Clinical impact of the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary service

Innovations in the care of childhood interstitial lung disease associated with connective tissue disease and immune-mediated disorders

Childhood interstitial lung disease (chILD) associated with connective tissue and immune mediated disorders is the second most common chILD diagnostic category. As knowledge of the molecular and genetic underpinnings of these rare disorders advances, the recognized clinical spectrum of associated pulmonary manifestations continues to expand. Pulmonary complications of these diseases, including ILD, confer increased risk for morbidity and mortality and contribute to increased complexity for providers tasked with managing the multiple organ systems that can be impacted in these systemic disorders. While pulmonologists play an important role in diagnosis and management of these conditions, thankfully they do not have to work alone. In collaboration with a multidisciplinary team of subspecialists, the pulmonary and other systemic manifestations of these conditions can be managed effectively together. The goal of this review is to familiarize the reader with the classic patterns of chILD and other pulmonary complications associated with primary immune-mediated disorders (monogenic inborn errors of immunity) and acquired systemic autoimmune and autoinflammatory diseases. In addition, this review will highlight current, emerging, and innovative therapeutic strategies and will underscore the important role of multidisciplinary management to improving outcomes for these patients.

Diagnostic Approach to Interstitial Lung Diseases Associated with Connective Tissue Diseases

Interstitial lung disorders are a group of respiratory diseases characterized by interstitial compartment infiltration, varying degrees of infiltration, and fibrosis, with or without small airway involvement. Although some are idiopathic (e.g., idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, idiopathic interstitial pneumonias, and sarcoidosis), the great majority have an underlying etiology, such as systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD, also called Connective Tissue Diseases or CTD), inhalational exposure to organic matter, medications, and rarely, genetic disorders. This review focuses on diagnostic approaches in interstitial lung diseases associated with SARDs. To make an accurate diagnosis, a multidisciplinary, personalized approach is required, with input from various specialties, including pulmonary, rheumatology, radiology, and pathology, to reach a consensus. In a minority of patients, a definitive diagnosis cannot be established. Their clinical presentations and prognosis can be variable even within subsets of SARDs.

Update on Interstitial Pneumonias

The American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society/Japanese Respiratory Society/Asociación Latinoamericana de Tórax 2018 clinical practice guideline and 2022 update provide recommendations to define and diagnose idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) in patients with newly diagnosed interstitial lung disease. The guideline emphasizes recognition of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) and probable UIP patterns of fibrosis on high-resolution CT, which can obviate the need for surgical lung biopsy and allow timely initiation of antifibrotic pharmacotherapy citing a high correlation with UIP on histopathology. This article reviews the recent 2022 IPF clinical practice guideline with a focus on the imaging updates.

Assessment of a randomized controlled trial on the safety of pre-placing bronchial balloons in transbronchial lung cryobiopsy for diagnosing interstitial lung disease

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Bleeding is a major complication of transbronchial lung cryobiopsy (TBLC), and pre-placing a bronchial balloon is one of the clinical practices used to prevent it, but with very weak evidence, which should be confirmed. This study aimed to conduct whether pre-placing a bronchial balloon in TBLC for diagnosing interstitial lung disease (ILD) is more safety.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial, patients with suspected ILD were enrolled and randomly assigned to pre-placed balloon and none-pre-placed balloon groups. The primary outcome was incidence of moderate bleeding in each group. The secondary endpoints were the incidence of severe bleeding, pneumothorax, and other procedural complications.

RESULTS

Exactly 250 patients were enrolled between August 2019 and March 2022, with 125 in each group. There were no significant differences in severe bleeding between the none-pre-placed balloon group and pre-placed balloon group (1.6% vs. 0.8%; adjusted p = 0.520), while more moderate bleeding occurred in the none-pre-placed balloon group (26.4% vs. 6.4%, adjusted p = 0.001), as well as more use of hemostatic drug (28.0% vs. 6.4%, adjusted p = 0.001). Three patients in the none-pre-placed balloon group used the bronchial balloon. More samples could be acquired in the pre-placed balloon group than in the none-pre-placed balloon group (3.8 ± 0.9 vs. 3.1 ± 0.9, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in multidisciplinary discussion (MDD) between the two groups (89.6% vs. 91.2%, adjusted p = 0.182).

CONCLUSION

A pre-placed bronchial balloon can reduce the incidence of moderate bleeding and increase the confidence of the bronchoscopists. However, it had no effect on increasing the diagnostic rate of MDD and reducing severe bleeding.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04047667 ( www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov identifier).

Speaking of the "Devil": Diagnostic Errors in Interstitial Lung Diseases

Interstitial lung diseases are respiratory diseases, which affect the normal lung parenchyma and can lead to significant pulmonary fibrosis, chronic respiratory failure, pulmonary hypertension, and ultimately death. Reuniting more than 200 entities, interstitial lung diseases pose a significant challenge to the clinician, as they represent rare diseases with vague and insidious respiratory symptoms. As such, there are many diagnostic errors that can appear along the journey of the patient with ILD, which leads to significant delays with implications for the prognosis and the quality of life of the patient.

Walking the path of treatable traits in interstitial lung diseases

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are complex and heterogeneous diseases. The use of traditional diagnostic classification in ILD can lead to suboptimal management, which is worsened by not considering the molecular pathways, biological complexity, and disease phenotypes. The identification of specific "treatable traits" in ILDs, which are clinically relevant and modifiable disease characteristics, may improve patient's outcomes. Treatable traits in ILDs may be classified into four different domains (pulmonary, aetiological, comorbidities, and lifestyle), which will facilitate identification of related assessment tools, treatment options, and expected benefits. A multidisciplinary care team model is a potential way to implement a "treatable traits" strategy into clinical practice with the aim of improving patients' outcomes. Multidisciplinary models of care, international registries, and the use of artificial intelligence may facilitate the implementation of the "treatable traits" approach into clinical practice. Prospective studies are needed to test potential therapies for a variety of treatable traits to further advance care of patients with ILD.

Role of Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in the Diagnosis and Management of Diffuse Parenchymal Lung Diseases in a Tertiary Care Hospital

Background  Decisions on the management of interstitial lung diseases (ILD) and prognostication require an accurate diagnosis. It has been proposed that multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings for ILD (ILD-MDT) improve these decisions in challenging cases of ILD. However, most studies in this field have been based on the decisions of individual clinicians and there are few reports on the outcomes of the ILD-MDT approach. We therefore describe the experience of the ILD-MDT meetings at our institution. Methods  A single-center retrospective review of the electronic health care records of patients discussed in the ILD-MDT meetings at our institution from February 2016 to January 2021 was performed. At out institution, at each ILD-MDT meeting, the referring pulmonologist presents the clinical history and the results of all relevant investigations including serology, blood gas analyses, lung function tests, bronchoscopy, and bronchoalveolar lavage. A radiologist then describes the imaging including serial computed tomography (CT) scans. When available, the findings on lung biopsy are presented by a pathologist. Subsequent discussions lead to a consensus on the diagnosis and further management. Results  The study included 121 patients, comprising 71 (57%) males and 76 nonsmokers (62.8%), with a mean age of 65 years (range: 25-93 years). The average number of comorbidities was 2.4 (range: 0-7). Imaging-based diagnoses were usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP)/chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (CHP) in 32 (26%) patients, UIP in 20 (17%) patients, probable UIP in 27 (22%) patients, nonspecific interstitial pneumonia in 11 (9%) patients, and indeterminate interstitial lung abnormalities (ILA) in 10 (8%) patients. The most common consensus clinical diagnosis after an ILD-MDT discussion was chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis/idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in 17 patients (14%), followed by idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and connective tissue disease associated interstitial lung disease in 16 patients (13%), CHP in 11 patients (9.1%), and ILA in 10 patients (8.4%). Only a 42 patients (35%) required surgical lung biopsy for confirmation of the diagnosis. Conclusion  This study describes the characteristics of the patients discussed in the ILD-MDT meetings with emphasis on their clinical, radiological, and laboratory data to reach a diagnosis and management plan. The decisions on commencement of antifibrotics or immunosuppressive therapy for patients with various ILDs are also made during these ILD-MDT meetings. This descriptive study could help other health care professionals regarding the structure of their ILD-MDT meetings and with discussions about diagnostic and care decisions for diffused parenchymal lung disease patients.

