Search

Obstructive pulmonary diseases are a group of respiratory conditions characterized by airflow limitation. They are prevalent in the population and lead to significant morbidity and mortality. The two most commonly encountered conditions are asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Although, for many years, the two conditions were regarded as separate, it was realized that some patients may have an overlap between these illnesses. This observation led to the identification of asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) syndrome. ACO is an umbrella term that is used “to collectively describe patients who have persistent airflow limitation together with clinical features that are consistent with both asthma and COPD”. Its importance in the field of respiratory medicine is increasing every year as there are more data that underline the importance of its timely diagnosis and management. The current review is a timely update of the advances in our understanding of ACO.

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease, usually characterized by chronic airway inflammation, bronchial reversible obstruction and hyperresponsiveness to direct or indirect stimuli. It is a severe disease causing approximately half a million deaths every year and thus possessing a significant public health burden. Stroke is the second leading cause of death and a major cause of disability worldwide. Asthma and asthma medications may be a risk factors for developing stroke. Nevertheless, since asthma is associated with a variety of comorbidities, such as cardiovascular, metabolic and respiratory, the increased incidence of stroke in asthma patients may be due to a confounding effect. The purpose of this review is to analyze the complex relationship between asthma and stroke.

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the management of COPD exacerbations evaluate heterogeneous outcomes, often omitting those that are clinically important and patient relevant. This limits their usability and comparability. A core outcome set (COS) is a consensus-based minimum set of clinically important outcomes that should be evaluated in all RCTs in specific areas of health care. We present the study protocol of the COS-AECOPD ERS Task Force, aiming to develop a COS for COPD exacerbation management, that could remedy these limitations. For the development of this COS we follow standard methodology recommended by the COMET initiative. A comprehensive list of outcomes is assembled through a methodological systematic review of the outcomes reported in relevant RCTs. Qualitative research with patients with COPD will also be conducted, aiming to identify additional outcomes that may be important to patients, but are not currently addressed in clinical research studies. Prioritisation of the core outcomes will be facilitated through an extensive, multi-stakeholder Delphi survey with a global reach. Selection will be finalised in an international, multi-stakeholder meeting. For every core outcome, we will recommend a specific measurement instrument and standardised time points for evaluation. Selection of instruments will be based on evidence-informed consensus. Our work will improve the quality, usability and comparability of future RCTs on the management of COPD exacerbations and, ultimately, the care of patients with COPD. Multi-stakeholder engagement and societal support by the European Respiratory Society will raise awareness and promote implementation of the COS., The COS-AECOPD @EuroRespSoc Task Force is developing a core outcome set (COS) for #COPD exacerbation management. COS is an agreed minimum set of clinically important outcomes to be evaluated in all RCTs and can improve their usability and comparability. https://bit.ly/3ftAXk6

Clinical trials evaluating the management of acute exacerbations of COPD assess heterogeneous outcomes, often omitting those that are clinically relevant or more important to patients. We have developed a core outcome set, a consensus-based minimum set of important outcomes that we recommend are evaluated in all future clinical trials on exacerbations management, to improve their quality and comparability. COPD exacerbations outcomes were identified through methodological systematic reviews and qualitative interviews with 86 patients from 11 countries globally. The most critical outcomes were prioritised for inclusion in the core outcome set through a two-round Delphi survey completed by 1063 participants (256 patients, 488 health professionals and 319 clinical academics) from 88 countries in five continents. Two global, multi-stakeholder, virtual consensus meetings were conducted to 1) finalise the core outcome set and 2) prioritise a single measurement instrument to be used for evaluating each of the prioritised outcomes. Consensus was informed by rigorous methodological systematic reviews. The views of patients with COPD were accounted for at all stages of the project. Survival, treatment success, breathlessness, quality of life, activities of daily living, the need for a higher level of care, arterial blood gases, disease progression, future exacerbations and hospital admissions, treatment safety and adherence were all included in the core outcome set. Focused methodological research was recommended to further validate and optimise some of the selected measurement instruments. The panel did not consider the prioritised set of outcomes and associated measurement instruments to be burdensome for patients and health professionals to use.

The DisEntangling Chronic Obstructive pulmonary Disease Exacerbations clinical trials NETwork: #DECODE_NET. Vision statement of an emerging, global network aiming to conduct collaborative clinical research on COPD exacerbation management @ERSpublicationshttps://bit.ly/36kISgp

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a very common disease, is the third leading cause of death worldwide. Due to the significant heterogeneity of clinical phenotypes of COPD there is no single method suitable for predicting patients' health status and outcomes, and therefore multidimensional indices, assessing different components of the disease, were developed and are recommended for clinical practice by international guidelines. Several indices have been widely accepted: BODE and its modifications, ADO, DOSE, CODEX, COTE. They differ in their composition and aim, while they are more accurate and better validated in specific settings and populations. We review the characteristics, strengths and limitations of these indices, and we discuss their role in routine management of patients with COPD, as well as in specific clinical scenarios, such as resuscitation and ceiling of care, or decisions to offer more invasive treatments. This analysis may help clinicians to use those indexes in a more practical and appropriate way.