Analysis of clinical characteristics and prognosis of lung cancer patients with CPFE or COPD: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer (LC) commonly occurs in patients with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but comparative research is limited. This study examines clinical characteristics, treatments, and prognosis in LC patients with CPFE or COPD. METHODS: The retrospective study involved 75 lung cancer patients with CPFE and 182 with COPD. It analyzed clinical features, tumor pathology, pulmonary function, laboratory parameters, and treatment responses. RESULTS: Notable differences were found between the CPFE + LC and COPD + LC groups. Both groups were mostly elderly, male smokers. The CPFE + LC group had higher BMI and more adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, while COPD + LC had predominantly squamous cell carcinoma. CPFE + LC tumors were mostly in the lower lobes; COPD + LC's were in the upper lobes. The CPFE + LC group showed higher tumor metastasis rates, more paraseptal emphysema, and elevated levels of TG, CEA, NSE, and Killer T Cells. In advanced stages (IIIB-IV), the CPFE + LC group receiving first-line treatment had shorter median progression-free survival (PFS) and a higher risk of progression or death than the COPD + LC group, regardless of whether it was non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or small cell lung cancer (SCLC). No significant PFS difference was found within CPFE + LC between chemotherapy and immunotherapy, nor in immune-related adverse events between groups, with interstitial pneumonia being common. CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes distinct lung cancer characteristics in CPFE or COPD patients, highlighting the need for tailored diagnostic and treatment approaches. It advocates for further research to improve care for this high-risk group.

Deleterious impact of trivial to severe interstitial pneumonia and emphysema on mortality and acute exacerbation of interstitial pneumonia in patients with lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Interstitial pneumonia and emphysema may complicate patients with lung cancer. However, clinical significance of trivial and mild pulmonary abnormalities remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether trivial and mild interstitial pneumonia and emphysema, in addition to their advanced forms, impact the prognosis and lead to acute exacerbation of interstitial pneumonia (AEIP) in patients with lung cancer. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary hospital and included patients with lung cancer. Computed tomography images were evaluated using the interstitial lung abnormality (ILA) score for interstitial pneumonia, which included no ILA, equivocal ILA, ILA, interstitial lung disease (ILD), and the Goddard score for emphysema. Cox analyses were performed using the ILA and Goddard scores as the main explanatory variables, adjusting for multiple covariates. RESULTS: Among 1,507 patients with lung cancer, 1,033 had no ILA, 160 had equivocal ILA, 174 had ILA, and 140 had ILD. In total, 474 patients (31.5%) exhibited interstitial pneumonia and 638 (42.3%) showed emphysema. The log-rank trend test showed that survival probability was significantly better in patients with no ILA, followed by those with equivocal ILA, ILA, and ILD (P < 0.001). After adjustment, the ILA and Goddard scores remained significant variables for increased hazard ratios (HR) for mortality: no ILA (HR, 1.00: reference), equivocal ILA (HR, 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-1.46; P < 0.001), ILA (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.39-2.12; P < 0.001), ILD (HR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.63-3.09; P < 0.001), and Goddard score (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P < 0.010). Moreover, both scores were associated with increased cause-specific HRs for AEIP. CONCLUSION: Our results revealed that approximately one-third of patients with lung cancer had interstitial pneumonia when incorporating trivial and mild cases. Because interstitial pneumonia and emphysema, ranging from trivial to severe, significantly impact mortality and AEIP in patients with lung cancer, we should identify even trivial and mild cases of these pulmonary abnormalities among patients with lung cancer in addition to the advanced ones.

Incidence of and predictive factors for lung cancer in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A retrospective long-term follow-up study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and predictive factors of lung cancer in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective follow-up study of patients who were diagnosed with RA at our institution between April 2001 and December 2022. Pulmonary complications were evaluated using high-resolution computed tomography at RA diagnosis. Patients were followed until the diagnosis of lung cancer, diagnosis of other malignancies, death, loss to follow-up, or the end of the study. RESULTS: Among 771 RA patients, 3.5% were diagnosed with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE), 4.9% with interstitial lung disease (ILD) alone, and 6.0% with emphysema alone. During follow-up (mean of 9.3 years), the crude incidence rates of lung cancer per 1,000 patient-years were 2.9 in all patients, 47.8 in CPFE patients, 10.5 in ILD patients, 11.9 in emphysema patients, and 0.8 in patients without these complications. The standardized incidence ratios (95% confidence intervals [CI]) compared with the general population were 2.53 (1.29-3.77) for male patients and 0.89 (0.57-1.16) for female patients. In Fine-Gray regression analysis, adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI) of lung cancer were 13.48 (3.14-57.85) for CPFE, 6.42 (1.42-29.09) for ILD alone, and 4.65 (1.18-18.30) for emphysema alone versus without these complications, and 1.02 (1.01-1.04) per additional 1 pack-year for smoking history. These factors were not associated with the risk of other malignancies. CONCLUSION: Close monitoring of lung cancer is needed for RA patients with smoking history and pulmonary complications, especially CPFE.