Multidisciplinary team discussion: the emerging gold standard for management of cardiopulmonary complications of connective tissue disease

Cardiopulmonary complications of connective tissue diseases (CTDs), particularly pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and interstitial lung disease (ILD), are major determinants of morbidity and mortality. Multidisciplinary meetings may improve diagnostic accuracy and optimise treatment. We review the literature regarding multidisciplinary meetings in CTD-ILD and PAH and describe our tertiary centre experience of the role of the multidisciplinary meeting in managing CTD-PAH.

The Evolving Concept of the Multidisciplinary Approach in the Diagnosis and Management of Interstitial Lung Diseases

BACKGROUND

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are a group of heterogeneous diseases characterized by inflammation and/or fibrosis of the lung interstitium, leading to a wide range of clinical manifestations and outcomes. Over the years, the literature has demonstrated the increased diagnostic accuracy and confidence associated with a multidisciplinary approach (MDA) in assessing diseases involving lung parenchyma. This approach was recently emphasized by the latest guidelines from the American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Latin American Thoracic Association for the diagnosis of ILDs.

METHODS

In this review, we will discuss the role, composition, and timing of multidisciplinary diagnosis (MDD) concerning idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, connective tissue disease associated with ILDs, hypersensitive pneumonia, and idiopathic pneumonia with autoimmune features, based on the latest recommendations for their diagnosis.

RESULTS

The integration of clinical, radiological, histopathological, and, often, serological data is crucial in the early identification and management of ILDs, improving patient outcomes. Based on the recent endorsement of transbronchial cryo-biopsy in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis guidelines, an MDA helps guide the choice of the sampling technique, obtaining the maximum diagnostic performance, and avoiding the execution of more invasive procedures such as a surgical lung biopsy. A multidisciplinary team should include pulmonologists, radiologists, pathologists, and, often, rheumatologists, being assembled regularly to achieve a consensus diagnosis and to review cases in light of new features.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature highlighted that an MDA is essential to improve the accuracy and reliability of ILD diagnosis, allowing for the early optimization of therapy and reducing the need for invasive procedures. The multidisciplinary diagnosis of ILDs is an ongoing and dynamic process, often referred to as a "working diagnosis", involving the progressive integration and re-evaluation of clinical, radiological, and histological features.

Challenges in the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: the importance of a multidisciplinary approach

INTRODUCTION

The diagnosis of Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) requires the careful exclusion of secondary causes of interstitial lung disease (ILD), and the collaboration among different specialists is considered paramount to establish a diagnosis with high diagnostic confidence. The multidisciplinary discussion (MDD) has assumed an increasing importance over the years in the different phases of the IPF diagnostic work-up.

AREAS COVERED

The role of MDD in the diagnosis and management of IPF will be described. Practical insights will be provided into how and when to perform MDD based on the available scientific evidence. Current limitations and future perspectives will be discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

In the absence of high diagnostic confidence, agreement between different specialists during MDD is recognized as a surrogate indicator of diagnostic accuracy. Often, despite a lengthy evaluation, the diagnosis remains unclassifiable in a significant percentage of patients. MDD therefore appears to be pivotal in attaining an accurate diagnosis of ILDs. The discussion among different specialists can also include other specialists, such as rheumatologists and thoracic surgeons, in addition to the core group of pulmonologists, radiologists, and pathologists. Such discussions can allow greater diagnostic accuracy and have important effects on management, pharmacologic therapies, and prognosis.

[Consensus guideline on the interdisciplinary diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases]

The evaluation of a patient with interstitial lung disease (ILD) includes assessment of clinical, radiological, and often histopathological data. As there were no specific recommendations to guide the evaluation of patients under the suspicion of an ILD within the German practice landscape, this position statement from an interdisciplinary panel of ILD experts provides guidance related to the diagnostic modalities which should be used in the evaluation of ILD. This includes clinical assessment rheumatological evaluation, radiological examinations, histopathologic sampling and the need for a final discussion in a multidisciplinary team.

Viewpoint: a multidisciplinary approach to the assessment of patients with systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare and heterogeneous disease affecting the skin and internal organs. SSc-associated ILD (SSc-ILD) is a common and often early manifestation of SSc. This article discusses the rationale for a multidisciplinary approach (MDA) to the early identification and assessment of patients with SSc-ILD. Diagnosis of SSc-ILD is often challenging as patients with early disease can be asymptomatic, and SSc-ILD symptoms, such as exertional dyspnea and cough, are non-specific. High-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) of the lungs is the gold standard for diagnosis of SSc-ILD since pulmonary function tests lack sensitivity and specificity, especially in early disease. On HRCT, most patients with SSc-ILD have a non-specific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) pattern. In addition, findings of pulmonary hypertension and esophageal dysmotility may be present. The multi-organ involvement of SSc and the diverse spectrum of symptoms support an MDA for the diagnosis and assessment of patients with SSc-ILD, with input from rheumatologists, pulmonologists, gastroenterologists, radiologists, and other specialists. Key Points • Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a common manifestation of systemic sclerosis (SSc). • Early diagnosis is key to reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with SSc-ILD and other manifestations of SSc. • The multi-organ involvement of SSc supports a multidisciplinary approach to the diagnosis and assessment of patients with SSc-ILD, with input from rheumatologists, pulmonologists, gastroenterologists, radiologists, and other specialists.

Diagnosis and Pharmacologic Management of Fibrotic Interstitial Lung Disease

Interstitial lung disease is an umbrella term that encompasses a spectrum of parenchymal lung pathologies affecting the gas exchanging part of the lung. While many of these disease entities are not fibrotic in nature, a number can lead to pulmonary fibrosis which may or may not progress over time. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis is the prototypical, progressive fibrotic interstitial lung disease, which can lead to worsening hypoxemic respiratory failure and mortality within a number of years from the time of diagnosis. The importance of an accurate and timely diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases, which is needed to inform prognosis and guide clinical management, cannot be overemphasized. Developing a consensus diagnosis requires the incorporation of a variety of factors by a multidisciplinary team, which then may or may not determine a need for tissue sampling. Clinical management can be challenging given the heterogeneity of disease behavior and the paucity of controlled trials to guide decision making. This review addresses current paradigms and recent updates in the diagnosis and pharmacologic management of these fibrotic interstitial lung diseases.

Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: A Narrative Review

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic, progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease of unknown aetiology. Patients typically present with symptoms of chronic dyspnoea and cough over a period of months to years. IPF has a poor prognosis, with an average life expectancy of 3-5 years from diagnosis if left untreated. Two anti-fibrotic medications (nintedanib and pirfenidone) have been approved for the treatment of IPF. These drugs slow disease progression by reducing decline in lung function. Early diagnosis is crucial to ensure timely treatment selection and improve outcomes. High-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) plays a major role in the diagnosis of IPF. In this narrative review, we discuss the importance of early diagnosis, awareness among primary care physicians, lung cancer screening programmes and early IPF detection, and barriers to accessing anti-fibrotic medications.

Management of interstitial lung disease in patients with autoimmune disease-related interstitial lung disease

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a common manifestation of systemic autoimmune diseases. A proportion of patients with autoimmune disease associated-ILDs develop progressive pulmonary fibrosis. Regular monitoring of patients with pulmonary fibrosis is recommended to enable prompt detection of progression and initiation or escalation of therapy if needed. However, there is no established algorithm for the treatment of autoimmune disease associated-ILDs. In this article, we present three case studies that demonstrate the challenges in the diagnosis and management of patients with autoimmune disease associated-ILDs and the importance of taking a multidisciplinary approach to their care.

Novel diagnostic techniques in interstitial lung disease

Research into novel diagnostic techniques and targeted therapeutics in interstitial lung disease (ILD) is moving the field toward increased precision and improved patient outcomes. An array of molecular techniques, machine learning approaches and other innovative methods including electronic nose technology and endobronchial optical coherence tomography are promising tools with potential to increase diagnostic accuracy. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current evidence regarding evolving diagnostic methods in ILD and to consider their future role in routine clinical care.

Clinical best practices in optimal monitoring, early diagnosis, and effective management of antibody-drug conjugate-induced interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis: a multidisciplinary team approach in Singapore

INTRODUCTION

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) or pneumonitis remains an important adverse event identified with treatment with antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). Drug-induced ILD (DILD) accounts for 3%-5% of common ILD cases and is a significant problem in clinical practice. Hence, with the anticipation of the widespread use of ADCs, it will be important for guidelines and recommendations to be established to direct and standardize the management of DILD by a multidisciplinary team (MDT).

AREAS COVERED

A thorough literature search was conducted using PubMed to identify relevant articles related to ADCs published between 1 January 2010 and 31 November 2022. Based on the review of the literature combined with expert opinions, this review article offers an overview of incidences of ILDs associated with the use of newer anticancer therapies, specifically ADCs, and discusses local-regional best practices in optimal monitoring, early diagnosis, and management of DILD involving an MDT.

EXPERT OPINION

Multidisciplinary input and consensus are crucial in the accurate diagnosis of DILD. The core group of essential attendees in the MDT are oncologists, pulmonologists, thoracic radiologists, and pathologists. This allows for the integration of expertise from different specialists to achieve a 'best fit' diagnosis and management.

Guidelines of the Polish Respiratory Society on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Progressive Fibrosing Interstitial Lung Diseases Other than Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

The recommendations were developed as answers to previously formulated questions concerning everyday diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. They were developed based on a review of the current literature using the GRADE methodology. The experts suggest that PF-ILD be diagnosed based on a combination of different criteria, such as the aggravation of symptoms, progression of radiological lesions, and worsening of lung function test parameters. The experts recommend a precise diagnosis of an underlying disease, with serological testing for an autoimmune disease always being included. The final diagnosis should be worked out by a multidisciplinary team (MDT). Patients with an interstitial lung disease other than IPF who do not meet the criteria for the progressive fibrosis phenotype should be monitored for progression, and those with systemic autoimmune diseases should be regularly monitored for signs of interstitial lung disease. In managing patients with interstitial lung disease associated with autoimmune diseases, an opinion of an MDT should be considered. Nintedanib rather than pirfenidon should be introduced in the event of the ineffectiveness of the therapy recommended for the treatment of the underlying disease, but in some instances, it is possible to start antifibrotic treatment without earlier immunomodulatory therapy. It is also admissible to use immunomodulatory and antifibrotic drugs simultaneously. No recommendations were made for or against termination of anti-fibrotic therapy in the case of noted progression during treatment of a PF-ILD other than IPF. The experts recommend that the same principles of non-pharmacological and palliative treatment and eligibility for lung transplantation should be applied to patients with an interstitial lung disease other than IPF with progressive fibrosis as in patients with IPF.

Multidisciplinary teams in the clinical care of fibrotic interstitial lung disease: current perspectives

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings, involving the integrated collaboration of healthcare professionals, are increasingly used in clinical practice to inform the diagnosis and treatment of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). Over time, the assessment of patients with ILD has transitioned from discussions among clinicians, radiologists and pathologists to the inclusion of a broader range of clinical data and specialist expertise. Studies have shown that a multidisciplinary approach can have many benefits for the clinical care of patients with ILD by improving the diagnostic confidence for different ILDs and guiding treatment decisions. The utility of MDT discussions for diagnosis, monitoring disease progression and management decisions, will need to be considered based on how it is best positioned in the diagnostic and therapeutic process, as well as the practicality and challenges of its use. There are also uncertainties and heterogeneity concerning the optimal practices of MDT meetings in ILD care. In this review, we describe recent developments refining the approach to MDTs in clinical practice, including who should be involved in the MDTs, when it is most needed, their use in patient management, challenges in their implementation, and ongoing controversies in the field that need further research.

Diagnosing interstitial lung disease by multidisciplinary discussion: A review

The multidisciplinary meeting (MDM) has been endorsed in current international consensus guidelines as the gold standard method for diagnosis of interstitial lung disease (ILD). In the absence of an accurate and reliable diagnostic test, the agreement between multidisciplinary meetings has been used as a surrogate marker for diagnostic accuracy. Although the ILD MDM has been shown to improve inter-clinician agreement on ILD diagnosis, result in a change in diagnosis in a significant proportion of patients and reduce unclassifiable diagnoses, the ideal form for an ILD MDM remains unclear, with constitution and processes of ILD MDMs varying greatly around the world. It is likely that this variation of practice contributes to the lack of agreement seen between MDMs, as well as suboptimal diagnostic accuracy. A recent Delphi study has confirmed the essential components required for the operation of an ILD MDM. The ILD MDM is a changing entity, as it incorporates new diagnostic tests and genetic markers, while also adapting in its form in response to the obstacles of the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this review was to evaluate the current evidence regarding ILD MDM and their role in the diagnosis of ILD, the practice of ILD MDM around the world, approaches to ILD MDM standardization and future directions to improve diagnostic accuracy in ILD.

Updates in Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis: A Narrative Review

Purpose of Review

Hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is an immune-mediated disease triggered by a known or unknown antigen. While reversible in the early stages of disease, progression toward irreversible pulmonary fibrosis may occur. This narrative review summarizes recent publications highlighting a methodical approach toward the diagnosis, classification, and management of fibrotic and nonfibrotic HP.

