ABSTRACT
Fibrotic interstitial lung diseases (fILDs) have poor survival rates and lack effective therapies. Despite evidence for immune mechanisms in lung fibrosis, immunotherapies have been unsuccessful for major types of fILD. Here, we review immunological mechanisms in lung fibrosis that have the potential to impact clinical practice. We first examine innate immunity, which is broadly involved across fILD subtypes. We illustrate how innate immunity in fILD involves a complex interplay of multiple cell subpopulations and molecular pathways. We then review the growing evidence for adaptive immunity in lung fibrosis to provoke a re-examination of its role in clinical fILD. We close with future directions to address key knowledge gaps in fILD pathobiology: (1) longitudinal studies emphasizing early-stage clinical disease, (2) immune mechanisms of acute exacerbations, and (3) next-generation immunophenotyping integrating spatial, genetic, and single-cell approaches. Advances in these areas are essential for the future of precision medicine and immunotherapy in fILD.
Subject(s)
Immunity, Innate , Lung Diseases, Interstitial , Humans , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/immunology , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/pathology , Animals , Adaptive Immunity , Immunotherapy , Pulmonary Fibrosis/immunology , Pulmonary Fibrosis/pathology , Lung/pathology , Lung/immunologyABSTRACT
Background: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) carries significant mortality and unpredictable progression, with limited therapeutic options. Designing trials with patient-meaningful endpoints, enhancing the reliability and interpretability of results, and streamlining the regulatory approval process are of critical importance to advancing clinical care in IPF. Methods: A landmark in-person symposium in June 2023 assembled 43 participants from the US and internationally, including patients with IPF, investigators, and regulatory representatives, to discuss the immediate future of IPF clinical trial endpoints. Patient advocates were central to discussions, which evaluated endpoints according to regulatory standards and the FDA's 'feels, functions, survives' criteria. Results: Three themes emerged: 1) consensus on endpoints mirroring the lived experiences of patients with IPF; 2) consideration of replacing forced vital capacity (FVC) as the primary endpoint, potentially by composite endpoints that include 'feels, functions, survives' measures or FVC as components; 3) support for simplified, user-friendly patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as either components of primary composite endpoints or key secondary endpoints, supplemented by functional tests as secondary endpoints and novel biomarkers as supportive measures (FDA Guidance for Industry (Multiple Endpoints in Clinical Trials) available at: https://www.fda.gov/media/162416/download). Conclusions: This report, detailing the proceedings of this pivotal symposium, suggests a potential turning point in designing future IPF clinical trials more attuned to outcomes meaningful to patients, and documents the collective agreement across multidisciplinary stakeholders on the importance of anchoring IPF trial endpoints on real patient experiences-namely, how they feel, function, and survive. There is considerable optimism that clinical care in IPF will progress through trials focused on patient-centric insights, ultimately guiding transformative treatment strategies to enhance patients' quality of life and survival.
Subject(s)
Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis , Patient Advocacy , Humans , Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis/drug therapy , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Quality of Life , Reproducibility of Results , United States , Vital Capacity , Clinical Trials as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern of lung injury is a key feature of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and is also observed in up to 40% of individuals with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD). The RA-UIP phenotype could result from either a causal relationship of RA on UIP or vice versa, or from a simple co-occurrence of RA and IPF due to shared demographic, genetic or environmental risk factors. METHODS: We used two-sample bidirectional Mendelian randomisation (MR) to test the hypothesis of a causal effect of RA on UIP and of UIP on RA, using variants from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of RA (separately for seropositive (18 019 cases and 991 604 controls) and seronegative (8515 cases and 1 015 471 controls) RA) and of IPF (4125 cases and 20 464 controls) as genetic instruments. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the results to violations of the MR assumptions. FINDINGS: IPF showed a significant causal effect on seropositive RA, with developing IPF increasing the risk of seropositive RA (OR=1.06, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.08, p<0.001) which was robust under all models. For the MR in the other direction, seropositive RA showed a significant protective effect on IPF (OR=0.93; 95% CI: 0.87 to 0.99; p=0.032), but the effect was not significant when sensitivity analyses were applied. This was likely because of bias due to exclusion of patients with RA from among the cases in the IPF GWAS, or possibly because our genetic instruments did not fully capture the effect of the complex human leucocyte antigen region, the strongest RA genetic risk factor. INTERPRETATION: Our findings support the hypothesis that RA-UIP may be due to a cause-effect relationship between UIP and RA, rather than due to a coincidental occurrence of IPF in patients with RA. The significant causal effect of IPF on seropositive RA suggests that pathomechanisms involved in the development of UIP may promote RA, and this may help inform future guidelines on screening for ILD in patients with RA.
Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid , Genome-Wide Association Study , Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis , Mendelian Randomization Analysis , Humans , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/genetics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/complications , Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis/genetics , Risk Factors , Male , Female , Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Fibrotic interstitial lung diseases (fILDs) are a heterogeneous group of lung diseases associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite a large increase in the number of clinical trials in the last 10 years, current regulatory-approved management approaches are limited to two therapies that prevent the progression of fibrosis. The drug development pipeline is long and there is an urgent need to accelerate this process. This manuscript introduces the concept and design of an innovative research approach to drug development in fILD: a global Randomised Embedded Multifactorial Adaptive Platform in fILD (REMAP-ILD). METHODS: Description of the REMAP-ILD concept and design: the specific terminology, design characteristics (multifactorial, adaptive features, statistical approach), target population, interventions, outcomes, mission and values, and organisational structure. RESULTS: The target population will be adult patients with fILD, and the primary outcome will be a disease progression model incorporating forced vital capacity and mortality over 12 months. Responsive adaptive randomisation, prespecified thresholds for success and futility will be used to assess the effectiveness and safety of interventions. REMAP-ILD embraces the core values of diversity, equity, and inclusion for patients and researchers, and prioritises an open-science approach to data sharing and dissemination of results. CONCLUSION: By using an innovative and efficient adaptive multi-interventional trial platform design, we aim to accelerate and improve care for patients with fILD. Through worldwide collaboration, novel analytical methodology and pragmatic trial delivery, REMAP-ILD aims to overcome major limitations associated with conventional randomised controlled trial approaches to rapidly improve the care of people living with fILD.
Subject(s)
Lung Diseases, Interstitial , Humans , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/therapy , Disease Progression , Research Design , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin have been used to treat patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). However, evidence on the safety and efficacy of these therapies is limited. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, three-group, controlled trial involving hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed Covid-19 who were receiving either no supplemental oxygen or a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive standard care, standard care plus hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 400 mg twice daily, or standard care plus hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 400 mg twice daily plus azithromycin at a dose of 500 mg once daily for 7 days. The primary outcome was clinical status at 15 days as assessed with the use of a seven-level ordinal scale (with levels ranging from one to seven and higher scores indicating a worse condition) in the modified intention-to-treat population (patients with a confirmed diagnosis of Covid-19). Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 667 patients underwent randomization; 504 patients had confirmed Covid-19 and were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. As compared with standard care, the proportional odds of having a higher score on the seven-point ordinal scale at 15 days was not affected by either hydroxychloroquine alone (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 2.11; P = 1.00) or hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.73; P = 1.00). Prolongation of the corrected QT interval and elevation of liver-enzyme levels were more frequent in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, than in those who were not receiving either agent. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care. (Funded by the Coalition Covid-19 Brazil and EMS Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04322123.).
Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Azithromycin/administration & dosage , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , Brazil , COVID-19 , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Patient Acuity , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Failure , COVID-19 Drug TreatmentABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To establish a framework by which experts define disease subsets in systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD). METHODS: A conceptual framework for subclinical, clinical and progressive ILD was provided to 83 experts, asking them to use the framework and classify actual SSc-ILD patients. Each patient profile was designed to be classified by at least four experts in terms of severity and risk of progression at baseline; progression was based on 1-year follow-up data. A consensus was reached if ≥75% of experts agreed. Experts provided information on which items were important in determining classification. RESULTS: Forty-four experts (53%) completed the survey. Consensus was achieved on the dimensions of severity (75%, 60 of 80 profiles), risk of progression (71%, 57 of 80 profiles) and progressive ILD (60%, 24 of 40 profiles). For profiles achieving consensus, most were classified as clinical ILD (92%), low risk (54%) and stable (71%). Severity and disease progression overlapped in terms of framework items that were most influential in classifying patients (forced vital capacity, extent of lung involvement on high resolution chest CT [HRCT]); risk of progression was influenced primarily by disease duration. CONCLUSIONS: Using our proposed conceptual framework, international experts were able to achieve a consensus on classifying SSc-ILD patients along the dimensions of disease severity, risk of progression and progression over time. Experts rely on similar items when classifying disease severity and progression: a combination of spirometry and gas exchange and quantitative HRCT.
