Search

Peter Alter,1 Kathrin Kahnert,2,3 Franziska C Trudzinski,4 Robert Bals,5 Henrik Watz,6 Tim Speicher,1 Sandra Söhler,1 Klaus F Rabe,7 Emiel FM Wouters,8,9 Claus F Vogelmeier,1 Rudolf A Jörres10 1Department of Medicine, Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany; 2Department of Internal Medicine V, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 3MediCenterGermering, Germering, Germany; 4Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 5Department of Internal Medicine V - Pulmonology, Allergology, Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, Germany; 6Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 7LungenClinic Grosshansdorf and Department of Medicine, Christian-Albrechts University, Kiel, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 8Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands; 9Sigmund Freud Private University, Medical Faculty, Vienna, Austria; 10Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, GermanyCorrespondence: Peter Alter, Department of Medicine, Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Baldingerstrasse 1, Marburg, Germany, Tel +49 6421 5866140, Email Alter@uni-marburg.deBackground: The COPD Assessment Test (CAT) comprises eight questions. We evaluated the information that each of the questions and the total score contributed to outcomes and characteristics of chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD), including their dependence on smoking status.Methods: Patients with COPD of the COSYCONET cohort with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) grades 1– 4 and the former grade 0 were included. The evaluated outcomes included mortality, exacerbation risk, the comorbidities asthma, cardiac disease (coronary artery disease/heart failure), osteoporosis, and emphysema, for which a reduction in carbon monoxide transfer coefficient (KCO) < 55% predicted was considered as marker. Analyses were performed by Cox proportional hazard or logistic multiple regression analyses separately for smokers and nonsmokers.Results: In total, 2509 patients had complete data, among them 1884 nonsmokers (ex or never; 38.4% female; mean age±SD 66.1± 8.5 years) and 625 current smokers (45.1% female, 61.6± 7.9 years). The pattern of responses to the single questions of the CAT differed between outcome variables, as well as between smokers and nonsmokers, but in most cases the total score was superior to the single items. The CAT total score was associated with mortality (p< 0.05) only in nonsmokers, while for exacerbation frequency/severity, it was of about equal importance in smokers and nonsmokers. Regarding KCO, the total score was indicative (p< 0.05) only in nonsmokers. Particularly in smokers, single items could show opposite signs of their coefficients which therefore largely cancelled in the total score.Conclusion: Our results show in detail for which outcomes single items are informative in nonsmokers and current smokers with COPD, overall being more informative in nonsmokers. Only regarding exacerbation risk, the predictive value was similar in both groups. These results might be helpful to extract as much as possible information from a COPD questionnaire that is often part of routine assessment.Trial Registration: NCT01245933.Keywords: COPD, COPD assessment test CAT, clinical questionnaire, smoking status, mortality, exacerbation

Carolina Fischer,1,2 Maria Siakavara,1 Peter Alter,3 Claus Franz Vogelmeier,3 Tim Speicher,3 Hendrik Pott,4 Henrik Watz,5 Robert Bals,6,7 Franziska Trudzinski,8 Felix Herth,8 Joachim H Ficker,9 Manfred Wagner,9 Christoph Lange,10 Krista Stoycheva,10 Winfried Randerath,11 Jürgen Behr,12,13 Sebastian Fähndrich,14 Tobias Welte15 ,† Isabell Pink,15 Kathrin Kahnert,12,16 Werner Seeger,17 Stefan Kuhnert,17 Tobias Gessler,17 Nina Adaskina,18 Rudolf A Jörres1 1Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Bavaria, Germany; 2Department of Medicine I, Division of Respiratory Diseases, School of Medicine & Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany; 3Department of Medicine, Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Hesse, Germany; 4Section of Airway Infections, Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), Marburg, Hesse, Germany; 5Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Schlewig-Holstein, Germany; 6Department of Internal Medicine V, Pulmonology, Allergology, Critical Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, Saarland, Germany; 7Helmholtz Institute for Pharmaceutical Research Saarland (HIPS), Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI), Saarland University Campus, Saarbrücken, Saarland, Germany; 8Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Member of the Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany; 9Department of Respiratory Medicine, Allergology and Sleep Medicine, Klinikum Nuremberg, Nürnberg, Bavaria, Germany; 10Clinical Infectious Diseases, Research Center Borstel, Borstel, Germany; German Center for Infection Research (DZIF), Standort Hamburg-Lübeck-Borstel-Riems, Germany; Respiratory Medicine & International Health, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany; 11Krankenhaus Bethanien gGmbH, Klinik für Pneumologie und Allergologie, Zentrum für Schlaf- und Beatmungsmedizin, Solingen, North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany; 12Department of Medicine V, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Bavaria, Germany; 13Asklepios Fachkliniken München-Gauting, Gauting, Germany; 14Department of Pneumology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany; 15Clinic for Pneumology, Hannover Medical School, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Lower Saxony, Germany; 16MediCenterGermering, Germering, Bavaria, Germany; 17University of Giessen and Marburg Lung Center (UGMLC), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Justus-Liebig University Giessen, Hesse, Germany; 18CAPNETZ STIFTUNG, Hannover, Lower Saxony, Germany†Tobias We