Recent Findings

Establishing the diagnosis of HP is often challenging given its variable clinical course, extensive inciting agents, and overlapping features with other interstitial lung diseases. Recently, HP has been re-classified into nonfibrotic and fibrotic subtypes based on radiographic and histopathological features. Chronic fibrotic HP is associated with significant functional impairment and increased mortality. In addition to antigen avoidance, immunosuppression is the cornerstone of management in nonfibrotic HP. Antifibrotic agents have emerged as a therapeutic option in halting the progression of chronic fibrotic HP.

Summary

The combination of clinical, radiographical, and histopathological data will assist in increasing the diagnostic certainty of HP. The new dichotomization of HP is thought to provide better prognostication for patients. This review provides clinicians with a current and evidence-based approach toward the management of patients with HP.

Interstitial lung diseases

Over 200 interstitial lung diseases, from ultra rare to relatively common, are recognised. Most interstitial lung diseases are characterised by inflammation or fibrosis within the interstitial space, the primary consequence of which is impaired gas exchange, resulting in breathlessness, diminished exercise tolerance, and decreased quality of life. Outcomes vary considerably for each of the different interstitial lung diseases. In some conditions, spontaneous reversibility or stabilisation can occur, but unfortunately in many people with interstitial lung disease, especially in those manifesting progressive pulmonary fibrosis, respiratory failure and death are a sad reality. Over the past 3 years, the field of interstitial lung disease has had important advances, with the approval of drugs to treat systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease, interstitial lung disease-associated pulmonary hypertension, and different forms of progressive pulmonary fibrosis. This Seminar provides an update on epidemiology, pathogenesis, presentation, diagnosis, disease course, and management of the interstitial lung diseases that are most frequently encountered in clinical practice. Furthermore, we describe how developments have led to a shift in the classification and treatment of interstitial lung diseases that exhibit progressive pulmonary fibrosis and summarise the latest practice-changing guidelines. We conclude with an outline of controversies, uncertainties, and future directions.

[French practical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of IPF - 2021 update, full version]

BACKGROUND

Since the previous French guidelines were published in 2017, substantial additional knowledge about idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis has accumulated.

METHODS

Under the auspices of the French-speaking Learned Society of Pulmonology and at the initiative of the coordinating reference center, practical guidelines for treatment of rare pulmonary diseases have been established. They were elaborated by groups of writers, reviewers and coordinators with the help of the OrphaLung network, as well as pulmonologists with varying practice modalities, radiologists, pathologists, a general practitioner, a head nurse, and a patients' association. The method was developed according to rules entitled "Good clinical practice" in the overall framework of the "Guidelines for clinical practice" of the official French health authority (HAS), taking into account the results of an online vote using a Likert scale.

RESULTS

After analysis of the literature, 54 recommendations were formulated, improved, and validated by the working groups. The recommendations covered a wide-ranging aspects of the disease and its treatment: epidemiology, diagnostic modalities, quality criteria and interpretation of chest CT, indication and modalities of lung biopsy, etiologic workup, approach to familial disease entailing indications and modalities of genetic testing, evaluation of possible functional impairments and prognosis, indications for and use of antifibrotic therapy, lung transplantation, symptom management, comorbidities and complications, treatment of chronic respiratory failure, diagnosis and management of acute exacerbations of fibrosis.

CONCLUSION

These evidence-based guidelines are aimed at guiding the diagnosis and the management in clinical practice of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

French practical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis - 2021 update. Full-length version

BACKGROUND

Since the latest 2017 French guidelines, knowledge about idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis has evolved considerably.

METHODS

Practical guidelines were drafted on the initiative of the Coordinating Reference Center for Rare Pulmonary Diseases, led by the French Language Pulmonology Society (SPLF), by a coordinating group, a writing group, and a review group, with the involvement of the entire OrphaLung network, pulmonologists practicing in various settings, radiologists, pathologists, a general practitioner, a health manager, and a patient association. The method followed the "Clinical Practice Guidelines" process of the French National Authority for Health (HAS), including an online vote using a Likert scale.

RESULTS

After a literature review, 54 guidelines were formulated, improved, and then validated by the working groups. These guidelines addressed multiple aspects of the disease: epidemiology, diagnostic procedures, quality criteria and interpretation of chest CT scans, lung biopsy indication and procedures, etiological workup, methods and indications for family screening and genetic testing, assessment of the functional impairment and prognosis, indication and use of antifibrotic agents, lung transplantation, management of symptoms, comorbidities and complications, treatment of chronic respiratory failure, diagnosis and management of acute exacerbations of fibrosis.

CONCLUSION

These evidence-based guidelines are intended to guide the diagnosis and practical management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

French national cohort of neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia of infancy (FRENCHI) study: diagnosis and initial management

Early diagnosis of neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia of infancy (NEHI) is crucial as, conversely to the other causes of intersititial lung disease, corticosteroids are not recommended. Diagnosis is historically based on lung biopsy (NEHI), but in current practice, a clinical and radiological approach is more and more preferred (NEHI syndrome). This national study aimed to address diagnosis and initial management of patients followed up for a NEHI pattern in pediatric centers for rare lung diseases (RespiRare, France). Data on neonatal and familial events, symptoms at diagnosis, explorations performed and results, and therapeutic management were collected by questionnaire. Fifty-four children were included (boys 63%). The mean onset of symptoms was 3.8 ± 2.6 months. The most frequent symptoms at diagnosis were tachypnea (100%), retraction (79.6%), crackles (66.7%), and hypoxemia (59.3%). The mean NEHI clinical score, evocative when ≥ 7/10, was 7.9 ± 1.4 (76% with a score ≥ 7). All chest CT-scans showed ground glass opacities evolving at least the middle lobe and the lingula. Lung biopsy was performed in 38.9% of the cases and was typical of NEHI in only 52.4%, even when the clinical presentation was typical. Initial treatments were oxygen (83.6%) and more curiously intravenous pulses of steroids (83.3%) and azithromycin (70.2%).

CONCLUSION

This national cohort of patients underlines diagnosis difficulties of NEHI. A composite clinical and radiological score should help clinicians for limiting the use of anti-inflammatory drugs.

WHAT IS KNOWN

•Neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia of infancy (NEHI) is an interstitial lung disease whose diagnosis is essential to limit corticosteroids therapy.

WHAT IS NEW

•In this national cohort of 54 patients with a NEHI pattern, diagnosis is mainly based on clinical symptoms and chest CT-scan results. The newly proposed clinical score and, when performed, the lung biopsies are faulted in 25 and 50% of the cases, respectively. •Corticosteroids are widely used. Such results plead for a new composite score to formally diagnose NEHI.

Alveolar crystal burden in stone workers with artificial stone silicosis

Background and objective

An epidemic of silicosis has emerged due to a failure to control risks associated with exposure to high‐silica content respirable dust generated while working with artificial stone products. Methods for quantification of alveolar crystal burden are needed to advance our understanding of the pathobiology of silica‐related lung injury as well as assisting in the diagnosis, clinical management and prognostication of affected workers. The objective of this study was to develop and validate novel methods to quantify alveolar crystal burden in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid from patients with artificial stone silicosis.

