Search

Introduction: Treatment with LABA/LAMA is recommended in GOLD B patients. We hypothesized that triple therapy (LABA/LAMA/ICS) will be superior to LABA/LAMA in achieving and maintaining clinical control (CC), a composite outcome that considers both impact and disease stability in a subgroup of GOLD B patients (here termed GOLD B+ patients) characterized by: (1) remaining symptomatic (CAT≥10) despite regular LABA/LAMA therapy; (2) having suffered one moderate exacerbation in the previous year; and (3) having blood eosinophil counts (BEC) ≥150cells/μL., Methods: The ANTES B+ study is a prospective, multicenter, open label, randomized, pragmatic, controlled trial designed to test this hypothesis. It will randomize 1028 B+ patients to continue with their usual LABA/LAMA combination prescribed by their attending physician or to begin fluticasone furoate (FF) 92μg/umeclidinium (UMEC) 55μg/vilanterol (VI) 22μg in a single inhaler q.d. for 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome will be the level of CC achieved. Secondary outcomes include the clinical important deterioration index (CID), annual rate of exacerbations, and FEV1. Exploratory objectives include the interaction of BEC and smoking status, all-cause mortality and proportion of patients on LABA/LAMA arm that switch therapy arms. Safety analysis include adverse events and incidence of pneumonia., Results: The first patient was recruited on February 29, 2024; results are expected in the first quarter of 2026., Conclusions: The ANTES B+ study is the first to: (1) explore the efficacy and safety of triple therapy in a population of B+ COPD patients and (2) use a composite index (CC) as the primary result of a COPD trial., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) has proposed new criteria for airflow limitation (AL) and recommends using these to interpret spirometry. The objective of this study was to explore the impact of the application of the AL GLI criteria in two well characterized GOLD-defined COPD cohorts., Methods: COPD patients from the BODE (n=360) and the COPD History Assessment In SpaiN (CHAIN) cohorts (n=722) were enrolled and followed. Age, gender, pack-years history, BMI, dyspnea, lung function measurements, exercise capacity, BODE index, history of exacerbations and survival were recorded. CT-detected comorbidities were registered in the BODE cohort. The proportion of subjects without AL by GLI criteria was determined in each cohort. The clinical, CT-detected comorbidity, and overall survival of these patients were evaluated., Results: In total, 18% of the BODE and 15% of the CHAIN cohort did not meet GLI AL criteria. In the BODE and CHAIN cohorts respectively, these patients had a high clinical burden (BODE≥3: 9% and 20%; mMRC≥2: 16% and 45%; exacerbations in the previous year: 31% and 9%; 6MWD<350m: 15% and 19%, respectively), and a similar prevalence of CT-diagnosed comorbidities compared with those with GLI AL. They also had a higher rate of long-term mortality - 33% and 22% respectively., Conclusions: An important proportion of patients from 2 GOLD-defined COPD cohorts did not meet GLI AL criteria at enrolment, although they had a significant burden of disease. Caution must be taken when applying the GLI AL criteria in clinical practice., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) supports the ANTES programme, which is run by an independent Scientific Committee; ANTES panellists (appendix p 1) were invited to participate in the debate leading to the proposal presented here according to their experience in the area of COPD exacerbations. GSK did not participate in the discussion or contribute to the scientific content of this Comment or the decision to submit for publication. JJS-C reports grants from GSK; speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Bial, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GSK, Menarini, and Novartis; and consulting fees from Bial, Chiesi, GSK, and Novartis. MM reports speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, Menarini, Rovi, Bial, Kamada, Takeda, Sandoz, Zambon, CSL Behring, Specialty Therapeutics, Grifols, and Novartis; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Atriva Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GSK, Bial, Gebro Pharma, CSL Behring, Inhibrx, Laboratorios Esteve, Ferrer, Menarini, Mereo Biopharma, Verona Pharma, Spin Therapeutics, ONO Pharma, pH Pharma, Palobiofarma, Takeda, Novartis, Sanofi, and Grifols; and research grants from Grifols. AF-V reports honoraria for lectures, scientific advice, participation in clinical studies, or writing of publications for AstraZeneca, Bial, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GSK, Grifols, Menarini, and Novartis. JLI reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GSK, Grifols, Menarini, Novartis, Orion, Pfizer, Sandoz, and Teva. JLG-R reports speaker fees from Gebro Pharma, Novartis, GSK, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, ALK, Teva, Menarini, Viso, and Sanofi; consulting fees from Novartis, GSK, AstraZeneca, Teva, Boehringer Ingelheim, ALK, Viso, Gebro Pharma, and Sanofi; and research grants from AstraZeneca. BGC reports grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Menarini, and Teva; speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Chiesi, GSK, Menarini, and Novartis; and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Teva, Sanofi, GSK, and Novartis. JLL-C reports honoraria during the past 3 years for lectures, scientific advice, participation in clinical studies, or writing of publications for AstraZeneca, Bial, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Ferrer, Gebro, GSK, Grifols, Menarini, Megalabs, Novartis, and Rovi. AA reports grants from AstraZeneca, GSK, and Menarini; speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, GSK, Menarini, and Zambon; and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, GSK, and Menarini.