Mircea Gabriel Stoleriu,1,2,&ast; Michael Pienn,3,4,&ast; Rudolf A Joerres,5 Peter Alter,6 Tamas Fero,7 Martin Urschler,8 Gabor Kovacs,3,9 Horst Olschewski,3,9 Hans-Ulrich Kauczor,7,10 Mark Wielpütz,7,10 Bertram Jobst,7,10 Tobias Welte,11 Jürgen Behr,2,12 Franziska C Trudzinski,10,13 Robert Bals,14,15 Henrik Watz,16 Claus F Vogelmeier,6 Jürgen Biederer,10,17,18,&ast; Kathrin Kahnert2,12,19,&ast; On behalf of the COSYCONET Study Group1Division for Thoracic Surgery Munich, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich (LMU) and Asklepios Medical Center; Munich-Gauting, Gauting, 82131, Germany; 2Institute for Lung Health and Immunity and Comprehensive Pneumology Center with the CPC-M bioArchive; Helmholtz Center Munich; Member of the German Lung Research Center (DZL), Munich, 81377, Germany; 3Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Lung Vascular Research, Graz, Austria; 4Division of Pulmonology, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria; 5Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich (LMU), Munich, 80336, Germany; 6Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Marburg (UMR), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, 35033, Germany; 7Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 8Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria; 9University Clinic for Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Division of Pulmonology, Graz, Austria; 10Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research DZL, Heidelberg, Germany; 11Department of Respiratory Medicine and Infectious Disease, Member of the German Center of Lung Research, Hannover School of Medicine, Hannover, Germany; 12Department of Medicine V, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 13Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 14Department of Internal Medicine V-Pulmonology, Allergology and Respiratory Critical Care Medicine, Saarland University, Homburg, 66421, Germany; 15Helmholtz Institute for Pharmaceutical Research, Saarbrücken, 66123, Germany; 16Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Centre North, German Centre for Lung Research, Großhansdorf, Germany; 17Faculty of Medicine, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Zu Kiel, Kiel, Germany; 18University of Latvia, Faculty of Medicine, Riga, LV-1586, Latvia; 19MediCenterGermering, Germering, Germany&ast;These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Mircea Gabriel Stoleriu, Division of Thoracic Surgery Munich, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich (LMU) and Asklepios Lung Clinic Munich-Gauting, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377 Munich and Robert-Koch-Allee 2, Gauting, 82131, Germany, Tel +49 89 85791 4201, Email gabriel.stoleriu@helmholtz-munich.dePurpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between computed tomography (CT) quantitative pulmonary vessel morphology and lung function, disease severity, and mortality risk in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).Patients and Methods: Participants of the prospective nationwide COSYCONET cohort study with paired inspiratory-expiratory CT were included. Fully automatic software, developed in-house, segmented arterial and venous pulmonary vessels and quantified volume and tortuosity on inspiratory and expiratory scans. The association between vessel volume normalised to lung volume and tortuosity versus lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 sec [FEV1]), air trapping (residual volume to total lung capacity ratio [RV/TLC]), transfer factor for carbon monoxide (TLCO), disease severity in terms of Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) group D, and mortality were analysed by linear, logistic or Cox proportional hazard regression.Results: Complete data were available from 138 patients (39% female, mean age 65 years). FEV1, RV/TLC and TLCO, all as % predicted, were significantly (p < 0.05 each) associated with expiratory vessel characteristics, predominantly venous volume and arterial tortuosity. Associations with inspiratory vessel characteristics were absent or negligible. The patterns were similar for relationships between GOLD D and mortality with vessel characteristics. Expiratory venous volume was an independent predictor of mortality, in addition to FEV1.Conclusion: By using automated software in patients with COPD, clinically relevant information on pulmonary vasculature can be extracted from expiratory CT scans (although not inspiratory scans); in particular, expiratory pulmonary venous volume predicted mortality.Trial Registration: NCT01245933.Keywords: COPD, computed tomography, pulmonary vasculature, vessel volume, vessel tortuosity, lung function

Peter Alter,1 Cosmina Stoleriu,2 Kathrin Kahnert,3,4 Markus Oliver Henke,5 Robert Bals,6 Franziska C Trudzinski,7 Henrik Watz,8 Tim Speicher,1 Sandra Söhler,1 Tobias Welte,9 Klaus F Rabe,10,11 Emiel FM Wouters,12,13 Claus F Vogelmeier,1 Rudolf A Jörres14 1Department of Medicine, Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany; 2Asklepios Lungenklinik Gauting, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Gauting, Germany; 3Department of Medicine V, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 4MediCenterGermering, Germering, Germany; 5Klinik für Innere Medizin und Pneumologie, Krankenhaus Martha-Maria, Munich, Germany; 6Department of Internal Medicine V, Pulmonology, Allergology, Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, Germany; 7Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Member of the Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 8Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 9Clinic for Pneumology, Hannover Medical School, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany; 10LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 11Department of Medicine, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany; 12Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands; 13Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Lung Health, Vienna, Austria; 14Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, GermanyCorrespondence: Peter Alter, Department of Medicine, Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Baldingerstrasse 1, Marburg, 35033, Germany, Tel +49 6421 5866140, Email Alter@uni-marburg.deBackground: Many patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) continue smoking. We used data from the “real-life” COSYCONET COPD cohort to evaluate whether these patients differed from patients with COPD who either had ceased smoking prior to inclusion or ceased during the follow-up time of the study.Methods: The analysis was based on data from visits 1– 5 (covering 4.5 years), including all patients with the diagnosis of COPD who were either ex-smokers or smokers and categorized as GOLD 1– 4 or the former GOLD 0 category. We compared the characteristics of smokers and ex-smokers at baseline (visit 1), as well as the course of lung function in the follow-up of permanent ex-smokers, permanent smokers and incident ex-smokers (smokers at visit 1 who ceased smoking before visit 5). We also identified baseline factors associated with subsequent smoking cessation.Results: Among 2500 patients who were ever-smokers, 660 were current smokers and 1840 ex-smokers at baseline. Smokers were younger than ex-smokers (mean 61.5 vs 66.0 y), had a longer duration of smoking but fewer pack-years, a lower frequency of asthma, higher forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1, 59.4 vs 55.2% predicted) and higher functional residual capacity (FRC, 147.7 vs 144.3% predicted). Similar results were obtained for the longitudinal subpopulation, comprising 713 permanent ex-smokers, 175 permanent smokers, and 55 incident ex-smokers. When analyzing the time course of lung function, higher FRC, lower FEV1 and the presence of asthma (p < 0.05 each) were associated with incident cessation prior to visit 5, while less airway obstruction was associated with smoking continuation.Conclusion: These findings, which were consistent in the cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, suggest that lung hyperinflation was associated with being or becoming ex-smoker. Possibly, it is perceived by patients as one of the factors motivating their attempts to quit smoking, independent from airway obstruction.Keywords: COPD, smoking, smoking cessation, airway obstruction, lung hyperinflation

