Stratification of COPD patients towards personalized medicine: reproduction and formation of clusters.

BACKGROUND: The global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease (GOLD) 2020 emphasizes that there is only a weak correlation between FEV1, symptoms and impairment of the health status of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Various studies aimed to identify COPD phenotypes by cluster analyses, but behavioral aspects besides smoking were rarely included. METHODS: The aims of the study were to investigate whether (i) clustering analyses are in line with the classification into GOLD ABCD groups; (ii) clustering according to Burgel et al. (Eur Respir J. 36(3):531-9, 2010) can be reproduced in a real-world COPD cohort; and (iii) addition of new behavioral variables alters the clustering outcome. Principal component and hierarchical cluster analyses were applied to real-world clinical data of COPD patients newly referred to secondary care (n = 155). We investigated if the obtained clusters paralleled GOLD ABCD subgroups and determined the impact of adding several variables, including quality of life (QOL), fatigue, satisfaction relationship, air trapping, steps per day and activities of daily living, on clustering. RESULTS: Using the appropriate corresponding variables, we identified clusters that largely reflected the GOLD ABCD groups, but we could not reproduce Burgel's clinical phenotypes. Adding six new variables resulted in the formation of four new clusters that mainly differed from each other in the following parameters: number of steps per day, activities of daily living and QOL. CONCLUSIONS: We could not reproduce previously identified clinical COPD phenotypes in an independent population of COPD patients. Our findings therefore indicate that COPD phenotypes based on cluster analysis may not be a suitable basis for treatment strategies for individual patients.

Multidimensional prognostic indices for use in COPD patient care. A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A growing number of prognostic indices for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is developed for clinical use. Our aim is to identify, summarize and compare all published prognostic COPD indices, and to discuss their performance, usefulness and implementation in daily practice. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in both Pubmed and Embase up to September 2010. Selection criteria included primary publications of indices developed for stable COPD patients, that predict future outcome by a multidimensional scoring system, developed for and validated with COPD patients only. Two reviewers independently assessed the index quality using a structured screening form for systematically scoring prognostic studies. RESULTS: Of 7,028 articles screened, 13 studies comprising 15 indices were included. Only 1 index had been explored for its application in daily practice. We observed 21 different predictors and 7 prognostic outcomes, the latter reflecting mortality, hospitalization and exacerbation. Consistent strong predictors were FEV1 percentage predicted, age and dyspnoea. The quality of the studies underlying the indices varied between fairly poor and good. Statistical methods to assess the predictive abilities of the indices were heterogenic. They generally revealed moderate to good discrimination, when measured. LIMITATIONS: We focused on prognostic indices for stable disease only and, inevitably, quality judgment was prone to subjectivity. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 15 prognostic COPD indices. Although the prognostic performance of some of the indices has been validated, they all lack sufficient evidence for implementation. Whether or not the use of prognostic indices improves COPD disease management or patients' health is currently unknown; impact studies are required to establish this.