Search

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with eosinophilic airway inflammation represents a distinct phenotype that might respond to treatment with inhaled corticosteroids. Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) might predict eosinophilic inflammation and guide treatment option. We hypothesized that COPD patients with different baseline levels of FENO might have differentiated response to treatment with salmeterol/fluticasone (SFC) or tiotropium (TIO).This open-label, randomized-controlled trial enrolled treatment-naïve COPD patients who were stratified into high- (≥23.5ppb) and low-FENO group, followed by 12-week treatment with SFC or TIO. A linear mixed model with repeated measures was applied to analyze the changes in FENO (primary outcome), COPD assessment test (CAT) score, FEV134 patients were divided into 4 subgroups: low-FENO/SFC (n=30), low-FENO/TIO (n=29), high-FENO/SFC (n=37), and high-FENO/TIO (n=38). At baseline, FENO 23.5ppb clearly differentiated between eosinophilic and non-eosinophilic inflammation groups based on the eosinophils in induced sputum and blood. FENO significantly correlated with sputum and blood eosinophils at baseline. High-FENO/SFC (vs. high-FENO/TIO) subgroup had significant reduction in FENO and sputum inflammation profiles (including eosinophils, macrophages, matrix metalloproteinase-9, and interlukin-8) after treatment. These differences were not replicated between low-FENO/SFC and low-FENO/TIO subgroups. The improvement in CAT and FEVHigh baseline FENO can serve as an indicator of eosinophilic airway inflammation in COPD patients who may respond favorably to treatment with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting βClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02546349.

Identifying positive bronchodilator reversibility (BDR) helps the diagnosis of asthma. However, not all patients can adequately perform the forced expiration during the spirometry test. An alternative test is required. Impulse oscillometry (IOS) is an effort-independent technique that enables the measurement of lung mechanics during quiet tidal breathing. We investigated the potentiality of IOS to evaluate BDR in untreated adult patients with newly diagnosed asthma (UAPNDS).All UAPNDS (aged 20-80 years) who never smoke and underwent IOS and spirometry before and after salbutamol inhalation at their initial visit to the hospital from March 22, 2017, to December 31, 2019, were identified. A total of 323 patients were enrolled. Data from the medical record, including demographic characteristics, laboratory examination, spirometric data, and IOS parameters, were retrospectively reviewed. The associations of parameters with the positive BDR and the performance of parameters in predicting the positive BDR were evaluated by statistical methods.Patients (n = 323) had a median age of 64 years and were mostly female (67.5%). Several variables, including serum total immunoglobulin level, blood eosinophil counts, blood eosinophil percentage (%), and two IOS parameters, were found to be different between the positive (n = 93) and negative BDR (n = 230) groups. Multivariate logistic regression analyses after adjustment by cofactors revealed that the percentage change of the area under the reactance curve between 5 Hz and resonant frequency [ΔAx (%)] after salbutamol inhalation was the only independent factor for the positive BDR. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of ΔAx (%) in predicting the positive BDR was 0.614 ( p = 0.0013), and its optimal cutoff value was -53.8% (sensitivity, 39.78% and specificity, 80.43%).In addition to spirometry, ΔAx (%), an IOS parameter, may serve as a novel indicator to evaluate BDR in UAPNDS.

BackgroundPatients with severe asthma may present with characteristics representing overlapping phenotypes, making them eligible for more than one class of biologic. Our aim was to describe the profile of adult patients with severe asthma eligible for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R and to compare the effectiveness of both classes of treatment in real life.MethodsThis was a prospective cohort study that included adult patients with severe asthma from 22 countries enrolled into the International Severe Asthma registry (ISAR) who were eligible for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R. The effectiveness of anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R was compared in a 1:1 matched cohort. Exacerbation rate was the primary effectiveness endpoint. Secondary endpoints included long-term-oral corticosteroid (LTOCS) use, asthma-related emergency room (ER) attendance, and hospital admissions.ResultsIn the matched analysis (n = 350/group), the mean annualized exacerbation rate decreased by 47.1% in the anti-IL5/5R group and 38.7% in the anti-IgE group. Patients treated with anti-IL5/5R were less likely to experience a future exacerbation (adjusted IRR 0.76; 95% CI 0.64, 0.89; p ConclusionsIn real life, both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R improve asthma outcomes in patients eligible for both biologic classes; however, anti-IL5/5R was superior in terms of reducing asthma exacerbations and LTOCS use. Background: Patients with severe asthma may present with characteristics representing overlapping phenotypes, making them eligible for more than one class of biologic. Our aim was to describe the profile of adult patients with severe asthma eligible for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R and to compare the effectiveness of both classes of treatment in real life. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study that included adult patients with severe asthma from 22 countries enrolled into the International Severe Asthma registry (ISAR) who were eligible for both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R. The effectiveness of anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R was compared in a 1:1 matched cohort. Exacerbation rate was the primary effectiveness endpoint. Secondary endpoints included long-term-oral corticosteroid (LTOCS) use, asthma-related emergency room (ER) attendance, and hospital admissions. Results: In the matched analysis (n = 350/group), the mean annualized exacerbation rate decreased by 47.1% in the anti-IL5/5R group and 38.7% in the anti-IgE group. Patients treated with anti-IL5/5R were less likely to experience a future exacerbation (adjusted IRR 0.76; 95% CI 0.64, 0.89; p < 0.001) and experienced a greater reduction in mean LTOCS dose than those treated with anti-IgE (37.44% vs. 20.55% reduction; p = 0.023). There was some evidence to suggest that patients treated with anti-IL5/5R experienced fewer asthma-related hospitalizations (IRR 0.64; 95% CI 0.38, 1.08), but not ER visits (IRR 0.94, 95% CI 0.61, 1.43). Conclusions: In real life, both anti-IgE and anti-IL5/5R improve asthma outcomes in patients eligible for both biologic classes; however, anti-IL5/5R was superior in terms of reducing asthma exacerbations and LTOCS use.

