Corticoides inhalados en la EPOC por fenotipo en lugar de por gravedad. Argumentos a favor

Deconstructing Phenotypes in COPD: an Analysis of the TRACE Cohort

OBJECTIVES

In a clinical phenotype-based management strategy for COPD, it would be preferable to at least assign all patients to a phenotype, but to a single phenotype only. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether all patients are assigned to one and only one phenotype using the Spanish COPD guidelines (GesEPOC) and to evaluate the criteria that define these categories.

METHOD

The Time-based Register and Analysis of COPD Endpoints study (TRACE; clinicaltrials.gov NCT03485690) is a prospective cohort of COPD patients attending annual visits since 2012, which collects GesEPOC phenotypes. Although the GesEPOC recommends that patients considered to be at low risk are not phenotyped, an analysis of the criteria for identifying high- and low-risk phenotypes was performed, comparing the distribution of phenotypes and the criteria applied between these 2 groups.

RESULTS

The cohort included 970 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COPD, divided into 427 (44.02%) low-risk and 543 (55.9%) high-risk patients. The most frequent phenotype was the non-exacerbator (44.9% of high-risk patients). Overall, 20.6% of low-risk patients met criteria for asthma-COPD overlap syndrome, while 9.2% of the cohort did not meet the diagnostic criteria for any phenotype, and 19.1% met the criteria for 2 phenotypes, with no differences between risk groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data highlight some of the weaknesses of the current clinical phenotype strategy, revealing overlapping categories in some cases, and patients to whom no phenotype was assigned.

Characterization of circadian COPD symptoms by phenotype: Methodology of the STORICO observational study

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The symptoms of COPD are troublesome, variable, can occur during all parts of the 24-h day and have a substantial impact on patients' health status, quality of life and healthcare resource utilization. Reducing symptoms, improving health status and increasing physical activity are major goals in the management of stable COPD. In order to provide effective, patient-oriented care, patients should be evaluated on the basis of lung function, frequency of symptoms and patient-perceived impact of symptoms on their lives and treatment decisions made on a case-by-case basis. The identification of COPD phenotypes is an evolving debate and literature data about the circadian variation of COPD symptoms according to phenotypes are nowadays lacking. The ongoing STORICO (STudio Osservazionale sulla caratteRizzazione dei sIntomi delle 24 ore nei pazienti con BPCO) study (NCT03105999) is aimed to describe by clinically defined phenotypes the frequency and 12-month evolution of early-morning, day- and night-time COPD symptoms in a cohort of 600 Italian patients with stable COPD. Secondary objectives include the description of the 12-month variation of outcomes of interest according to phenotypes and of the healthcare resources utilization (overall and by phenotype) during 12-month observation. An exploratory analysis will be conducted aimed to phenotype COPD patients in an alternative researcher-independent way based on circadian pattern of symptoms combined with measures of respiratory function, health-related quality of life and comorbidity. The present paper describes the methodology of the STORICO study.

Which bronchodilator reversibility criteria can predict severe acute exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients?

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether various bronchodilator reversibility (BDR) criteria affect the prognosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of positive BDR defined according to various BDR criteria on the risk of severe acute exacerbation (AE) in COPD patients.

METHODS

Patients from four prospective COPD cohorts in South Korea who underwent follow-up for at least 1 year were enrolled in this study. The assessed BDR criteria included the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD), American Thoracic Society (ATS), American College of Chest Physicians, (ACCP), major criteria of the Spanish definition of asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS), criteria compatible with ACOS in the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA), and European Respiratory Society (ERS). The rate of patients with severe AE who required hospitalization within 1 year due to BDR results according to each set of criteria was analyzed using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among a total of 854 patients, the BDR-positive cases varied according to the criteria used. There was a 3.5% positive BDR rate according to GINA and a 29.9% rate according to the ATS criteria. Positive BDR according to the GOLD criteria was significantly associated with a decreased risk of severe AE (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.38; 95% Confidence interval (CI) = 0.15-0.93). This result remained statistically significant even in a sensitivity analysis that included only participants with a smoking history of at least 10 pack-years and in the analysis for the propensity score-matched participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Among different criteria for positive BDR, the use of the GOLD ones was significantly associated with a decreased risk of severe AE in COPD patients. Increase use of ICS/LABA may have affected this relationship.

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap: asthmatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or chronic obstructive asthma?

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are different disease entities. They are both clinical diagnoses, with diagnostic tools to discriminate between one another. However, especially in older patients (>55 years) it seems more difficult to differentiate between asthma and COPD. This has led to the definition of a new phenotype called asthma COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS). However, our understanding of ACOS is at a very preliminary stage, as most research has involved subjects with existing diagnoses of asthma or COPD from studies with different definitions for ACOS. This has led to different and sometimes opposing results between studies on several features of ACOS, also depending on the comparison with COPD alone, asthma alone or both, which are summarized in this review.We suggest not using the term ACOS for a patient with features of both asthma and COPD, but to describe a patient with chronic obstructive airway disease as completely as possible, with regard to characteristics that determine treatment response (e.g. eosinophilic inflammation) and prognosis (such as smoking status, exacerbation rate, fixed airflow limitation, hyperresponsiveness, comorbidities). This will provide a far more clinically relevant diagnosis, and would aid in research on treatment in more homogenous groups of patients with chronic airways obstruction. More research is certainly needed to develop more evidence-based definitions for this patient group and to evaluate biomarkers, which will help to further classify these patients, treat them more adequately and unravel the underlying pathophysiological mechanism.