Background: Inhaled medications are central to treating asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), yet critical inhaler technique errors are made by up to 90% of patients. In the clinical research setting, recruitment of subjects with poor inhaler technique may give a false impression of both the benefits and the necessity of add-on treatments such as biologic therapies., Objective: To assess the frequency with which inhaler technique is assessed and reliably optimized before and during patient enrollment into randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the efficacy of topical therapy, and the escalation of therapy for asthma and COPD., Methods: Systematic searches were conducted of PubMed and Embase for RCTs published in the past 10 years involving patients with a diagnosis of asthma or COPD undergoing escalation of baseline inhaled therapy (stepping up, changing, adding, switching, increasing, etc) or the introduction of biologic agents., Results: Searches highlighted 1,014 studies, 118 of which were eligible after the removal of duplicates as well as screening and full text review. Of these, only 14 (11.9%) included accessible information in the methods section or referred to such information in online supplements or protocols concerning assessment of participants' inhaler technique. We therefore developed the proposed Best Practice Inhaler Technique Assessment and Reporting Checklist., Conclusions: Our study identifies a concerning lack of checking and correcting inhaler technique, or at least reporting that this was undertaken, before enrollment in asthma and COPD RCTs, which may affect the conclusions drawn. Mandating the use of a standardized checklist in RCT protocols and ensuring all published RCTs report checking and correcting inhaler technique before enrollment are important next steps., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with frequent exacerbations (ExCOPD) are commonly treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and are at risk of infections caused by potential pathogenic bacteria (PPB) including Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PsA)., Objectives: To investigate the association between the use of ICS and PsA infection among ExCOPD., Methods: Case-control study with longitudinal follow-up that recruited ExCOPD after a hospitalisation due to exacerbation between 2012 and 2020. Patients with isolation of PsA (COPD-PsA) in sputum either during admission or follow-up were compared with those with other or no PPB. Clinical, functional characteristics, DDD, use of ICS and survival were evaluated. Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the risk factors associated to PsA infection and mortality., Results: 358 patients (78% male, mean age 73±9 years) were enrolled and followed up for a median of 4 years (IQR=3-8). 173 patients (48.3%) had at least a positive culture for PsA. COPD-PsA had more frequent exacerbations, more severe airflow limitation and higher mortality (69.4% vs 46.5%, p<0.001). There were no differences in the use of ICS between groups but the dose of ICS was significantly higher among COPD-PsA (median of 500 µg fluticasone propionate equivalents (IQR=250-1000) vs 400 µg (IQR=200-1000), p=0.007). Blood eosinophil count (BEC) was not different between ICS users and non-users. In multivariate analysis, the dose of ICS was an independent risk factor for PsA infection and mortality but not ICS use., Conclusions: ICS dose, but not its use, could be a risk factor for PsA infection in patients with severe COPD regardless of BEC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) does not promote diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (Dlco) values in the evaluation of COPD. In GOLD spirometric stage I COPD patients, the clinical and prognostic impact of a low Dlco has not been explored., Research Question: Could a Dlco threshold help define an increased risk of death and a different clinical presentation in these patients?, Study Design and Methods: GOLD stage I COPD patients (n = 360) were enrolled and followed over 109 ± 50 months. Age, sex, pack-years' history, BMI, dyspnea, lung function measurements, exercise capacity, BODE index, and history of exacerbations were recorded. A cutoff value for Dlco was identified for all-cause mortality and the clinical and physiological characteristics of patients above and below the threshold compared. Cox regression analysis explored the predictive power of that cutoff value for all-cause mortality., Results: A Dlco cutoff value of <60% predicted was associated with all-cause mortality (Dlco ≥ 60%: 9% vs Dlco < 60%: 23%, P = .01). At a same FEV 1 % predicted and Charlson score, patients with Dlco < 60% had lower BMI, more dyspnea, lower inspiratory capacity (IC)/total lung capacity (TLC) ratio, lower 6-min walk distance (6MWD), and higher BODE. Cox multiple regression analysis confirmed that after adjusting for age, sex, pack-years history, smoking status, and BMI, a Dlco < 60% is associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 95% CI = 3.37, 1.35-8.39; P = .009) INTERPRETATION: In GOLD I COPD patients, a Dlco < 60% predicted is associated with increased risk of death and worse clinical presentation. What the cause(s) of this association are and whether they can be treated need to be determined., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The value of the single-breath diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (Dlco) relates to outcomes for patients with COPD. However, little is known about the natural course of Dlco over time, intersubject variability, and factors that may influence Dlco progression., Research Question: What is the natural course of Dlco in patients with COPD over time, and which other factors, including sex differences, could influence this progression?, Study Design and Methods: We phenotyped 602 smokers (women, 33%), of whom 506 (84%) had COPD and 96 (16%) had no airflow limitation. Lung function, including Dlco, was monitored annually over 5 years. A random coefficients model was used to evaluate Dlco changes over time., Results: The mean (± SE) yearly decline in Dlco % in patients with COPD was 1.34% ± 0.015%/y. This was steeper compared with non-COPD control subjects (0.04% ± 0.032%/y; P = .004). Sixteen percent of the patients with COPD, vs 4.3% of the control subjects, had a statistically significant Dlco % slope annual decline (4.14%/y). At baseline, women with COPD had lower Dlco values (11.37% ± 2.27%; P < .001) in spite of a higher FEV 1 % than men. Compared with men, women with COPD had a steeper Dlco annual decline of 0.89% ± 0.42%/y (P = .039)., Interpretation: Patients with COPD have an accelerated decline in Dlco compared with smokers without the disease. However, the decline is slow, and a testing interval of 3 to 4 years may be clinically informative. The lower and more rapid decline in Dlco values in women, compared with men, suggests a differential impact of sex in gas exchange function., Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01122758; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Exacerbations of COPD (ECOPD) are a frequent cause of hospitalization that seemed to ameliorate during the COVID outbreak. We aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics of COPD-related hospital admissions and mortality in relation to the presence of COVID-19., Patients and Methods: We conducted a case-control study of patients admitted in four teaching hospitals throughout Spain between March 15 and April 30, 2020. Hospital admissions of respiratory cause with and without PCR-proven SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with COPD were evaluated. Baseline and episode-related clinical characteristics were analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the risk for mortality., Results: During the study period, 2101 patients were admitted for respiratory worsening, 1200 (57.1%) with COVID-19. A total of 228 (10.8%) were admitted due to COPD worsening, of whom 52 (22.8%) tested positive for COVID-19. COPD patients with COVID-19, when compared to those without COVID-19, were more frequently males with better lung function (FEV 1 postbronchodilator 71% vs 46% respectively, p <0.001) and had higher mortality (44.9% vs 13.6% respectively, p <0.001) despite similar age, comorbidities, total days of hospitalization and admission to intensive care unit. COVID-19 and eosinopenia were the strongest risk factors for mortality in the multivariate analysis in the overall COPD population. Inhaled corticosteroid use was not associated to mortality., Conclusion: Hospitalizations for ECOPD without COVID-19 were more frequent than COPD with COVID-19 during the first outbreak, but the latter were associated with higher mortality and low eosinophil counts that warrant further analysis., Competing Interests: Prof. Dr Borja G Cosio report grants, personal fees, nonfinancial support from GSK, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Menarini, personal fees, nonfinancial support from Sanofi, Novartis, outside the submitted work; Dr Nuria Toledo-Pons report personal fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, outside the submitted work; Dr Jose Luis Lopez-Campos report personal fees, non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, CSL Behring, grants from Esteve, Ferrer, GebroPharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Grifols, Menarini, Novartis, Rovi, Teva, outside the submitted work; Dr Juan Jose Soler-Cataluna report personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees, nonfinancial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Bial, personal fees from Chiesi, grants, personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, nonfinancial support from Esteve, Novartis, Rovi, Ferrer, Teva, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2021 Cosio et al.)