Subject(s)
Lung Diseases, Interstitial , Scleroderma, Systemic , Humans , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/complications , Scleroderma, Systemic/complications , Vital Capacity , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Severity of Illness Index , LungABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Genetic analysis is emerging for interstitial lung diseases (ILDs); however, ILD practices are not yet standardized. We surveyed patients', relatives' and pulmonologists' experiences and needs on genetic testing in ILD to evaluate the current situation and identify future needs. METHODS: A clinical epidemiologist (MT) together with members of the ERS taskforce and representatives of the European Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis and related disorders Federation (EU-IPFF) patient organisation developed a survey for patients, relatives and pulmonologists. Online surveys consisted of questions on five main topics: awareness of hereditary ILD, the provision of information, genetic testing, screening of asymptomatic relatives and clinical impact of genetic analysis in ILD. RESULTS: Survey respondents consisted of 458 patients with ILD, 181 patients' relatives and 352 pulmonologists. Most respondents think genetic testing can be useful, particularly for explaining the cause of disease, predicting its course, determining risk for developing disease and the need to test relatives. Informing patients and relatives on genetic analysis is primarily performed by the pulmonologist, but 88% (218) of pulmonologists identify a need for more information and 96% (240) ask for guidelines on genetic testing in ILD. A third of the pulmonologists who would offer genetic testing currently do not offer a genetic test, primarily because they have limited access to genetic tests. Following genetic testing, 72% (171) of pulmonologists may change the diagnostic work-up and 57% (137) may change the therapeutic approach. CONCLUSION: This survey shows that there is wide support for implementation of genetic testing in ILD and a high need for information, guidelines and access to testing among patients, their relatives and pulmonologists.
Subject(s)
Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis , Lung Diseases, Interstitial , Genetic Testing , Humans , Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis/diagnosis , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/diagnosis , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/genetics , Pulmonologists , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
QUESTION ADDRESSED BY THE STUDY: Methotrexate (MTX) is a key anchor drug for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management. Fibrotic interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a common complication of RA. Whether MTX exposure increases the risk of ILD in patients with RA is disputed. We aimed to evaluate the association of prior MTX use with development of RA-ILD. METHODS: Through a case-control study design with discovery and international replication samples, we examined the association of MTX exposure with ILD in 410 patients with chronic fibrotic ILD associated with RA (RA-ILD) and 673 patients with RA without ILD. Estimates were pooled over the different samples using meta-analysis techniques. RESULTS: Analysis of the discovery sample revealed an inverse relationship between MTX exposure and RA-ILD (adjusted OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24-0.90; p=0.022), which was confirmed in the replication samples (pooled adjusted OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.79; p=0.009). The combined estimate using both the derivation and validation samples revealed an adjusted OR of 0.43 (95% CI 0.26-0.69; p=0.0006). MTX ever-users were less frequent among patients with RA-ILD compared to those without ILD, irrespective of chest high-resolution computed tomography pattern. In patients with RA-ILD, ILD detection was significantly delayed in MTX ever-users compared to never-users (11.4±10.4â years and 4.0±7.4â years, respectively; p<0.001). ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: Our results suggest that MTX use is not associated with an increased risk of RA-ILD in patients with RA, and that ILD was detected later in MTX-treated patients.
Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , Arthritis, Rheumatoid , Lung Diseases, Interstitial , Antirheumatic Agents/adverse effects , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/complications , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/chemically induced , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/drug therapy , Methotrexate/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Social media is an increasingly popular source of health information, and the rarity and complexity of interstitial lung disease (ILD) may particularly draw patients with ILD to social media for information and support. The objective of this viewpoint is to provide an overview of social media, explore the benefits and limitations of ILD-related social media use, and discuss future development of healthcare information on social media. We describe the value of integrating social media into the practice of ILD health professionals, including its role in information dissemination, patient engagement, knowledge generation, and formation of health policy. We also describe major challenges to expanded social media use in ILD, including limited access for some individuals and populations, abundance of misinformation, and concerns about patient privacy. Finally, for healthcare professionals looking to join social media, we provide practical guidance and considerations to optimize the potential benefits and minimize the potential pitfalls of social media.
