Bronchodilator Responsiveness in Tobacco-Exposed People With or Without COPD

Background: Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) in obstructive lung disease varies over time and may be associated with distinct clinical features. Research Question: Is consistent BDR over time (always present) differentially associated with obstructive lung disease features relative to inconsistent (sometimes present) or never (never present) BDR in tobacco-exposed people with or without COPD? Study Design and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 2,269 tobacco-exposed participants in the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study with or without COPD. We used various BDR definitions: change of ≥ 200 mL and ≥ 12% in FEV1 (FEV1-BDR), change in FVC (FVC-BDR), and change in in FEV1, FVC or both (ATS-BDR). Using generalized linear models adjusted for demographics, smoking history, FEV1 % predicted after bronchodilator administration, and number of visits that the participant completed, we assessed the association of BDR group: (1) consistent BDR, (2) inconsistent BDR, and (3) never BDR with asthma, CT scan features, blood eosinophil levels, and FEV1 decline in participants without COPD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] stage 0) and the entire cohort (participants with or without COPD). Results: Both consistent and inconsistent ATS-BDR were associated with asthma history and greater small airways disease (%parametric response mapping functional small airways disease) relative to never ATS-BDR in participants with GOLD stage 0 disease and the entire cohort. We observed similar findings using FEV1-BDR and FVC-BDR definitions. Eosinophils did not vary consistently among BDR groups. Consistent BDR was associated with FEV1 decline over time relative to never BDR in the entire cohort. In participants with GOLD stage 0 disease, both the inconsistent ATS-BDR group (OR, 3.20; 95% CI, 2.21-4.66; P < .001) and consistent ATS-BDR group (OR, 9.48; 95% CI, 3.77-29.12; P < .001) were associated with progression to COPD relative to the never ATS-BDR group. Interpretation: Demonstration of BDR, even once, describes an obstructive lung disease phenotype with a history of asthma and greater small airways disease. Consistent demonstration of BDR indicated a high risk of lung function decline over time in the entire cohort and was associated with higher risk of progression to COPD in patients with GOLD stage 0 disease

Clinical significance of bronchodilator responsiveness evaluated by forced vital capacity in COPD: SPIROMICS cohort analysis

Objective: Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) is prevalent in COPD, but its clinical implications remain unclear. We explored the significance of BDR, defined by post-bronchodilator change in FEV1 (BDRFEV1) as a measure reflecting the change in flow and in FVC (BDRFVC)reflecting the change in volume. Methods: We analyzed 2974 participants from a multicenter observational study designed to identify varying COPD phenotypes (SPIROMICS). We evaluated the association of BDR with baseline clinical characteristics, rate of prospective exacerbations and mortality using negative binomial regression and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: A majority of COPD participants exhibited BDR (52.7%). BDRFEV1 occurred more often in earlier stages of COPD, while BDRFVC occurred more frequently in more advanced disease. When defined by increases in either FEV1 or FVC, BDR was associated with a self-reported history of asthma, but not with blood eosinophil counts. BDRFVC was more prevalent in subjects with greater emphysema and small airway disease on CT. In a univariate analysis, BDRFVC was associated with increased exacerbations and mortality, although no significance was found in a model adjusted for post-bronchodilator FEV1. Conclusion: With advanced airflow obstruction in COPD, BDRFVC is more prevalent in comparison to BDRFEV1 and correlates with the extent of emphysema and degree of small airway disease. Since these associations appear to be related to the impairment of FEV1,BDRFVC itself does not define a distinct phenotype nor can it be more predictive of outcomes, but it can offer additional insights into the pathophysiologic mechanism in advanced COPD. Clinical trials registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01969344T4