Prognostic role of interstitial pneumonia with or without emphysema in patients with clinical stage I lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The prognostic role of interstitial pneumonia with emphysema in lung cancer is not fully understood. This study aimed to examine the prognostic role of the presence of emphysema in patients with clinical stage I lung cancer and interstitial pneumonia. METHODS: The presence of interstitial pneumonia and emphysema was evaluated on preoperative high-resolution computed tomography. In total, 836 consecutive patients with clinical stage I lung cancer who underwent complete resection between April 2007 and March 2016 were retrospectively analyzed using the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard model to examine survival differences. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in 5-year overall survival between patients with interstitial pneumonia and emphysema (n = 65) and those without (n = 771) (62.6% vs. 86.5%; P < 0.001). However, in patients with interstitial pneumonia on high-resolution computed tomography, there was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival between patients with emphysema (n = 65) and those without emphysema (n = 50) (62.6% vs. 59.4%, P = 0.84). Multivariable backward stepwise Cox proportional hazard analysis in patients with interstitial pneumonia showed that histology, %diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide, radiologic interstitial pneumonia pattern and surgical procedure were independent prognostic factors for overall survival, but the presence of emphysema was not. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of emphysema was not an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in patients with clinical stage I lung cancer with interstitial pneumonia. Poor survival of patients with IP and emphysema may be due to the presence of interstitial pneumonia.

Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Combined Pulmonary Fibrosis and Emphysema.

BACKGROUND: Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) is a distinct entity among fibrosing lung diseases with a high risk for lung cancer and pulmonary hypertension (PH). Notably, concomitant PH was identified as a negative prognostic indicator that could help with early diagnosis to provide important information regarding prognosis. OBJECTIVES: The current study aimed to determine whether cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) can be helpful in differentiating patients having CPFE with and without PH. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with CPFE in 2 German cities (Hemer and Greifswald) over a period of 10 years were included herein. CPET parameters, such as peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2), functional dead space ventilation (VDf/VT), alveolar-arterial oxygen difference (AaDO2), arterial-end-tidal CO2 difference [P(a-ET)CO2] at peak exercise, and the minute ventilation-carbon dioxide production relationship (VE/VCO2 slope), were compared between patients with and without PH. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients with CPET (22 with PH, 19 without PH) were analyzed. Right heart catheterization was performed in 15 of 41 patients without clinically relevant complications. Significant differences in peak VO2 (861 ± 190 vs. 1,397 ± 439 mL), VO2/kg body weight/min (10.8 ± 2.6 vs. 17.4 ± 5.2 mL), peak AaDO2 (72.3 ± 7.3 vs. 46.3 ± 14.2 mm Hg), VE/VCO2 slope (70.1 ± 31.5 vs. 39.6 ± 9.6), and peak P(a-ET)tCO2 (13.9 ± 3.5 vs. 8.1 ± 3.6 mm Hg) were observed between patients with and without PH (p < 0.001). Patients with PH had significantly higher VDf/VT at rest, VT1, and at peak exercise (65.6 ± 16.8% vs. 47.2 ± 11.6%; p < 0.001) than those without PH. A cutoff value of 44 for VE/VCO2 slope had a sensitivity and specificity of 94.7 and 72.7%, while a cutoff value of 11 mm Hg for P(a-ET)CO2 in combination with peak AaDO2 >60 mm Hg had a specificity and sensitivity of 95.5 and 84.2%, respectively. Combining peak AaDO2 >60 mm Hg with peak VO2/body weight/min <16.5 mL/kg/min provided a sensitivity and specificity of 100 and 95.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study provided initial data on CPET among patients having CPFE with and without PH. CPET can help noninvasively detect PH and identify patients at risk. AaDO2 at peak exercise, VE/VCO2 slope, peak P(a-ET)CO2, and peak VO2 were parameters that had high sensitivity and, when combined, high specificity.