Elisabeth J Adams,1 Alexander van Doornewaard,1 Yixuan Ma,1 Nurilign Ahmed,1 Man Ki Cheng,1 Henrik Watz,2 Masakazu Ichinose,3 Tom Wilkinson,4 Mohit Bhutani,5 Christopher J Licskai,6– 8 Katy M E Turner1 1Aquarius Population Health, London, UK; 2Pulmonary Research Institute at Lungen Clinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 3Academic Center of Osaki Citizen Hospital, Osaki, Japan; 4Southampton University Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK; 5University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; 6London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada; 7Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada; 8Asthma Research Group Windsor Essex County Inc., Windsor, Ontario, CanadaCorrespondence: Elisabeth J Adams, Aquarius Population Health, Unit 29 Tileyard Studios, London, N7 9AH, UK, Tel +44 207 993 2930, Email Elisabeth.adams@aquariusph.comIntroduction: COPD is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Management is complex and costly. Although international quality standards for diagnosis and management exist, opportunities remain to improve outcomes, especially in reducing avoidable hospitalisations.Objective: To estimate the potential health and economic impact of improved adherence to guideline-recommended care for prevalent, on-treatment COPD populations in four high-income settings.Methods: A disease simulation model was developed to evaluate the impact of theoretical improvements to COPD management, comparing outcomes for usual care and policy scenarios for interventions that reduce avoidable hospitalisations: 1) increased attendance (50% vs 31– 38%) of early follow-up review after severe exacerbation hospitalisation; 2) increased access (30% vs 5– 10%) to an integrated disease management (IDM) programme that provides guideline adherent care.Results: For cohorts of 100,000 patients, Policy 1 yielded additional life years (England: 523; Germany: 759; Canada: 1316; Japan: 512) and lifetime cost savings (-£ 2.89 million; -€ 6.58 million; -&dollar;40.08 million; -¥ 735.58 million). For Policy 2, additional life years (2299; 3619; 3656) and higher lifetime total costs (£ 38.15 million; € 35.58 million; ¥ 1091.53 million) were estimated in England, Germany and Japan, and additional life years (4299) and cost savings (-&dollar;20.52 million) in Canada. Scenarios found that the cost impact depended on the modelled intervention effect size.Conclusion: Interventions that reduce avoidable hospitalisations are estimated to improve survival and may generate cost savings. This study provides evidence on the theoretical impact of policies to improve COPD care and highlights priority areas for further research to support evidence-based policy decisions.Keywords: health intervention, exacerbations, re-admission, integrated care, economic evaluation

Donald A Mahler,1,2 Henrik Watz,3 Rachel Emerson-Stadler,4 John Ritz,5 Asparuh Gardev,4 Asif Shaikh,6 M Bradley Drummond7 1Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA; 2Valley Regional Hospital, Claremont, NH, USA; 3Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 4Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany; 5Syneos Health, Somerset, NJ, USA; 6Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ridgefield, CT, USA; 7Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USACorrespondence: Donald A Mahler, Tel +1 603 542-6777, Email mahlerdonald@gmail.comBackground: In patients with COPD, inhalation ability should be assessed when considering inhaler choice. To evaluate whether the soft mist inhaler (SMI) is suitable for COPD patients irrespective of inhalation ability, the TRONARTO study investigated the efficacy of dual long-acting bronchodilator therapy delivered via the Respimat® SMI on lung function in patients with COPD stratified by inhalation ability. Tiotropium/olodaterol delivered via the SMI was effective both in patients with peak inspiratory flow (PIF) < 60 L/min and PIF ≥ 60 L/min, measured against medium-low resistance.Methods: This congress compilation summarizes post hoc analyses from the TRONARTO study presented at the annual American Thoracic Society 2022 and European Respiratory Society 2022 meetings. These analyses evaluated PIF in over 200 patients, with PIF measurements taken daily at home for 4 weeks, and in the clinic at baseline, Weeks 2 and 4.Results: Overall, 57.9% of patients had a PIF range (difference between lowest and highest PIF measurements) < 20 L/min (12.4% of patients had PIF range < 10 L/min). At-home PIF range decreased over the study period, suggesting that inhaler training/repeated PIF measurements may help to make patients’ inspiratory effort more consistent. Some patient characteristics correlated with lower PIF (female gender, shorter stature, more severe disease, worse airflow obstruction) and lower PIF range (more severe disease). PIF measurements differed between medium-low and high-resistance settings, highlighting the importance of measuring PIF at the resistance of a patient’s inhaler. PIF correlated poorly with spirometry measurements.Conclusion: As indicated in COPD management guidelines, choice of inhaler is essential to optimize pharmacologic therapies for COPD. Poor inspiratory ability should be viewed as a treatable trait that can help to inform inhaler choice. Inhaler training and consideration of PIF (if patients use a dry powder inhaler) can reduce patient-to-inhaler mismatch, with potential consequences for health status and exacerbation risk.Keywords: COPD, dry powder inhaler, DPI, PIF, suboptimal, congress, variability, characteristics

Anne Meiwald,1 Rupert Gara-Adams,1 Aleix Rowlandson,1 Yixuan Ma,1 Henrik Watz,2 Masakazu Ichinose,3 Jane Scullion,4 Tom Wilkinson,5,6 Mohit Bhutani,7 Georgie Weston,1 Elisabeth J Adams1 1Aquarius Population Health, London, UK; 2Pulmonary Research Institute, LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany; 3Academic Center, Osaki Citizen Hospital, Miyagi, Japan; 4Bush & Co, Northamptonshire, UK; 5Faculty of Medicine, Southampton University, Southampton, Hampshire, UK; 6Respiratory and Allergy, NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Southampton, Hampshire, UK; 7Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, CanadaCorrespondence: Elisabeth J Adams, Aquarius Population Health, Unit 29 Tileyard Studios, London, N7 9AH, UK, Tel +44 (0)207 993 2930, Email elisabeth.adams@aquariusph.comBackground: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. A comprehensive and detailed understanding of COPD care pathways from pre-diagnosis to acute care is required to understand the common barriers to optimal COPD care across diverse health systems.Methods: Country-specific COPD care pathways were created for four high-income countries using international recommendations and country-specific guidelines, then populated with published epidemiological, clinical, and economic data. To refine and validate the pathways, semi-structured interviews using pre-prepared discussion guides and country-specific pathway maps were held with twenty-four primary and secondary care respiratory healthcare professionals. Thematic analysis was then performed on the interview transcripts.Results: The COPD care pathway showed broad consistency across the countries. Three key themes relating to barriers in optimal COPD management were identified across the countries: journey to diagnosis, treatment, and the impact of COVID-19. Common barriers included presentation to healthcare with advanced COPD, low COPD consideration, and sub-optimal acute and chronic disease management. COVID-19 has negatively impacted disease management across the pathway but presents opportunities to retain virtual consultations. Structural factors such as insurance and short duration of appointments also impacted the diagnosis and management of COPD.Conclusion: COPD is an important public health issue that needs urgent prioritization. The use of Evidenced Care Pathways with decision-makers can facilitate evidence-based decision making on interventions and policies to improve care and outcomes for patients and reduce unnecessary resource use and associated costs for the healthcare provider/payer.Keywords: health policy, COPD management, COPD diagnosis, exacerbations, qualitative, pathway mapping