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. It has also imposed a substantial economic and social burden on the health care system. In Taiwan, a nationwide COPD pay-for-performance (P4P) program was designed to improve the quality of COPD-related care by introducing financial incentives for health care providers and employing a multidisciplinary team to deliver guideline-based, integrated care for patients with COPD, reducing adverse outcomes, especially COPD exacerbation. However, the results of a survey of the effectiveness of the pay-for-performance program in COPD management were inconclusive. To address this knowledge gap, this study evaluated the effectiveness of the COPD P4P program in Taiwan. Methods This retrospective cohort study used data from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance claims database and nationwide COPD P4P enrollment program records from June 2016 to December 2018. Patients with COPD were classified into P4P and non-P4P groups. Patients in the P4P group were matched at a ratio of 1:1 based on age, gender, region, accreditation level, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and inhaled medication prescription type to create the non-P4P group. A difference-in-difference analysis was used to evaluate the influence of the P4P program on the likelihood of COPD exacerbation, namely COPD-related emergency department (ED) visit, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or hospitalization. Results The final sample of 14,288 patients comprised 7144 in each of the P4P and non-P4P groups. The prevalence of COPD-related ED visits, ICU admissions, and hospitalizations was higher in the P4P group than in the non-P4P group 1 year before enrollment. After enrollment, the P4P group exhibited a greater decrease in the prevalence of COPD-related ED visits and hospitalizations than the non-P4P group (ED visit: −2.98%, p, Graphical Abstract

Objectives Fiberglass-reinforced plastics (FRP) manufacturing has been related to cases of severe airway obstruction and elevated risk of respiratory mortality. But the specific job content risk is not clear. This study evaluated the respiratory health effects of the FRP lamination process. Methods A questionnaire was used to evaluate respiratory symptoms of workers in two yacht-building plants. Pre-shift (07:30-08:30 hours) and post-shift (17:00-18:00 hours) lung function was measured, while post-shift induced sputum was collected on the first day of the week. The participants were grouped into FRP laminators and non-laminators. Linear and logistic regression was used to investigate the effects of the lamination process on lung function. Results Laminators had a higher prevalence of chronic cough, lower pre-shift forced expiratory volume in first second (FEV1) and FEV1/force vital capacity (FVC) (-3.3% and -1.5%), lower post-shift FVC and FEV1 (-3.6% and -4.9%), and larger post-shift reduction of FVC (-2.1%) compared to non-laminators. The laminators also had higher risk of early obstructive and overall (obstructive plus restrictive) lung function impairment, and post-shift reduction of FVC >10% [odds ratio (OR) 5.98, 4.98, and 3.87, respectively). They also had higher percentages of neutrophils and lymphocytes in the induced sputum. Conclusion Laminators should undergo regular check-ups of respiratory symptoms and lung function. Further toxicologic studies are warranted to identify the specific causal agent in the FRP lamination process. ispartof: SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF WORK ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH vol:47 issue:1 pages:62-69 ispartof: location:Finland status: published

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) may present comorbid obstructive lung diseases with small airway dysfunction (SAD). Existing guidelines suggest that inhaled bronchodilators should be used if the ratio of forced expiratory volume in the 1st second and forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) 1/FVC > 0.7 even with coexisting emphysema. We retrospectively enrolled IPF patients who were registered at our outpatient clinic. At baseline, 63 patients completed computed tomography (CT) scans, lung function measurements, and symptom questionnaires. Among these patients, 54 (85.71%) underwent antifibrotic treatment and 38 (60.32%) underwent long-acting bronchodilator treatment. The median FEV1/FVC was 0.86. Not all patients treated with bronchodilators showed significant changes in lung function. IPF patients with SAD, determined by IOS parameters, showed significant improvement in FEV1, FEF25–75%, and symptom scores after bronchodilator treatment. Bronchodilator efficacy was not observed in patients without SAD. CT-confirmed emphysema was seen in 34.92% of patients. There were no changes in lung function or symptom scores after bronchodilator treatment in patients with emphysema. In conclusion, FEV1/FVC cannot reflect the airflow limitation in IPF. Emphysema in IPF is not a deciding factor in whether patients should receive bronchodilator treatment. IOS parameters may be useful to guide bronchodilator therapy in patients with IPF coexisting with SAD.