Protective role of overexpressed MUC5AC against fibrosis in MHV-68-induced combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema mouse model.

Mucins have long been regarded to play a role as a barrier to prevent mucosal infections; however, some studies report that overexpression of mucins induces obstruction and inflammation of airways. We investigated whether the secretion of overexpressed mucin, mucin5ac (MUC5AC), could improve protection against pathogens. To examine the possible roles of mucin hypersecretion in augmenting host defense against disease-promoting muco-obstructive lung disease, a mouse model that overexpressed MUC5AC was generated. We had previously proved that murine gammaherpesvirus-68 (MHV-68) infection could induce emphysema in mice, which later developed into combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE). We further explored whether increased MUC5AC secretion could provide benefits against MHV-68 induced fibrosis. We initially developed a pcDNA3.1-MUC5AC mouse model. Next, the experimental mice were randomly divided into five groups: normal control, pcDNA3.1 control, pcDNA3.1-MUC5AC, CPFE, and pcDNA3.1- MUC5AC + CPFE. Morphometric analysis of each group was performed by hematoxylin and eosin staining and Masson trichrome staining. MUC5AC levels in lung tissues were analyzed by immunohistochemical staining, real-time polymerase chain reaction, and Western blot analysis. The airway inflammation was determined by differential cell counts of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and measurement of cytokines and chemokines in BALF by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. MUC5AC hypersecretion alone was not sufficient to drive goblet cell metaplasia to induce obvious mucus plugging and airway inflammation. However, MUC5AC overexpression served as a protective barrier against MHV-68 virus infection in vivo. Infectivity of MHV-68 was decreased in the pcDNA3.1-MUC5AC + CPFE group compared with that in CPFE group. Meanwhile, a reduction of MHV-68 virus attenuated the expressions of chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 2 (CCL2), chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 5 (CXCL5), interleukin-13 (IL-13), and transforming growth factor-ß1 (TGF-ß1), and weakened airway inflammation and fibrosis in the pcDNA3.1-MUC5AC + CPFE group. Overexpression of MUC5AC appears to exhibit a protective role against MHV-68 infection in mice with emphysema that subsequently developed into CPFE and to further decrease airway inflammation and fibrosis induced by MHV-68 by decreasing the expressions of CCL2, CXCL5, IL-13, and TGF-ß1.

Acute exacerbations of COPD versus IPF in patients with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema.

RATIONALE: Patients with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) may develop acute exacerbations of IPF (AE-IPF) or COPD (AE-COPD). The incidence and the characteristics of exacerbations in patients with CPFE (e.g., COPD vs IPF) have not been well described. OBJECTIVES: To compare the incidence and rate of exacerbations in patients with CPFE vs. IPF and evaluate their effect on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Comprehensive clinical data from CPFE and IPF patients were retrospectively reviewed. Baseline characteristics including lung function data, oxygen requirements, and pulmonary hemodynamics, were collected. Acute exacerbation events in both groups were defined clinically and radiographically. In the CPFE group, two patterns of exacerbations were identified. AE-COPD was defined clinically by symptoms of severe airflow obstruction causing respiratory failure and requiring hospitalization. Radiographic data were also defined based on previously published literature. AE-IPF was defined clinically as an acute hypoxic respiratory failure, requiring hospitalization and treatment with high dose corticosteroids. Radiographically, patients had to have a change in baseline imaging including presence of ground-glass opacities, interlobular septal thickening or new consolidations; that is not fully explained by other etiologies. RESULTS: Eighty-five CPFE patients were retrospectively compared to 112 IPF patients. Of 112 patients with IPF; 45 had AE-IPF preceding lung transplant (40.18%) compared to 12 patients in the CPFE group (14.1%) (p < 0.05). 10 patients in the CPFE group experienced AE-COPD (11.7%). Patients with AE-IPF had higher mortality and more likely required mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) compared to patients with AE-COPD, whether their underlying disease was IPF or CPFE. CONCLUSIONS: CPFE patients may experience either AE-IPF or AE-COPD. Patients with CPFE and AE-COPD had better outcomes, requiring less intensive therapy compared to patients with AE-IPF regardless if underlying CPFE or IPF was present. These data suggest that the type of acute exacerbation, AE-COPD vs AE-IPF, has important implications for the treatment and prognosis of patients with CPFE.

