Initial therapeutic dose of corticosteroid for an acute exacerbation of IPF is associated with subsequent early recurrence of another exacerbation

Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis a narrative review primary focus on treatments

Background and Objective

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic, progressive, fibrotic interstitial pneumonia, which is the commonest type of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia in the clinic. For most patients, the course of the disease is slow and prolonged, but a percentage of them develop an acute respiratory worsening during the disease, known as an acute exacerbation of IPF (AE-IPF). The updated guidelines define AE-IPF as an acute worsening of dyspnea in an IPF patient within 1 month and exclude other conditions such as left heart failure and pulmonary embolism. However, the prevention and treatment of AE-IPF are still unclear. Based on the high mortality rate caused by AE, in this article, we will focus on the latest research advances in AE-IPF treatment strategies and provide a comprehensive review of its pathogenesis, risk factors, clinical features, and diagnosis.

Methods

This study searched for relevant literature published from 2018 to 2023 in the PubMed database. The search terms used were as follows: "Acute exacerbation", "Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis", "Biomarker", "Pathogenesis", "Treatment", "HRCT", "Antifibrotic", "Infection", "Immunosuppressant", "Autoantibody", "Oxygen therapy", "Hemoperfusion", "Inflammation".

Key Content and Findings

The review found that corticosteroids are still the primary treatment strategy at present, although there is some controversy regarding the dosing and tapering of corticosteroids. However, corticosteroids combined with intravenous cyclophosphamide have been shown to be detrimental to the prognosis of patients with AE-IPF. Given its deadly high mortality rate, early intervention is crucial. Pirfenidone and nintedanib have been proven to reduce incidence of AE. Meanwhile, in the future, the lung microbiome may also be a break-through.

Conclusions

This study reviewed the pathogenesis and risk factors of AE-IPF and updated the current and potential treatment strategies regarding AE-IPF. The pathogenesis of AE-IPF is not exact, multiple mechanisms may be involved simultaneously. Corticosteroids remain the mainstream treatment modality in the medical treatment of AE-IFP. Many other treatment modalities have been proposed in succession, but no clear conclusions can be drawn about the effectiveness and safety of these interventions.

Pulse versus non-pulse corticosteroid therapy in patients with acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Corticosteroids are commonly used for the treatment of acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF); however, the optimal initial dose of corticosteroids remains uncertain due to a lack of sufficient evidence. We evaluated whether the administration of a pulse dose of corticosteroids resulted in improved survival outcomes compared with conventional non-pulse dose of corticosteroids.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 238 patients with AE-IPF treated with corticosteroids at a tertiary referral hospital between January 2013 and December 2021. Based on whether a pulse dose of corticosteroids (methylprednisolone of ≥250 mg/day or equivalent) was administered within 7 days of hospitalization for AE-IPF, the patients were divided into the pulse and non-pulse regimen groups. The survival outcomes were compared between the two groups using multivariable regression and propensity score-matched analyses.

RESULTS

Among the 238 patients, 59 patients received pulse dose of corticosteroids, whereas 179 patients received conventional non-pulse dose of corticosteroids. After adjusting for the confounding factors related to the baseline clinical and radiographic severity, compared with the conventional non-pulse regimen, the pulse regimen of corticosteroids did not reduce the risk of mortality at the 3-month (aHR 0.84, 95% CI 0.45-1.38) or 12-month (aHR 0.96, 95% CI 0.60-1.25) follow-ups. Propensity score-matched analysis revealed similar results.

CONCLUSION

The survival outcomes of patients with AE-IPF who received a pulse dose of corticosteroids did not differ from those of patients who received conventional non-pulse dose of corticosteroids. Further prospective studies are required to establish the optimal initial dose of corticosteroids for the treatment of AE-IPF.

Systemic Corticosteroids for Treating Respiratory Diseases: Less Is Better, but… When and How Is It Possible in Real Life?