Background: There is uncertainty regarding efficacy of telehealth-based approaches in COPD patients for sustaining benefits achieved with intensive pulmonary rehabilitation (PR)., Research Question: To determine whether a maintenance pulmonary telerehabilitation (TelePR) programme, after intensive initial PR, is superior to usual care in sustaining over time benefits achieved by intensive PR., Study Design and Methods: A multicentre open-label pragmatic parallel-group randomized clinical trial was conducted. Two groups were created at completion of an 8-week intensive outpatient hospital PR programme. Intervention group (IG) patients were given appropriate training equipment and instructed to perform three weekly training sessions and send performance data through an app to a web-based platform. Patients in the control group (CG) were advised to exercise regularly (usual care)., Results: Ninety-four patients (46 IG, 48 CG) were randomized. The analysis of covariance showed non-significant improvements in 6-min walk distance [19.9m (95% CI -4.1/+43.8)] and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire - Emotion score [0.4 points (0-0.8)] in the IG. Secondary linear mixed models showed improvements in the IG in Short Form-36 mental component summary [9.7, (4.0-15.4)] and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire - Emotion [0.5, (0.2-0.9)] scores, but there was no association between compliance and outcomes. Acute exacerbations were associated with a marginally significant decrease in 6-minute walk distance of 15.8m (-32.3/0.8) in linear models., Conclusions: The TelePR maintenance strategy was both feasible and safe but failed to show superiority over usual care, despite improvements in some HRQoL domains. Acute exacerbations may have an important negative influence on long-term physical function. CLINICALTRIALS., Gov Identifier: NCT03247933., (Copyright © 2020 SEPAR. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Chronic airflow obstruction affects a wide range of airway diseases, the most frequent of which are asthma, COPD, and bronchiectasis; they are clearly identifiable in their extremes, but quite frequently overlap in some of their pathophysiological and clinical characteristics. This has generated the description of new mixed or overlapping disease phenotypes with no clear biological grounds. In this special article, a group of experts provides their perspective and proposes approaching the treatment of chronic airway disease (CAD) through the identification of a series of therapeutic goals (TG) linked to treatable traits (TT) - understood as clinical, physiological, or biological characteristics that are quantifiable using biomarkers. This therapeutic approach needs validating in a clinical trial with the strategy of identification of TG and treatment according to TT for each patient independently of their prior diagnosis., Competing Interests: Luis Perez de Llano declares to have received grants and/or fees for consultancy or speeches from Novartis, Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Teva, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chiesi, Sanofi, Menarini, Mundipharma, and Esteve, and reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, TEVA, and Chiesi, personal fees and non-financial support from GSK, Novartis, Mundipharma and Boehringer, personal fees from Sanofi, other from Menarini, and personal fees from Esteve, BIAL, TECHDOW PHARMA, MSD, and ROVI S.A., outside the submitted work; Marc Miravitlles has received speaking fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, AstraZeneca, Menarini, Rovi, Bial, Zambon, CSL Behring, Grifols, and Novartis; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Ferrer, GlaxoSmithKline, Bial, Gebro Pharma, CSL Behring, Laboratorios Esteve, Ferrer, Mereo Biopharma, Verona Pharma, TEVA, pH Pharma, Novartis, and Grifols; and aid for research from GlaxoSmithKline and Grifols, and reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, Menarini, Rovi, Bial, Sandoz, Zambon, CSL Behring, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Gebro Pharma, Kamada, Laboratorios Esteve, Ferrer, Mereo Biopharma, Verona Pharma, TEVA, Spin Therapeutics, pH Pharma, Sanofi and Grifols, and grants from GlaxoSmithKline and Grifols, outside the submitted work. Rafael Golpe declares that he has received speaking or advisory fees, or economic aid to attend congresses from Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Novartis, Chiesi, Mundipharma, Menarini, TEVA, Grifols, Ferrer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Rovi, and Gebro. Borja G Cosío declares he has received speaking or advisory fees, or economic aid to attend congresses from Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Novartis, Chiesi, Mundipharma, Menarini, TEVA, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Rovi and reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Rovi, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chiesi, Menarini, Rovi, Zambon, Grifols, Novartis, Ferrer, Gebro Pharma, and Laboratorios Esteve, during the conduct of the study. Francisco Javier Alvarez-Gutiérrez declares that in the last 3 years he has received fees for advisory work, lectures, or subsidies to attend congresses and scientific meetings from ALK, AstraZeneca, BIal, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chiesi, GSK, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, and TEVA. Carolina Cisneros has received speaking fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, TEVA, Menarini, Mundipharma, and Novartis; aid to attend congresses from Chiesi, TEVA, Menarini, and Mundipharma; and fees for advisory work from ALK, AstraZeneca, MundiPharma, TEVA, GSK, and Novartis, and reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from GSK and Novartis, personal fees and non-financial support from TEVA, Menarini, Chiesi and Mundipharma, and personal fees from ALK, outside the submitted work. Carlos Almonacid declares to have received funding in the last 5 years from Astra-zeneca, GSK, Novartis, Chiesi, Mundipharma, Menarini, and TEVA, by way of aid to attend congresses, or as speaking or consulting fees, and reports grants and personal fees from GSK and AstraZeneca, personal fees from ALK, Novartis, Chiesy, and Mundipharma, and non-financial support from Menarini, outside the submitted work. Eva Martinez-Moragon declares to have received funding in the last 5 years from Astra-zeneca, GSK, ALK, Novartis, Chiesi, Mundipharma, Menarini, and TEVA, by way of aid to attend congresses, as speaking fees, or participation in scientific consultancy. Francisco-Javier Gonzalez-Barcala has received speaking fees or research grants from ALK, AstraZeneca, Bial, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Gebro Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Laboratorios Esteve, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, Rovi, Roxall, Stallergenes-Greer, and Teva, and reports speaker fees, consulting fees or research grants from ALK, Astra-Zeneca, Bial, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Gebro Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Laboratorios Esteve, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, Rovi, Roxall, Stallergenes-Greer and Teva. David Ramos-Barbón reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, TEVA Pharmaceuticals, personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis and Chiesi, non-financial support from Boehringer-Ingelheim, and personal fees from BIAL Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Vicente Plaza declares to have received, in the last 3 years, fees for participating as speaker at meetings sponsored by AstraZeneca, Chiesi, and Novartis, and as a consultant from ALK, AstraZeneca, Bial, Boehringer, MundiPharma, and Sanofi; he received economic aid to attend congresses from AZ, Chiesi, and Novartis; and he received subsidies for research projects from AZ, Chiesi, and Menarini; and reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Chiesi, grants from Menarini, and personal fees from Sanofi, Mundipharma, Boehringer-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, and Merck, outside the submitted work. Jose Luis López-Campos has received fees, in the last 3 years, for giving lectures, scientific consultancy, participation in clinical studies, or writing papers for (alphabetical order): AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Esteve, Ferrer, Gebro, GlaxoSmithKline, Grifols, Menarini, Novartis, Rovi, and Teva, and reports personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Boehringer, Chiesi, GSK, Grifols, Menarini, and Novartis, personal fees from CSL Behring, Esteve, and Ferrer, grants and personal fees from GebroPharma, and personal fees from Rovi and Teva, outside the submitted work. Ciro Casanova has received fees for giving lectures, scientific consultancy, participation in clinical studies, or writing papers for (alphabetical order): AstraZeneca, Bial, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Esteve, Gebro, GlaxoSmithKline, Menarini, Novartis, Rovi, and Teva, and reports non-financial support from Astra-Zeneca, personal fees from Bial, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chiesi, Esteve, and Novartis, personal fees and non-financial support from GSK, and grants and non-financial support from Menarini, outside the submitted work. Juan Luis Rodriguez Hermosa has received speaking fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Gebro Pharma and reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Grifols, Gebro, and Glaxo, outside the submitted work. Myriam Calle Rubio has received speaking fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Menarini, and Novartis; and consulting fees from GlaxoSmith¬Kline, Gebro Pharma, and Novartis, and reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Menarini, Novartis, Gebro, Glaxo, and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. JJ Soler-Cataluña declares to have received fees for giving lectures, scientific consultancy, or participation in clinical studies on behalf of Air Liquide, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Esteve, Ferrer, GSK, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, Rovi, Sandoz, and Teva and reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, and GSK, grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Boehringer-Ingelheim and Novartis, and personal fees from Bial, Ferrer, Rovi, and Teva, outside the submitted work. Borja G Cosio reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, and GSK, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees and non-financial support from Mundipharma, and grants from Menarini, Teva, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Rovi, outside the submitted work. The rest of the authors declare they have no conflict of interests for this work. The rest of the authors declare they have no conflict of interests for this work., (© 2020 Pérez de Llano et al.)