Prognosis of patients with acute exacerbation of combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema: a retrospective single-centre study.

BACKGROUND: Previous analyses of combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) cohorts have provided conflicting data on the survival of patients with CPFE. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the clinical prognosis of acute exacerbations (AE) of CPFE. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who had been treated at the Shinshu University Hospital (Matsumoto, Japan) between 2003 and 2017. We identified 21 patients with AE of CPFE and 41 patients with AE of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and estimated their prognoses using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Treatment content and respiratory management were not significantly different between the two groups before and after exacerbation. At the time of AE, the median serum Krebs von den Lungen-6 level was significantly lower in the CPFE group (Krebs von den Lungen-6: 966 U/µL; white blood cell count: 8810 /µL) than that in the IPF group (Krebs von den Lungen-6: 2130 U/µL, p < 0.001; white blood cells: 10809/µL, p = 0.0096). The baseline Gender-Age-Physiology scores were not significantly different between the two groups (CPFE, 4.5 points; IPF, 4.7 points; p = 0.58). Kaplan-Meier curves revealed that the survival time after AE for patients with CPFE was longer than that for patients with IPF (p < 0.001, log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: Survival prognoses after AE were significantly better for patients with CPFE than that for those with IPF. Our findings may improve the medical treatment and respiratory management of patients with AE-CPFE.

Effects of emphysema on physiological and prognostic characteristics of lung function in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) is characterized by preserved lung volume and slower lung function decline. However, it is unclear at what extent emphysema begins to impact respiratory physiology and prognostic characteristics in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). We estimated the extent of emphysema that could be used to define CPFE in IPF. METHODS: The extent of emphysema was observed on high-resolution computed tomography scans and measured by a texture-based automated quantification system in 209 IPF patients. We analysed the impact of differences in the extent of emphysema on the annual decline rate and prognostic significance of lung function parameters. RESULTS: The extent of emphysema was ≥5% in 53 patients (25%), ≥10% in 23 patients (11%) and ≥15% in 12 patients (6%). Patients with emphysema to an extent of ≥5% were more frequently men and ever-smokers; they had more preserved lung volume and lower forced vital capacity (FVC) decline rates than those with no or trivial emphysema. The FVC decline rate was a significant predictor of mortality in patients with no or trivial emphysema (hazard ratio (HR): 0.933, P < 0.001) and in patients with an extent of emphysema ≥5% (HR: 0.906, P < 0.001). However, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO ) was the most significant prognostic factor in those patients with an extent of emphysema ≥10% (HR: 0.972, P = 0.040) and ≥15% (HR: 0.942, P = 0.023). A 10% cut-off value for the extent of emphysema created the most significant difference in the annual FVC decline rate in IPF patients. CONCLUSION: In IPF, emphysema to an extent of ≥10% affects both the annual decline rate and the prognostic significance of FVC. This extent could be used to define CPFE.

Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in non-small cell lung cancer: impact on survival and acute exacerbation.

BACKGROUND: In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, concomitant idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and emphysema (CPFE) are independently related to poor survival. CPFE is a condition with features of both pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema. Here, we evaluated the effect of CPFE and IPF alone on the outcomes of NSCLC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 283 patients with CPFE or IPF who were diagnosed with NSCLC between November 2003 and February 2018 at two tertiary care hospitals in South Korea. Patients were classified into CPFE and IPF groups according to chest computed tomography findings. RESULTS: One-hundred-and-seven patients (37.8%; mean age: 70.1 years; men 97.2%) had CPFE. Compared with IPF patients, CPFE patients had a heavier smoking history; lower diffusing capacity of carbon monoxide (78.0% vs 64.8%, p <  0.001), and lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s. Of all patients with NSCLC, 71.7% overall died during the follow-up period; 71.6% died in the CPFE group and 72.0% in the IPF group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that CPFE (odds ratio [OR]: 2.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-4.69; P = 0.029) was significantly correlated with acute exacerbations (AEs). In a Cox proportional hazards analysis, stage > III NSCLC, higher Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and higher gender-age-physiology index score was related to higher mortality. However, CPFE was not related to a higher mortality rate in univariate (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.75-1.32, P = 0.972) or multivariate analysis (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.66-1.21, P = 0.466). CONCLUSIONS: AE risk, but not all-cause mortality, was higher in patients with CPFE and NSCLC than in those with IPF and NSCLC. Physicians should be aware of the exaggerated risk of AE in patients with concomitant CPFE and NSCLC.

