Search

Abstract Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma can be treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) delivered by low climate impact inhalers (dry powder inhalers) or high climate impact inhalers (pressurized metered-dose inhalers containing potent greenhouse gasses). ICS delivered with greenhouse gasses is prescribed ubiquitously and frequent despite limited evidence of superior effect. Our aim was to examine the beneficial and harmful events of ICS delivered by low and high climate impact inhalers in patients with asthma and COPD. Methods Nationwide retrospective cohort study of Danish outpatients with asthma and COPD treated with ICS delivered by low and high climate impact inhalers. Patients were propensity score matched by the following variables; age, gender, tobacco exposure, exacerbations, dyspnoea, body mass index, pulmonary function, ICS dose and entry year. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalisation with exacerbations and all-cause mortality analysed by Cox proportional hazards regression. Results Of the 10,947 patients with asthma and COPD who collected ICS by low or high climate impact inhalers, 2,535 + 2,535 patients were propensity score matched to form the population for the primary analysis. We found no association between high climate impact inhalers and risk of exacerbations requiring hospitalization and all-cause mortality (HR 1.02, CI 0.92–1.12, p = 0.77), nor on pneumonia, exacerbations requiring hospitalization, all-cause mortality, or all-cause admissions. Delivery with high climate impact inhalers was associated with a slightly increased risk of exacerbations not requiring hospitalization (HR 1.10, CI 1.01–1.21, p = 0.03). Even with low lung function there was no sign of a superior effect of high climate impact inhalers. Conclusion Low climate impact inhalers were not inferior to high climate impact inhalers for any risk analysed in patients with asthma and COPD.

Asthma is a highly heterogenous disease which researchers over time have attempted to classify into different phenotypes and endotypes to improve diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. Earlier classifications based on reaction to environmental allergens, age, sex and lung function have evolved, and today, the use of precision medicine guided by biomarkers offers new perspectives on asthma management. Identifying biomarkers that may reveal the underlying pathophysiology of the disease will help to select the patients who will benefit most from specific treatments. This review explores the classification of asthma phenotypes and focuses on the most recent advances in using biomarkers to guide treatment.

Background Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are associated with an increased risk of pneumonia among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The introduction of extrafine particle ICS has aimed to improve the distribution of medicine in the airways by altering deposition within the lungs, potentially affecting efficacy and side effects. It remains unclear if extrafine particle ICS administration alters the risk of pneumonia compared with standard particle size ICS.Methods An observational cohort study including all Danish COPD outpatients receiving ICS from 2010 to 2017. The primary outcome was pneumonia hospitalisation in the different ICS particle dosing regimens. The primary analysis was an adjusted Cox proportional hazards model. For sensitivity analysis, a subgroup analysis of patients receiving spray devices was done. Further, we created a propensity score matched cohort, in which we matched for the same covariates as adjusted for in the main analysis.Results A total of 35 691 patients were included of whom 1471 received extrafine particle ICS. Among these patients, 4657 were hospitalised due to pneumonia. Patients with COPD receiving extrafine particle ICS had a lower risk of hospitalisation due to pneumonia compared with patients receiving standard particle size ICS in our primary analysis (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.89; p=0.002), subgroup analysis (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.65; p

ABSTRACTBackground Sedating antihistamines such as promethazine are used as anxiolytics and hypnotic agents for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with and without asthma despite limited knowledge of its effects and side effects. We evaluated if treatment with promethazine had a lower risk of harmful outcome.Methods Nationwide retrospective cohort study of Danish specialist diagnosed outpatients with COPD treated with promethazine or an active comparator (melatonin). Patients with collection of promethazine or melatonin were propensity score matched 1:1. The primary outcome was a composite of severe COPD exacerbations and death from all causes analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression. We performed an interaction analysis for comorbid asthma.Results In our registry of 56,523 patients with COPD, 5,661 collected promethazine (n = 3,723) or melatonin (n = 1,938). A cohort of 3,290 promethazine- or melatonin-treated patients matched 1:1 was available for the primary analysis.Within 1-year patients treated with promethazine were at higher risk of the primary outcome than matched controls with a Hazard Ratio (HR) of 1.42 (CI 1.27–1.58, p

Background Chronic low-grade inflammation as in asthma may lead to a higher risk of cardiovascular events. We evaluated whether patients with COPD and asthma have a higher risk of acute cardiovascular events than patients with COPD without asthma. Methods Nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study of Danish outpatients with a specialist diagnosis of COPD with or without asthma. Patients with both COPD and asthma were propensity-score matched 1:2 to patients with COPD without asthma. The primary end-point was severe major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as mortal cardiovascular events and events requiring revascularisation or hospitalisation. Results A total of 52 386 Danish patients with COPD were included; 34.7% had pre-existing cardiovascular disease, and 20.1% had asthma in addition to their COPD. Patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease were then propensity-score matched: 3690 patients with COPD and asthma versus 7236 patients with COPD without asthma, and similarly, for patients without pre-existing cardiovascular disease (6775 matched with 13 205). The risk of MACE was higher among patients with asthma and COPD versus COPD without asthma: hazard ratio (HR) 1.25 (95% CI 1.13–1.39, p