Carolina Fischer,1 Rudolf A Jörres,1 Peter Alter,2 Franziska C Trudzinski,3 Önder Yildirim,4 Robert Bals,5 Claus F Vogelmeier,2 Diego Kauffmann-Guerrero,6 Jürgen Behr,6 Henrik Watz,7 Rolf Holle,8 Kathrin Kahnert6 And members of the COSYCONET study group1Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Munich, Germany; 2Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Marburg (UMR), Germany, Marburg, Germany; 3Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Heidelberg, Germany; 4Institute of Lung Biology and Disease (ILBD), Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Munich, Germany; 5Department of Internal Medicine V - Pulmonology, Allergology, Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, Germany; 6Department of Medicine V, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Munich, Germany; 7Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 8Institute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, GermanyCorrespondence: Kathrin Kahnert, Department of Medicine V, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Ziemssenstraße 1, Munich, 80336, Germany, Email Kathrin.Kahnert@med.uni-muenchen.deIntroduction: In many chronic diseases, including COPD, the patients’ basic knowledge of the disorder has been shown to be relevant for the course of the disease. We studied which clinical and functional characteristics were related to this knowledge as well as the patients’ satisfaction with their knowledge about COPD.Methods: The study population comprised 645 patients of GOLD grades 1– 4 who participated in Visit 6 of the COSYCONET cohort (COPD and Systemic Consequences - Comorbidities Network). The assessments covered a broad panel of clinical and functional characteristics, including generic and disease-specific quality of life and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). The study aim was addressed by two questions, referring to patients’ knowledge of the meaning of FEV1 and the overall satisfaction with their knowledge of COPD.Results: Knowledge of FEV1 was higher in patients of higher spirometric GOLD grades or exacerbation risk, in males, with higher educational level, and after participation in a prior educational training on COPD. Patients with more detailed knowledge showed a higher satisfaction with their knowledge. Satisfaction was associated with higher generic quality of life and a lower CAT score. Furthermore, satisfaction was higher in patients with a treatment plan but lower in patients with cardiac comorbidities. It appeared that females with basic education, high burden from COPD and low quality of life had the greatest knowledge deficits.Discussion: The results suggest room for education programs adapted to the educational level of the participants. They also emphasize the major role of a disease management plan for the patients.Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, knowledge, education, satisfaction

Peter Alter,1 Kathrin Kahnert,2 Franziska C Trudzinski,3 Robert Bals,4 Henrik Watz,5 Tim Speicher,1 Sandra Söhler,1 Stefan Andreas,6 Tobias Welte,7 Klaus F Rabe,8 Emiel FM Wouters,9 Antonia Sassmann-Schweda,10 Hubert Wirtz,11 Joachim H Ficker,12,13 Claus F Vogelmeier,1 Rudolf A Jörres14 1Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), Germany, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany; 2Department of Internal Medicine V, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 3Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 4Department of Internal Medicine V - Pulmonology, Allergology, Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, Germany; 5Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 6LungClinic Immenhausen and Department of Cardiology and Pneumology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Germany, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Göttingen, Germany; 7Clinic for Pneumology, Hannover Medical School, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany; 8LungenClinic Grosshansdorf and Department of Medicine, Christian-Albrechts University, Kiel, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 9Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands and Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Lung Health, Vienna, Austria; 10Center for Clinical Studies, Research Center Borstel, Borstel, Germany; 11Department of Internal Medicine I, Pneumology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany; 12Department of Respiratory Medicine, Allergology and Sleep Medicine, Klinikum Nuremberg, Nürnberg, Germany; 13Paracelsus Medical University Nuremberg, Nürnberg, Germany; 14Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, GermanyCorrespondence: Peter Alter, Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), Baldingerstrasse 1, Marburg, Germany, Email Alter@uni-marburg.deBackground: Multimorbidity plays an important role in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but is also a feature of ageing. We estimated to what extent increases in the prevalence of multimorbidity over time are attributable to COPD progression compared to increasing patient age.Methods: Patients with COPD from the long-term COSYCONET (COPD and Systemic Consequences - Comorbidities Network) cohort with four follow-up visits were included in this analysis. At each visit, symptoms, exacerbation history, quality of life and lung function were assessed, along with the comorbidities heart failure (HF), coronary artery disease (CAD), peripheral arterial disease (PAD), hypertension, sleep apnea, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, hyperuricemia and osteoporosis. Using longitudinal logistic regression analysis, we determined what proportion of the increase in the prevalence of comorbidities could be attributed to patients’ age or to the progression of COPD over visits.Results: Of 2030 patients at baseline, 878 completed four follow-up visits (up to 4.5 years). CAD prevalence increased over time, with similar effects attributable to the 4.5-year follow-up, used as indicator of COPD progression, and to a 5-year increase in patients’ age. The prevalence of HF, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hyperuricemia, osteoporosis and sleep apnea showed stronger contributions of COPD progression than of age; in contrast, age dominated for hypertension and PAD. There were different relationships to patients’ characteristics including BMI and sex. The results were not critically dependent on the duration of COPD prior to enrolment, or the inclusion of patients with all four follow-up visits vs those attending only at least one of them.Conclusion: Analyzing the increasing prevalence of multimorbidity in COPD over time, we separated age-independent contributions, probably reflecting intrinsic COPD-related disease progression, from age-dependent contributions. This distinction might be useful for the individual assessment of disease progression in COPD.Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, comorbidities, multimorbidity, prognosis, disease progression

Mustafa Abdo,1 Frauke Pedersen,1,2 Frederik Trinkmann,3,4 Felix JF Herth,3 Klaus F Rabe,1 Anne-Marie Kirsten,2 Henrik Watz2 1LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 3Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University Hospital Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), Member of German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 4Department of Biomedical Informatics (DBMI) at the Center for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health Baden-Württemberg (CPD-BW), University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, GermanyCorrespondence: Mustafa Abdo, LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Wöhrendamm 80, Grosshansdorf, 22927, Germany, Email m.abdo@lungenclinic.de

