The Secondary Pulmonary Hypertension Diagnosis is Not Useful in Lung Allocation.

BACKGROUND: In lung transplant, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) contains a diagnosis of secondary pulmonary hypertension (SPH). SPH and pulmonary arterial hypertension are treated the same in the allocation scoring system. It is not clear whether utilizing the SPH diagnosis instead of the primary diagnosis is helpful to patients or providers. METHODS: Analysis of UNOS data from May 2005 through July 2021, comparing patients listed under the SPH diagnosis with patients listed under COPD and interstitial lung disease (ILD) who met criteria for PH (COPD-PH and ILD-PH, respectively), as well as patients listed under pulmonary arterial hypertension (primary pulmonary hypertension, PPH). Competing-risk analysis examined waitlist and post-transplant outcomes. An exploratory analysis of UNOS spirometry data was performed. RESULTS: Compared to patients listed under the SPH diagnosis, patients with ILD-PH were more likely to undergo transplantation (adjusted HR: 1.34, 95% confidence interval: 1.16-1.54, P < .001), with no significant difference comparing the SPH diagnosis to PPH or to COPD-PH. Waitlist mortality did not vary between groups. Post-transplant survival was lower in patients with PPH (adjusted HR: 1.35, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.75, P = .025), with no significant difference comparing the SPH diagnosis to COPD-PH or ILD-PH. Spirometry failed to demonstrate a clear phenotype within the SPH diagnosis. CONCLUSION: In an adjusted analysis, patients with advanced lung disease and secondary PH were more likely to undergo transplantation when listed for ILD than when listed under the SPH diagnosis. The SPH diagnosis is too clinically heterogeneous to be useful in predictive models and should be considered for removal from UNOS.

Feasibility of a Novel Real-Time Provider Teaching Intervention in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Background: It is not known whether an intervention using real-time provider teaching in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) improves provider knowledge and/or patient outcomes. Objective: To pilot the combination of a novel, real-time provider teaching intervention delivered by subspecialists to Internal Medicine trainees with a traditional patient education and medication reconciliation (PEMR) intervention and to assess the impact of these interventions on provider knowledge regarding COPD and patient care. Methods: This was a single-center, nonrandomized, quality-improvement study. Patients admitted with AECOPD were prospectively identified between June 19 and November 20, 2019. Patients with asthma, lung cancer, or interstitial lung disease were excluded. The primary care team received a novel intervention featuring in-person, real-time teaching, covering Global Initiative on Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease COPD groups and management, including pulmonary rehabilitation referral. Providers completed a knowledge assessment before and after their real-time teaching session. Provider knowledge scores before and after teaching were compared using McNemar's test. Patients received a traditional PEMR intervention from a nurse practitioner and/or clinical pharmacist. A retrospective chart review was conducted for 50 historical control patients admitted with AECOPD to obtain preintervention rates of discharge on long-acting bronchodilators and referral to pulmonary rehabilitation. The proportions of patients discharged on long-acting bronchodilators and referred to pulmonary rehabilitation in the intervention group were compared with the preintervention historical control patients using chi-square testing. Results: Seventy-one providers caring for patients with AECOPD received real-time teaching. Postintervention, there was significant improvement in knowledge scores pertaining to Global Initiative on Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease groups and exacerbation risk (81% correct vs. 43% on pretest; P < 0.001) and guideline-directed treatment (83% correct vs. 28% on pretest; P < 0.001). Out of 44 eligible patients, 75% (n = 33 patients) received the PEMR intervention. Ninety percent of patients (n = 40 patients) were discharged on any long-acting inhaler, similar to the group of preintervention control subjects. Pulmonary rehabilitation referrals were made for 50% of patients (n = 22 patients) compared with 6% of preintervention control subjects (n = 3 patients; P < 0.001). Conclusion: In this single-center quality-improvement study, the combination of a novel, real-time provider teaching intervention and a traditional PEMR intervention improved provider knowledge and was associated with increased referrals to pulmonary rehabilitation.

A Man in His 20s With Cough, Unilateral Pleural Effusion, and Nodular Pleural Thickening.

CASE PRESENTATION: A man in his 20s presented to the ED after several months of progressive dyspnea, dry cough, and night sweats. He had no chest pain, fevers, weight loss, or sick contacts. He was previously healthy and took no medications. Social history was notable for 5 pack-years of tobacco use. The patient was sexually active with male partners and had a recent partner infected with human T-lymphotropic virus. The patient worked in set design and window installations, and wore a respirator when working around solvents and resins. From ages 2 to 7 years, he frequently visited buildings at his parents' workplace that were undergoing asbestos abatement. From ages 7 to 24 years, he frequently visited pottery studios where talc-containing products were used. He frequently visited northern Massachusetts, and infections with Borrelia burgdorferi and Bartonella henselae were common in family members. His stepfather had recently been infected with Anaplasma. There was no family history of cancer.

Identifying the Optimal Radiation Dose in Locally Advanced Non-Small-cell Lung Cancer Treated With Definitive Radiotherapy Without Concurrent Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal radiation dose for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not known for patients who receive sequential chemoradiation (CRT) or definitive radiotherapy (RT) only. Our objective was to determine whether a benefit exists for radiation dose escalation for these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients included in our retrospective analysis had undergone RT for NSCLC from 2004 to 2013, had not undergone surgery, and received a dose ≥ 50.0 Gy. Patients who received concurrent CRT were excluded from the analysis, leaving 336 patients for analysis. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), local failure (LF), and distant failure (DF). RESULTS: On multivariate analysis, after adjusting for age, Karnofsky performance status, gross tumor volume, and treatment modality, patients treated with a radiation dose > 66 Gy had significantly improved OS compared with those treated with < 60 Gy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.87; P = .008). After adjusting for smoking history and radiologic tumor size, patients treated with a radiation dose > 66 Gy had a significantly decreased risk of LF compared with those treated with < 60 Gy (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.38-0.91; P = .02). The radiation dose was not an independent prognostic factor of DF on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: When controlling for tumor volume and/or dimensions and other independent prognostic factors, patients with locally advanced NSCLC who were not candidates for concurrent CRT benefited from a radiation dose > 66 Gy versus < 60 Gy with improved OS and reduced LF. An increased radiation dose did not appear to affect the incidence of DF.