Clinical Characteristics Of Patients With Asthma COPD Overlap (ACO) In Australian Primary Care

Different Case Finding Approaches to Optimise COPD Diagnosis: Evidence from the RADICALS Trial

Aim

Diagnosis of COPD in primary care is hindered by underuse of spirometry. Case finding using validated symptom and health status questionnaires, and simple handheld devices in high-risk populations may improve diagnosis. This study aimed to determine the best combination of measures to optimise COPD diagnosis in the primary care setting.

Methods

We recruited 335 current or ex-smokers, including those with an established diagnosis of COPD from general practices. Participants' FEV1 and FEV6 were measured using a handheld spirometry device (COPD-6®). Each completed the COPD assessment test (CAT), a modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and smoking history questionnaire. From these data we calculated the predictive validity for spirometry-confirmed diagnosis of COPD. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) were calculated for each. Kappa coefficient was used to measure the agreement between the Fixed-Ratio (FR) and Lower Limit of Normal (LLN) spirometric criteria in diagnosing COPD.

Results

FEV1/FEV6 <0.70 alone showed significant association (p<0.0001) with COPD diagnosis and good predictive accuracy (AUROC=0.725). However, no further improvement was found after combining SGRQ, CAT and mMRC with FEV1/FEV6. FEV1/FEV6 <0.70 using the COPD-6® handheld device had moderate sensitivity (65.7%) and high PPV (90.1%), high specificity (79.3%) and NPV (44.8%). There was good agreement between FR and LLN definitions (κ=0.70).

Conclusion

Handheld micro-spirometers can facilitate case finding of COPD in smokers and ex-smokers attending general practice. The fixed ratio criterion currently recommended by COPD-X guidelines offers the simplest method for diagnosing COPD in Australian primary care.

Clinical characteristics of adults with self-reported diagnosed asthma and/or COPD: data from the BOLD Australia Study

Background

Diagnosis of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the community is variable, often without spirometry. Some studies report that adults with both diagnostic labels (asthma+COPD) have worse health outcomes than those with asthma or COPD only, but data for Australian adults are limited. We investigated the relationship between clinical characteristics and self-reported diagnoses of asthma, COPD and both.

Method

We used data from the BOLD Australia study, which included randomly selected adults aged ≥40 years from six study sites. The BOLD questionnaires and spirometry test were used in all sites. Participants were grouped by self-reported diagnosis. Demographic and clinical characteristics and lung function were compared between groups.

Results

Of the study sample (n=3522), 336 reported asthma only, 172 reported COPD only, 77 reported asthma+COPD and 2937 reported neither. Fewer than half of participants with a COPD diagnosis (with or without asthma) had airflow limitation. Participants with asthma+COPD had more respiratory symptoms and greater airflow limitation than those with either diagnosis alone. Having asthma+COPD was independently associated with a higher probability of having clinically important breathlessness (modified Medical Research Council score ≥2) than asthma only (adjusted OR 3.44, 95% CI 1.86-6.33) or COPD only (adjusted OR 3.28, 95% CI 1.69-6.39). Airflow limitation (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2 or higher, using post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity ratio <0.7) was similar between asthma only and COPD only, but twice as prevalent in asthma+COPD (adjusted OR 2.18 and 2.58, respectively).

Conclusions

Adults with diagnoses of asthma+COPD have a higher symptom and disease burden than those with diagnoses of asthma only or COPD only. These patients should receive regular comprehensive reviews because of the substantially increased burden of having both diagnoses.

Does the asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap syndrome (ACOS) exist? A narrative review from epidemiology and practice

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have traditionally been approached as separate entities that must be researched and treated separately. There is growing recognition, however, that a substantial proportion of patients with obstructive lung disease have characteristics of both asthma and COPD (termed the asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS)). Lung disease experts have difficulty defining ACOS, and many still resist accepting the possibility that asthma and COPD may be linked. It is likely that practicing clinicians may be equally confused about how to identify and treat ACOS. This narrative review aims to clarify concepts of ACOS definition, argues that the best way to understand ACOS is to view the chronic lung disease process longitudinally rather than cross-sectionally, and presents evidence that ACOS can be the end result of the natural history of severe asthma. The review also points out the serious gaps in knowledge regarding therapy for ACOS and presents emerging data supporting the intracellular respiratory pathogen Chlamydia pneumoniae as a possible common etiologic agent in severe asthma and ACOS.

Asthma-COPD Overlap: What Are the Important Questions?

Asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) is a heterogeneous condition that describes patients who show persistent airflow limitation with clinical features that support both asthma and COPD. Although no single consensus definition exists to diagnose this entity, common major criteria include a strong bronchodilator reversibility or bronchial hyperreactivity, a physician diagnosis of asthma, and a ≥ 10-pack-year cigarette smoking history. The prevalence of ACO ranges from 0.9% to 11.1% in the general population, depending on the diagnostic definition used. Notably, patients with ACO experience greater symptom burden, worse quality of life, and more frequent and severe respiratory exacerbations than those with asthma or COPD. The underlying pathophysiologic features of ACO have been debated. Although emerging evidence supports the role of environmental and inhalational exposures in its pathogenesis among patients with a pre-existing airway disease, biomarker profiling and genetic analyses suggest that ACO may be a heterogeneous condition, but with definable characteristics. Early-life factors including childhood-onset asthma and cigarette smoking may interact to increase the risk of airflow obstruction later in life. For treatment options, the population with ACO historically has been excluded from therapeutic trials; therefore strong, evidence-based recommendations are lacking beyond first-line inhaler therapies. Advanced therapies in patients with ACO are selected according to disease phenotypes and are based on extrapolated data from asthma and COPD. Research focused on defining biomarkers and evidence-based treatment options for ACO is needed urgently.

Current Knowledge of Asthma-COPD Overlap (ACO) Genetic Risk Factors, Characteristics, and Prognosis

Asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) is a newly identified phenotype of chronic obstructive airway diseases with shared asthma and COPD features. Patients with ACO are poorly defined, and some evidence suggests that they have worse health outcomes and greater disease burden than patients with COPD or asthma. Generally, there is no evidence-based and universal definition for ACO; several consensus documents have provided various descriptions of the phenotype. In addition, the mechanisms underlying the development of ACO are not fully understood. Whether ACO is a distinct clinical entity with its particular discrete genetic determinant different from asthma and COPD alone or an intermediate phenotype with overlapping genetic markers within asthma and COPD spectrum of obstructive airway disease remains unproven. This review summarizes the current knowledge of the genetic risk factors, characteristics, and prognosis of ACO.

ACO (Asthma-COPD Overlap) Is Independent from COPD: The Case in Favour

Over the last decade interest has been shown in people with symptomatic lung disease who have features both of COPD and asthma. In this review we examine how COPD and asthma are defined and examine clinical characteristics of people defined by researchers as having asthma-COPD overlap (ACO). We look at pathological and physiological features along with symptoms and consider the impact of each diagnosis upon therapeutic management. We highlight challenges in the diagnosis and management of airway disease and the various phenotypes that could be part of ACO, in so doing suggesting ways for the clinician to manage patients with features of both asthma and COPD.

Clinical, laboratory, and functional characteristics of asthma-COPD overlap in patients with a primary diagnosis of COPD

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the frequency of asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) in patients with COPD and to compare, from a clinical, laboratory, and functional point of view, patients with and without ACO, according to different diagnostic criteria.

METHODS

The participants underwent evaluation by a pulmonologist, together with spirometry and blood tests. All of the patients were instructed to record their PEF twice a day. The diagnosis of ACO was based on the Proyecto Latinoamericano de Investigación en Obstrucción Pulmonar (PLATINO, Latin American Project for the Investigation of Obstructive Lung Disease) criteria, the American Thoracic Society (ATS) Roundtable criteria, and the Spanish criteria. We investigated patient histories of exacerbations and hospitalizations, after which we applied the COPD Assessment Test and the modified Medical Research Council scale, to classify risk and symptoms in accordance with the GOLD criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 51 COPD patients, 14 (27.5%), 8 (12.2%), and 18 (40.0) were diagnosed with ACO on the basis of the PLATINO, ATS Roundtable, and Spanish criteria, respectively. The values for pre-bronchodilator FVC, post-bronchodilator FVC, and pre-bronchodilator FEV1 were significantly lower among the patients with ACO than among those with COPD only (1.9 ± 0.4 L vs. 2.4 ± 0.7 L, 2.1 ± 0.5 L vs. 2.5 ± 0.8 L, and 1.0 ± 0.3 L vs. 1.3 ± 0.5 L, respectively). When the Spanish criteria were applied, IgE levels were significantly higher among the patients with ACO than among those with COPD only (363.7 ± 525.9 kU/L vs. 58.2 ± 81.6 kU/L). A history of asthma was more common among the patients with ACO (p < 0.001 for all criteria).

CONCLUSIONS

In our sample, patients with ACO were more likely to report previous episodes of asthma and had worse lung function than did those with COPD only. The ATS Roundtable criteria appear to be the most judicious, although concordance was greatest between the PLATINO and the Spanish criteria.