Methods

New methods to quantify and analyse alveolar crystal in BAL from patients with artificial stone silicosis were developed. Crystals were isolated and counted by microscopy and alveolar crystal burden was calculated using a standard curve generated by titration of respirable α‐Quartz. The utility of the assay was then assessed in 23 patients with artificial stone silicosis.

Results

Alveolar crystal burden was greater in patients with silicosis (0.44 picograms [pg]/cell [0.08–3.49]) compared to patients with other respiratory diagnoses (0.057 pg/cell [0.01–0.34]; p < 0.001). Alveolar crystal burden was positively correlated with years of silica exposure (ρ = 0.49, p = 0.02) and with decline in diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (ρ = −0.50, p = 0.02).

Conclusion

Alveolar crystal burden quantification differentiates patients with silicosis from patients with other respiratory disorders. Furthermore, crystal burden is correlated with the rate of decline in lung function in patients with artificial stone silicosis.

Transbronchial lung cryobiopsy: prospective safety evaluation and 90-day mortality after a standardized examination protocol

BACKGROUND

Transbronchial lung cryobiopsy (TBLC) is a new method of bronchoscopic tissue sampling in patients with unclear diffuse parenchymal lung disease (DPLD). While not the gold standard, TBLC has a good diagnostic correlation with surgical lung biopsy, and retrospective analyses of peri-interventional complications and mortality are promising. However, prospective reports on 90-day mortality are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

This study addresses morbidity and 30- and 90-day mortality in TBLC after a standardized protocol.

METHODS

In this prospective study, 75 patients with DPLD requiring tissue sampling were included. A standardized protocol (including prophylactic use of an endobronchial balloon, postinterventional observation, and minimum sampling requirements) was used in all patients. Adverse events (pneumothorax, bronchial bleeding, premature discontinuation, prolonged monitoring at ICU, and fatal outcome) and 30- and 90-day mortality rates were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 308 cryobiopsies were performed in 75 patients. Peri- and postinterventional pneumothorax were observed in 20% (9.3% mild and 10.7% moderate with the necessity of chest drainage), and bronchial bleeding was found in 29.3% (22.7% moderate and 6.7% severe). Total lung capacity below normal value was associated with the risk of pneumothorax (p = 0.009), and diffusion limitation for carbon monoxide below normal value was associated with the risk of bronchial bleeding (p = 0.044). No fatal events were observed within 30 days, and the 90-day mortality rate was 1.3%, but not related to the procedure itself.

CONCLUSION

As it gradually becomes the invasive procedure of choice in unclear DPLD, TBLC is a safe procedure with a low 30- and 90-day mortality.Trial registration ID: DRKS00026746 (German Clinical Trial Register).

Deep Learning of Computed Tomography Virtual Wedge Resection for Prediction of Histologic Usual Interstitial Pneumonitis

Rationale: The computed tomography (CT) pattern of definite or probable usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) can be diagnostic of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and may obviate the need for invasive surgical biopsy. Few machine-learning studies have investigated the classification of interstitial lung disease (ILD) on CT imaging, but none have used histopathology as a reference standard.Objectives: To predict histopathologic UIP using deep learning of high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT).Methods: Institutional databases were retrospectively searched for consecutive patients with ILD, HRCT, and diagnostic histopathology from 2011 to 2014 (training cohort) and from 2016 to 2017 (testing cohort). A blinded expert radiologist and pulmonologist reviewed all training HRCT scans in consensus and classified HRCT scans based on the 2018 American Thoracic Society/European Respriatory Society/Japanese Respiratory Society/Latin American Thoracic Association diagnostic criteria for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. A convolutional neural network (CNN) was built accepting 4 × 4 × 2 cm virtual wedges of peripheral lung on HRCT as input and outputting the UIP histopathologic pattern. The CNN was trained and evaluated on the training cohort using fivefold cross validation and was then tested on the hold-out testing cohort. CNN and human performance were compared in the training cohort. Logistic regression and survival analyses were performed.Results: The CNN was trained on 221 patients (median age 60 yr; interquartile range [IQR], 53-66), including 71 patients (32%) with UIP or probable UIP histopathologic patterns. The CNN was tested on a separate hold-out cohort of 80 patients (median age 66 yr; IQR, 58-69), including 22 patients (27%) with UIP or probable UIP histopathologic patterns. An average of 516 wedges were generated per patient. The percentage of wedges with CNN-predicted UIP yielded a cross validation area under the curve of 74% for histopathological UIP pattern per patient. The optimal cutoff point for classifying patients on the training cohort was 16.5% of virtual lung wedges with CNN-predicted UIP and resulted in sensitivity and specificity of 74% and 58%, respectively, in the testing cohort. CNN-predicted UIP was associated with an increased risk of death or lung transplantation during cross validation (hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.2; P = 0.03).Conclusions: Virtual lung wedge resection in patients with ILD can be used as an input to a CNN for predicting the histopathologic UIP pattern and transplant-free survival.

Unclassifiable, or simply unclassified interstitial lung disease?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Unclassifiable interstitial lung disease (ILD) comprises a subset of ILDs which cannot be classified according to the current diagnostic framework. This is a likely a heterogeneous group of diseases rather than a single entity and it is poorly defined and hence problematic for prognosis and therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

With increased treatment options for progressive fibrosing ILD it is increasingly relevant to correctly categorise ILD.

SUMMARY

This review article will summarise the definition and reasons for a diagnosis of unclassifiable ILD, the current management options and possible future approaches to improve diagnosis and differentiation within this broad subset. Finally, we will describe the implications of the labelling of unclassifiable ILD in clinical practice and research and whether the term 'unclassified' should be used, implying a less definitive diagnosis.

A contemporary practical approach to the multidisciplinary management of unclassifiable interstitial lung disease

Fibrotic interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) frequently have nonspecific and overlapping clinical and radiological features, resulting in approximately 10-20% of patients with ILD lacking a clear diagnosis and thus being labelled with unclassifiable ILD. The objective of this review is to describe how patients with unclassifiable ILD should be evaluated and what impact specific clinical, radiological, and histopathological features may have on management decisions, focusing on patients with a predominantly fibrotic phenotype. We highlight recent data that have suggested an increasing role for antifibrotic medications in a variety of fibrotic ILDs, but justify the ongoing importance of making an accurate ILD diagnosis given the benefit of immunomodulatory therapies in many patient populations. We provide a practical approach to support management decisions that can be used by clinicians and tested by clinical researchers, and further identify the need for additional research to support a rational and standardised approach to the management of patients with unclassifiable ILD.

Diagnosis and Evaluation of Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this analysis is to provide evidence-based and consensus-derived guidance for clinicians to improve individual diagnostic decision-making for hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) and decrease diagnostic practice variability.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Approved panelists developed key questions regarding the diagnosis of HP using the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) format. MEDLINE (via PubMed) and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for relevant literature, which was supplemented by manual searches. References were screened for inclusion, and vetted evaluation tools were used to assess the quality of included studies, to extract data, and to grade the level of evidence supporting each recommendation or statement. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Graded recommendations and ungraded consensus-based statements were drafted and voted on using a modified Delphi technique to achieve consensus. A diagnostic algorithm is provided, using supporting data from the recommendations where possible, along with expert consensus to help physicians gauge the probability of HP.