Maud Koopman,1– 3 Frits ME Franssen,1– 3 Swetlana Gaffron,4 Henrik Watz,5 Thierry Troosters,6,7 Judith Garcia-Aymerich,8– 10 Pierluigi Paggiaro,11 Eduard Molins,12 Miguel Moya,12 Lindy van Burk,13 Dieter Maier,14 Esther Garcia Gil,12 Emiel FM Wouters,1,3,15 Lowie EGW Vanfleteren,16 Martijn A Spruit1– 3 1Department of Research and Development, CIRO+, Center of Expertise for Chronic Organ Failure, Horn, the Netherlands; 2NUTRIM, School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht, the Netherlands; 3Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), Maastricht, the Netherlands; 4Viscovery Software GmbH, Vienna, Austria; 5Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 6Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, KU Leuven – University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 7Department of Respiratory Diseases, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 8Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), Barcelona, Spain; 9Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain; 10CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Publica (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain; 11Department of Surgery, Medicine, Molecular Biology and Critical Care, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy; 12AstraZeneca, Barcelona, Spain; 13AstraZeneca, Den Haag, the Netherlands; 14Biomax Informatics AB, Planegg, 82152, Germany; 15Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Lung Health, Vienna, Austria; 16COPD Center, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Institute of Medicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenCorrespondence: Maud Koopman, CIRO+, Center of Expertise for Chronic Organ Failure, Hornerheide 1, Horn, 6085 NM, the Netherlands, Email maudkoopman@gmail.comRationale: It is difficult to predict the effects of long-acting bronchodilators (LABD) on lung function, exercise capacity and physical activity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Therefore, the multidimensional response to LABD was profiled in COPD patients participating in the ACTIVATE study and randomized to LABD.Methods: In the ACTIVATE study, patients were randomized to aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate (AB/FF) or placebo for four weeks. The primary outcomes included (1) lung function as measured by functional residual capacity (FRC), residual volume (RV), and spirometric outcomes; (2) exercise performance as measured by a constant work rate cycle ergometry test (CWRT); and (3) physical activity (PA) using an activity monitor. Self-organizing maps (SOMs) were used to create an ordered representation of the patients who were randomly assigned to four weeks of AB/FF and cluster them into different outcome groups.Results: A total of 250 patients were randomized to AB/FF (n = 126) or placebo (n = 124). Patients in the AB/FF group (39.6% women) had moderate-to-severe COPD, static hyperinflation (FRC: 151.4 (27.7)% predicted) and preserved exercise capacity. Six clusters with differential outcomes were identified. Patients in clusters 1 and 2 had significant improvements in lung function compared to the remaining AB/FF-treated patients. Patients in clusters 1 and 3 had significant improvements in CWRT time, and patients in clusters 2, 3 and 6 had significant improvements in PA compared to the remaining AB/FF-treated patients.Conclusion: Individual responses to 4 weeks of AB/FF-treatment in COPD are differential and the degree of change differs across domains of lung function, exercise capacity and PA. These results indicate that clinical response to LABD therapy is difficult to predict and is non-linear, and show doctors that it is important to look at multiple outcomes simultaneously when evaluating the clinical response to LABD therapy.Clinical Trial Registration: The original ACTIVATE study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT02424344.Keywords: COPD, hyperinflation, physical activity

Kathrin Kahnert,1 Rudolf A Jörres,2 Tanja Lucke,2 Franziska C Trudzinski,3 Pontus Mertsch,1 Christiane Bickert,1 Joachim H Ficker,4 Jürgen Behr,1 Robert Bals,5 Henrik Watz,6 Tobias Welte,7 Claus F Vogelmeier,8 Peter Alter8 On behalf of COSYCONET Study Group1Department of Medicine V, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 2Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 3Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 4Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nürnberg General Hospital, Paracelsus Medical University, Nürnberg, Germany; 5Department of Internal Medicine V - Pulmonology, Allergology, Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, Germany; 6Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 7Clinic for Pneumology, Hannover Medical School, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany; 8Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Marburg (UMR), Germany, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, GermanyCorrespondence: Kathrin KahnertDepartment of Medicine V, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, GermanyTel +49 89 4400 52590Fax +49 89 4400 54905Email kathrin.kahnert@med.uni-muenchen.deBackground: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often have osteoporosis and diabetes as comorbid conditions. Anti-diabetic medication, including metformin, has protective effects on osteoporosis in experimental studies. We therefore studied whether patients with COPD receiving anti-diabetic medication had a lower osteoporosis prevalence in a large COPD cohort, COSYCONET.Methods: Assessment of osteoporosis was based on patients’ reports of physician-based diagnoses and the presence of disease-specific medication. The predictive value of physical characteristics, lung function, comorbidities, cardiovascular medication, and the use of anti-inflammatory diabetes medication, including metformin, sulfonylureas, glinides or DPP4I, was evaluated using logistic regression analysis. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01245933.Results: In total, 2222 patients were eligible for analysis (863 [39%] female, mean age 65 y), 515 of whom had higher symptoms and exacerbations (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease group D). Osteoporosis was present in 15.8% of the overall cohort, and in 24.1% of GOLD D patients. Regression analyses identified the following as associated with osteoporosis (p < 0.05): female sex, higher age, lower body-mass index, asthma, higher air trapping, oral steroids, and cardiovascular medication. Although oral anti-diabetic medication was overall not associated with a lower prevalence of osteoporosis (p = 0.131), anti-inflammatory anti-diabetic medication (p = 0.009) and metformin-containing therapy (p = 0.039) were. This was driven by GOLD D patients.Conclusion: In a large COPD cohort, anti-inflammatory diabetes therapy, including metformin, was associated with a lower prevalence of osteoporosis, especially in patients with higher symptoms and exacerbations. These findings suggest a protective effect of common anti-diabetic medication on osteoporosis, possibly as a result of attenuated systemic inflammation.Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, oral corticosteroids, inhaled corticosteroids, anti-inflammatory, metformin, diabetes