Subject(s)
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Health Personnel/trends , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/therapy , Patient Participation/trends , Social Media/trends , Communication , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/standards , Humans , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/diagnosis , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/psychology , Patient Participation/psychology , Social Media/standardsABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: If developed using rigorous methods and produced in a timely manner, clinical practice guidelines have the potential to improve patient outcomes. Although the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the challenges involved in generating reliable clinical guidance, it has also provided an opportunity to address these challenges. RECENT FINDINGS: New research addressing drugs for COVID-19 is being produced at unprecedented rates. Incorporating this new knowledge into patient care can be daunting for the average clinician. In collaboration with the BMJ and MAGIC, the WHO has developed a living guideline initiative with the goal of providing rapid and trustworthy clinical guidance in response to practice-changing evidence. As new evidence becomes available, it is incorporated into a living network meta-analysis that informs these guidelines, which are iteratively updated. Until this point, the group has generated guidelines addressing the use of corticosteroids, remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and ivermectin for COVID-19. SUMMARY: We provide an example of how rapid and rigorous guidelines can be accomplished, even in the setting of a pandemic, capitalizing on expertise, large and dedicated teams, and focused scope. We highlight the benefits of multifaceted knowledge dissemination through multiple formats to ensure global dissemination and in order to maximize impact.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine , Lopinavir , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Importance: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with substantial mortality and use of health care resources. Dexamethasone use might attenuate lung injury in these patients. Objective: To determine whether intravenous dexamethasone increases the number of ventilator-free days among patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, randomized, open-label, clinical trial conducted in 41 intensive care units (ICUs) in Brazil. Patients with COVID-19 and moderate to severe ARDS, according to the Berlin definition, were enrolled from April 17 to June 23, 2020. Final follow-up was completed on July 21, 2020. The trial was stopped early following publication of a related study before reaching the planned sample size of 350 patients. Interventions: Twenty mg of dexamethasone intravenously daily for 5 days, 10 mg of dexamethasone daily for 5 days or until ICU discharge, plus standard care (n =151) or standard care alone (n = 148). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days during the first 28 days, defined as being alive and free from mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality at 28 days, clinical status of patients at day 15 using a 6-point ordinal scale (ranging from 1, not hospitalized to 6, death), ICU-free days during the first 28 days, mechanical ventilation duration at 28 days, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores (range, 0-24, with higher scores indicating greater organ dysfunction) at 48 hours, 72 hours, and 7 days. Results: A total of 299 patients (mean [SD] age, 61 [14] years; 37% women) were enrolled and all completed follow-up. Patients randomized to the dexamethasone group had a mean 6.6 ventilator-free days (95% CI, 5.0-8.2) during the first 28 days vs 4.0 ventilator-free days (95% CI, 2.9-5.4) in the standard care group (difference, 2.26; 95% CI, 0.2-4.38; P = .04). At 7 days, patients in the dexamethasone group had a mean SOFA score of 6.1 (95% CI, 5.5-6.7) vs 7.5 (95% CI, 6.9-8.1) in the standard care group (difference, -1.16; 95% CI, -1.94 to -0.38; P = .004). There was no significant difference in the prespecified secondary outcomes of all-cause mortality at 28 days, ICU-free days during the first 28 days, mechanical ventilation duration at 28 days, or the 6-point ordinal scale at 15 days. Thirty-three patients (21.9%) in the dexamethasone group vs 43 (29.1%) in the standard care group experienced secondary infections, 47 (31.1%) vs 42 (28.3%) needed insulin for glucose control, and 5 (3.3%) vs 9 (6.1%) experienced other serious adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with COVID-19 and moderate or severe ARDS, use of intravenous dexamethasone plus standard care compared with standard care alone resulted in a statistically significant increase in the number of ventilator-free days (days alive and free of mechanical ventilation) over 28 days. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04327401.
Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , Administration, Intravenous , Aged , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus , Brazil , COVID-19 , Catheter-Related Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Dexamethasone/adverse effects , Early Termination of Clinical Trials , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Drug TreatmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To assess whether use of low-chloride solutions in unselected critically ill or perioperative adult patients for maintenance or resuscitation reduces mortality and renal replacement therapy (RRT) use when compared to high-chloride fluids. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis with random-effects inverse variance model. PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBASE, LILACS, and Web of Science were searched from inception to October 2016. Published and unpublished randomized controlled trials in any language that enrolled critically ill and/or perioperative adult patients and compared a low- to a highchloride solution for volume maintenance or resuscitation. The primary outcomes were mortality and RRT use. We conducted trial sequential analyses and assessed risk of bias of individual trials and the overall quality of evidence. Fifteen trials with 4067 patients, most at low risk of bias, were identified. Of those, only 11 and 10 trials had data on mortality and RRT use, respectively. A total of 3710 patients were included in the mortality analysis and 3724 in the RRT analysis. RESULTS: No statistically significant impact on mortality (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-1.17; P = .44; I = 0%) or RRT use (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.58; P = .52; I = 0%) was found. Overall quality of evidence was low for both primary outcomes. Trial sequential analyses highlighted that the sample size needed was much larger than that available for properly powered outcome assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence on low- versus high-chloride solutions for unselected critically ill or perioperative adult patients demonstrates no benefit, but suffers from considerable imprecision. We noted a limited exposure volume for study fluids and a relatively low risk of the populations in each study. Together with the relatively small pooled sample size, these data leave us underpowered to detect potentially important differences. Results from well-conducted, adequately powered randomized controlled trials examining sufficiently large fluid exposure are necessary.