A re-evaluation of the role of inhaled corticosteroids in the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (in fixed combinations with long-acting β2-agonists [LABAs]) are frequently prescribed for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), outside their labeled indications and recommended treatment strategies and guidelines, despite having the potential to cause significant side effects.

AREAS COVERED

Although the existence of asthma in patients with asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) clearly supports the use of anti-inflammatory treatment (typically an ICS/LABA combination, as ICS monotherapy is usually not indicated for COPD), the current level of ICS/LABA use is not consistent with the prevalence of ACOS in the COPD population. Data have recently become available showing the comparative efficacy of fixed bronchodilator combinations (long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA]/LABA with ICS/LABA combinations). Additionally, new information has emerged on ICS withdrawal without increased risk of exacerbations, under cover of effective bronchodilation.

EXPERT OPINION

For patients with COPD who do not have ACOS, a LAMA/LABA combination may be an appropriate starting therapy, apart from those with mild disease who can be managed with a single long-acting bronchodilator. Patients who remain symptomatic or present with exacerbations despite effectively delivered LAMA/LABA treatment may require additional drug therapy, such as ICS or phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors. When prescribing an ICS/LABA, the risk:benefit ratio should be considered in individual patients.

"Correct use of inhaled corticosteroids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease": a consensus document

INTRODUCTION

Indications for inhaled corticosteroids (IC) in combination with long-acting bronchodilators (LABD) are well defined in clinical practice guidelines. However, there are some doubts about their efficacy and safety. The aim of this document is to establish an expert consensus to clarify these issues.

METHOD

A coordinator group was formed, which systematically reviewed the scientific evidence with the aim of identifying areas of uncertainty about the efficacy of ICs, the adverse effects associated with their use and criteria for withdrawal. Their proposals were submitted to a panel of experts and the Delphi technique was used to test the level of consensus.

RESULTS

Twenty-five experts participated in the panel, and consensus was reached on the use of IC in the mixed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)-asthma phenotype and in frequent exacerbators, and on not using IC in association with LABD for improving lung function in COPD. There was no general consensus on restricting the use of IC to prevent adverse effects. The panel did agree that IC withdrawal is feasible but should be undertaken gradually, and patients who have discontinued must be evaluated in the short term.

CONCLUSIONS

Consensus was reached regarding the indication of IC in mixed COPD-asthma and frequent exacerbator phenotypes. The potential for adverse effects must be taken into consideration, but there is no consensus on whether limiting use is justified. The withdrawal of ICs was uniformly agreed to be feasible.

Moving towards patient-centered medicine for COPD management: multidimensional approaches versus phenotype-based medicine--a critical view

For decades, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been considered a relentlessly progressive disease in which the deterioration of lung function is associated with an increase in symptoms, interrupted only by periods of exacerbation. However, this paradigm of COPD severity based on FEV1 has been challenged by currently available evidence. So far, three main approaches, though with contradictory aspects, have been proposed in order to address the complexity of COPD as well as to develop appropriate diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic strategies for the disease: 1) the use of independent, clinically relevant variables, 2) the use of multidimensional indices, and 3) disease approaches based on clinical phenotypes. Multivariable systems seem superior to FEV1 in predicting prognosis and defining disease severity. However, selection of variables available from current literature must be confronted with issues of medical practice. Future evidence will be needed to reveal their effective relationship with disease long-term prognosis and to demonstrate the most adequate cutoff values to be used in clinical settings. Multidimensional scores provide a good prognostic instrument for the identification of patients with a particular degree of disease severity. Clinical phenotyping can help clinicians identify the patients who respond to specific pharmacological interventions; however, there is some controversy about the phenotypes to select and their long-term implications. Although these approaches are not perfect, they represent the first step towards patient-centered medicine for COPD. In the near-future, these different approaches should converge towards one new field to focus on the better management of COPD patients.

How and when to use inhaled corticosteroids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease?

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are widely used in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Since inflammatory processes play a key role in the pathogenesis of the disease and ICSs have been shown to be very effective in controlling asthma, their use in COPD patients has become widespread. However, their efficacy in COPD is more limited than in asthma, since the type of inflammation in COPD is predominantly neutrophilic and resistant to corticosteroids. ICSs have not been shown to prevent disease progression or reduce mortality in clinical trials. By contrast, these agents reduce exacerbations and improve both symptoms and quality of life in selected patients, particularly those with bronchial reversibility. Since ICSs are not harmless drugs, clinicians should make every effort to distinguish patients who will benefit from ICS treatment from those who will not. Side effects of ICSs may be both local and systemic, with most of them being dose dependent. A potential increase in the risk of pneumonia, diabetes, dysphonia or candiadiasis, among other complications, should be considered when prescribing these drugs in patients who usually have several comorbidities. Hence, it is important to identify those patients in whom the best risk-to-benefit ratio can be achieved and to use the most appropriate ICS dose with the least incidence of side effects.

[Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC): Pharmacological treatment of stable COPD]

Recognizing the clinical heterogeneity of COPD suggests a specific therapeutic approach directed by the so-called clinical phenotypes of the disease. The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) is an initiative of SEPAR, which, together with the scientific societies involved in COPD patient care, and the Spanish Patient Forum, has developed these new clinical practice guidelines. This present article describes the severity classification and the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD. GesEPOC identifies four clinical phenotypes with differential treatment: non-exacerbator, mixed COPD-asthma, exacerbator with emphysema and exacerbator with chronic bronchitis. Pharmacological treatment of COPD is based on bronchodilation in addition to other drugs depending on the clinical phenotype and severity. Severity is established by the BODE/BODEx multidimensional scales. Severity can also be approximated by assessing airflow obstruction, dyspnea, level of physical activity and history of exacerbations. GesEPOC is a new, more individualized approach to COPD treatment according to the clinical characteristics of the patients.

Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC): pharmacological treatment of stable COPD. Spanish Society of Pulmonology and Thoracic Surgery

Recognizing the clinical heterogeneity of COPD suggests a specific therapeutic approach directed by the so-called clinical phenotypes of the disease. The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) is an initiative of SEPAR, which, together with the scientific societies involved in COPD patient care, and the Spanish Patient Forum, has developed these new clinical practice guidelines. This present article describes the severity classification and the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD. GesEPOC identifies four clinical phenotypes with differential treatment: non-exacerbator, mixed COPD-asthma, exacerbator with emphysema and exacerbator with chronic bronchitis. Pharmacological treatment of COPD is based on bronchodilation in addition to other drugs depending on the clinical phenotype and severity. Severity is established by the BODE/BODEx multidimensional scales. Severity can also be approximated by assessing airflow obstruction, dyspnea, level of physical activity and history of exacerbations. GesEPOC is a new, more individualized approach to COPD treatment according to the clinical characteristics of the patients.

The excessive use of inhaled corticosteroids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Despite the fact that the recommendations of the main clinical guidelines have restricted the indications for inhaled corticosteroids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), currently more than 80% of patients are receiving this treatment in Spain, mostly with high doses. A detailed review of the literature does not justify the use of these high doses, a position that agrees with the recommendations of the FDA. A re-evaluation of their safety, the consistency of the data on their efficacy showing similar results with moderate doses and a better patient selection require the use of this treatment in COPD patients to be reconsidered.

Clinical phenotypes of COPD: identification, definition and implications for guidelines

The term phenotype in the field of COPD is defined as "a single or combination of disease attributes that describe differences between individuals with COPD as they relate to clinically meaningful outcomes". Among all phenotypes described, there are three that are associated with prognosis and especially are associated with a different response to currently available therapies. There phenotypes are: the exacerbator, the overlap COPD-asthma and the emphysema-hyperinflation. The exacerbator is characterised by the presence of, at least, two exacerbations the previous year, and on top of long-acting bronchodilators, may require the use of antiinflammatory drugs. The overlap phenotype presents symptoms of increased variability of airflow and incompletely reversible airflow obstruction. Due to the underlying inflammatory profile, it uses to have a good therapeutic response to inhaled corticosteroids in addition to bronchodilators. Lastly, the emphysema phenotype presents a poor therapeutic response to the existing antiinflammatory drugs and long-acting bronchodilators together with rehabilitation are the treatments of choice. Identifying the peculiarities of the different phenotypes of COPD will allow us to implement a more personalised treatment, in which the characteristics of the patients, together with their severity will be key to choose the best treatment option.

Impairment of quality of life in women with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

There is ample evidence of the differences between genders in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The purpose of this study was to identify the factors that contribute to these differences.

METHODS

This was a multi-center, cross-sectional observational study including 4574 patients of 40 years of age and older who attended primary care and pulmonary clinics. Data were collected on COPD characteristics, comorbidities, quality of life as assessed by both the EuroQoL 5D questionnaire (EQ-5D) and the Airways Questionnaire 20 (AQ20), and prevalence of anxiety and depression. Data collected were compared between males and females.

RESULTS

Mean age was 67 years and 740 patients (16.7%) were female. Women were significantly younger, had better pulmonary function, and smoked less; however, they showed poorer quality of life (EQ-5D: 0.6 [SD = 0.3] versus 0.7 [0.3]; p < 0.001; and AQ20: 10.4 [SD = 4.6] versus 9.2 [SD = 4.5]; p < 0.001) and a higher rate of anxiety (34.5% versus 20.6%; p < 0.001) and depression (31.7% versus 22.1%; p < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, female gender was significantly associated to poorer quality of life (AQ20) but not to a higher rate of dyspnea.

CONCLUSION

Women with COPD are younger and have lower rates of impaired lung function; however, they show poorer quality of life and more frequent COPD-associated anxiety and depression.