Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Cardiac sarcoidosis is an infiltrative cardiomyopathy that results from granulomatous inflammation of the myocardium and may present with high-grade conduction disease, ventricular arrhythmias, and right or left ventricular dysfunction. Over the past several decades, the prevalence of cardiac sarcoidosis has increased. Definitive histological confirmation is often not possible, so clinicians frequently face uncertainty about the accuracy of diagnosis. Hence, the likelihood of cardiac sarcoidosis should be thought of as a continuum (definite, highly probable, probable, possible, low probability, unlikely) rather than in a binary fashion. Treatment should be initiated in individuals with clinical manifestations and active inflammation in a tiered approach, with corticosteroids as first-line treatment. The lack of randomized clinical trials in cardiac sarcoidosis has led to treatment decisions based on cohort studies and consensus opinions, with substantial variation observed across centers. This scientific statement is intended to guide clinical practice and to facilitate management conformity by providing a framework for the diagnosis and management of cardiac sarcoidosis.

Clinical Pharmacology in Sarcoidosis: How to Use and Monitor Sarcoidosis Medications.

When sarcoidosis needs treatment, pharmacotherapy is usually required. Although glucocorticoids work reliably and relatively quickly for sarcoidosis, these drugs are associated with numerous significant side effects. Such side effects are common in sarcoidosis patients, as the disease frequently has a chronic course and glucocorticoid treatment courses are often prolonged. For these reasons, corticosteroid-sparing and corticosteroid-replacing therapies are often required for sarcoidosis. Unfortunately, many healthcare providers who care for sarcoidosis patients are not familiar with the use of these agents. In this manuscript, we provide a review of the pharmacotherapy of sarcoidosis. We discuss the mechanism of action, dosing, side-effect profile, approach to monitoring and patient counselling concerning glucocorticoids, and the common alternative drugs recommended for use in the recent European Respiratory Society (Lausanne, Switzerland) Sarcoidosis Treatment Guidelines. We also discuss the use of these agents in special situations including hepatic insufficiency, renal insufficiency, pregnancy, breastfeeding, vaccination, and drug-drug interactions. It is hoped that this manuscript will provide valuable practical guidance to clinicians who care for sarcoidosis patients.

Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment in Sarcoidosis.

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is of major concern to patients with sarcoidosis. HRQoL impairment is the most common reason to treat the disease. Advances in patient-reported outcome (PRO) methodology offer the promise to use these instruments to follow quality of life in individual patients with sarcoidosis over time. Several HRQoL issues will be highlighted including their clinical importance, common causes in patients with sarcoidosis, the construction and use of PROs in clinical sarcoidosis trials, methods to adapt PROs to monitor HRQoL in individual patients with sarcoidosis, and the approach to improving HRQoL in this disease.

An Artificial Intelligence Platform for the Radiologic Diagnosis of Pulmonary Sarcoidosis: An Initial Pilot Study of Chest Computed Tomography Analysis to Distinguish Pulmonary Sarcoidosis from a Negative Lung Cancer Screening Scan.

PURPOSE: To determine the reliability of an artificial intelligence, deep learning (AI/DL)-based method of chest computer tomography (CT) scan analysis to distinguish pulmonary sarcoidosis from negative lung cancer screening chest CT scans (Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System score 1, Lung-RADS score 1). METHODS: Chest CT scans of pulmonary sarcoidosis were evaluated by a clinician experienced with sarcoidosis and a chest radiologist for clinical and radiologic evidence of sarcoidosis and exclusion of alternative or concomitant pulmonary diseases. The AI/DL based method used an ensemble network architecture combining Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and Vision Transformers (ViTs). The method was applied to 126 pulmonary sarcoidosis and 96 Lung-RADS score 1 CT scans. The analytic approach of training and validation of the AI/DL method used a fivefold cross-validation technique, where 4/5th of the available data set was used to train a diagnostic model and tested on the remaining 1/5th of the data set, and repeated 4 more times with non-overlapping validation/test data. The probability values were used to generate Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves to assess the model's discriminatory power. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of the AI/DL method for the 5 folds of the training/validation sets and the entire set of CT scans were all over 94% to distinguish pulmonary sarcoidosis from LUNG-RADS score 1 chest CT scans. The area under the curve for the corresponding ROC curves were all over 97%. CONCLUSION: This AL/DL model shows promise to distinguish sarcoidosis from alternative pulmonary conditions using minimal radiologic data.

