Screening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Early Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD and Asthma - A Randomized, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Many persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma have not received a diagnosis, so their respiratory symptoms remain largely untreated.

METHODS

We used a case-finding method to identify adults in the community with respiratory symptoms without diagnosed lung disease. Participants who were found to have undiagnosed COPD or asthma on spirometry were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial to determine whether early diagnosis and treatment reduces health care utilization for respiratory illness and improves health outcomes. Participants were assigned to receive the intervention (evaluation by a pulmonologist and an asthma-COPD educator who were instructed to initiate guideline-based care) or usual care by their primary care practitioner. The primary outcome was the annualized rate of participant-initiated health care utilization for respiratory illness. Secondary outcomes included changes from baseline to 1 year in disease-specific quality of life, as assessed with the St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating better health status); symptom burden, as assessed with the COPD Assessment Test (CAT; scores range from 0 to 40, with lower scores indicating better health status); and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1).

RESULTS

Of 38,353 persons interviewed, 595 were found to have undiagnosed COPD or asthma and 508 underwent randomization: 253 were assigned to the intervention group and 255 to the usual-care group. The annualized rate of a primary-outcome event was lower in the intervention group than in the usual-care group (0.53 vs. 1.12 events per person-year; incidence rate ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.63; P<0.001). At 12 months, the SGRQ score was lower than the baseline score by 10.2 points in the intervention group and by 6.8 points in the usual-care group (difference, -3.5 points; 95% CI, -6.0 to -0.9), and the CAT score was lower than the baseline score by 3.8 points and 2.6 points, respectively (difference, -1.3 points; 95% CI, -2.4 to -0.1). The FEV1 increased by 119 ml in the intervention group and by 22 ml in the usual-care group (difference, 94 ml; 95% CI, 50 to 138). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the trial groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial in which a strategy was used to identify adults in the community with undiagnosed asthma or COPD, those who received pulmonologist-directed treatment had less subsequent health care utilization for respiratory illness than those who received usual care. (Funded by Canadian Institutes of Health Research; UCAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03148210.).

Urinary volatile organic compound metabolites and COPD among US adults: mixture, interaction and mediation analysis

BACKGROUND

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) encompass hundreds of high production volume chemicals and have been reported to be associated with adverse respiratory outcomes such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, research on the combined toxic effects of exposure to various VOCs on COPD is lacking. We aimed to assess the effect of VOC metabolite mixture on COPD risk in a large population sample.

METHODS

We assessed the effect of VOC metabolite mixture on COPD risk in 5997 adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2011 to 2020 (pre-pandemic) using multivariate logistic regression, Bayesian weighted quantile sum regression (BWQS), quantile-based g-Computation method (Qgcomp), and Bayesian kernel machine regression (BKMR). We explored whether these associations were mediated by white blood cell (WBC) count and total bilirubin.

RESULTS

In the logistic regression model, we observed a significantly increased risk of COPD associated with 9 VOC metabolites. Conversely, N-acetyl-S-(benzyl)-L-cysteine (BMA) and N-acetyl-S-(n-propyl)-L-cysteine (BPMA) showed insignificant negative correlations with COPD risk. The overall mixture exposure demonstrated a significant positive relationship with COPD in both the BWQS model (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06, 1.58) and BKMR model, and with marginal significance in the Qgcomp model (adjusted OR = 1.22, 95% CI: 0.98, 1.52). All three models indicated a significant effect of the VOC metabolite mixture on COPD in non-current smokers. WBC count mediated 7.1% of the VOC mixture associated-COPD in non-current smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide novel evidence suggesting that VOCs may have adverse associations with COPD in the general population, with N, N- Dimethylformamide and 1,3-Butadiene contributing most. These findings underscore the significance of understanding the potential health risks associated with VOC mixture and emphasize the need for targeted interventions to mitigate the adverse effects on COPD risk.