The prognostic impact of combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema in patients with clinical stage IA non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the long-term outcomes of clinical stage IA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) who underwent lobectomy. METHODS: We reviewed the chest computed tomography (CT) findings and divided the patients into normal, fibrosis, emphysema and CPFE groups. We evaluated the relationships among the CT findings, the clinicopathological findings and postoperative survival. RESULTS: The patients were classified into the following groups based on the preoperative chest CT findings: normal lung, n = 187; emphysema, n = 62; fibrosis, n = 8; and CPFE, n = 17. The patients with CPFE were significantly older, more likely to be men and smokers, had a higher KL-6 level and lower FEV 1.0% value and had a higher rate of squamous cell carcinoma. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival rates were as follows: normal group, 82.5 and 76.8%; emphysema group, 80.0 and 74.9%; fibrosis group, 46.9 and 50%; and CPFE group, 36.9 and 27.9%, respectively (p < 0.01). A univariate and multivariate analysis determined that the pathological stage and CT findings were associated with OS. CONCLUSIONS: CPFE is a significantly unfavorable prognostic factor after lobectomy, even in early-stage NSCLC patients with a preserved lung function.

Histological analysis of vasculopathy associated with pulmonary hypertension in combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema: comparison with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis or emphysema alone.

AIMS: To evaluate pulmonary vasculopathy in an autopsy series of patients with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE), and compare these findings with those of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) alone and emphysema alone. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively analysed the clinical, radiological and pathological features of 26 patients with CPFE, 11 with IPF, and 23 with emphysema. We evaluated pulmonary vascular, venous-venular and arteriolar tissue changes in the fibrotic, emphysematous and relatively unaffected (preserved) areas by using the Heath-Edwards scoring system. We found moderate-to-severe vasculopathy in the CPFE group, but no significant differences in the fibrotic and emphysematous areas among the three groups. However, in the preserved area, the grading was significantly different among the three groups (P < 0.001), and vasculopathy in the CPFE group was the most severe. Although venous-venular and arteriolar changes in almost all fibrotic and emphysematous areas in the three groups showed no significant differences, there were significant differences in venous-venular (P = 0.004) and arteriolar (P < 0.001) changes in the preserved area among the three groups, which were most prevalent in the CPFE group. In the CPFE group, venous-venular changes and vasculopathy by Heath-Edwards grading were highest in the fibrotic area and lowest in the preserved area. CONCLUSIONS: These results imply that pulmonary vasculopathy in patients with CPFE could occur in the whole lung tissue. This may explain the tendency for it to lead to the development of pulmonary hypertension in CPFE cases.

The Preoperative Composite Physiologic Index May Predict Mortality in Lung Cancer Patients with Combined Pulmonary Fibrosis and Emphysema.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether the preoperative pulmonary function parameters and prognostic indices that are indicative of nutritional and immunological status are associated with prognosis in lung cancer patients with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) who have undergone surgery. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to identify prognostic determinants in these patients. METHODS: The medical records of all patients with lung cancer associated with CPFE who had undergone surgery at Shinshu University Hospital were retrospectively reviewed to obtain clinical data, including the results of preoperative pulmonary function tests and laboratory examinations, chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT), and survival. RESULTS: Univariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed that a high pathological stage of the lung cancer, a higher preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen level, and a higher preoperative composite physiologic index (CPI) were associated with a high risk of death. Multivariate analysis showed that a high pathological stage of the lung cancer (HR: 1.579; p = 0.0305) and a higher preoperative CPI (HR: 1.034; p = 0.0174) were independently associated with a high risk of death. In contrast, the severity of fibrosis or emphysema on chest HRCT, the individual pulmonary function parameters, the prognostic nutritional index, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio were not associated with prognosis. In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, the log-rank test showed significant differences in survival between the high-CPI and the low-CPI group (p = 0.0234). CONCLUSION: The preoperative CPI may predict mortality and provide more powerful prognostic information than individual pulmonary function parameters in lung cancer patients with CPFE who have undergone surgery.

Case of 78-Year-Old Male with Cerebral Gas Embolism Associated with Combined Pulmonary Fibrosis and Emphysema.

