Differential Effect of Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea, COPD Assessment Test, and Clinical COPD Questionnaire for Symptoms Evaluation Within the New GOLD Staging and Mortality in COPD.

OBJECTIVE: The modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea, the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) have been interchangeably proposed by GOLD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) for assessing symptoms in patients with COPD. However, there are no data on the prognostic value of these tools in terms of mortality. We endeavored to evaluate the prognostic value of the CAT and CCQ scores and compare them with mMRC dyspnea. METHODS: We analyzed the ability of these tests to predict mortality in an observational cohort of 768 patients with COPD (82% men; FEV1, 60%) from the COPD History Assessment in Spain (CHAIN) study, a multicenter observational Spanish cohort, who were monitored annually for a mean follow-up time of 38 months. RESULTS: Subjects who died (n = 73; 9.5%) had higher CAT (14 vs 11, P = .022), CCQ (1.6 vs 1.3, P = .033), and mMRC dyspnea scores (2 vs 1, P < .001) than survivors. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that higher CAT, CCQ, and mMRC dyspnea scores were associated with higher mortality (area under the curve: 0.589, 0.588, and 0.649, respectively). CAT scores ≥ 17 and CCQ scores > 2.5 provided a similar sensitivity than mMRC dyspnea scores ≥ 2 to predict all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The CAT and the CCQ have similar ability for predicting all-cause mortality in patients with COPD, but were inferior to mMRC dyspnea scores. We suggest new thresholds for CAT and CCQ scores based on mortality risk that could be useful for the new GOLD grading classification. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01122758; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Clinical application of the COPD assessment test: longitudinal data from the COPD History Assessment in Spain (CHAIN) cohort.

OBJECTIVE: The COPD Assessment Test (CAT) has been proposed for assessing health status in COPD, but little is known about its longitudinal changes. The objective of this study was to evaluate 1-year CAT variability in patients with stable COPD and to relate its variations to changes in other disease markers. METHODS: We evaluated the following variables in smokers with and without COPD at baseline and after 1 year: CAT score, age, sex, smoking status, pack-year history, BMI, modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) scale, 6-min walk distance (6MWD), lung function, BODE (BMI, obstruction, dyspnea, exercise capacity) index, hospital admissions, Hospital and Depression Scale, and the Charlson comorbidity index. In patients with COPD, we explored the association of CAT scores and 1-year changes in the studied parameters. RESULTS: A total of 824 smokers with COPD and 126 without COPD were evaluated at baseline and 441 smokers with COPD and 66 without COPD 1 year later. At 1 year, CAT scores for patients with COPD were similar (± 4 points) in 56%, higher in 27%, and lower in 17%. Of note, mMRC scale scores were similar (± 1 point) in 46% of patients, worse in 36%, and better in 18% at 1 year. One-year CAT changes were best predicted by changes in mMRC scale scores (ß-coefficient, 0.47; P < .001). Similar results were found for CAT and mMRC scale score in smokers without COPD. CONCLUSIONS: One-year longitudinal data show variability in CAT scores among patients with stable COPD similar to mMRC scale score, which is the best predictor of 1-year CAT changes. Further longitudinal studies should confirm long-term CAT variability and its clinical applicability. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01122758; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

New GOLD classification: longitudinal data on group assignment.

RATIONALE: Little is known about the longitudinal changes associated with using the 2013 update of the multidimensional GOLD strategy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). OBJECTIVE: To determine the COPD patient distribution of the new GOLD proposal and evaluate how this classification changes over one year compared with the previous GOLD staging based on spirometry only. METHODS: We analyzed data from the CHAIN study, a multicenter observational Spanish cohort of COPD patients who are monitored annually. Categories were defined according to the proposed GOLD: FEV1%, mMRC dyspnea, COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), and exacerbations-hospitalizations. One-year follow-up information was available for all variables except CCQ data. RESULTS: At baseline, 828 stable COPD patients were evaluated. On the basis of mMRC dyspnea versus CAT, the patients were distributed as follows: 38.2% vs. 27.2% in group A, 17.6% vs. 28.3% in group B, 15.8% vs. 12.9% in group C, and 28.4% vs. 31.6% in group D. Information was available for 526 patients at one year: 64.2% of patients remained in the same group but groups C and D show different degrees of variability. The annual progression by group was mainly associated with one-year changes in CAT scores (RR, 1.138; 95%CI: 1.074-1.206) and BODE index values (RR, 2.012; 95%CI: 1.487-2.722). CONCLUSIONS: In the new GOLD grading classification, the type of tool used to determine the level of symptoms can substantially alter the group assignment. A change in category after one year was associated with longitudinal changes in the CAT and BODE index.

Omalizumab therapy in severe asthma: experience from the Spanish registry--some new approaches.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of omalizumab in severe asthma has been widely demonstrated. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of omalizumab in a real-life setting in Spain, particularly in those patients with immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels out of range. METHODS: Totally 266 uncontrolled severe asthma patients receiving high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) plus long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) were recruited. Main efficacy outcomes were asthma exacerbation rate (AER), asthma control test (ACT), and global evaluation of treatment effectiveness (GETE). RESULTS: AER was reduced from 3.6 (3.6) in previous year to 0.67 (1.2) at 4 months (p < .05) and to 1.04 (1.8) at 2 years (p < .05). ACT increased significantly from 14.3 (4.7) at baseline to 18.4 (4.4) at 4 months (p < .05) and to 20.3 (4.0) (p < .05) at 2 years. After 4 months, 74.6% of patients had reached a good or excellent rate on the GETE scale (p < .05). This rate continued increasing up to 81.6% at 2 years. These efficacy results were similar for patients with "off-label" IgE > 700 IU/ml. At follow-up, maintenance treatment with oral steroids was discontinued in a considerable number of patients: from 89 to 19 (p < .05). Omalizumab was discontinued because of lack of efficacy only in 28/266 (10.5%) patients. Overall, 30 patients (11.4%) reported adverse events. Severe adverse events were not observed. CONCLUSION: This real-life study confirms that omalizumab is very efficacious and very well tolerated in patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. Results did not vary in the subgroup of patients with IgE levels >700 IU/ml.