Background: The respiratory microbiome is altered in COPD patients but its relationship with core components of the disease, such as the severity of airflow limitation, the frequency of exacerbations or the circulating levels of eosinophils, is unclear., Methods: Cross-sectional study comprising 72 clinically stable COPD patients (mean age 68 [SD 7.9] years; FEV1 48.7 [SD 20.1]% of reference) who provided spontaneous sputum samples for 16S rRNA gene amplification and sequencing. The microbiome composition was analysed with QIIME., Results: We observed that: (1) more severe airflow limitation was associated with reduced relative abundance (RA) of Treponema and an increase in Pseudomonas; (2) patients with ≥2 exacerbations the previous year showed a significantly different bacterial community with respect to non-exacerbators (p = 0.014), with changes in 13 genera, including an increase of Pseudomonas, and finally, (3) peripheral eosinophils levels ≥2% were associated with more diverse microbiome [Chao1 224.51 (74.88) vs 277.39 (78.92) p = 0.006; Shannon 3.94 (1.05) vs 4.54 (1.06) p = 0.020], and a significant increase in the RAs of 20 genera., Conclusion: The respiratory microbiome in clinically stable COPD patients varies significantly according to the severity of airflow limitation, previous history of exacerbations and circulating eosinophils levels.

There is increasing interest in the origins of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as it is envisaged that preventive efforts and treatment can modify its clinical course. The concept of early COPD is not new, but it has recently regained interest, given new population data, recent cellular and molecular advances and insights from clinical trials. To date, many knowledge gaps in the nature of early COPD still exist, mainly because COPD has always been considered a disease of the elderly, and little attention has been paid to the pathological changes occurring in the lungs of individuals at risk before they develop clinically evident COPD. Future studies should focus on identifying early pathological manifestations of COPD in order to prevent its progression in susceptible individuals. In this review, we aim to summarise what is known on early COPD, from the epidemiological, cellular and clinical perspectives., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: J.B. Soriano declares having received pharmaceutical company grants from GSK in 2011 and Chiesi in 2012 via CIMERA, his former home institution, and from 2014 to date from Linde via Hospital Universitario de La Princesa; and participated in speaking activities, advisory committees and consultancies during the period 2011–2017 sponsored by: Almirall, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, CHEST, Chiesi, ERS, GEBRO, Grifols, GSK, Linde, Lipopharma, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, RiRL, Rovi, Sandoz, SEPAR and Takeda. Conflict of interest: F. Polverino has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: B.G. Cosio reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from Rovi, grants from Menarini and personal fees from Esteve, outside the submitted work., (Copyright ©ERS 2018.)

Background: The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in combination with bronchodilators in patients with COPD has been shown to decrease the rate of disease exacerbations and to improve the lung function and patients' quality of life. However, their use has also been associated with an increased risk of pneumonia., Materials and Methods: We have reviewed existing clinical evidence on the risks and benefits of ICS in COPD, including large randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and clinical reviews., Results: A large body of evidence supports the clinical benefits of ICS in patients with COPD in terms of exacerbations, symptoms, lung function, and quality of life. The incidence of adverse events related to ICS, including pneumonia, varies strongly among the studies and seems to be dose dependent, with recent well-designed, large studies on low-dose ICS reporting similar safety profiles in ICS and non-ICS groups., Conclusion: The benefits of ICS in COPD continue to outweigh the risks, especially when lower ICS doses are employed. Given that the data on ICS withdrawal in COPD are scarce and conflicting, we argue that using reduced doses of ICS could be an optimal strategy to manage patients with COPD., Competing Interests: Disclosure José Luis Izquierdo reports speaker fees, travel grants, and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chiesi, Glaxo Smith Kline, Menarini, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, and Teva. Borja G. Cosio reports speaker fees, travel grants, and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chiesi, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, Sanofi, and Teva.

Background: The stability of the new GOLD 2017 COPD staging is unknown, as well as the frequency of individual transitions in COPD stages beyond one year., Methods: All COPD participants in the CHAIN cohort were re-analysed according to GOLD 2017 up to five years of follow-up. Their individual changes within COPD stages were aggregated into cohort-wide Markov chains; group stability was evaluated using joinpoint regression., Results: At baseline, 959 COPD patients were distributed according to GOLD 2017 stages as 37.7% in A, 38.3% B, 8.2% C, and 15.7% D. The group proportion of patients in each stage was maintained from years one to five. However, we found significant changes between stages at the individual patient level, especially in the more severe stages. The probability of a patient remaining in the same GOLD 2017 COPD stage for two consecutive years ranged during the five years of follow-up for stage C from 16% to 31% per year, while for D from 23% to 43% per year, indicating substantial variation either increasing or decreasing severity for the vast majority of patients., Conclusions: We conclude that group stability observed in COPD staging according to GOLD 2017 recommendations is paired with a large variability at the individual patient level., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be classified into groups A/C or B/D based on symptom intensity. Different threshold values for symptom questionnaires can result in misclassification and, in turn, different treatment recommendations. The primary aim was to find the best fitting cut-points for Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) symptom measures, with an modified Medical Research Council dyspnea grade of 2 or higher as point of reference., Methods: After a computerized search, data from 41 cohorts and whose authors agreed to provide data were pooled. COPD studies were eligible for analyses if they included, at least age, sex, postbronchodilator spirometry, modified Medical Research Council, and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) total scores., Main Outcomes: Receiver operating characteristic curves and the Youden index were used to determine the best calibration threshold for CAT, COPD Clinical Questionnaire, and St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire total scores. Following, GOLD A/B/C/D frequencies were calculated based on current cut-points and the newly derived cut-points., Findings: A total of 18,577 patients with COPD [72.0% male; mean age: 66.3 years (standard deviation 9.6)] were analyzed. Most patients had a moderate or severe degree of airflow limitation (GOLD spirometric grade 1, 10.9%; grade 2, 46.6%; grade 3, 32.4%; and grade 4, 10.3%). The best calibration threshold for CAT total score was 18 points, for COPD Clinical Questionnaire total score 1.9 points, and for St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire total score 46.0 points., Conclusions: The application of these new cut-points would reclassify about one-third of the patients with COPD and, thus, would impact on individual disease management. Further validation in prospective studies of these new values are needed., (Copyright © 2017 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The impact of blood eosinophilia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains controversial.To evaluate the prevalence and stability of a high level of blood eosinophils (≥300 cells·μL -1 ) and its relationship to outcomes, we determined blood eosinophils at baseline and over 2 years in 424 COPD patients (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ) 60% predicted) and 67 smokers without COPD from the CHAIN cohort, and in 308 COPD patients (FEV 1 60% predicted) in the BODE cohort. We related eosinophil levels to exacerbations and survival using Cox hazard analysis.In COPD patients, 15.8% in the CHAIN cohort and 12.3% in the BODE cohort had persistently elevated blood eosinophils at all three visits. A significant proportion (43.8%) of patients had counts that oscillated above and below the cut-off points, while the rest had persistent eosinophil levels <300 cells·μL -1 A similar eosinophil blood pattern was observed in controls. Exacerbation rates did not differ in patients with and without eosinophilia. All-cause mortality was lower in patients with high eosinophils compared with those with values <300 cells·μL -1 (15.8% versus 33.7%; p=0.026).In patients with COPD, blood eosinophils ≥300 cells·μL -1 persisting over 2 years was not a risk factor for COPD exacerbations. High eosinophil count was associated with better survival., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Disclosures can be found alongside this article at erj.ersjournals.com, (Copyright ©ERS 2017.)