Asthma imposes a significant burden on the health system and patients' quality of life. Within Asia, there is large variability in several cultural, social and economic factors ultimately influencing the management of asthma. Differences in risk factors and asthma management practices across Asia make asthma a truly 'mixed-bag' phenomenon. With the advent of biological agents and the consequent emphasis on asthma phenotyping and endotyping, it is more important than ever to understand the diverse nature of asthma as a disease. This is a collaborative review within Asia to highlight the differences in management of adult asthma, and the local modifications that are made to international guidelines. This review paves the way for a future Asian collaborative network in asthma epidemiological research.

Wenjia Chen,1 Mohsen Sadatsafavi,2 Trung N Tran,3 Ruth B Murray,4 Chong Boon Nigel Wong,1 Nasloon Ali,4,5 Cono Ariti,4,5 Esther Garcia Gil,6 Anthony Newell,5,7 Marianna Alacqua,8 Mona Al-Ahmad,9 Alan Altraja,10 Riyad Al-Lehebi,11,12 Mohit Bhutani,13 Leif Bjermer,14 Anne Sofie Bjerrum,15 Arnaud Bourdin,16 Lakmini Bulathsinhala,4,5 Anna von Bülow,17 John Busby,18 Giorgio Walter Canonica,19,20 Victoria Carter,4,5 George C Christoff,21 Borja G Cosio,22 Richard W Costello,23 J Mark FitzGerald,24 João A Fonseca,25 Kwang Ha Yoo,26 Liam G Heaney,27 Enrico Heffler,19,20 Mark Hew,28,29 Ole Hilberg,30 Flavia Hoyte,31,32 Takashi Iwanaga,33 David J Jackson,34,35 Rupert C Jones,36 Mariko Siyue Koh,37,38 Piotr Kuna,39 Désirée Larenas-Linnemann,40 Sverre Lehmann,41 Lauri A Lehtimäki,42,43 Juntao Lyu,5,7 Bassam Mahboub,44,45 Jorge Maspero,46,47 Andrew N Menzies-Gow,48 Concetta Sirena,49 Nikolaos Papadopoulos,50,51 Andriana I Papaioannou,52 Luis Pérez de Llano,53,54 Diahn-Warng Perng,55,56 Matthew Peters,57 Paul E Pfeffer,58,59 Celeste M Porsbjerg,17 Todor A Popov,60 Chin Kook Rhee,61 Sundeep Salvi,62 Camille Taillé,63 Christian Taube,64 Carlos A Torres-Duque,65 Charlotte S Ulrik,66 Seung Won Ra,67 Eileen Wang,31,32 Michael E Wechsler,68 David B Price4,5,69 1Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore; 2Respiratory Evaluation Sciences Program, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; 3AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD, USA; 4Optimum Patient Care, Cambridge, UK; 5Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore; 6AstraZeneca, Barcelona, Spain; 7Optimum Patient Care, Queensland, VIC, Australia; 8AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK; 9Microbiology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Kuwait University, Al-Rashed Allergy Center, Ministry of Health, Kuwait City, Kuwait; 10Department of Pulmonology, University of Tartu and Lung Clinic, Tartu University Hospital, Tartu, Estonia; 11Department of Pulmonology, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 12College of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 13Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary Medicine, University of Alberta, Western Canada, AB, Canada; 14Department of Clinical Sciences, Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden; 15Department of Respiratory Medicine and Allergy, Aarhus University Hospital, Jutland, Aarhus, Denmark; 16PhyMedExp, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, CHU Montpellier, Montpellier, France; 17Respiratory Research Unit, Bispebjerg University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; 18Centre for Public Health, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland; 19Personalized Medicine, Asthma and Allergy, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Milan, Italy; 20Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy; 21Medical University-Sofia, Faculty of Public Health, Sofia, Bulgaria; 22Son Espases University Hospital-IdISBa-Ciberes, Mallorca, Spain; 23Department of Respiratory Medicine, Clinical Research Centre, Smurfit Building Beaumont Hospital, RCSI, Dublin, Ireland; 24Department of Medicine, the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; 25Comunity Health, Information and Decision Sciences Department (MEDCIDS) & Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), Faculty of Medicine of University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 26KonKuk University School of Medicine in Seoul, Seoul, Korea; 27Wellcome-Wolfson Centre for Experimental Medicine, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland; 28Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology Service, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; 29Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; 30Medical Department, Vejle University Hospital, Jutland, Vejle, Denmark; 31Department of Medicine, Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO, USA; 32Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Allergy & Clinical Immunology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA; 33Center for General Medical Education and Clinical Training, Kindai University Hospital, Osakasayama, Japan; 34UK Severe Asthma Network and National Registry, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust, London, UK; 35School of Immunology & Microbial Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK; 36Research and Knowledge Exchange, Plymouth Marjon University, Plymouth, UK; 37Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore; 38SingHealth Duke-NUS Lung Centre, Singapore, Singapore; 39Division of Internal Medicine, Asthma and Allergy Medical University of &Lstrok;ód&zacute;, &Lstrok;ód&zacute;, Poland; 40Directora Centro de Excelencia en Asma y Alergia, Hospital Médica Sur, Ciudad de México, Mexico; 41Section of Thoracic Medicine, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; 42Allergy Centre, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland; 43Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland; 44College of Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates; 45Rashid Hospital, Dubai Health Authority, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; 46Clinical Research for Allergy and Respiratory Medicine, CIDEA Foundation, Buenos Aires, Argentina; 47University Career of Specialists in Allergy and Clinical Immunology at the Buenos Aires University School of Medicine, Buenos Aires, Argentina; 48Royal Brompton & Harefield Hospitals, London, UK; 49Severe Asthma Network in Italy (SANI), Milano, Italy; 50Division of Infection, Immunity & Respiratory Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; 51Allergy Department, 2nd Pediatric Clinic, University of Athens, Athens, Greece; 52 2nd Respiratory Medicine Department, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, Athens, Greece; 53Pneumology Service, Lucus Augusti University Hospital, EOXI Lugo, Lugo, Spain; 54Biodiscovery Research Group, Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain; 55Division of Clinical Respiratory Physiology Chest Department, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; 56COPD Assembly of the Asian Pacific Society of Respirology Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan; 57Department of Thoracic Medicine, Concord Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 58Department of Respiratory Medicine, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK; 59Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK; 60University Hospital ”sv. Ivan Rilski”, Sofia, Bulgaria; 61Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, the Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea; 62Pulmocare Research and Education Foundation, Pune, India; 63Department of Respiratory Diseases, Bichat Hospital, AP-HP Nord-Université de Paris, Paris, France; 64Department of Pulmonary Medicine, University Medical Center Essen-Ruhrlandklinik, Essen, Germany; 65CINEUMO, Respiratory Research Center, Fundación Neumológica Colombiana, Bogotá, Colombia; 66Department of Respiratory Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital-Hvidovre, Hvidovre, Denmark; 67Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Pulmonology, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, South Korea; 68Department of Medicine, NJH Cohen Family Asthma Institute, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO, USA; 69Centre of Academic Primary Care, Division of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UKCorrespondence: David B Price, Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute, 22 Sin Ming Lane, &num;06 Midview City, Singapore, Singapore, 573969, Tel +65 3105 1489, Email dprice@opri.sgBackground: Many severe asthma patients with high oral corticosteroid exposure (HOCS) often do not initiate biologics despite being eligible. This study aimed to compare the characteristics of severe asthma patients with HOCS who did and did not initiate biologics.Methods: Baseline characteristics of patients with HOCS (long-term maintenance OCS therapy for at least 1 year, or ≥ 4 courses of steroid bursts in a year) from the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR; https://isaregistries.org/), who initiated or did not initiate biologics (anti-lgE, anti-IL5/5R or anti-IL4R), were described at the time of biologic initiation or registry enrolment. Statistical relationships were tested using Pearson’s chi-squared tests for categorical variables, and t-tests for continuous variables, adjusting for potential errors in multiple comparisons.Results: Between January 2015 and February 2021, we identified 1412 adult patients with severe asthma from 19 countries that met our inclusion criteria of HOCS, of whom 996 (70.5%) initiated a biologic and 416 (29.5%) did not. The frequency of biologic initiation varied across geographical regions. Those who initiated a biologic were more likely to have higher blood eosinophil count (483 vs 399 cells/μL, p=0.003), serious infections (49.0% vs 13.3%, p< 0.001), nasal polyps (35.2% vs 23.6%, p< 0.001), airflow limitation (56.8% vs 51.8%, p=0.013), and uncontrolled asthma (80.8% vs 73.2%, p=0.004) despite greater conventional treatment adherence than those who did not start a biologic. Both groups had similar annual asthma exacerbation rates in the previous 12 months (5.7 vs 5.3, p=0.147).Conclusion: Around one third of severe HOCS asthma patients did not receive biologics despite a similar high burden of asthma exacerbations as those who initiated a biologic therapy. Other disease characteristics such as eosinophilic phenotype, serious infectious events, nasal polyps, airflow limitation and lack of asthma control appear to dictate biologic use.Keywords: severe asthma, biologics, real-world, treatment pattern, patient characteristics