The Symptoms of Pulmonary Sarcoidosis.

The aim of this manuscript is to provide a comprehensive review of the etiology, measurement, and treatment of common pulmonary symptoms associated with sarcoidosis. The assessment of symptoms associated with pulmonary sarcoidosis is an important component of disease management. Some symptoms of pulmonary sarcoidosis are sensitive but nonspecific markers of disease activity, and the absence of such symptoms provides evidence that the disease is quiescent. Although quantifiable objective measurements of pulmonary physiology and chest imaging are important in the assessment of pulmonary sarcoidosis, they correlate poorly with the patient's quality of life. Because the symptoms of pulmonary sarcoidosis directly relate to how the patient feels, they are reasonable endpoints in terms of clinical research and individual patient care. Recently, the symptoms of pulmonary sarcoidosis are capable of being quantified via patient-reported outcome measures and electronic devices. We conclude that a thorough assessment of the symptoms associated with pulmonary sarcoidosis improves patient care because it is a useful screen for manifestations of the disease, provides insight into the pathophysiology of manifestations of sarcoidosis, and may assist in optimizing treatment.

A 74-Year-Old Man With Dyspnea.

CASE PRESENTATION: A 74-year-old man presented to the ED with progressive dyspnea, orthopnea, and bilateral leg swelling for 2 months. He denied cough, hemoptysis, fever, night sweats, or weight loss. He had history of COPD and chronic atrial fibrillation. He had a 50 pack-year smoking history and had quit 7 years prior to presentation.

The Relationship Between Serum Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Level and the Decision to Escalate Treatment of Sarcoidosis.

PURPOSE: We performed a retrospective analysis of a sarcoidosis cohort who had sACE obtained at their initial clinic visit, but the treating physician was blinded to the results. We examined the relationship between sACE and the treating physician's decision to escalate sarcoidosis treatment. METHODS: Treatment was considered escalated if the prednisone dose was increased or if the prednisone dose was not changed but an additional anti-sarcoidosis drug was added or the dose was increased. RESULTS: 561 sarcoidosis patients were analyzed. The most common target organ was the lung (84%). Using a cut-off of > 82 units/L for an elevated sACE, 31/82 (38%) with an elevated sACE had treatment escalation whereas 91/497 (18%) had treatment escalation with a normal sACE (p < 0.0001). For the need of treatment escalation, a sACE (cut-off of > 82) had sensitivity 0.25, specificity 0.89, positive predictive value 0.38, negative predictive value 0.81. These results were not appreciably different using other sACE cut-off values such as 70, 80, 90, or 100. A multivariable logistic regression model that included demographics, the target organ, spirometry results estimated that sACE level and lower FVC were significantly associated with the likelihood of treatment escalation. These findings held when sACE > 82 replaced sACE level in the multivariable logistic regression model. CONCLUSIONS: Although there was a strong correlation between sACE at the initial sarcoidosis clinic visit and subsequent treatment escalation of sarcoidosis, the predictive power was such that sACE is not adequately reliable to be used in isolation to make this determination.