The natural history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is still not well understood. Traditionally believed to be a self-inflicted disease by smoking, now we know that not all smokers develop COPD, that other inhaled pollutants different from cigarette smoke can also cause it, and that abnormal lung development can also lead to COPD in adulthood. Likewise, the inflammatory response that characterizes COPD varies significantly between patients, and not all of them perceive symptoms (mostly breathlessness) similarly. To investigate the variability and determinants of different "individual natural histories" of COPD, we developed a theoretical, multi-stage, computational model of COPD (EASI) that integrates dynamically and represents graphically the relationships between exposure (E) to inhaled particles and gases (smoking), the biological activity (inflammatory response) of the disease (A), the severity (S) of airflow limitation (FEV1) and the impact (I) of the disease (breathlessness) in different clinical scenarios. EASI shows that the relationships between E, A, S and I vary markedly within individuals (through life) and between individuals (at the same age). It also helps to delineate some potentially relevant, but often overlooked concepts, such as disease progression, susceptibility to COPD and issues related to symptom perception. In conclusion, EASI is an initial conceptual model to interpret the longitudinal and cross-sectional relationships between E, A, S and I in different clinical scenarios. Currently, it does not have any direct clinical application, thus it requires experimental validation and further mathematical development. However, it has the potential to open novel research and teaching alternatives.

Differences between COPD and asthma may also differentially affect adherence to inhaled drugs in each disease. We aimed to determine differences in behaviour patterns of adherence and non-adherence to inhaled therapy between patients with COPD and patients with asthma using the Test of Adherence to Inhalers (TAI) questionnaire. A total of 910 patients (55% with asthma, 45% with COPD) participated in a cross-sectional multicentre study. Data recorded included sociodemographics, education level, asthma or COPD history, TAI score, the Asthma Control Test (ACT), the COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and spirometry. Asthma patients were statistically significant less adherents, 140 (28%) vs. 201 (49%), and the pattern of non-adherence was more frequently erratic (66.8% vs. 47.8%) and deliberate (47.2% vs. 34.1%) than COPD patients; however unwitting non-adherence was more frequently observed in COPD group (31.2% vs. 22.8%). Moreover, taking together all sample studied, only being younger than 50 years of age (OR 1.88 [95% CI: 1.26-2.81]) and active working status (OR 1.45 [95% CI: 1.00-2.09]) were risk factors for non-adherence in the multivariate analysis, while having asthma remained in the limits of the significance (OR 1.44 [95%CI: 0.97-2.14]). Even though non-adherence to inhalers is more frequently observed in asthma than in COPD patients and exhibited a different non-adherence patterns, these differences are more likely to be related to sociodemographic characteristics. However, differences in non-adherence patterns should be considered when designing specific education programmes tailored to each disease.

Rationale: Mucins are essential for airway defense against bacteria. We hypothesized that abnormal secreted airway mucin levels would be associated with bacterial colonization in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) Objectives: To investigate the relationship between mucin levels and the presence of potentially pathogenic micro-organisms in the airways of stable patients with severe COPD Methods: Clinically stable patients with severe COPD were examined prospectively. All patients underwent a computerized tomography scan, lung function tests, induced sputum collection, and bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and protected specimen brush. Patients with bronchiectasis were excluded. Secreted mucins (MUC2, MUC5AC, and MUC5B) and inflammatory markers were assessed in BAL and sputum by ELISA., Measurements and Main Results: We enrolled 45 patients, with mean age (±SD) of 67 (±8) years and mean FEV1 of 41 (±10) % predicted. A total of 31% (n = 14) of patients had potentially pathogenic micro-organisms in quantitative bacterial cultures of samples obtained by protected specimen brush. Patients with COPD with positive cultures had lower levels of MUC2 both in BAL (P = 0.02) and in sputum (P = 0.01). No differences in MUC5B or MUC5AC levels were observed among the groups. Lower MUC2 levels were correlated with lower FEV1 (r = 0.32, P = 0.04) and higher sputum IL-6 (r = -0.40, P = 0.01)., Conclusions: Airway MUC2 levels are decreased in patients with severe COPD colonized by potentially pathogenic micro-organisms. These findings may indicate one of the mechanisms underlying airway colonization in patients with severe COPD. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01976117).