Donald A Mahler,1,2 Andrea Ludwig-Sengpiel,3 Gary T Ferguson,4 Alberto de la Hoz,5 John Ritz,6 Asif Shaikh,7 Henrik Watz8 1Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA; 2Section of Pulmonary Medicine, Valley Regional Hospital, Claremont, NH, USA; 3KLB Gesundheitsforschung Lübeck GmbH, Lübeck, Germany; 4Department of Medicine, Pulmonary Research Institute of Southeast Michigan, Farmington Hills, MI, USA; 5Cardio-Metabolism and Respiratory, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany; 6Biostatistics, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ridgefield, CT, USA; 7Clinical Development & Medical Affairs, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ridgefield, CT, USA; 8Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, GermanyCorrespondence: Donald A MahlerMedicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USATel +1 603 542-6777Fax +1 603 543-5613Email mahlerdonald@gmail.comBackground: Inhaled bronchodilator therapy is currently the mainstay of treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Some inhalers require patients to achieve certain inhalation efforts either to activate the device or to deliver medication to the site of action. For dry powder inhalers, low peak inspiratory flow (PIF) can result in poor medication delivery but the clinical significance of this is not well understood.Methods: TRONARTO was a 4-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, parallel-group study which stratified patients with moderate-to-severe COPD according to their PIF against medium-low resistance at screening. Patients were randomized to receive tiotropium/olodaterol (5 μg/5 μg) or matched placebo delivered via the Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler (SMI). After 4 weeks of treatment, we assessed change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) area under the curve 0– 3 hours (FEV1 AUC0– 3h) and trough FEV1.Results: Overall, 213 patients were randomized, of whom 106 received tiotropium/olodaterol (PIF < 60 L/min, 55; PIF ≥ 60 L/min, 51) and 107 received placebo (PIF < 60 L/min, 55; PIF ≥ 60 L/min, 52). For FEV1 AUC0– 3h, the adjusted mean change from baseline versus placebo was 336 mL (95% confidence interval [CI] 246– 425 mL; P< 0.0001) in the PIF < 60 L/min group and 321 mL (95% CI 233– 409 mL; P< 0.0001) in the PIF ≥ 60 L/min group. For trough FEV1, the adjusted mean change from baseline versus placebo was 201 mL (95% CI 117– 286 mL; P< 0.0001) in the PIF < 60 L/min group and 217 mL (95% CI 135– 299 mL; P< 0.0001) in the PIF ≥ 60 L/min group.Conclusion: In the TRONARTO study, which included patients with moderate-to-severe COPD and varying inspiratory flow abilities, treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol resulted in significant lung function improvements versus placebo. This SMI can be used irrespective of the PIF that a patient can generate.Keywords: inhaler, tiotropium/olodaterol, peak inspiratory flow, SMI, lung function

Mustafa Abdo,1 Frederik Trinkmann,2,3 Anne-Marie Kirsten,4 Heike Biller,1 Frauke Pedersen,1,4 Benjamin Waschki,1 Erika Von Mutius,5 Matthias Kopp,6,7 Gesine Hansen,8 Klaus F Rabe,1 Thomas Bahmer,1,9,&ast; Henrik Watz4,&ast; On behalf of the ALLIANCE study group1LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 3Department of Biomedical Informatics, Heinrich-Lanz-Center, University Medical Center Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany; 4Pulmonary Research Institute at the LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 5Dr von Hauner Children’s Hospital, Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich, German Center for Lung Research (DZL), and Institute of Asthma and Allergy Prevention, Helmholtz Centre, Both Munich, Germany; 6Department of Pediatric Respiratory Medicine, Inselspital, University Children’s Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; 7Division of Pediatric Pneumology & Allergology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein-Campus Luebeck, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Luebeck, Germany; 8Department of Paediatric Pneumology, Allergology and Neonatology, Hannover Medical School, Biomedical Research in Endstage and Obstructive Lung Disease (BREATH), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany; 9University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein-Campus Kiel, department for Internal Medicine I, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Kiel, Germany&ast;These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Mustafa AbdoLungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Wöhrendamm 80, Grosshansdorf, 22927, GermanyTel +49 4102 601 2412Email m.abdo@lungenclinic.deRationale: Small airway dysfunction (SAD) is a frequent feature of asthma that has been linked to disease severity and poor symptom control. However, little is known about the role of SAD in nocturnal asthma.Objective: To study the association between the severity of SAD and frequency of nocturnal symptoms compared to conventional lung function testing.Methods: We assessed the frequency of self-reported nocturnal symptoms through the asthma control test. We studied the impact of nocturnal asthma using the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20). We assessed the lung function using spirometry, body plethysmography, impulse oscillometry, single and multiple inert gas washout and measured markers of T2-inflammation (blood and sputum eosinophils; fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNo)). We stratified the patients according to the presence and frequency of nocturnal asthma.Results: A total of 166 asthma patients were enrolled in the analysis. Eighty-seven patients (52%) reported to have nocturnal symptoms at least once in the last four weeks. The odds ratio of nocturnal asthma correlated with the severity of all non-spirometric measures of SAD, yet neither with airflow obstruction (FEV1 and FEV/FVC) nor with large airway resistance (R20). Patients with frequent nocturnal asthma (n = 29) had a numerical increase of T2 markers and more severe SAD, as indicated by all non-spirometric measures of SAD (all p-values < 0.05), worse overall asthma control, increased fatigue and reduced quality of life (all p-values < 0.01) compared to patients with infrequent nocturnal asthma (n = 58) or patients without nocturnal asthma (n = 79). We identified 63 patients without airflow obstruction, nearly 43% of them (n = 27) had nocturnal asthma. In this subgroup, only markers of air trapping and ventilation heterogeneity were significantly elevated and correlated with the frequency of nocturnal symptoms: LCI (Spearman’s coefficient = − 0.42, p < 0.001), RV% (− 0.32, p = 0.02).Conclusion: SAD is closely associated to asthma with nocturnal symptoms. Spirometry might underestimate the broad spectrum of distal lung function impairments in this population of patients.Keywords: small airway dysfunction, nocturnal asthma, ventilation heterogeneity, air trapping

