62 serious adverse events of which 33 occurred in the cyclophosphamide group and 29 in the rituximab group. INTERPRETATION: Rituximab was not superior to cyclophosphamide to treat patients with CTD-ILD, although participants in both treatment groups had increased FVC at 24 weeks, in addition to clinically important improvements in patient-reported quality of life. Rituximab was associated with fewer adverse events. Rituximab should be considered as a therapeutic alternative to cyclophosphamide in individuals with CTD-ILD requiring intravenous therapy. FUNDING: Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme (Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research, UK)

British Lung Foundation/United Kingdom primary immunodeficiency network consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis, and management of granulomatous-lymphocytic interstitial lung disease in common variable immunodeficiency disorders

A proportion of people living with common variable immunodeficiency disorders develop granulomatous-lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD). We aimed to develop a consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis, and management of GLILD. All UK specialist centers were contacted and relevant physicians were invited to take part in a 3-round online Delphi process. Responses were graded as Strongly Agree, Tend to Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Tend to Disagree, and Strongly Disagree, scored +1, +0.5, 0, −0.5, and −1, respectively. Agreement was defined as greater than or equal to 80% consensus. Scores are reported as mean ± SD. There was 100% agreement (score, 0.92 ± 0.19) for the following definition: “GLILD is a distinct clinico-radio-pathological ILD occurring in patients with [common variable immunodeficiency disorders], associated with a lymphocytic infiltrate and/or granuloma in the lung, and in whom other conditions have been considered and where possible excluded.” There was consensus that the workup of suspected GLILD requires chest computed tomography (CT) (0.98 ± 0.01), lung function tests (eg, gas transfer, 0.94 ± 0.17), bronchoscopy to exclude infection (0.63 ± 0.50), and lung biopsy (0.58 ± 0.40). There was no consensus on whether expectant management following optimization of immunoglobulin therapy was acceptable: 67% agreed, 25% disagreed, score 0.38 ± 0.59; 90% agreed that when treatment was required, first-line treatment should be with corticosteroids alone (score, 0.55 ± 0.51)

ERS International Congress 2021: highlights from the Interstitial Lung Diseases Assembly

This article provides an overview of scientific highlights in the field of interstitial lung disease (ILD), presented at the virtual European Respiratory Society Congress 2021. A broad range of topics was discussed this year, ranging from translational and genetic aspects to novel innovations with the potential to improve the patient pathway. Early Career Members summarise a selection of interesting findings from different congress sessions, together with the leadership of Assembly 12 - Interstitial Lung Disease. © The authors 2022