Subject(s)
Critical Illness/therapy , Perioperative Care/methods , Sodium Chloride/administration & dosage , Sodium Chloride/chemistry , Administration, Intravenous , Adult , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Drug Compounding , Humans , Length of Stay/trends , Perioperative Care/trends , Pharmaceutical Solutions/administration & dosage , Pharmaceutical Solutions/chemistry , Water-Electrolyte Imbalance/epidemiology , Water-Electrolyte Imbalance/prevention & controlABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is highly prevalent in patients with mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD). However, little is known about the long-term progression of ILD in MCTD. The aims of this study were to describe pulmonary function test (PFT) and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) results in long-term MCTD patients, to measure changes in PFT and HRCT results over a 10-year period, and to ascertain correlations in functional and imaging data. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, comparison between baseline and follow-up PFT and HRCT data was performed for 39 unselected consecutive MCTD patients. RESULTS: At baseline, 51% of the patients had abnormal PFTs. Forced vital capacity (FVC) was slightly reduced at baseline (77% of predicted), but remained stable after 10 years. A relative decrease of 15% in the diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) was detected (from 84% to 71% of predicted, p<0.001). The median lower lobes ILD-HRCT score progressed from 7.5% at baseline to 11.2% at follow-up (p=0.02), and findings of traction bronchiolectasis and honeycombing increased (p<0.05). A moderate negative correlation was observed between functional parameters and quantification of image findings. CONCLUSIONS: Functional and radiologic alterations suggestive of ILD in long-term MCTD patients are prevalent, mild, and progressed slightly over time. The most sensitive parameters for detecting subtle progression of ILD in MCTD patients are trends in DLCO, quantification of lower-lobes disease by HRCT (lower-lobes %ILD-HRCT score), and qualitative analysis of HRCT imaging.
Subject(s)
Lung Diseases, Interstitial/etiology , Lung , Mixed Connective Tissue Disease/complications , Adult , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Lung/physiopathology , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/diagnosis , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/physiopathology , Male , Middle Aged , Mixed Connective Tissue Disease/diagnosis , Pulmonary Diffusing Capacity , Respiratory Function Tests , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Vital CapacityABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to investigate the in situ pulmonary endothelial activation in lung lesions of granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) and systemic sclerosis (SScl). METHODS: We examined the endothelial expression of ICAM-1, VCAM-1, and E-selectin using immunohistochemistry on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded sections of lung lesions of GPA, interstitial lung disease associated with SScl and controls. RESULTS: A significantly enhanced expression of ICAM-1 and E-selectin was observed in GPA and SScl pulmonary endothelium compared to controls. VCAM-1 was more pronouncedly expressed in GPA compared to SScl. CONCLUSION: These observations are an evidence of in situ pulmonary vascular endothelial activation in lesions of GPA and SScl, adding information to the pathogenic knowledge of both diseases.