Initial behaviors and attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccine in sarcoidosis patients: results of a self-reporting questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with self-declared sarcoidosis are at increased risk of COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality for which vaccination can be lifesaving. Despite this, vaccine hesitancy remains a large barrier to global acceptance of vaccination against COVID-19. We aimed to identify individuals with sarcoidosis who had and had not been vaccinated against COVID-19 vaccine to 1) establish a safety profile of COVID-19 vaccination in those with sarcoidosis and 2) to elucidate factors that contribute to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. METHODS: A questionnaire inquiring about COVID-19 vaccination status, vaccination side effects, and willingness for future vaccination was distributed from December 2020 to May 2021 to individuals with sarcoidosis living in the US and European countries. Details regarding sarcoidosis manifestations and treatment were solicited. Vaccine attitudes were classified as pro or anti-COVID-19 vaccination for subgroup analysis. RESULTS: At the time of questionnaire administration, 42% of respondents had already received a COVID-19 vaccination, most of whom either denied side effects or reported a local reaction only. Those off sarcoidosis therapy were more likely to report systemic side effects. Among subjects who had not yet received a COVID-19 vaccine, 27% of individuals reported they would not receive one once available. Reasons against vaccination were overwhelmingly related to the lack of confidence in vaccine safety and/or efficacy and less related to concerns associated with convenience or complacency. Black individuals, women, and younger adults were more likely to decline vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with sarcoidosis, COVID-19 vaccination is well-accepted and well-tolerated. Subjects on sarcoidosis therapy reported significantly less vaccination side effects, and thus the correlation between side effects, vaccine type, and vaccine efficacy requires further investigation. Strategies to improve vaccination should focus on improving knowledge and education regarding vaccine safety and efficacy, as well as targeting sources of misinformation, particularly in young, black, and female subpopulations.

Pressure-Dependent Pneumothorax and Air Leak: Physiology and Clinical Implications.

Pressure-dependent pneumothorax is a common clinical event, often occurring after pleural drainage in patients with visceral pleural restriction, partial lung resection, or lobar atelectasis from bronchoscopic lung volume reduction or an endobronchial obstruction. This type of pneumothorax and air leak is clinically inconsequential. Failure to appreciate the benign nature of such air leaks may result in unnecessary pleural procedures or prolonged hospital stay. This review suggests that identification of pressure-dependent pneumothorax is clinically important because the air leak that results is not related to a lung injury that requires repair but rather to a physiological consequence of a pressure gradient. A pressure-dependent pneumothorax occurs during pleural drainage in patients with lung-thoracic cavity shape/size mismatch. It is caused by an air leak related to a pressure gradient between the subpleural lung parenchyma and the pleural space. Pressure-dependent pneumothorax and air leak do not need any further pleural interventions.

Living with sarcoidosis: Virtual roundtable dialogue with patients and healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Sarcoidosis is a multisystem disease, characterised by the infiltration of various organs by non-necrotising granulomas. The disease's heterogeneity complicates the study of patients' experiences. OBJECTIVE: To gather insight into life experiences, unmet needs and views on hypothetically emerging treatment options among patients living with sarcoidosis. METHODS: Multinational, virtual, interactive, moderated discussion of specific questions between people with sarcoidosis, with experienced clinicians participating. RESULTS: Nine patients with sarcoidosis from Australia, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Japan and the US, and three clinicians took part. All patients had pulmonary sarcoidosis, self-assessed as mild by five patients. The path to diagnosis was convoluted, with up to four physicians and a large number of tests involved. There was agreement that the process would be improved by earlier referral to specialists. The patients made a clear distinction between 'living with a condition' (adapting to the disease) and 'being ill'. The concept of remission was viewed sceptically as disease might develop in multiple organs. Panellists had a pragmatic attitude to therapies: side effects during a treatment course were accepted if overall symptoms improved. When considering hypothetical new therapies, improved quality of life (QoL) was the most important need; improved tolerability had lower priority. New therapies should be targeted on reducing disease progression and improving symptoms and QoL rather than corticosteroid withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: The interactive exchange provided insights into the need for earlier specialist referrals, distrust of the concept of remission in sarcoidosis, and the need for therapies targeted on reducing disease progression and improving symptoms and QoL.

The Management of Sarcoidosis in the 2020s by the Primary Care Physician.

Sarcoidosis is an idiopathic granulomatous disease that occurs worldwide and can affect any organ. Because the presenting symptoms of sarcoidosis are not specific for the disease, the primary care physician is usually the first provider to assess these patients. In addition, patients who have previously been diagnosed with sarcoidosis are usually followed longitudinally by primary care physicians. Therefore, these physicians are often the first to address sarcoidosis patient symptoms related to exacerbations of the disease, and first observe complications of sarcoidosis medications. This article outlines the approach to the evaluation, treatment, and monitoring of sarcoidosis patients by the primary care physician.