Johanna I Lutter,1 Rudolf A Jörres,2 Franziska C Trudzinski,3 Peter Alter,4 Christina Kellerer,2,5 Henrik Watz,6 Tobias Welte,7 Robert Bals,8 Diego Kauffmann-Guerrero,9 Jürgen Behr,9 Rolf Holle,10 Claus F Vogelmeier,4 Kathrin Kahnert9 On behalf of the COSYCONET study group1Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München GmbH – German Research Center for Environmental Health, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research, Munich, Germany; 2Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, LMU Hospital, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Munich, Germany; 3Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 4Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University Medical Center Giessen and Marburg, Philipps-University Marburg (UMR), Germany, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany; 5School of Medicine, Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany; 6Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 7Department of Pneumology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany; 8Department of Internal Medicine V – Pulmonology, Allergology, Respiratory Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, Germany; 9Department of Medicine V, University of Munich (LMU), Comprehensive Pneumology Center, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 10Institute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, LMU Hospital, Munich, GermanyCorrespondence: Kathrin KahnertDepartment of Internal Medicine V, University of Munich (LMU), LMU Hospital, Ziemssenstraße 1, Munich, 80336, GermanyEmail Kathrin.Kahnert@med.uni-muenchen.deBackground: In COPD patients of GOLD groups A and B, a high degree of treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) has been reported, which is regarded as overtreatment according to GOLD recommendations. We investigated which factors predict ICS use and which relationship it has to clinical and functional outcomes, or healthcare costs.Methods: We used pooled data from visits 1 and 3 of the COSYCONET cohort (n=2741, n=2053, interval 1.5 years) including patients categorized as GOLD grades 1– 4 and GOLD group A or B at both visits (n=1080). Comparisons were performed using ANOVA, and regression analyses using propensity matching and inverse probability weighting to adjust for differences between ICS groups. These were defined as having ICS at both visits (always) vs no ICS at both visits (never). Measures were divided into predictors of ICS treatment and outcomes.Results: Among 1080 patients, 608 patients were eligible for ICS groups (n=297 never, n=311 always). Prior to matching, patients with ICS showed significantly (p< 0.05 each) impaired lung function, symptoms and exacerbation history. After matching, the outcomes generic quality of life and CO diffusing capacity were increased in ICS patients (p< 0.05 each). Moreover, costs for respiratory medication, but not total health care costs, were significantly elevated in the ICS group by 780€ per year.Conclusion: ICS therapy in COPD GOLD A/B patients can have small positive and negative effects on clinical outcomes and health care costs, indicating that the clinical evaluation of ICS over-therapy in COPD requires a multi-dimensional approach.Keywords: COPD, inhaled corticosteroids, GOLD groups, overtreatment

Frauke Pedersen,1,2 Frederik Trinkmann,3 Mustafa Abdo,2 Anne-Marie Kirsten,1 Klaus F Rabe,2 Henrik Watz,1 Simonetta Baraldo,4 Marina Saetta,4 Jens M Hohlfeld,5,6 Olaf Holz5 1Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 3Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik at University Hospital Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 4Department of Cardiac, Thoracic, Vascular Sciences and Public Health, Respiratory Diseases Clinic, University of Padova, Padova, Italy; 5Fraunhofer ITEM, Clinical Airway Research - Biomedical Research in End-Stage and Obstructive Lung Disease Hannover (BREATH), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany; 6Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hannover Medical School (MHH), Biomedical Research in End-Stage and Obstructive Lung Disease Hannover (BREATH), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, GermanyCorrespondence: Frauke PedersenPulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Wöhrendamm 80, Grosshansdorf, D-22927, GermanyTel +49-4102-6016845Fax +49-4102-8881114Email f.pedersen@pulmoresearch.dePurpose: We recently introduced a sputum cell quality score to rate how cell morphology, cellular debris and squamous cell contamination influence inflammatory cell identification during microscopic evaluation. However, sputum cell quality is generally not considered for the interpretation of sputum fluid phase biomarkers. Therefore, we compared the soluble protein concentrations between sputum samples with different cell quality. The impact of cell quality was compared to other factors potentially affecting soluble biomarker concentrations.Methods: A comprehensive sputum dataset from 154 clinically stable COPD patients was used to analyse the differences and the variability of sputum supernatant concentrations for 23 proteins between low, medium, and high sputum cell quality samples. A model was developed and tested to compare the impact of different factors on sputum supernatant protein levels.Results: Mean percentages of sputum macrophages, neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes and lymphocytes showed no significant differences between low, medium and high cell quality levels. The mean percentage of squamous cells were lower, while total cell count/mL sputum and cell viability were significantly higher in sputum samples with higher cell quality. The concentrations of Interleukin-6, Interleukin-8 and Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor 2 were significantly increased in sputum samples of higher cell quality. The variability of most protein concentrations declined with increasing cell quality levels. Sixteen proteins showed significantly negative correlations with the percentage of squamous cells. For 14 proteins we observed a positive correlation with cell number/mL sputum. Multiple regression analysis shows that generally less than 30% of the protein variability can be explained by the included factors.Conclusion: Sputum cell quality has a significant impact on some soluble biomarker concentrations in sputum supernatant. Sputum samples with low sputum cell quality show a higher variability of fluid phase proteins in comparison to medium and high sputum cell quality levels.Keywords: sputum cell quality score, soluble biomarkers, sputum supernatant

Mustafa Abdo,1 Benjamin Waschki,2 Anne-Marie Kirsten,3 Frederik Trinkmann,4,5 Heike Biller,1 Christian Herzmann,6 Erika von Mutius,7 Matthias Kopp,8,9 Gesine Hansen,10 Klaus F Rabe,1 Thomas Bahmer,1,11,* Henrik Watz3,* On behalf of the ALLIANCE study group1LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2Department of Cardiology and Pneumology at Hospital Itzehoe, Itzehoe, Germany; 3Pulmonary Research Institute at the LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 4Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany; 5Department of Biomedical Informatics, Heinrich-Lanz-Center, University Medical Center Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany; 6Research Center Borstel, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Borstel, Germany; 7Dr von Hauner Children’s Hospital, Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 8Department of Pediatric Respiratory Medicine, Inselspital, University Children’s Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; 9Division of Pediatric Pneumology & Allergology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein-Campus Luebeck, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Luebeck, Germany; 10Department of Paediatric Pneumology, Allergology and Neonatology, Hannover Medical School, Biomedical Research in Endstage and Obstructive Lung Disease (BREATH), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany; 11University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein-Campus Kiel, Department for Internal Medicine I, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Kiel, Germany*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Mustafa AbdoLungenClinic Grosshansdorf GmbH, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Wöhrendamm 80, Großhansdorf, 22927, GermanyTel +49 4102 601 2412Email m.abdo@lungenclinic.deRationale: Asthma, obesity and physical activity (PA) are interrelated. However, longitudinal data with objective PA measures and direct assessment of body composition are still lacking.Objective: To study the impact of symptom control on PA and body composition.Methods: In a longitudinal cohort study of the German Center for Lung Research, we assessed the body composition of 233 asthma patients and 84 healthy controls using bioelectrical impedance analysis. PA (ie average daily steps and time of at least moderate activity, steps/min) was measured by accelerometry for one week. Asthma control was assessed by ACT score, ACQ-5 score and history of severe exacerbations. After two years of follow-up, we studied changes in physical activity and body composition in relation to asthma control.Results: Patients with uncontrolled asthma had increased fat mass and decreased muscle mass compared to patients with controlled asthma or healthy controls. Both fat mass and muscle mass correlated better with asthma control than the body mass index (BMI). In multivariate regressions adjusted for age and sex, asthma control and physical activity were independent predictors of body composition (R2 = 0.61, p