Chiung-Zuei Chen,1 Chau-Chyun Sheu,2 Shih-Lung Cheng,3,4 Hao-Chien Wang,5 Meng-Chih Lin,6 Wu-Huei Hsu,7 Kang-Yun Lee,8 Diahn-Warng Perng,9 Hen-I Lin,10 Ming-Shian Lin,11 Sheng-Hao Lin,12 Jong-Rung Tsai,13 Chin-Chou Wang,6 Cheng-Yi Wang,10 Tsung-Ming Yang,14 Ching-Lung Liu,15 Tsai-Yu Wang,16 Ching-Hsiung Lin12,17,18 1Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan; 2Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, 807, Taiwan; 3Department of Internal Medicine, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Taipei, 220, Taiwan; 4Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, Yuan Ze University, Zhongli, Taoyuan, 320, Taiwan; 5Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, 100, Taiwan; 6Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, 404, Taiwan; 7Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, 833, Taiwan; 8Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, 110, Taiwan; 9Department of Chest Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, 112, Taiwan; 10Department of Internal Medicine, Cardinal Tien Hospital, Fu-Jen Catholic University, Taipei, 242, Taiwan; 11Department of Internal Medicine, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital, Chiayi, 600, Taiwan; 12Division of Chest Medicine, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, 500, Taiwan; 13Division of Respiratory Therapy, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, 807, Taiwan; 14Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan City, Taiwan; 15Division of Chest Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, MacKay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, 104, Taiwan; 16Pulmonary Disease Research Centre, Department of Thoracic Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan; 17Institute of Genomics and Bioinformatics, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, 402, Taiwan; 18Department of Recreation and Holistic Wellness, MingDao University, Changhua, 523, TaiwanCorrespondence: Ching-Hsiung LinDivision of Chest Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Changhua Christian Hospital, 135 Nanhsiao Street, Changhua, 50006, TaiwanTel +886-4-7238595Fax +886-4-7232942Email 47822@cch.org.twBackground and Aim: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is frequently underdiagnosed because of the unavailability of spirometers, especially in resource-limited outpatient settings. This study provides real-world evidence to identify optimal approaches for COPD case finding in outpatient settings.Methods: This retrospective study enrolled individuals who were at risk of COPD (age ≥ 40 years, ≥ 10 pack-years, and ≥ 1 respiratory symptom). Eligible participants were examined using various COPD case-finding tools, namely the COPD Population Screener (COPD-PS) questionnaire, a COPD prediction (PCOPD) model, and a microspirometer, Spirobank Smart; subsequently, the participants underwent confirmatory spirometry. The definition and confirmation of COPD were based on conventional spirometry. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), area under the curve (AUC), and decision curve analyses were conducted, and a clinical impact curve was constructed.Results: In total, 385 participants took part in the study [284 without COPD (73.77%) and 101 with COPD (26.23%)]. The microspirometer exhibited a higher AUC value than did the COPD-PS questionnaire and the PCOPD model. The AUC for microspirometry was 0.908 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87– 0.95), that for the PCOPD model was 0.788 (95% CI = 0.74– 0.84), and that for the COPD-PS questionnaire was 0.726 (95% CI = 0.67– 0.78). Decision and clinical impact curve analyses revealed that a microspirometry-derived FEV1/FVC ratio of < 74% had superior clinical utility to the other measurement tools.Conclusion: The PCOPD model and COPD-PS questionnaire were useful for identifying symptomatic patients likely to have COPD, but microspirometry was more accurate and had higher clinical utility. This study provides real-world evidence to identify optimal practices for COPD case finding; such practices ensure that physicians have convenient access to up-to-date evidence when they encounter a symptomatic patient likely to have COPD.Keywords: COPD, COPD case-finding, PCOPD model, COPD-PS questionnaire, microspirometry, spirometry