RESULTS

The systematic review of the literature based on 14 PICO questions resulted in 14 key action statements: 12 evidence-based, graded recommendations and 2 ungraded consensus-based statements. All evidence was of very low quality.

INTERPRETATION

Diagnosis of HP should employ a patient-centered approach and include a multidisciplinary assessment that incorporates the environmental and occupational exposure history and CT pattern to establish diagnostic confidence prior to considering BAL and/or lung biopsy. Criteria are presented to facilitate diagnosis of HP. Additional research is needed on the performance characteristics and generalizability of exposure assessment tools and traditional and new diagnostic tests in modifying clinical decision-making for HP, particularly among those with a provisional diagnosis.

Executive Summary: Diagnosis and Evaluation of Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this summary is to provide a synopsis of evidence-based and consensus-derived guidance for clinicians to improve individual diagnostic decision-making for hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) and decrease diagnostic practice variability.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Approved panelists developed key questions regarding the diagnosis of HP using the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome) format. MEDLINE (via PubMed) and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for relevant literature, which was supplemented by manual searches. References were screened for inclusion and vetted evaluation tools were used to assess the quality of included studies, to extract data, and to grade the level of evidence supporting each recommendation or statement. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Graded recommendations and ungraded consensus-based statements were drafted and voted on using a modified Delphi technique to achieve consensus.

RESULTS

The systematic review of the literature based on 14 PICO questions resulted in 14 key action statements: 12 evidence-based, graded recommendations, and 2 ungraded consensus-based statements. All evidence was of very low quality.

INTERPRETATION

Diagnosis of HP should employ a patient-centered approach and include a multidisciplinary assessment that incorporates the environmental and occupational exposure history and CT pattern to establish diagnostic confidence prior to considering BAL and/or lung biopsy. Additional research is needed on the performance characteristics and generalizability of exposure assessment tools and traditional and new diagnostic tests in modifying clinical decision-making for HP, particularly among those with a provisional diagnosis.

A comprehensive assessment of environmental exposures and the medical history guides multidisciplinary discussion in interstitial lung disease

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary discussion (MDD) is widely recommended for patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD), but published primary data from MDD has been scarce, and factors influencing MDD other than chest computed tomography (CT) and lung histopathology interpretations have not been well-described.

METHODS

Single institution MDD of 179 patients with ILD.

RESULTS

MDD consensus clinical diagnoses included autoimmune-related ILD, chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis, smoking-related ILD, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, medication-induced ILD, occupation-related ILD, unclassifiable ILD, and a few less common pulmonary disorders. In 168 of 179 patients, one or more environmental exposures or pertinent features of the medical history were identified, including recreational/avocational, residential, and occupational exposures, systemic autoimmune disease, malignancy, medication use, and family history. The MDD process demonstrated the importance of comprehensively assessing these exposures and features, beyond merely noting their presence, for rendering consensus clinical diagnoses. Precise, well-defined chest CT and lung histopathology interpretations were rendered at MDD, including usual interstitial pneumonia, nonspecific interstitial pneumonia, and organizing pneumonia, but these interpretations were associated with a variety of MDD consensus clinical diagnoses, demonstrating their nonspecific nature in many instances. In 77 patients in which MDD consensus diagnosis differed from referring diagnosis, assessment of environmental exposures and medical history was found retrospectively to be the most impactful factor.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive assessment of environmental exposures and pertinent features of the medical history guided MDD. In addition to rendering consensus clinical diagnoses, MDD presented clinicians with opportunities to initiate environmental remediation, behavior modification, or medication alteration likely to benefit individual patients with ILD.

Current monitoring and treatment of progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease: a survey of physicians in Japan, the United States, and the European Union

OBJECTIVE

To understand assumptions about and approaches to interstitial lung disease (ILD), including those of the progressive phenotype (progressive fibrosing ILD), this multinational survey assessed physicians' attitudes toward, knowledge of, and management strategies for progressive fibrosing ILD.

METHODS

This internet-based survey of physicians was conducted between November 2018 and February 2019. Practical management strategies for progressive fibrosing ILD, and current approaches to the assessment and treatment of ILD, were compared between countries/regions (Japan vs. United States and European Union) and specialties (pulmonologists vs. rheumatologists).

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 574 respondents. Compared with Western countries, the progressive fibrosing phenotype concept was not widely understood by Japanese respondents, with no notable differences in the understanding of this phenotype between pulmonologists and rheumatologists. Across all regions, pulmonary function tests, diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide assessments, and pulse oximeter measurements were commonly performed at intervals of ≤6 months. In general, physicians in the United States and European Union preferred physiologic approaches for follow-up, while those in Japan preferred imaging and blood monitoring. Compared with rheumatologists, pulmonologists performed more frequent monitoring of autoimmune ILDs, and the differences between specialties were most pronounced in Japan. Regional differences in treatment approaches were observed, probably reflecting the local availability of agents and healthcare environments.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness and management of progressive fibrosing ILD varied between specialties and regions, highlighting an unmet need for standardized diagnosis, treatment guidelines, and specialist education in this area.

S2K Guideline for Diagnosis of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a severe and often fatal disease. Diagnosis of IPF requires considerable expertise and experience. Since the publication of the international IPF guideline in the year 2011 and the update 2018 several studies and technical advances have occurred, which made a new assessment of the diagnostic process mandatory. The goal of this guideline is to foster early, confident, and effective diagnosis of IPF. The guideline focusses on the typical clinical context of an IPF patient and provides tools to exclude known causes of interstitial lung disease including standardized questionnaires, serologic testing, and cellular analysis of bronchoalveolar lavage. High-resolution computed tomography remains crucial in the diagnostic workup. If it is necessary to obtain specimens for histology, transbronchial lung cryobiopsy is the primary approach, while surgical lung biopsy is reserved for patients who are fit for it and in whom a bronchoscopic diagnosis did not provide the information needed. After all, IPF is a diagnosis of exclusion and multidisciplinary discussion remains the golden standard of diagnosis.

Diagnosis and management of connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease in Australia and New Zealand: A position statement from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand

Pulmonary complications in CTD are common and can involve the interstitium, airways, pleura and pulmonary vasculature. ILD can occur in all CTD (CTD-ILD), and may vary from limited, non-progressive lung involvement, to fulminant, life-threatening disease. Given the potential for major adverse outcomes in CTD-ILD, accurate diagnosis, assessment and careful consideration of therapeutic intervention are a priority. Limited data are available to guide management decisions in CTD-ILD. Autoimmune-mediated pulmonary inflammation is considered a key pathobiological pathway in these disorders, and immunosuppressive therapy is generally regarded the cornerstone of treatment for severe and/or progressive CTD-ILD. However, the natural history of CTD-ILD in individual patients can be difficult to predict, and deciding who to treat, when and with what agent can be challenging. Establishing realistic therapeutic goals from both the patient and clinician perspective requires considerable expertise. The document aims to provide a framework for clinicians to aid in the assessment and management of ILD in the major CTD. A suggested approach to diagnosis and monitoring of CTD-ILD and, where available, evidence-based, disease-specific approaches to treatment have been provided.