Validity of the Espiro Mobile Application in the Interpretation of Spirometric Patterns: An App Accuracy Study

Spirometry is a pulmonary function test where correct interpretation of the results is crucial for accurate diagnosis of disease. There are online tools to assist in the interpretation of spirometry results; however, as yet none are validated. We evaluated the interpretation accuracy of the Espiro app using pulmonologist interpretations as the gold standard. This is an observational descriptive study in which 118 spirometry results were interpreted by the Espiro app, two pulmonologists, two primary care physicians, and two residents of a primary care training program. We determined the interpretation accuracy of the Espiro app and the concordance of the pattern and severity interpretation between the Espiro app and each of the observers using Cohen's kappa coefficient (k). We obtained a sensitivity and specificity for the Espiro app of 97.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 86.8-99.9%) and 94.9% (95%CI: 87.4-98.6%) with pulmonologist 1 and 100% (95%CI: 91.6-100%) and 98.7% (95%CI: 92.9-99.9%) with pulmonologist 2. The concordance for the pattern interpretation was greater than k 0.907, representing almost perfect agreement. The concordance of the severity interpretation was greater than k 0.807, representing substantial to almost perfect agreement. We concluded that the Espiro app is a valid tool for spirometry interpretation.

The association of chest computed tomography-defined visual emphysema and prognosis in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer

Background

Although computed tomography (CT)-defined emphysema is considered a predictor of lung cancer risk, it is not fully clear whether CT-defined emphysema is associated with the prognosis of lung cancer. We aimed to assess the clinical impact of CT-defined emphysema on the survival of lung cancer.

Methods

In the prospective cohort study of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the correlation between CT-defined emphysema and clinical variables was analysed. A multivariable Cox regression model was built to assess the association between CT-defined emphysema and overall survival (OS) for up to 8.8 years. The differences in survival analyses were derived by Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank testing. Low attenuation area (LAA%) was defined as the per cent of voxels below -950 HU.

Results

854 patients were included and CT-defined emphysema was present in 300 (35.1%) at diagnosis. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) wild-type (OR 1.998; p<0.001) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) wild-type (OR 2.277; p=0.004) were associated with CT-defined emphysema. CT-defined emphysema remained a significant predictor of prognosis adjusting for age, sex, smoking history, tumour histology and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS), whether in I-IIIA stage (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.745; p=0.017) or in IIIB-IV stage (adjusted HR 1.291; p=0.022). Stratified analyses showed that OS rate among the driver oncogene groups with different CT-defined emphysema status differed significantly (log-rank p<0.001). Furthermore, patients with centrilobular emphysema (CLE) with LAA% >17% displayed poorer survival than those with LAA% ≤17% (median 432 versus 670 days; HR 1.564; p=0.020).

Conclusions

CT-defined emphysema, especially CLE with LAA%>17%, is an independent predictor of NSCLC prognosis. Moreover, prospective studies are needed to further explore this association.

Is it preferable to administer a bronchodilator once- or twice-daily when treating COPD?

Nocturnal and early morning symptoms are common and uncomfortable in many patients with COPD, and are likely to affect their long-term outcomes. However, it is still debated whether it is better to give long-acting bronchodilators once- or twice-daily to symptomatic COPD patients. The functional link between circadian rhythms of autonomic tone and airway calibre explains why the timing of administration of bronchodilators in chronic airway diseases can induce different effects when taken at different biological (circadian) times. However, the timing also depends on the pharmacological characteristics of the bronchodilator to be used. Because the profile of bronchodilation produced by once-daily vs. twice-daily long-acting bronchodilators differs throughout 24 h, selecting long-acting bronchodilators may be customized to specific patient preferences based on the need for further bronchodilation in the evening. This is especially helpful for people who experience respiratory symptoms at night or early morning. Compared to placebo, evening bronchodilator administration is consistently linked with persistent overnight improvements in dynamic respiratory mechanics and inspiratory neural drive. The current evidence indicates that nocturnal and early morning symptoms control is best handled by a LAMA taken in the evening. In contrast, it seems preferable to use a LABA for daytime symptoms. Therefore, it can be speculated that combining a LAMA with a LABA can improve bronchodilation and control symptoms better. Both LAMA and LABA must be rapid in their onset of action. Aclidinium/formoterol, a twice-daily combination, is the most studies of the available LAMA/LABA combinations in terms of impact on daytime and nocturnal symptoms.