Sleep apnea has been associated with a variety of diseases, but its impact on sepsis outcome remains unclear. This study investigated the effect of intermittent hypoxia [IH]–the principal feature of sleep apnea–on murine sepsis. 5-week-old male C57BL6 mice were assigned to groups receiving severe IH (O2 fluctuating from room air to an O2 nadir of 5.7% with a cycle length of 90 seconds), mild IH (room air to 12%, 4 minutes/cycle), or room air for 3 weeks. Sepsis was induced by cecal ligation and puncture and survival was monitored. Sepsis severity was evaluated by murine sepsis scores, blood bacterial load, plasma tumor necrosis factor-α [TNF-α]/interleukin-6 [IL-6] levels and histopathology of vital organs. Compared with normoxic controls, mice subjected to severe IH had earlier mortality, a lower leukocyte count, higher blood bacterial load, higher plasma TNF-α and IL-6 levels, more severe inflammatory changes in the lung, spleen and small intestine. Mice subjected to mild IH did not differ from normoxic controls, except a higher IL-6 level after sepsis induced. The adverse impact of severe IH was reversed following a 10-day normoxic recovery. In conclusion, severe IH, not mild IH, contributed to poorer outcomes in a murine sepsis model.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major disease in Asia. However, how to manage specifically Asian COPD patients has not been proposed. Awareness of COPD is very low and underdiagnosis/undertreatment is common in Asian countries. Low utilization of pulmonary function test and inhalers is also a problem. Moreover, high smoking prevalence and air pollution are barriers to managing Asian patients with COPD. The relatively low body mass index of Asian patients with COPD can increase their risk for experiencing adverse effects from COPD drugs. Physicians should consider the unique features of Asian populations with COPD such as the high prevalence rates of bronchiectasis and tuberculosis-destroyed lungs, biomass smoke exposure and parasitic infection.

The appropriate treatment for patients with coexistent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure (HF) remains unclear. Data from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database was used for this retrospective cohort study. Patients diagnosed with both diseases between 1997 and 2012 were enrolled as the COPD-heart failure overlap cohort. Patients were categorized as non-users and users of specific COPD and HF medications. Medication prescriptions in each 3-month and 1-year period served as time-dependent covariates. The primary endpoint was cumulative survival. The validation study confirmed the accuracy of definitions of COPD (94.0% sensitivity) and HF (96.3% sensitivity).The study included 275,436 patients with COPD-heart failure overlap, with a mean follow-up period of 9.32 years. The COPD-heart failure overlap cohort had more medical service use and higher mortality than did the COPD alone cohort. Use of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combinations, long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), β blockers, aldosterone antagonists, and statins reduced mortality risk compared with non-use. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses confirmed the consistency and robustness of results.ICS/LABA combinations, LAMA, ARBs, β blockers, aldosterone antagonists, and statins use was associated with a lower mortality risk in patients with COPD-heart failure overlap.

Some patients with severe asthma experience exacerbations despite receiving multiple therapy. The risk of exacerbation and heterogeneous response to treatment may be associated with specific inflammatory molecules that are responsive or resistant to corticosteroids. We aimed to identify the independent factors predictive for the future risk of exacerbation in patients with severe asthma. In this multi-center prospective observational study, 132 patients with severe asthma were enrolled and divided into exacerbation (n = 52) and non-exacerbation (n = 80) groups on the basis of exacerbation rate after a 1-year follow-up period. We found that previous history of severe-to-serious exacerbation, baseline blood eosinophil counts (≥ 291cells/μL), and serum tryptase (≤ 1448 pg/mL) and thrymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) levels (≥ 25 pg/mL) independently predicted the future development of exacerbation with adjusted odds ratios (AOR) of 3.27, 6.04, 2.53 and 8.67, respectively. Notably, the patients with high blood eosinophil counts and low tryptase levels were likely to have more exacerbations than those with low blood eosinophil counts and high tryptase levels (AOR 16.9). TSLP potentially played the pathogenic role across different asthma phenotypes. TSLP and tryptase levels may be implicated in steroid resistance and responsiveness in the asthma inflammatory process. High blood eosinophil counts and low serum tryptase levels predict a high probability of future asthma exacerbation.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is preventable and treatable. However, many patients remain undiagnosed and untreated due to the underutilization or unavailability of spirometers. Accordingly, we used Spirobank Smart, an app-based spirometer, for facilitating the early detection of COPD in outpatient clinics. This prospective study recruited individuals who were at risk of COPD (i.e., with age of ≥40 years, ≥10 pack-years of smoking, and at least one respiratory symptoms) but had no previous COPD diagnosis. Eligible participants were examined with Spirobank Smart and then underwent confirmatory spirometry (performed using a diagnostic spirometer), regardless of their Spirobank Smart test results. COPD was defined and confirmed using the postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity values of &lt, 0.70 as measured by confirmatory spirometry. A total of 767 participants were enrolled and examined using Spirobank Smart, 370 participants (94.3% men, mean age of 60.9 years and mean 42.6 pack-years of smoking) underwent confirmatory spirometry. Confirmatory spirometry identified COPD in 103 participants (27.8%). At the optimal cutoff point of 0.74 that was determined using Spirobank Smart for COPD diagnosis, the area under the receiver operating characteristic was 0.903 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.860–0.947). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that participants who have an FEV1/FVC ratio of &lt, 74% that was determined using Spirobank Smart (odds ratio (OR) = 58.58, 95% CI = 27.29–125.75) and old age (OR = 3.23, 95% CI = 1.04–10.07 for 60 ≤ age &lt, 65, OR = 5.82, 95% CI = 2.22–15.27 for age ≥ 65) had a higher risk of COPD. The Spirobank Smart is a simple and adequate tool for early COPD detection in outpatient clinics. Early diagnosis and appropriate therapy based on GOLD guidelines can positively influence respiratory symptoms and quality of life.

