Search

BackgroundInterstitial lung abnormalities (ILA) may represent undiagnosed early-stage or subclinical interstitial lung disease (ILD). ILA are often observed incidentally in patients who subsequently develop clinically overt ILD. There is limited information on consensus definitions for, and the appropriate evaluation of, ILA. Early recognition of patients with ILD remains challenging, yet critically important. Expert consensus could inform early recognition and referral.Research questionCan consensus-based expert recommendations be identified to guide clinicians in the recognition, referral, and follow-up of patients with or at risk of developing early ILDs?Study design and methodsPulmonologists and radiologists with expertise in ILD participated in two iterative rounds of surveys. The surveys aimed to establish consensus regarding ILA reporting, identification of patients with ILA, and identification of populations that might benefit from screening for ILD. Recommended referral criteria and follow-up processes were also addressed. Threshold for consensus was defined a priori as ≥ 75% agreement or disagreement.ResultsFifty-five experts were invited and 44 participated; consensus was reached on 39 of 85 questions. The following clinically important statements achieved consensus: honeycombing and traction bronchiectasis or bronchiolectasis indicate potentially progressive ILD; honeycombing detected during lung cancer screening should be reported as potentially significant (eg, with the Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System "S-modifier" [Lung-RADS; which indicates clinically significant or potentially significant noncancer findings]), recommending referral to a pulmonologist in the radiology report; high-resolution CT imaging and full pulmonary function tests should be ordered if nondependent subpleural reticulation, traction bronchiectasis, honeycombing, centrilobular ground-glass nodules, or patchy ground-glass opacity are observed on CT imaging; patients with honeycombing or traction bronchiectasis should be referred to a pulmonologist irrespective of diffusion capacity values; and patients with systemic sclerosis should be screened with pulmonary function tests for early-stage ILD.InterpretationGuidance was established for identifying clinically relevant ILA, subsequent referral, and follow-up. These results lay the foundation for developing practical guidance on managing patients with ILA.

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a disease of progressive scarring caused by excessive extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition and activation of α‐SMA‐expressing myofibroblasts. Human antigen R (HuR) is an RNA binding protein that promotes protein translation. Upon translocation from the nucleus to the cytoplasm, HuR functions to stabilize messenger RNA (mRNA) to increase protein levels. However, the role of HuR in promoting ECM production, myofibroblast differentiation, and lung fibrosis is unknown. Human lung fibroblasts (HLFs) treated with transforming growth factor β1 (TGF‐β1) showed a significant increase in translocation of HuR from the nucleus to the cytoplasm. TGF‐β‐treated HLFs that were transfected with HuR small interfering RNA had a significant reduction in α‐SMA protein as well as the ECM proteins COL1A1, COL3A, and FN1. HuR was also bound to mRNA for ACTA2, COL1A1, COL3A1, and FN. HuR knockdown affected the mRNA stability of ACTA2 but not that of the ECM genes COL1A1, COL3A1, or FN. In mouse models of pulmonary fibrosis, there was higher cytoplasmic HuR in lung structural cells compared to control mice. In human IPF lungs, there was also more cytoplasmic HuR. This study is the first to show that HuR in lung fibroblasts controls their differentiation to myofibroblasts and consequent ECM production. Further research on HuR could assist in establishing the basis for the development of new target therapy for fibrotic diseases, such as IPF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hospitalizations are common among patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). We investigated the impact of hospitalizations on outcomes in patients with IPF.Methods: The IPF-PRO Registry is an observational US registry that enrolled patients with IPF that was diagnosed or confirmed at the enrolling center in the previous 6 months. Associations between patient characteristics and hospitalization, and between hospitalization and mortality, were analyzed using Cox regression models.Results: A total of 1002 patients with IPF were enrolled into the IPF-PRO Registry. Over a median follow-up time of 23.7 months (maximum: 67.0 months), 568 patients (56.7%) had at least one hospitalization. Of these patients, 319 (56.2%) had at least one respiratory-related hospitalization and 120 (21.1%) had at least one hospitalization with ventilatory support. Younger age (HR 0.68 [95% CI 0.55, 0.84] per 5-year increase for patients < 62 years), lower BMI (0.96 [0.93, 0.98] per 1-point increase), lower FVC % predicted (0.90 [0.83, 0.97] per 10% increase), oxygen use at rest (2.85 [2.18, 3.72]) and history of pulmonary hypertension (2.02 [1.37, 2.96]) at enrollment were associated with an increased risk of respiratory-related hospitalization during follow-up. In a multivariable model, there was an eightfold increase in the risk of mortality during hospitalization or within 90 days of discharge compared with outside of this period. The risk of mortality associated with a respiratory hospitalization or a hospitalization with ventilatory support was even greater.Conclusions: Data from the IPF-PRO Registry demonstrate that hospitalizations are common among patients with IPF. The risk of mortality during hospitalization or within 90 days of discharge was high, particularly among patients who were hospitalized for a respiratory cause or received ventilatory support. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01915511. Registered 5 August 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01915511. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To establish a framework by which experts define disease subsets in systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD)., Methods: A conceptual framework for subclinical, clinical and progressive ILD was provided to 83 experts, asking them to use the framework and classify actual SSc-ILD patients. Each patient profile was designed to be classified by at least four experts in terms of severity and risk of progression at baseline; progression was based on 1-year follow-up data. A consensus was reached if ≥75% of experts agreed. Experts provided information on which items were important in determining classification., Results: Forty-four experts (53%) completed the survey. Consensus was achieved on the dimensions of severity (75%, 60 of 80 profiles), risk of progression (71%, 57 of 80 profiles) and progressive ILD (60%, 24 of 40 profiles). For profiles achieving consensus, most were classified as clinical ILD (92%), low risk (54%) and stable (71%). Severity and disease progression overlapped in terms of framework items that were most influential in classifying patients (forced vital capacity, extent of lung involvement on high resolution chest CT [HRCT]); risk of progression was influenced primarily by disease duration., Conclusions: Using our proposed conceptual framework, international experts were able to achieve a consensus on classifying SSc-ILD patients along the dimensions of disease severity, risk of progression and progression over time. Experts rely on similar items when classifying disease severity and progression: a combination of spirometry and gas exchange and quantitative HRCT., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)