Use of CAPTURE to Identify Individuals Who May or May Not Require Treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Rationale: The CAPTURE tool (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease [COPD] Assessment in Primary Care to Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk) was developed to identify patients with undiagnosed COPD with an FEV1 <60% predicted or risk of exacerbation as treatment criteria. Objectives: To test the ability of CAPTURE to identify patients requiring treatment because of symptoms or risk of exacerbation or hospitalization. Methods: Data were from COMPASS (Clinical, Radiological and Biological Factors Associated with Disease Progression, Phenotypes and Endotypes of COPD in China), a prospective study of COPD, chronic bronchitis without airflow limitation (postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC ratio ≥0.70), and healthy never-smokers. CAPTURE was tested as questions alone and with peak expiratory flow measurement. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predicted values (PPV and NPV) were calculated for COPD Assessment Test (CAT) scores ⩾10 versus <10, modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) scores ⩾2 versus <2, and at least one moderate exacerbation or hospitalization in the previous year versus none. Measurements and Main Results: Patients with COPD (n = 1,696) had a mean age of 65 ± 7.5 years, and 90% were male, with a postbronchodilator FEV1 of 66.5 ± 20.1% predicted. Control participants (n = 307) had a mean age of 60.2 ± 7.0 years, and 65% were male, with an FEV1/FVC ratio of 0.78 ± 0.04. CAPTURE using peak expiratory flow showed the best combination of sensitivity and specificity. Sensitivity and specificity were 68.5% and 64.0%, respectively, to detect a CAT score ⩾10; 85.6% and 61.0% to detect an mMRC score ⩾2; 63.5% and 55.6% to detect at least one moderate exacerbation; and 70.2% and 59.4% to detect at least one hospitalization. PPVs ranged from 15.6% (moderate exacerbations) to 47.8% (CAT score). NPVs ranged from 80.8% (CAT score) to 95.6% (mMRC score). Conclusions: CAPTURE has good sensitivity to identify patients with COPD who may require treatment because of increased symptoms or risk of exacerbations or hospitalization, including those with an FEV1 >60% predicted. High NPV values show that CAPTURE can also exclude those who may not require treatment. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04853225).

Should we be screening for COPD? - looking through the lens of lung cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

In May 2022, the US Preventive Services Task Force published their recommendation against screening for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in asymptomatic adults. However, we argue the routine use of spirometry in both asymptomatic and symptomatic high-risk smokers has utility.

AREAS COVERED

We provide published and unpublished observations from a secondary analyses of the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN), arm of the National Lung Screening Trial, including 18,463 high-risk current or former smokers who underwent pre-bronchodilator spirometry at baseline. According to history alone, 20% reported a prior diagnosis of 'COPD,' although only 11% (about one half), actually had airflow limitation (Diagnosed COPD) and 9% had Global Initiative for Obstructive Pulmonary Disease GOLD 0 Pre-COPD. Of the remaining 80% of 'asymptomatic' screening participants, 23% had airflow limitation (Screen-detected COPD) and 13% had preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm). This means 45% of this high-risk cohort were reclassified by spirometry, and together with comorbid disease, identified subgroups where lung cancer screening efficacy could be optimized by between 2-6 fold.

EXPERT OPINION

Our preliminary findings suggest lung cancer screening outcomes vary according to 'new' COPD-related spirometric-defined subgroups and that screening spirometry, together with comorbid disease, identifies those for whom lung cancer screening is mostly beneficial or potentially harmful.

Association between co-exposure of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among the US adults: results from the 2013-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

Although existing epidemiological studies have reported the relationship between single polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) exposure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), little is known about the impact of PAH mixture exposure on COPD. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the associations of single and mixed exposures to PAHs with COPD in US adults using data from NHANES 2013-2016 by fitting three statistical methods, including multiple logistic regression, Bayesian kernel machine regression (BKMR), and quantile-based g-computation (qgcomp) models. This study included 1836 participants aged 40 and older. Multiple logistic regression showed that 2-FLU, 1-PHE, 1-PYR, and 2&3-PHE increased the risk of COPD after adjusting for all covariates. The BKMR model identified positive trends between PAH mixture and the risk of COPD in all adults and males when all PAHs were at or above their 55th percentile compared to all PAHs at their 50th percentile. The qgcomp model suggested that PAH co-exposure increased the risk of COPD (OR:1.44, 95%CI:1.09, 1.90) when each quartile increased in PAH mixture concentration, with 2-FLU having the highest weight. The combined impact also be observed in men. In conclusion, PAHs co-exposure was associated with a higher risk of COPD, especially in males, with the positive impact of 2-FLU being the most important.