Cerebral gas embolism (CGE) from the thoracic cavity is commonly associated with invasive procedures, and cases of spontaneous CGE are rare. A 78-year-old man presented with severe spontaneous CGE associated with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE). To the best of our knowledge, the comorbidity of CGE in a CPFE patient has not been documented until now. The patient became unconscious with left hemiparesis at approximately 2 a.m. Computed tomography scan revealed minute air densities scattered in the deep white matter of the right frontal lobe. The patient died on the sixth day of hospitalization. We postulated that CGE can be classified as either arterial CGE or retrogradely infused venous CGE. To differentiate between these two, the distribution of air densities provided useful information in our case. We assumed that the air was infused through the pulmonary vein to the left atrium of the heart, resulting in arterial CGE. A review of the literature further suggests that an upright position at the time of a CGE attack might be related to the retrogradely infused venous origin of the air, whereas arterial CGE may more likely occur when the patient is lying down.

Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema: a retrospective analysis of clinical characteristics, treatment and prognosis.

BACKGROUND: Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) is increasingly acknowledged as a separate syndrome with distinct clinical, physiological and radiological characteristics. We sought to identify physiologic and radiographic indices that predict mortality in CPFE. METHODS: Data on clinical characteristics, pulmonary function, high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) and treatment were compared between patients with usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) plus emphysema (CPFE group) and those with IPF alone (IPF group). Composite physiologic index (CPI) and HRCT scores at diagnosis and during follow-up were assessed. RESULTS: CPFE group (N = 87) was characterized by the predominance of males and smokers, who were less likely to have viral infection prior to the diagnosis, and display basal crackles, finger clubbing and wheeze, as compared to that in the IPF group (N = 105). HRCT and CPI scores increased over time in both groups. Moreover, CPFE group had a poorer prognosis, lower 5-year survival rate (43.42 % vs. 65.56 %; P < 0.05), and higher mortality (39.47 % vs. 23.33 %; P < 0.05) as compared to that in the IPF group. All CPFE patients received oxygen therapy, antibiotics and oral N-acetylcysteine; > 50 % received bronchodilators, 40 % received corticosteroids and 14 % needed noninvasive mechanical ventilation. On survival analyses, pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and ≥ 5-point increase in CPI score per year were predictors of mortality in the CPFE group (hazard ratio [HR]: 10.29, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI]: 2.69-39.42 and HR: 21.60, 95 % CI: 7.28-64.16, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients with CPFE were predominantly male and smokers and exhibited distinct clinical, physiological and radiographic characteristics. They had a poorer prognosis than IPF. PAH and ≥ 5-point increase in CPI score per year were predictors of mortality in these patients. Future studies are needed to identify the optimal treatment approach to CPFE.

Outcomes of lung cancer resection for patients with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema.

PURPOSE: Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) has recently been reported as a prognostic factor that may increase the risk of lung cancer for patients with respiratory disorders; however, there have been no reports published on mortality and morbidity following major lung resection for patients with CPFE. METHODS: The subjects of this retrospective study were 1507 patients who underwent surgical resection of lung cancer at our institute between 2008 and 2013. We reviewed the computed tomography findings and divided the patients into four groups: CPFE group, fibrosis group, emphysema group, and normal group. The surgical outcomes of the patients with CPFE were compared with those of the patients in the other groups. RESULTS: The CPFE group comprised 137 (10.0 %) patients. This group had worse surgical morbidity and mortality rates than either the fibrosis group or the emphysema group. The 90-day mortality rates for the CPFE, fibrosis, and emphysema groups were 7.3, 0, and 3.0 %, respectively. A multivariate analysis of the CPFE group revealed that the distribution of IIP (HR 13.29, p = 0.038) and blood loss (ml) (HR 1.001, p = 0.013) predicted the hazard ratio for 90-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The postoperative outcome of patients with CPFE in this study was poor with respect to morbidity and mortality. The high rate of complications and poor survival warrants further investigation of the indications for surgery in patients with CPFE.

Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE): what radiologist should know.

Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema is a relatively newly defined entity, which has been deeply studied in the recent years. Despite the wide numbers of papers on this topic, there are still several open questions about pathogenesis, epidemiology, natural history and prognosis. The diagnosis could be assessed only after HRCT scan as functional tests often result in an underestimation of this syndrome. What radiologists need to know about this syndrome consists in the heterogeneity of appearances: emphysema is mainly paraseptal and fibrotic pattern could be variable, including the variant of airspace enlargement with fibrosis which needs to be differentiated from honeycombing. A special attention must be paid on complications which could worsen the prognosis, such as pulmonary hypertension and lung cancer. Further studies are needed to address if the type of fibrotic pattern as well as fibrosis CT index could be considered as prognostic factors. Thus, the role of radiologists in the management of these patients is crucial as it involves diagnosis, detection of complications and could possible concerns the identification of patients at higher risk.