Dental care workers are frequently exposed to various types of volatile organic and inorganic compounds. In addition to biological materials, these compounds include silica, heavy metals, and acrylic plastics. Such exposures may cause respiratory symptoms, but the nonspecific nature of these symptoms often means that the etiology is difficult to discern. The disease severity depends on the particle size and type of the inhaled compounds, as well as the duration and intensity of exposure, which varies markedly among dental workers. Here, we present two unique cases with the same occupational exposure. Both patients showed radiological changes in the lungs that were suspicious for lung cancer.The first patient did not undergo a biopsy due to cardiac comorbidities and risk of bleeding, and the diagnosis was based on thoracic computer tomography (CT) which confirmed multiple, bilateral, solid, smooth, partly calcified lung nodules, normal positron emission tomography (PET)-CT and the relevant occupational exposure. In the second case, a CT-guided biopsy and thoracoscopic resection was done with histopathological findings consistent with granuloma. The multi-disciplinary team decision of both cases was consistent with occupational exposure related lunge disease.This is the first case study report whereby same occupational exposure related health condition is compared with two different approaches. Respiratory clinicians should be aware of this potential diagnosis, especially for asymptomatic patients with relevant exposures. Careful attention to the occupational history may help to prevent unnecessary, invasive diagnostic procedures or surgeries.

Chronic inflammation such as asthma may lead to higher risks of malignancy, which may be inhibited by anti-inflammatory medicine such as inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). The aim of this study was to evaluate if patients with asthma-Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) overlap have a higher risk of malignancy than patients with COPD without asthma, and, secondarily, if inhaled corticosteroids modify such a risk in a nationwide multi-center retrospective cohort study of Danish COPD-outpatients with or without asthma. Patients with asthma-COPD overlap were propensity score matched (PSM) 1:2 to patients with COPD without asthma. The endpoint was cancer diagnosis within 2 years. Patients were stratified depending on prior malignancy within 5 years. ICS was explored as a possible risk modifier. We included 50,897 outpatients with COPD; 88% without prior malignancy and 20% with asthma. In the PSM cohorts, 26,003 patients without prior malignancy and 3331 patients with prior malignancy were analyzed. There was no association between asthma-COPD overlap and cancer with hazard ratio (HR) = 0.92, CI = 0.78–1.08, p = 0.31 (no prior malignancy) and HR = 1.04, CI = 0.85–1.26, and p = 0.74 (prior malignancy) as compared to patients with COPD without asthma. ICS did not seem to modify the risk of cancer. In conclusion, in our study, asthma-COPD overlap was not associated with an increased risk of cancer events.

Patients admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may develop acute respiratory failure (ARF) with compromised gas exchange. These patients require oxygen and possibly ventilatory support, which can be delivered via different devices. Initially, oxygen therapy will often be administered through a conventional binasal oxygen catheter or air-entrainment mask. However, when higher rates of oxygen flow are needed, patients are often stepped up to high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). BiPAP, CPAP, and HFNC may be beneficial alternatives to IMV for COVID-19-associated ARF. Current evidence suggests that when nasal catheter oxygen therapy is insufficient for adequate oxygenation of patients with COVID-19-associated ARF, CPAP should be provided for prolonged periods. Subsequent escalation to IMV may be implemented if necessary.

Introduction Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has presented health-care systems worldwide with novel challenges and experiences and evidence is emerging during the pandemic. Patients requiring hospitalization frequently suffer from respiratory failure of different severities. Aim The aim of this guideline is the treatment of patients with SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19) in hospital; in particular, it addresses the treatment of respiratory failure treated in general Internal Medical- and Pulmonary Medical wards. Results Elderly patients and patients with chronic disease are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19. Target oxygen saturation should be between 92% and 96% in patients without chronic lung diseases. Treatment with >5 L oxygen/min should be in close collaboration with intensive care colleagues and >15 l/min preferably in intensive care units. High-flow nasal canula (HFNC) and long-term Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) are recommended for patients not responding to conventional oxygen therapy. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is only recommended for selected patients, such as those with a ceiling of treatment or patients presenting with hypercapnic failure. With the use of humidification protective equipment as FFP2-3 masks should be used. Nebulized medication should be avoided, and spacers should be used instead. Conclusion Respiratory failure is frequently the cause of hospitalization in patients with COVID-19 and should be monitored closely.

ABSTRACT Background Methods Results Conclusions In patients with severe asthma, treatment with anti‐interleukin‐5 (IL‐5) biologics can lead to a reduction in fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) in some patients. The clinical implications of varying FeNO responses to anti‐IL‐5 biologics remain unclear. This study aims to categorise patients based on their FeNO response to anti‐IL‐5 biologics and evaluate the association of these categories with clinical outcomes.We used the Danish Severe Asthma Register (DSAR) to identify the early FeNO response profiles in patients receiving anti‐IL5 biologics. We defined FeNO responders as patients with elevated FeNO levels at baseline and a decrease corresponding to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at 4 months of follow‐up and FeNO non‐responders as those who did not experience a decrease.We identified 403 patients on anti‐IL5 treatment in DSAR, and 265 (66%) had elevated FeNO levels at baseline. After 4 months of treatment, 151 (57%) patients showed a significant decrease in FeNO levels, and 114 (43%) did not. FeNO responders were more likely to achieve clinical remission of asthma (34% vs. 19%, p = 0.01, OR 2.11, CI 1.04, 5.18, p = 0.03) than FeNO non‐responders after 12 months of treatment. The higher remission rates in FeNO responders mainly reflected a higher rate of normalisation of lung function.FeNO levels were reduced after anti‐IL5 treatment in a significant proportion of patients treated with anti‐IL5, and this was associated with clinical remission. Early FeNO response to anti‐IL5 could potentially be used as a biomarker to guide management decisions with biologics towards remission of disease in severe asthma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]