Search

Background: This American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Asociacion Latinoamericana de Torax guideline updates prior idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) guidelines and addresses the progression of pulmonary fibrosis in patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) other than IPF. Methods: A committee was composed of multidisciplinary experts in ILD, methodologists, and patient representatives. 1) Update of IPF: Radiological and histopathological criteria for IPF were updated by consensus. Questions about transbronchial lung cryobiopsy, genomic classifier testing, antacid medication, and antireflux surgery were informed by systematic reviews and answered with evidence-based recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. 2) Progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF): PPF was defined, and then radiological and physiological criteria for PPF were determined by consensus. Questions about pirfenidone and nintedanib were informed by systematic reviews and answered with evidence-based recommendations using the GRADE approach. Results: 1) Update of IPF: A conditional recommendation was made to regard transbronchial lung cryobiopsy as an acceptable alternative to surgical lung biopsy in centers with appropriate expertise. No recommendation was made for or against genomic classifier testing. Conditional recommendations were made against antacid medication and antireflux surgery for the treatment of IPF. 2) PPF: PPF was defined as at least two of three criteria (worsening symptoms, radiological progression, and physiological progression) occurring within the past year with no alternative explanation in a patient with an ILD other than IPF. A conditional recommendation was made for nintedanib, and additional research into pirfenidone was recommended. Conclusions: The conditional recommendations in this guideline are intended to provide the basis for rational, informed decisions by clinicians.

Rationale: Current diagnosis of chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (cHP) involves considering a combination of clinical, radiological, and pathological information in multidisciplinary team discussions. However, this approach is highly variable with poor agreement between centers. Objectives: We aimed to identify diagnostic criteria for cHP that reach consensus among international experts. Methods: A three-round modified Delphi survey was conducted between April and August 2017. A total of 45 experts in interstitial lung disease from 14 countries participated in the online survey. Diagnostic items included in round 1 were generated using expert interviews and literature review. During rounds 1 and 2, experts rated the importance of each diagnostic item on a 5-point Likert scale. The a priori threshold of consensus was 75% or greater of experts rating a diagnostic item as very important or important. In the third round, experts graded the items that met consensus as important and provided their level of diagnostic confidence for a series of clinical scenarios. Measurements and Main Results: Consensus was achieved on 18 of the 40 diagnostic items. Among these, experts gave the highest level of importance to the identification of a causative antigen, time relation between exposure and disease, mosaic attenuation on chest imaging, and poorly formed nonnecrotizing granulomas on pathology. In clinical scenarios, the diagnostic confidence of experts in cHP was heightened by the presence of these diagnostic items. Conclusions: This consensus-based approach for the diagnosis of cHP represents a first step toward the development of international guidelines for the diagnosis of cHP.