Diagnostic Values For Club Cell Secretory Protein (CC16) in Serum of Patients of Combined Pulmonary Fibrosis and Emphysema.

Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) is an under-recognized syndrome for which the diagnostic use of serum biomarkers is an attractive possibility. We hypothesized that CC16 and/or TGF-ß1 or combinations with other biomarkers are useful for diagnosing CPFE. Patients with respiratory symptoms and a smoking history, with or without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, were divided into the following three groups according to findings of high-resolution computed tomography of the chest: controls without either emphysema or fibrosis, patients with emphysema alone, and patients compatible with the diagnosis of CPFE. Serum concentrations of CC16, TGF-ß1, SP-D, and KL-6 were measured in patients whose condition was stable for at least 3 months. To investigate changes in biomarkers of lung fibrosis in patients with a life-long smoking history, additional measurements were performed on the patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) of smoking history. The mean age of the first three groups was 68.0 years, whereas that of the IPF group was 71.8 years, and the groups contained 36, 115, 27, and 10 individuals, respectively. The serum concentration of CC16 in the four groups was 5.67 ± 0.42, 5.66 ± 0.35, 9.38 ± 1.04 and 22.15 ± 4.64 ng/ml, respectively, indicating that those patients with lung fibrosis had a significantly higher concentration. The combined use of CC16, SP-D, and KL-6 provided supportive diagnosis in conjunction with radiological imaging in diagnosis of CPFE. We conclude that a combination of biomarkers including CC16 could provide useful information to screen and predict the possible diagnosis of CPFE.

Comparison of clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema versus idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis alone.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The results of studies examining the outcome and the factors predicting prognosis in combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) have so far been contradictory. Our objective was to determine prognosis and the prognostic factors for CPFE. METHODS: Of 108 consecutive idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) patients admitted to our hospital, 46 were diagnosed as having CPFE and 62 patients diagnosed as having IPF alone. We retrospectively compared the clinical features between these two groups. RESULTS: Annual increase in estimated systolic pulmonary arterial pressure (esPAP) was significantly greater in CPFE patients, and survival time was significantly lower. Moreover, the prognosis was unfavourable regardless of the presence of lung cancer. The multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model showed that predictive factors were an increase in the modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea score and esPAP ≥ 30.4 mm Hg. We classified patients into the following four groups: CPFE with high esPAP (esPAP ≥ 30.4 mm Hg), CPFE with normal esPAP (esPAP < 30.4 mm Hg), IPF alone with high esPAP and IPF alone with normal esPAP. Survival in the CPFE with high esPAP group was significantly worse than that in the other three subgroups. Furthermore, CPFE with the paraseptal type of emphysema and high esPAP had the worst prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the prognosis of CPFE is significantly worse than that of IPF alone. In particular, CPFE with paraseptal emphysema associated with high esPAP has an extremely poor prognosis.

Quantitative Imaging Methods in Combined Pulmonary Fibrosis and Emphysema.

TOPIC IMPORTANCE: Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) is an underdiagnosed syndrome in which individuals have variable degrees of pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema. Patients with CPFE have high morbidity, including poor exercise tolerance and increased development of comorbidities. CPFE mortality also seems to outpace that of lone emphysema and pulmonary fibrosis. A major limitation to rigorous, large-scale studies of CPFE has been the lack of a precise definition for this syndrome. A 2022 American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society/Japanese Respiratory Society/Latin American Thoracic Association Research Statement called attention to fundamental gaps in our understanding of CPFE and highlighted the potential use of quantitative imaging techniques to better define CPFE. REVIEW FINDINGS: Broadly, CPFE has been defined using visual interpretation of chest CT imaging documenting the presence of both emphysema and fibrosis, with varying distributions. When quantitative approaches were involved, varying thresholds of emphysema and fibrosis on imaging have been used across different studies. SUMMARY: This review is structured into 3 primary themes, starting with early imaging studies, then evaluating the use of quantitative methods and imaging-based thresholds, both in large population studies and single-center cohorts to define CPFE and assess patient outcomes. It concludes by discussing current challenges and how to focus our efforts so that quantitative imaging methods can effectively address the most pressing clinical dilemmas in CPFE.