Background: Asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) has been recently described by international guidelines. A stepwise approach to diagnosis using usual features of both diseases is recommended although its clinical application is difficult., Methods: To identify patients with ACOS, a cohort of well-characterized patients with COPD and up to 1 year of follow-up was analyzed. We evaluated the presence of specific characteristics associated with asthma in this COPD cohort, divided into major criteria (bronchodilator test > 400 mL and 15% and past medical history of asthma) and minor criteria (blood eosinophils > 5%, IgE > 100 IU/mL, or two separate bronchodilator tests > 200 mL and 12%). We defined ACOS by the presence of one major criterion or two minor criteria. Baseline characteristics, health status (COPD Assessment Test [CAT]), BMI, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity (BODE) index, rate of exacerbations, and mortality up to 1 year of follow-up were compared between patients with and without criteria for ACOS., Results: Of 831 patients with COPD included,125 (15%) fulfilled the criteria for ACOS, and 98.4% of them sustained these criteria after 1 year. Patients with ACOS were predominantly male (81.6%), with symptomatic mild to moderate disease (67%), who were receiving inhaled corticosteroids (63.2%). There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, and only survival was worse in patients with non-ACOS COPD after 1 year of follow-up (P < .05)., Conclusions: The proposed ACOS criteria are present in 15% of a cohort of patients with COPD and these patients show better 1-year prognosis than clinically similar patients with COPD with no ACOS criteria., Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01122758; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a risk factor for lung cancer (LC). Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) down-regulate the T cell receptor ζ chain (TCR ζ) through L-arginine deprivation and lead to T cell dysfunction and deficient antitumor immunity. We hypothesized that abnormally high levels of MDSCs in COPD patients may alter tumor immunosurveillance., Methods: We compared the proportion of circulating MDSCs (Lin-HLA-DR-/CD33+/CD11b+) (by flow cytometry), arginase I (ARG I) serum levels (by ELISA), and expression levels of TCR ζ on circulating lymphocytes (by flow cytometry) in 28 patients with LC, 62 subjects with COPD, 41 patients with both LC and COPD, 40 smokers with normal spirometry and 33 non-smoking controls. T cell proliferation assays were performed in a subgroup of participants (CFSE dilution protocol)., Results: We found that: (1) circulating MDSCs were up-regulated in COPD and LC patients (with and without COPD); (2) MDSCs expansion was associated with TCR ζ down-regulation in the three groups; (3) in LC patients, these findings were independent of COPD and tobacco smoking exposure; (4) TCR ζ down-regulation correlates with T cell hyporesponsiveness in COPD and LC patients., Conclusions: These results suggest that tumor immunosurveillance might be impaired in COPD and may contribute to the increased risk of LC reported in these patients.

Rationale: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have increased pulmonary lymphoid follicle (LF) counts. B cell-activating factor of tumor necrosis factor family (BAFF) regulates B cells in health, but its role in COPD pathogenesis is unclear., Objectives: To determine whether BAFF expression in pulmonary LFs correlates with COPD severity, LF size or number, and/or readouts of B-cell function in LFs., Methods: We correlated BAFF immunostaining in LFs in lung explants or biopsies from nonsmoking control subjects (NSC), smokers without COPD (SC), and patients with COPD with the number and size of LFs, and LF B-cell apoptosis, activation, and proliferation. We analyzed serum BAFF levels and BAFF expression in B cells in blood and bronchoalveolar lavage samples from the same subject groups. We assessed whether: (1) cigarette smoke extract (CSE) increases B-cell BAFF expression and (2) recombinant BAFF (rBAFF) rescues B cells from CSE-induced apoptosis by inhibiting activation of nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB)., Measurements and Main Results: Patients with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage IV COPD had increased numbers and larger pulmonary LFs than patients with GOLD stages I-II COPD and SC. We identified two main types of pulmonary LFs: (1) type A, the predominant type in GOLD stages I-II COPD and SC, characterized by abundant apoptotic but few BAFF-positive cells (mostly B cells); and (2) type B, the main type in GOLD stage IV COPD, characterized by abundant BAFF-positive cells but few apoptotic cells (mostly B cells). BAFF levels were also higher in blood and bronchoalveolar lavage B cells in patients with COPD versus NSC and SC. Surprisingly, rBAFF blocked CSE-induced B-cell apoptosis by inhibiting CSE-induced NF-κB activation., Conclusions: Our data support the hypothesis that B-cell BAFF expression creates a self-perpetuating loop contributing to COPD progression by promoting pulmonary B-cell survival and LF expansion.