Essential Components of an Interstitial Lung Disease Clinic: Results From a Delphi Survey and Patient Focus Group Analysis

Background

Management of patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) requires subspecialized, comprehensive, multidisciplinary care. The Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation established the Care Center Network (CCN) in 2013 with identified criteria to become a designated CCN site. Despite these criteria, the essential components of an ILD clinic remain unknown.

Research Questions

How are ILD clinics within the CCN structured? What are the essential components of an ILD clinic according to ILD physician experts, patients, and caregivers?

Study Design and Methods

This study had three components. First, all 68 CCN sites were surveyed to determine the characteristics of their current ILD clinics. Second, an online, three-round modified Delphi survey was conducted between October and December 2019 with 48 ILD experts participating in total. Items for round 1 were generated using expert interviews. During rounds 1 and 2, experts rated the importance of each item on a 5-point Likert scale. The a priori threshold for consensus was more than 75% of experts rating an item as important or very important. In round 3, experts graded items that met consensus and ranked items deemed essential for an ILD clinic. Third, ILD patient and caregiver focus groups were conducted and analyzed for content to determine their perspectives of an ideal ILD clinic.

Results

Forty items across four categories (members, infrastructure, resources, and multidisciplinary conference) achieved consensus as essential to an ILD clinic. Patient and caregiver focus groups identified three major themes: comprehensive, patient-centered medical care; expanded access to care; and comprehensive support for living and coping with ILD.

Interpretation

The essential components of an ILD clinic are well-aligned between physician experts and patients. Future research can use these findings to evaluate the impact of these components on patient outcomes and to inform best practices for ILD clinics throughout the world.

Retrospective outcomes analysis of 99 consecutive uniportal awake lung biopsies: a real standard of care?

Background

Surgical lung biopsy for interstitial lung disease (ILD) is traditionally performed through video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) and general anesthesia (GA). The mortality and morbidity rates associated with this procedure are not negligible, especially in patients with significant risk factors and respiratory impairment. Based on these considerations, our center evaluated a safe non-intubated VATS approach for lung biopsy performed in ILD subjects.

Methods

Ninety-nine patients affected by undetermined ILD were enrolled in a retrospective cohort study. In all instances, lung biopsies were performed using a non-intubated VATS technique, in spontaneously breathing patients, with or without intercostal nerve blockage. The primary end-point was the diagnostic yield, while surgical and global operating room times, post-operative length of stay (pLOS), numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) after surgery and early mortality were considered as secondary outcomes.

Results

All the procedures were carried out without conversion to GA. The pathological diagnosis was achieved in 97 patients with a diagnostic yield of 98%. The mean operating room length-of-stay and operating time were 73.7 and 42.5 min, respectively. Mean pLOS was 1.3 days with a low readmissions rate (3%). No mortality in the first 30 days due to acute exacerbation of ILD occurred. Both analgesia methods resulted in optimal feasibility with a mean NPRS score of 1.13.

Conclusions

In undetermined ILD patients, surgical lung biopsy with a non-intubated VATS approach and spontaneous ventilation anesthesia appears to be both a practical and safe technique with an excellent diagnostic yield and high level of patient satisfaction.

Utility of Bronchoalveolar Lavage and Transbronchial Biopsy in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease

PURPOSE

Bronchoalveolar lavage and transbronchial biopsy can be a useful tool in the evaluation of interstitial lung disease (ILD), but patient selection for this procedure remains poorly defined. Determining clinical characteristics that help with patient selection for bronchoscopy may improve confidence of ILD classification while limiting potential adverse outcomes associated with surgical lung biopsy. The purpose of this study is to identify factors that were associated with change in multidisciplinary ILD diagnosis (MDD) before and after incorporation of BAL and TBBx data.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ILD patients at a single center who underwent bronchoscopy in the diagnostic workup of ILD. We performed sequential MDD both pre- and post-bronchoscopy to calculate the frequency of change in diagnosis after incorporating information from BAL and TBBx and identify features associated with change in diagnosis.

RESULTS

245 patients were included in the study. Bronchoscopy led to a change in diagnosis in 58 patients (23.7%). The addition of TBBx to BAL increased diagnostic yield from 21.8 to 34.1% (p = 0.027). Identification of antigen, HRCT scan inconsistent with UIP, and absence of a pre-bronchoscopy diagnosis of CTD-ILD or IPAF were associated with a change in diagnosis after bronchoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests clinical features that may assist with patient selection for bronchoscopy. We suggest bronchoscopy in patients with identified antigen or an HRCT that is consistent with a non-IPF diagnosis. Appropriate patient selection for bronchoscopy may improve ILD diagnostic confidence and avoid potential complications from more invasive and higher risk procedures.

Priorities and expectations of patients attending a multidisciplinary interstitial lung disease clinic

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The significant and progressive morbidity associated with ILD mean that patients often struggle with the impact of this disease on their QOL and independence. To date, no studies have investigated the importance of multidisciplinary care on patient experience in ILD. We aimed to determine the expectations and priorities of patients attending a tertiary referral centre multidisciplinary ILD clinic. In particular, we sought to learn how important the multidisciplinary element of the clinic was to patients and which aspects of the clinic were most valued.

METHODS

An 18-item patient questionnaire was developed in conjunction with expert physicians and specialist nurses involved in the ILD clinic and sent to all patients on the centre's ILD registry at the time of the study (n = 240). Patients rated the importance of different aspects of their experience of attending the clinic. Data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics. Comparisons across disease severity were made using two-sided Z-tests for independent proportions.

RESULTS

A total of 100 respondents comprised the study group. Almost all respondents valued the multidisciplinary aspect of the clinic. Obtaining an accurate diagnosis and improving their disease understanding was most important to respondents. The importance of the ILD specialist nurse for both education and support increased with worsening disease severity.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that a multidisciplinary approach to the management of ILD with additional focus on patient education, as well as tailoring care to disease severity, is a plausible pathway to improving the patient experience with ILD.

The Impact of Multidisciplinary Discussion (MDD) in the Diagnosis and Management of Fibrotic Interstitial Lung Diseases

Accurate diagnosis of interstitial lung disease (ILD) is crucial for management and prognosis but can be challenging even for experienced clinicians. Expert multidisciplinary discussion (MDD) is considered the reference standard for ILD diagnosis; however, there remain concerns regarding lack of validation studies and relative limited information on the impact of MDD in real-life clinical practice. The goal of this study was to assess the effect of MDD in providing a specific ILD diagnosis, changing the diagnosis provided upon referral, and to determine how often and in which way MDD altered management. Material and Methods. Retrospective observational study in an ILD referral tertiary academic center. MDD diagnoses were categorized as specific, provisional, and unclassifiable ILD. Pre-MDD and MDD diagnoses were compared for change in diagnosis and concordance rates for specific diagnoses. Relevant change in management including initiation or change in pharmacological treatment, referral to surgical biopsy, and nonpharmacological management were recorded. Results. 126 cases were included (79M, 47F, 36–93 years, mean 70 y). Specific MDD diagnosis was provided in 62% (78/126); 12% (15/126) had provisional diagnosis, and 21% (27/126) was unclassifiable. Overall agreement for specific pre-MDD and MDD diagnosis was 41% (52/126) and 80% for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) diagnosis. MDD altered diagnosis in 37% (47/126) and changed management in 39% (50/126). Amongst concordant diagnoses, management was altered in 46% (24/52). In summary, MDD provided a specific diagnosis discordant with pre-MDD diagnosis in a significant proportion of cases and was particularly valuable in the diagnosis of non-IPF ILD. MDD often altered management and had relevant impact on management even in cases with concordant pre-MDD diagnosis.