Subject(s)
E-Selectin/analysis , Endothelial Cells/chemistry , Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis/complications , Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-1/analysis , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/metabolism , Lung/blood supply , Scleroderma, Systemic/complications , Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule-1/analysis , Adult , Biomarkers/analysis , Case-Control Studies , Endothelial Cells/pathology , Female , Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis/diagnosis , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/diagnosis , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/etiology , Male , Middle Aged , Paraffin Embedding , Scleroderma, Systemic/diagnosisABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and azathioprine (AZA) are immunomodulatory treatments in interstitial lung disease (ILD). This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of MMF or AZA on pulmonary function in ILD. DESIGN: Population included any ILD diagnosis, intervention included MMF or AZA treatment, outcome was delta change from baseline in per cent predicted forced vital capacity (%FVC) and gas transfer (diffusion lung capacity of carbon monoxide, %DLco). The primary endpoint compared outcomes relative to placebo comparator, the secondary endpoint assessed outcomes in treated groups only. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies were included. No language restrictions were applied. Retrospective studies and studies with high-dose concomitant steroids were excluded. DATA SYNTHESIS: The systematic search was performed on 9 May. Meta-analyses according to drug and outcome were specified with random effects, I2 evaluated heterogeneity and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation evaluated certainty of evidence. Primary endpoint analysis was restricted to RCT design, secondary endpoint included subgroup analysis according to prospective observational or RCT design. RESULTS: A total of 2831 publications were screened, 12 were suitable for quantitative synthesis. Three MMF RCTs were included with no significant effect on the primary endpoints (%FVC 2.94, 95% CI -4.00 to 9.88, I2=79.3%; %DLco -2.03, 95% CI -4.38 to 0.32, I2=0.0%). An overall 2.03% change from baseline in %FVC (95% CI 0.65 to 3.42, I2=0.0%) was observed in MMF, and RCT subgroup summary estimated a 4.42% change from baseline in %DLCO (95% CI 2.05 to 6.79, I2=0.0%). AZA studies were limited. All estimates were considered very low certainty evidence. CONCLUSIONS: There were limited RCTs of MMF or AZA and their benefit in ILD was of very low certainty. MMF may support preservation of pulmonary function, yet confidence in the effect was weak. To support high certainty evidence, RCTs should be designed to directly assess MMF efficacy in ILD. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023423223.
Subject(s)
Azathioprine , Immunosuppressive Agents , Lung Diseases, Interstitial , Mycophenolic Acid , Humans , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/drug therapy , Azathioprine/therapeutic use , Mycophenolic Acid/therapeutic use , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome , Vital Capacity , Observational Studies as TopicABSTRACT
The use of steroids in fibrotic interstitial lung diseases is founded on limited evidence. This modified Delphi survey sheds light on current clinical practices. Given the risks of steroids, clinical trials are needed to evaluate efficacy and harm. https://bit.ly/3VkgvbS.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Describe the development, implementation, and utilization of dashboards for epidemiological analysis through open data research during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The dashboards were designed to analyze COVID-19 related public data from various sources, including official government data and social media, at world level. Data processing and cleaning techniques were used to join datasets. We calculated Spearman correlation coefficient between the COVID-like symptoms data of the University of Maryland and Facebook Health research, called COVID Trends and Impacts Survey (CTIS) and the official data of notified COVID-19 cases by the Brazilian Health Ministry. RESULTS: The dashboards were successful in predicting the onset of new waves of COVID-19 in Brazil. The data analysis revealed a correlation between the CTIS and the official number of cases the country. This article shows the potential of interactive dashboards as a decision-making tool in the context of public health emergencies, as it was used by the official communication of the Rio Grande do Sul state government. CONCLUSION: The use of dashboards for predicting the spread of COVID-19 in Brazil was a useful tool for decision-making. To anticipate waves of the disease gives time so that these decisions can be potentially more assertive. This drafts the need of more interdisciplinary actions of this nature, with visualization tools on epidemiologic research.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dashboard Systems , Humans , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Government , Pandemics , Public HealthABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Acute exacerbations of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF) increases mortality risk, but which factors increase mortality is unknown. We aimed to perform a prognostic review of factors associated with mortality in patients with IPF. STUDY DESIGN: and methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for studies that reported on the association between any prognostic factor and AE-IPF. We assessed risk of bias using the QUIPS tool. We conduced pairwise meta-analyses using REML heterogeneity estimator, and GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 35 studies in our analysis. We found that long-term supplemental oxygen at baseline (aHR 2.52 [95 % CI 1.68 to 3.80]; moderate certainty) and a diagnosis of IPF compared to non-IPF ILD (aHR 2.19 [95 % CI 1.22 to 3.92]; moderate certainty) is associated with a higher risk of death in patients with AE-IPF. A diffuse pattern on high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) compared to a non-diffuse pattern (aHR 2.61 [95 % CI 1.32 to 2.90]; moderate certainty) is associated with a higher risk of death in patients with AE-IPF. We found that using corticosteroids prior to hospital admission (aHR 2.19 [95 % CI 1.26 to 3.82]; moderate certainty) and those with increased neutrophils (by % increase) in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) during the exacerbation is associated with a higher risk of death (aHR 1.02 [1.01 to 1.04]; moderate certainty). INTERPRETATION: Our results have implications for healthcare providers in making treatment decisions and prognosticating the clinical trajectory of patients, for researchers to design future interventions to improve patient trajectory, and for guideline developers in making decisions about resource allocation.