Systemic corticosteroids (CSs), a keystone in pulmonology, are drugs with strong antiinflammatory activity. They are cheap, easily available, and accessible, but with common and serious side effects. Moreover, the use of exogenous CSs may suppress the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, predisposing to adrenal insufficiency. Safe CS treatment is a challenge of pharmacological research. This narrative review examined the indications of CSs in some respiratory diseases, analyzing what types, dosages, and length of treatment are required as the dosage and duration of CS treatments need to be minimized. Chronic maintenance treatments with CSs are associated with poor prognosis, but they are still prescribed in patients with severe asthma, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and interstitial lung diseases. When CS discontinuation is not possible, all efforts should be made to achieve clinically meaningful reductions. Guidelines suggest the use of methylprednisolone at a dose of 20-40 mg/day or equivalent for up to 10 days in subjects with COVID-19 pneumonia (but not other respiratory viral diseases) and respiratory failure, exacerbations of asthma, and COPD. Some guidelines suggest that CS treatment shorter than 10-14 days can be abruptly stopped, strictly monitoring subjects with unexplained symptoms after CS withdrawal, who should promptly be tested for adrenal insufficiency (AI) and eventually treated. CSs are often used in severe community-acquired pneumonia associated with markedly increased serum inflammation markers, in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), in septic shock unresponsive to hydro-saline replenishment and vasopressors, and acute exacerbations of interstitial lung diseases. As these cases often require higher doses and longer duration of CS treatment, CS tapering should be gradual and, when useful, supported by an evaluation of HPA axis function.

Re-hospitalisation predicts poor prognosis after acute exacerbation of interstitial lung disease

BACKGROUND

Several markers have been identified to increase the risk for acute exacerbation of interstitial lung disease (AE-ILD) or mortality related to AE-ILD. However, less is known about the risk predictors of ILD patients who have survived AE. The aim of the study was to characterise AE-ILD survivors and investigate prognostic factors in this subpopulation.

METHODS

All AE-ILD patients (n = 95) who had been discharged alive from two hospitals located in Northern Finland were selected from a population of 128 AE-ILD patients. Clinical data related to the hospital treatment and six-month follow-up visit were collected retrospectively from medical records.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and 42 patients with other ILD were identified. Two thirds of the patients had been treated without invasive or non-invasive ventilation support. The clinical features of six-month survivors (n = 65) and non-survivors (n = 30) did not differ in terms of medical treatment or oxygen requirements. Of the patients, 82.5% used corticosteroids at the six-month follow-up visit. Fifty-two patients experienced at least one non-elective respiratory re-hospitalisation before the six-month follow-up visit. In a univariate model, IPF diagnosis, high age and a non-elective respiratory re-hospitalisation increased the risk of death, although re-hospitalisation was the only independent risk factor in a multivariate model. In six-month survivors, there was no statistically significant decrease in pulmonary function test results (PFT) examined at the follow-up visit compared with earlier PFT examined near the time of AE-ILD.

CONCLUSIONS

The AE-ILD survivors were a heterogeneous group of patients both clinically and in terms of their outcome. A non-elective respiratory re-hospitalisation was identified as a marker of poor prognosis among AE-ILD survivors.

Prognostic value of the qSOFA in patients with acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have a slowly progressive clinical course, although some develop acute exacerbations (AEs). An easily obtained composite score is desirable for predicting the survival rate in patients with AE of IPF (AE-IPF). We investigated the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA), originally developed to identify sepsis, as a predictor of mortality in patients with AE-IPF and compared it to other composite assessments.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with IPF admitted for their first AE between 2008 and 2019 were recruited retrospectively. The association between the qSOFA score obtained at admission and mortality was investigated.

RESULTS

During the study period, 97 patients with AE-IPF were hospitalized. The hospital mortality was 30.9%. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that both the qSOFA and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine (JAAM)-disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) scores were significant predictors of hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 3.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43-10.3; p = 0.007 and OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.56-4.67; p = 0.0004; respectively). Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that both scores were consistently associated with survival. Furthermore, the sum of the two scores was a more effective predictor than the individual scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The qSOFA score of patients admitted with AE-IPF was associated with both in-hospital and long-term mortality, which was also true for the JAAM-DIC score. The qSOFA score plus the JAAM-DIC score should be determined during the diagnostic evaluation of a patient with AE-IPF. Both scores combined may be more effective at predicting outcomes than individual scores.

Early corticosteroid dose tapering in patients with acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Although corticosteroid therapy with dose tapering is the most commonly used treatment for acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF), there is no consensus on the tapering regimen. This study aimed to investigate the association between early corticosteroid dose tapering and in-hospital mortality in patients with AE-IPF.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed the data of a cohort from eight Japanese tertiary care hospitals and routinely collected administrative data from a cohort from 185 Japanese hospitals. Patients with AE-IPF were classified into the early and non-early tapering groups depending on whether the maintenance dose of corticosteroids was reduced within two weeks of admission. Propensity score analysis with inverse probability weighting (IPW) was performed to estimate the effect of early corticosteroid dose tapering.