Diagnostic approach of fibrosing interstitial lung diseases of unknown origin

Interstitial lung diseases encompass a broad range of numerous individual conditions, some of them characterized histologically by fibrosis, especially idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, nonspecific interstitial pneumonia, chronic hypersensitivity pneumonia, interstitial lung disease associated with connective tissue diseases, and unclassifiable interstitial lung disease. The diagnostic approach relies mainly on the clinical evaluation, especially assessment of the patient's demographics, history, smoking habits, occupational or domestic exposures, use of drugs, and on interpretation of high-quality HRCT of the chest. Imaging is key to the initial diagnostic approach, and often can confirm a definite diagnosis, particularly a diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis when showing a pattern of usual interstitial pneumonia in the appropriate context. In other cases, chest HRCT may orientate toward an alternative diagnosis and appropriate investigations to confirm the suspected diagnosis. Autoimmune serology helps diagnosing connective disease. Indications for bronchoalveolar lavage and for lung biopsy progressively become more restrictive, with better considerations for their discriminate value, of the potential risk associated with the procedure, and of the anticipated impact on management. Innovative techniques and genetics are beginning to contribute to diagnosing interstitial lung disease and to be implemented routinely in the clinic. Multidisciplinary discussion, enabling interaction between pulmonologists, chest radiologists, pathologists and often other healthcare providers, allows integration of all information available. It increases the accuracy of diagnosis and prognosis prediction, proposes a first-choice diagnosis, may suggest additional investigations, and often informs the management. The concept of working diagnosis, which can be revised upon additional information being made available especially longitudinal disease behaviour, helps dealing with diagnostic uncertainty inherent to interstitial lung diseases and facilitates management decisions. Above all, the clinical approach and how thoroughly the patient's history and possible exposures are assessed determine the possibility of an accurate diagnosis.

Treatment of the Connective Tissue Disease-Related Interstitial Lung Diseases: A Narrative Review

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a frequent complication of patients with connective tissue disease (CTD) and significantly affects morbidity and mortality. Disease course may vary from stable or mildly progressive to more severe, with rapid loss of lung function. We conducted a search of PubMed (National Library of Medicine) and the Web of Science Core Collection using the key words lung, pulmonary, pneumonia, pneumonitis, and alveolar and subtypes of CTD. All clinical studies from January 1, 1980, through September 1, 2018, were reviewed for descriptions of specific therapies and their efficacy or safety and were categorized as controlled interventional trials, observational prospective or retrospective cohort studies, case series (>5 patients), and case reports (<5 patients). Low-quality reports (<5 patients) before 2000, reviews, editorials, popular science papers, and letters to the editor without complete descriptions of the therapies used or their outcomes were excluded. Directed therapy for CTD-ILD is dominated by empirical use of immunosuppressive agents, with the decision to treat, treatment choice, and treatment duration limited to cases and cohort observations. Only a few higher-level controlled studies were available specifically in scleroderma-related ILD. We summarize herein for the clinician the published treatment scope and experience, highlighted clinical response, and common adverse reactions for the management of CTD-ILD.

Pilot experience of multidisciplinary team discussion dedicated to inherited pulmonary fibrosis

Background

Genetic testing is proposed for suspected cases of monogenic pulmonary fibrosis, but clinicians and patients need specific information and recommendation about the related diagnosis and management issues. Because multidisciplinary discussion (MDD) has been shown to improve accuracy of interstitial lung disease (ILD) diagnosis, we evaluated the feasibility of a genetic MDD (geneMDD) dedicated to the indication for and interpretation of genetic testing. The geneMDD group met monthly and included pediatric and adult lung specialists with ILD expertise, molecular and clinical geneticists, and one radiologist. Hematologists, rheumatologists, dermatologists, hepatologists, and pathologists were also invited to attend.

Results

Since 2016, physicians from 34 different centers in 7 countries have participated in the geneMDD. The medical files of 95 patients (53 males) have been discussed. The median age of patients was 43 years [range 0–77], 10 were ≤ 15 years old, and 6 were deceased at the time of the discussion. Among 85 analyses available, the geneMDD considered the rare gene variants pathogenic for 61: 37 variants in telomere-related genes, 23 variants in surfactant-related genes and 1 variant in MARS. Genetic counseling was offered for relatives of these patients. The geneMDD therapeutic proposals were as follows: antifibrotic drugs (n = 25), steroids or immunomodulatory therapy (n = 18), organ transplantation (n = 21), watch and wait (n = 21), or best supportive care (n = 4).

Conclusion

Our experience shows that a dedicated geneMDD is feasible regardless of a patient’s age and provides a unique opportunity to adapt patient management and therapy in this very rare condition.

Idiopathic and immune-related pulmonary fibrosis: diagnostic and therapeutic challenges

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) encompasses a large group of pulmonary conditions sharing common clinical, radiological and histopathological features as a consequence of fibrosis of the lung interstitium. The majority of ILDs are idiopathic in nature with possible genetic predisposition, but is also well recognised as a complication of connective tissue disease or with certain environmental, occupational or drug exposures. In recent years, a concerted international effort has been made to standardise the diagnostic criteria in ILD subtypes, formalise multidisciplinary pathways and standardise treatment recommendations. In this review, we discuss some of the current challenges around ILD diagnostics, the role of serological testing, especially, in light of the new classification of Interstitial Pneumonia with Autoimmune Features (IPAF) and discuss the evidence for therapies targeted at idiopathic and immune-related pulmonary fibrosis.

The Role of the Multidisciplinary Evaluation of Interstitial Lung Diseases: Systematic Literature Review of the Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

The opportunity of a multidisciplinary evaluation for the diagnosis of interstitial pneumonias highlighted a major change in the diagnostic approach to diffuse lung disease. The new American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Latin American Thoracic Society guidelines for the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis have reinforced this assumption and have underlined that the exclusion of connective tissue disease related lung involvement is mandatory, with obvious clinical and therapeutic impact. The multidisciplinary team discussion consists in a moment of interaction among the radiologist, pathologist and pulmonologist, also including the rheumatologist when considered necessary, to improve diagnostic agreement and optimize the definition of those cases in which pulmonary involvement may represent the first or prominent manifestation of an autoimmune systemic disease. Moreover, the proposal of classification criteria for interstitial lung disease with autoimmune features (IPAF) represents an effort to define lung involvement in clinically undefined autoimmune conditions. The complexity of autoimmune diseases, and in particular the lack of classification criteria defined for pathologies such as anti-synthetase syndrome, makes the involvement of the rheumatologist essential for the correct interpretation of the autoimmune element and for the application of classification criteria, that could replace clinical pictures initially interpreted as IPAF in defined autoimmune disease, minimizing the risk of misdiagnosis. The aim of this review was to evaluate the available evidence about the efficiency and efficacy of different multidisciplinary team approaches, in order to standardize the professional figures and the core set procedures that should be necessary for a correct approach in diagnosing patients with interstitial lung disease.