Diagnosis and treatment outcomes from prebronchodilator spirometry performed alongside lung cancer screening in a Lung Health Check programme

INTRODUCTION

Incorporating spirometry into low-dose CT (LDCT) screening for lung cancer may help identify people with undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), although the downstream impacts are not well described.

METHODS

Participants attending a Lung Health Check (LHC) as part of the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial were offered spirometry alongside LDCT screening. Results were communicated to the general practitioner (GP), and those with unexplained symptomatic airflow obstruction (AO) fulfilling agreed criteria were referred to the Leeds Community Respiratory Team (CRT) for assessment and treatment. Primary care records were reviewed to determine changes to diagnostic coding and pharmacotherapy.

RESULTS

Of 2391 LHC participants undergoing prebronchodilator spirometry, 201 (8.4%) fulfilled the CRT referral criteria of which 151 were invited for further assessment. Ninety seven participants were subsequently reviewed by the CRT, 46 declined assessment and 8 had already been seen by their GP at the time of CRT contact. Overall 70 participants had postbronchodilator spirometry checked, of whom 20 (29%) did not have AO. Considering the whole cohort referred to the CRT (but excluding those without AO postbronchodilation), 59 had a new GP COPD code, 56 commenced new pharmacotherapy and 5 were underwent pulmonary rehabilitation (comprising 2.5%, 2.3% and 0.2% of the 2391 participants undergoing LHC spirometry).

CONCLUSIONS

Delivering spirometry alongside lung cancer screening may facilitate earlier diagnosis of COPD. However, this study highlights the importance of confirming AO by postbronchodilator spirometry prior to diagnosing and treating patients with COPD and illustrates some downstream challenges in acting on spirometry collected during an LHC.

Prevalence of abnormal spirometry in individuals with a smoking history and no known obstructive lung disease

INTRODUCTION

Recent evidence suggests a high prevalence of undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). These individuals are at risk of exacerbations and delayed treatment. We analyzed an at-risk population for the prevalence of abnormal spirometry to provide clarity into who should undergo early spirometry.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the COPDGene study. Participants with ≥10 pack-years of smoking were included. Individuals with self-reported or physician-diagnosed COPD, asthma, chronic bronchitis, emphysema and/or were on inhalers were excluded. Parsimonious multivariable logistic regression models identified factors associated with abnormal spirometry, defined as either airflow obstruction (AFO) or preserved ratio impaired spirometry. Variables were selected for the final model using a stepwise backward variable elimination process which minimized Akaike information criterion (AIC). Similarly, during the 5-year follow-up period, we assessed factors associated with incident diagnosis of COPD.

RESULTS

Of 5055 individuals, 1064 (21%) had undiagnosed AFO. Age, pack-years, current smoking and a history of acute bronchitis were associated with AFO while body mass index, female sex, and Black race were inversely associated. Among 2800 participants with 5-year follow-up, 532 (19%) had an incident diagnosis of COPD. Associated risk factors included mMRC ≥2, chronic productive cough, respiratory exacerbations during the follow-up period, and abnormal spirometry. Age was inversely associated.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of undiagnosed COPD is high in at-risk populations. We found multiple factors associated with undiagnosed COPD and incident diagnosis of COPD at follow up. These results can be used to identify those at risk for undiagnosed COPD to facilitate earlier diagnosis and treatment.

Screening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an irreversible reduction of airflow in the lungs. Progression to severe disease can prevent participation in normal activities because of deterioration of lung function. In 2020 it was estimated that approximately 6% of US adults had been diagnosed with COPD. Chronic lower respiratory disease, composed mainly of COPD, is the sixth leading cause of death in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update that focused on targeted key questions for benefits and harms of screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults and treatment in screen-detected or screen-relevant adults.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic adults who do not recognize or report respiratory symptoms.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Using a reaffirmation process, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults has no net benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends against screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults. (D recommendation).