RESULTS

The multi-center cohort included 153 eligible patients, of whom 47 (31%) died, whereas the administrative cohort included 229 patients, of whom 51 (22%) died. Patients with early tapering tended to have a better prognosis than those without it (unadjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.41 [0.22-0.76] and 0.65 [0.36-1.18] in the multi-center and administrative cohorts, respectively). After IPW, the early tapering group had a better prognosis than the non-early tapering group (IPW-adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.37 [0.14-0.99] and 0.27 [0.094-0.83] in the multi-center and administrative cohorts, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Early corticosteroid dose tapering was associated with a favorable prognosis in patients with AE-IPF. Further studies are warranted to confirm the effects of early corticosteroid dose tapering in patients with AE-IPF.

Sarcoidosis: Updates on therapeutic drug trials and novel treatment approaches

Sarcoidosis is a systemic granulomatous inflammatory disease of unknown etiology. It affects the lungs in over 90% of patients yet extra-pulmonary and multi-organ involvement is common. Spontaneous remission of disease occurs commonly, nonetheless, over 50% of patients will require treatment and up to 30% of patients will develop a chronic progressive non-remitting disease with marked pulmonary fibrosis leading to significant morbidity and death. Guidelines outlining an immunosuppressive treatment approach to sarcoidosis were recently published, however, the strength of evidence behind many of the guideline recommended drugs is weak. None of the drugs currently used for the treatment of sarcoidosis have been rigorously studied and prescription of these drugs is often based on off-label” indications informed by experience with other diseases. Indeed, only two medications [prednisone and repository corticotropin (RCI) injection] currently used in the treatment of sarcoidosis are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration. This situation results in significant reimbursement challenges especially for the more advanced (and often more effective) drugs that are favored for severe and refractory forms of disease causing an over-reliance on corticosteroids known to be associated with significant dose and duration dependent toxicities. This past decade has seen a renewed interest in developing new drugs and exploring novel therapeutic pathways for the treatment of sarcoidosis. Several of these trials are active randomized controlled trials (RCTs) designed to recruit relatively large numbers of patients with a goal to determine the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of these new molecules and therapeutic approaches. While it is an exciting time, it is also necessary to exercise caution. Resources including research dollars and most importantly, patient populations available for trials are limited and thus necessitate that several of the challenges facing drug trials and drug development in sarcoidosis are addressed. This will ensure that currently available resources are judiciously utilized. Our paper reviews the ongoing and anticipated drug trials in sarcoidosis and addresses the challenges facing these and future trials. We also review several recently completed trials and draw lessons that should be applied in future.

Gypenosides Attenuate Pulmonary Fibrosis by Inhibiting the AKT/mTOR/c-Myc Pathway

Gypenosides (Gyps), the major active constituents isolated from Gynostemma pentaphyllum, possess anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activities. Previous studies have demonstrated that Gyps displayed potent ameliorative effects on liver fibrosis and renal fibrosis. In this study, we found that Gyps significantly reduced the mortality of bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis mice (40% mortality rate of mice in the model group versus 0% in the treatment group). Masson staining showed that Gyps could reduce the content of collagen in the lung tissue of pulmonary fibrosis mice Masson staining and immunohistochemistry demonstrated that the expression of the collagen gene α-SMA and fibrosis gene Col1 markedly decreased after Gyps treatment. The active mitosis of fibroblasts is one of the key processes in the pathogenesis of fibrotic diseases. RNA-seq showed that Gyps significantly inhibited mitosis and induced the G2/M phase cell cycle arrest. The mTOR/c-Myc axis plays an important role in the pathological process of pulmonary fibrosis. RNA-seq also demonstrated that Gyps inhibited the mTOR and c-Myc signaling in pulmonary fibrosis mice, which was further validated by Western blot and immunohistochemistry. AKT functions as an upstream molecule that regulates mTOR. Our western blot data showed that Gyps could suppress the activation of AKT. In conclusion, Gyps exerted anti-pulmonary fibrosis activity by inhibiting the AKT/mTOR/c-Myc pathway.