Toll-like receptor (TLR) 4 was originally thought to be the sole pattern recognition receptor for lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Transient receptor potential ankyrin 1 (TRPA1), a Ca2+-permeant channel, has been suggested as a non-TLR receptor membrane-bound sensor of LPS. We recently reported that TRPA1 is expressed in lung epithelial cells (LECs) and mediates lung inflammation induced by cigarette smoke. However, the role of TRPA1 in LPS-induced lung inflammation has not been conclusively defined, and its underlying cellular mechanisms remain unclear. In this study, our in vitro results showed that LPS sequentially produced a cascade of events, including the elevation of intracellular Ca2+, the activation of NADPH oxidase, increase in intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS), the activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)/nuclear factor-kB (NF-κB) signaling, and the induction of IL-8. The increase in intracellular Ca2+ was inhibited by HC030031 (a TRPA1 antagonist) but was unaffected by TAK-242 (a TLR-4 inhibitor). The activation of NADPH oxidase was prevented by its inhibitor apocynin, EGTA (an extracellular Ca2+ chelator), and HC030031. The increase in intracellular ROS was attenuated by apocynin, N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC, a ROS scavenger), EGTA, and HC030031. The activation of the MAPK/NF-κB signaling was halted by NAC, EGTA, and HC030031. IL-8 induction was suppressed by HC030031 and TRPA1 siRNA, and further reduced by the combination of HC030031 and TAK-242. Our in vivo studies showed that trpa1–/– mice exhibited a reduced level of LPS-induced lung inflammation compared with wild-type mice as evidenced by the alleviations of increases in vascular permeability, inflammatory cell infiltration, inflammatory cytokine levels, oxidative stress, and MAPK signaling activation. Thus, in LECs, LPS may activate TRPA1 resulting in an increase in Ca2+ influx. The increased intracellular Ca2+ leads to NADPH oxidase activation, which causes an increase in intracellular ROS. The intracellular ROS activates the MAPK/NF-κB signaling resulting in IL-8 induction. This mechanism may possibly be at work to induce lung inflammation in mice.

Several databases of epidemiologic studies in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have been analyzed in the Western community. However, few studies have been reported in Asia. The objective of this study was to investigate the epidemiology of IPF in Taiwan. We collected and analyzed patients with IPF from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database from 2001 to 2011. We estimated the annual incidence and cumulative prevalence of IPF and mean survival time of patients and determined the causes of death. The annual incidence rates of IPF remained stable after 2005, ranging from 0.7 to 1.3 cases per 100,000 people per year, whereas the cumulative prevalence rates increased steadily from 3.1 to 6.4 cases per 100,000 people per year during 2006&ndash, 2011 based on a narrow case definition. Men older than 75 years had higher incidence compared with other age groups. The mean survival after diagnosis was 6.9 years. Old age, male sex, and respiratory hospitalization were associated with shorter survival time after diagnosis. Both the incidence and prevalence rates of IPF were lower in Taiwanese patients than Western ones. Moreover, the survival time was higher in the Asian population compared with the Western population. These results may suggest the heterogeneity of the IPF definition in different study populations and geographic locations.

The independent risk factors for death in patients admitted for asthma exacerbation have not been thoroughly investigated. This study aimed to investigate these independent risk factors and the relationship between mortality and the prescription patterns of anti-asthmatic medications in patients admitted for asthma exacerbation. Using a nested case–control design, we identified 267 cases (death after asthma admission) and 1035 controls (survival after asthma admission) from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) from 2001 to 2010. Conditional logistic regressions were used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We identified the independent risk factors for death as the comorbidities of pneumonia (aOR 3.82, 95% CI 2.41–6.05), genitourinary disease (aOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.17–2.62), septicemia (aOR 4.26, 95% CI 2.61–6.94), diabetes mellitus (aOR 2.10, 95% CI 1.30–3.38), arrhythmia (aOR 2.00, 95% CI 1.14–3.50), and a history of asthmatic hospitalization (aOR 4.48, 95% CI 2.77–7.25). Moreover, the use of short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) and the dosage of oral corticosteroids (OCSs) >70 mg prednisolone during previous hospitalization (all p

Background: The current outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV or SARS-CoV-2) in China and globally requires urgent research to guide the appropriate treatmen