Deconstructing Multiorgan Sarcoidosis.

Sarcoidosis is a multisystem granulomatous disease of unknown cause [...].

Potential limitations of activity tracking devices in monitoring effects of treatment for sarcoidosis.

INTRODUCTION:   activity tracker device usage can help analyze the impact of disease state and therapy on patients in clinical practice.  factors such as age, race, and gender may contribute to difficulties with using such technology.  Objective: we evaluated the effect of age, race, and gender on the usability of the Fitbit OneTM activity tracking device in sarcoidosis patients and the impact of device on sarcoidosis patients' activity. METHOD: patients participated in a six-month prospective study where were asked to wear a Fitbit OneTM activity tracker daily. device usage education was provided at study enrollment.  weekly data download and submission reports to participating centers was required. patients were asked to complete a post-study questionnaire reviewing the motivation of the activity tracker on daily activity. RESULTS: at three centers, 91 patients completed all study visits and the post study questionnaire with a mean age of 55 and 75% were female and 34% african american. accurate downloads occurred >75% of the time, regardless of age, race, or sex. results of the post-study questionnaire did not show a correlation between the likelihood of wearing the device and motivation to increase activity. CONCLUSION: using an activity tracking device to evaluate and/or correlated with quality of life (QOL) instruments may prove beneficial for gathering more data on patients.  age, race, and gender did not contribute to differences in usability among sarcoidosis patients.

Validation of the Sarcoidosis Diagnostic Score in a Multicontinental Study.

Rationale: The Sarcoidosis Diagnostic Score (SDS) has been established to quantitate the clinical features consistent with sarcoidosis in a monocentric study. Objectives: We aimed to confirm the diagnostic value of SDS in a large, multicontinental study and to assess the utility of SDS in differentiating sarcoidosis from alternative diagnoses, including infectious and noninfectious granulomatous diseases. Methods: We included patients with biopsy-confirmed sarcoidosis at nine centers across the world. Patients without sarcoidosis seen at the same sites served as control patients. Using a modified World Association of Sarcoidosis and Other Granulomatous Disorders organ assessment instrument, we scored all patients for the presence of granuloma on biopsy, highly probable symptoms, and least probable symptoms for each area. Two sarcoidosis scores were generated: SDS Biopsy (with biopsy) and SDS Clinical (without biopsy). SDS Clinical and Biopsy were calculated for all patients. We calculated and compared the area under the curve (AUC) for SDS Clinical and Biopsy according to different diagnosis scenarios. Results: A total of 1,041 patients with sarcoidosis and 1,035 without sarcoidosis were included. The results for SDS Clinical (AUC, 0.888; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.874-0.902) and SDS Biopsy (AUC, 0.979; 95% CI, 0.973-0.985) according to AUC were good to excellent for differentiating sarcoidosis from alternative diagnosis. SDS Clinical was less discriminatory in males (P = 0.01) and in high tuberculosis prevalence centers (P < 0.001). However, SDS Clinical (AUC, 0.684; 95% CI, 0.602-0.766) and SDS Biopsy (AUC, 0.754; 95% CI, 0.673-0.835) were not sufficiently discriminative for noninfectious granulomatous diseases, but both SDSs could differentiate sarcoidosis from infectious granulomatous diseases. Algorithms were proposed for the SDS Clinical and SDS Biopsy to assist the clinician in the diagnostic process, and cutoff values were proposed for the SDS Clinical and SDS Biopsy, allowing the diagnosis of sarcoidosis to be safely confirmed or rejected in most cases except for noninfectious granulomatous disease. Conclusions: This multicontinental study confirms that both SDS Clinical and SDS Biopsy have good to excellent performance in discriminating sarcoidosis from alternative diagnoses. Differences in the AUC were seen for high tuberculosis prevalence versus low tuberculosis prevalence centers and for males versus females. Both SDSs had good discriminatory function for infectious granulomatous disease but failed in cases of noninfectious granulomatous disease such as berylliosis.