Background: Some patients with COPD may share characteristics of asthma; this is the so-called asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS). There are no universally accepted criteria for ACOS, and most treatments for asthma and COPD have not been adequately tested in this population., Materials and Methods: We performed a survey among pulmonology specialists in asthma and COPD aimed at collecting their opinions about ACOS and their attitudes in regard to some case scenarios of ACOS patients. The participants answered a structured questionnaire and attended a face-to-face meeting with the Metaplan methodology to discuss different aspects of ACOS., Results: A total of 26 pulmonologists with a mean age of 49.7 years participated in the survey (13 specialists in asthma and 13 in COPD). Among these, 84.6% recognized the existence of ACOS and stated that a mean of 12.6% of their patients might have this syndrome. In addition, 80.8% agreed that the diagnostic criteria for ACOS are not yet well defined. The most frequently mentioned characteristics of ACOS were a history of asthma (88.5%), significant smoking exposure (73.1%), and postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity <0.7 (69.2%). The most accepted diagnostic criteria were eosinophilia in sputum (80.8%), a very positive bronchodilator test (69.2%), and a history of asthma before 40 years of age (65.4%). Up to 96.2% agreed that first-line treatment for ACOS was the combination of a long-acting β2-agonist and inhaled steroid, with a long-acting antimuscarinic agent (triple therapy) for severe ACOS., Conclusion: Most Spanish specialists in asthma and COPD agree that ACOS exists, but the diagnostic criteria are not yet well defined. A previous history of asthma, smoking, and not fully reversible airflow limitation are considered the main characteristics of ACOS, with the most accepted first-line treatment being long-acting β2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroids.

Background and Objective: Several diseases commonly co-exist with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), especially in elderly patients. This study aimed to investigate whether there is an association between COPD severity and the frequency of comorbidities in stable COPD patients., Patients and Methods: In this multicenter, cross-sectional study, patients with spirometric diagnosis of COPD attended to by internal medicine departments throughout Spain were consecutively recruited by 225 internal medicine specialists. The severity of airflow obstruction was graded using the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) and data on demographics, smoking history, comorbidities, and dyspnea were collected. The Charlson comorbidity score was calculated., Results: Eight hundred and sixty-six patients were analyzed: male 93%, mean age 69.8 (standard deviation [SD] 9.7) years and forced vital capacity in 1 second 42.1 (SD 17.7)%. Even, the mean (SD) Charlson score was 2.2 (2.2) for stage I, 2.3 (1.5) for stage II, 2.5 (1.6) for stage III, and 2.7 (1.8) for stage IV (P=0.013 between stage I and IV groups), independent predictors of Charlson score in the multivariate analysis were age, smoking history (pack-years), the hemoglobin level, and dyspnea, but not GOLD stage., Conclusion: COPD patients attended to in internal medicine departments show high scores of comorbidity. However, GOLD stage was not an independent predictor of comorbidity.

Background: Airway bacterial colonization by potentially pathogenic microorganisms occurs in a proportion of patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). It increases airway inflammation and influences outcomes negatively. Yet, its diagnosis in clinical practice is not straightforward. The electronic nose is a new non-invasive technology capable of distinguishing volatile organic compound (VOC) breath-prints in exhaled breath. We aim to explore if an electronic nose can reliably discriminate COPD patients with and without airway bacterial colonization., Methods: We studied 37 clinically stable COPD patients (67.8 ± 5.2 yrs, FEV1 41 ± 10% ref.) and 13 healthy controls (62.8 ± 5.2 yrs, FEV1 99 ± 10% ref.). The presence of potentially pathogenic microorganisms in the airways of COPD patients (n = 10, 27%) was determined using quantitative bacterial cultures of protected specimen brush. VOCs breath-prints were analyzed by discriminant analysis on principal component reduction, resulting in cross-validated accuracy values. Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristics (AUROC) was calculated using multiple logistic regression., Results: Demographic, functional and clinical characteristics were similar in colonized and non-colonized COPD patients but their VOC breath-prints were different (accuracy 89%, AUROC 0.92, p > 0.0001). Likewise, VOCs breath-prints from colonized (accuracy 88%, AUROC 0.98, p < 0.0001) and non-colonized COPD patients (accuracy 83%, AUROC 0.93, p < 0.0001) were also different from controls., Conclusions: An electronic nose can identify the presence of airway bacterial colonization in clinically stable patients with COPD., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by an enhanced and persistent innate and acquired immune response to tobacco smoking. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) modulate T-cell responses by down-modulating the T cell receptor ζ chain (TCR ζ) through the catabolism of l-arginine. The effects of smoking on MDSCs and their potential participation in COPD immunopathogenesis have not been explored so far., Methods: To investigate it, we compared the level of circulating Lineage-/HLA-DR-/CD33+/CD11b+ MDSCs, the serum concentration of arginase I (ARG I) and the expression of peripheral T-cell receptor ζ chain (TCR ζ) in never smokers, smokers with normal spirometry and COPD patients. Flow cytometry was used to quantify circulating MDSCs and TCR ζ expression. Serum ARG I levels were determined by ELISA., Results: The main findings of this study were that: (1) current smoking upregulates and activates circulating MDSCs both in smoker controls and COPD patients; and, (2) at variance with the smokers with normal spirometry, in patients with COPD this effect persists after quitting smoking and is accompanied by a significant and specific down-regulation of the TCR ζ chain expression in circulating T lymphocytes., Conclusion: Smoking modulates circulating MDSCs. Their regulation appears altered in patients with COPD., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common chronic inflammatory disease of the lungs with little or no response to glucocorticoids and a high level of oxidative stress. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) activity is reduced in cells of cigarette smokers, and low concentrations of theophylline can increase HDAC activity. We measured the effect of theophylline on HDAC activity and inflammatory gene expression in alveolar macrophages (AM) from patients with COPD. AM from normal smokers showed a decrease in HDAC activity compared with normal control subjects, and this was further reduced in COPD patients (51% decrease, P < 0.01). COPD AMs also showed increased basal release of IL-8 and TNF-alpha, which was poorly suppressed by dexamethasone. Theophylline induced a sixfold increase in HDAC activity in COPD AM lysates and significantly enhanced dexamethasone suppression of induced IL-8 release, an effect that was blocked by the HDAC inhibitor trichostatin A. Therefore, theophylline might restore steroid responsiveness in COPD patients.