Vincent Yi-Fong Su,1–3 Han-Fang Liao,4 Diahn-Warng Perng,3,5Yueh-Ching Chou,4,6,7 Chia-Chen Hsu,6 Chia-Lin Chou,4,6Yuh-Lih Chang,4,6Jiin-Cherng Yen,4 Tzeng-Ji Chen,3,8,9 Ting-Chun Chou4,6 1Department of Internal Medicine, Taipei City Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; 2Institute of Clinical Medicine, 3Faculty of Medicine, School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan; 4Department and Institute of Pharmacology, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan; 5Department of Chest Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; 6Department of Pharmacy, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; 7School of Pharmacy, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan; 8Department of Family Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; 9Institute of Hospital and Health Care Administration, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan Objective: The effect of antacid therapy for patients with COPD and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains unclear.Patients and methods: This nationwide population-based study was conducted using data from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database, and enrolled COPD patients with or without GERD. Patients with COPD who were not prescribed COPD medications were excluded. Patients with GERD who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy or 24-hour pH monitoring and received at least 1 antacid were enrolled as symptomatic GERD group. The primary endpoint was acute exacerbation and mortality.Results: This study included 3,485 patients with COPD and symptomatic GERD, and 13,938 patients with COPD alone and covered 12,806.57 and 56,809.78 person-years, respectively, from 2000 to 2011. After multivariate adjustment, symptomatic GERD was associated with acute exacerbation (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.23–1.48, p

The effects of long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs) have not been evaluated in a model with simultaneous lung inflammation and small airway remodeling induced by cigarette smoke (CS). We exposed the mice to CS for four weeks with daily treatment with a LAMA (glycopyrronium bromide, NVA237) or its vehicle. Human bronchial epithelial cells (PBECs) and lung fibroblasts were exposed to CS extract (CSE) or acetylcholine with or without NVA237 treatment. We found that NVA237, but not its vehicle, suppressed elevations in inflammatory score, epithelial thickness, and peribronchial collagen deposition in CS-exposed mice. NVA237 alleviated CS-induced increased levels of chemokines, inflammatory cells, and total protein in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. NVA237 suppressed acetylcholine- or CSE-induced elevations in IL-8 production in PBECs and elevations in proliferation and collagen production in lung fibroblasts. These phenomena were also prevented by a p44/42 MAPK inhibitor. In conclusion, NVA237 exerted a potent suppressive effect on lung inflammation and small airway remodeling induced by subchronic CS exposure.

Introduction The relationship between bronchodilator responsiveness and eosinophilic airway inflammation has not been well documented in COPD. It has been investigated in this retrospective study. This issue has grown in importance due to increasing interest in the asthma-COPD overlap syndrome. Methods 264 stable COPD patients with no past history of asthma were retrospectively analyzed. Correlation analyses between FEV1 reversibility and sputum eosinophil levels were conducted. Sputum eosinophil levels were dichotomized using FEV1 reversibility cut-off points (>0.4 L and >15% vs. >0.2 L and >12%) and compared. The effectiveness of FEV1 reversibility to predict sputum eosinophilia (>3%) was analyzed with a logistic regression and a ROC analysis. Results 82 (31.1%) patients with higher FEV1 reversibility values (0.14 vs. 0.11 L, P=.01) presented sputum eosinophilia. FEV1 reversibility was weakly correlated with the sputum eosinophil level (r = 0.162, P=.008). Patients with FEV1 > 0.4 L and >15% increment had higher sputum eosinophil levels (6.11 vs. 1.02%, P=.049) whereas the level did not differ when dichotomized by FEV1 increment >0.2 L and >12%. Very positive FEV1 reversibility (>0.4 L and >15%) predicted sputum eosinophilia after adjustment forage, baseline FEV1 and FVC (OR: 4.262, P=.029). In the ROC analysis, the AUC was 0.58 (P=.034), and FEV1 increment > 0.4 L and >15% had a positive predictive value of 63.6% and an overall accuracy of 70.1%. Conclusions FEV1 reversibility was weakly correlated with sputum eosinophil levels in COPD. Positive FEV1 reversibility (>0.4 L and >15%) is moderately successful in predicting sputum eosinophilia (>3%).

Background: The prognostic factors for hospital mortality in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have not been characterised well. We aimed to determine the impact of respiratory hospitalisation on patient outcomes and the prognostic predictors for hospital mortality.Methods: Data from patients with IPF was collected and analysed from two cohorts, TaiwanNational Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) between 2001 and 2011 and a national medical centre (NMC)between 2001and 2015. Results: 122 patients in NHIRD cohort were recruited. The median survival was lower in patients with respiratory hospitalisation (25/122, 29.8%) compared with non-respiratory hospitalisation(59/122, 48.4%) in NHIRD cohort (2.3 years vs non-respiratory 9 years, p=0.007). In NMC cohort (N=47), patients with acute respiratory deterioration (ARD) hospitalisation (30/47,63.8%) compared with non-ARD hospitalisation (17/47, 36.2%) had poor survival (0.9 monthsvs 29.6 months,pConclusions: The respiratory hospitalisation negatively impacted patient outcomes, and the independent prognostic factors may be utilised to refine the management in patients with IPF.