Sanjay Ramakrishnan,1– 3 Wim Janssens,4 Pierre-Regis Burgel,5 Marco Contoli,6 Frits ME Franssen,7 Neil J Greening,8 Timm Greulich,9 Iwein Gyselinck,4 Andreas Halner,1 Arturo Huerta,10 Rebecca L Morgan,11 Jennifer K Quint,12 Lowie EGW Vanfleteren,13 Kristina Vermeersch,4 Henrik Watz,14 Mona Bafadhel1 1Respiratory Medicine Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine - Experimental Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; 2 National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; 3School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia; 4Department of Respiratory Diseases, UZ Leuven, Research Group BREATHE, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 5Faculty of Medicine, University of Paris and INSERM 1016 Institut Cochin, Cochin Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France; 6Department of Morphology, Surgery and Experimental Medicine, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy; 7Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, Netherlands; 8Department of Respiratory Sciences, NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (Respiratory), Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK; 9Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University Medical Centre Giessen and Marburg, Philipps University, Member of the German Centre for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany; 10Pulmonary and Critical Care Division, Clinica Sagrada Familia, IDIBAPS August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain; 11Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada; 12National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK; 13COPD Center, Department of Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of Internal Medicine and Clinical Nutrition at Institute of Medicine, SU Sahlgrenska, Göteborg, Sweden; 14Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, GermanyCorrespondence: Mona BafadhelRespiratory Medicine Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine Experimental Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKTel +44 1865 612898Email mona.bafadhel@ndm.ox.ac.ukBackground: Despite hospitalization for exacerbation being a high-risk event for morbidity and mortality, there is little consensus globally regarding the assessment and management of hospitalised exacerbations of COPD. We aimed to establish a consensus list of symptoms, physiological measures, clinical scores, patient questionnaires and investigations to be obtained at time of hospitalised COPD exacerbation and follow-up.Methods: A modified Delphi online survey with pre-defined consensus of importance, feasibility and frequency of measures at hospitalisation and follow-up of a COPD exacerbation was undertaken.Findings: A total of 25 COPD experts from 18 countries contributed to all 3 rounds of the survey. Experts agreed that a detailed history and examination were needed. Experts also agreed on which treatments are needed and how soon these should be delivered. Experts recommended that a full blood count, renal function, C-reactive protein and cardiac blood biomarkers (BNP and troponin) should be measured within 4 hours of admission and that the modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale (mMRC) and COPD assessment test (CAT) should be performed at time of exacerbation and follow-up. Experts encouraged COPD clinicians to strongly consider discussing palliative care, if indicated, at time of hospitalisation.Interpretation: This Europe-wide consensus document is the first attempt to standardise the assessment and care of patients hospitalised for COPD exacerbations. This should be regarded as the starting point to build knowledge and evidence on patients hospitalised for COPD exacerbations.Keywords: COPD, disease exacerbation, hospitalisation, patient care, consensus development, expert opinion

Gary T Ferguson,1 Asif Shaikh,2 Kay Tetzlaff,3 Achim Mueller,3 Helgo Magnussen,4 Henrik Watz4 1Pulmonary Research Institute of Southeast Michigan, Farmington Hills, MI, USA; 2Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Ridgefield, CT, USA; 3Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Biberach an der Riss, Germany; 4Pulmonary Research Institute at Lung Clinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, GermanyCorrespondence: Gary T FergusonPulmonary Research Institute of Southeast Michigan, Suite A, 29255 W 10 Mile Road, Farmington Hills, MI, USATel +1 248-478-6561Fax +1 248-478-6908Email garytferguson@msn.comPurpose: In the Withdrawal of Inhaled Steroids during Optimized Bronchodilator Management (WISDOM) trial, inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) withdrawal in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease receiving triple therapy (long-acting β2-agonist+long-acting muscarinic antagonist+ICS) did not change moderate/severe exacerbation risk. However, many patients were not taking triple therapy before study participation. This analysis was conducted to eliminate the impact of non-ICS users on WISDOM results by re-analyzing the data using only the subset of patients who were taking triple therapy at screening.Patients and Methods: The effect of ICS withdrawal on moderate/severe exacerbation risk in the subgroup of WISDOM patients taking triple therapy before enrolling in the study was evaluated in this post hoc analysis. Additionally, the effect of ICS withdrawal in patients with a history of ≥ 2 exacerbations in the previous year and various blood eosinophil counts was assessed.Results: Overall, 39.0% (n=970: ICS continuation, 479; ICS withdrawal, 491) of the WISDOM trial population were taking triple therapy at screening. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between groups. Moderate/severe exacerbation risk between the ICS withdrawal and continuation groups (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89– 1.25) was not increased in patients taking triple therapy at screening versus the overall trial population (HR [95% CI]: 1.06 [0.94– 1.19]). However, in patients with a history of ≥ 2 exacerbations, exacerbation risk (HR [95% CI]) increased nominally with blood eosinophil count from 1.07 [0.81– 1.41] (≥ 100 cells/μL) to 1.45 [0.58– 3.60] (≥ 400 cells/μL).Conclusion: Consistent with results from the overall WISDOM trial population, ICS withdrawal did not increase exacerbation risk in patients taking triple therapy at screening. Patients with a history of frequent exacerbations and higher blood eosinophil counts could benefit from continuation of ICS-based therapy.Keywords: COPD, dual bronchodilator, glucocorticoid, triple therapy

Johanna I Lutter,1 Rudolf A Jörres,2 Tobias Welte,3 Henrik Watz,4 Benjamin Waschki,5 Peter Alter,6 Franziska C Trudzinski,7 Johan Ohlander,1,8 Jürgen Behr,9 Robert Bals,10 Michael Studnicka,11 Rolf Holle,12 Claus F Vogelmeier,6 Kathrin Kahnert9 1Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München GmbH - German Research Center for Environmental Health, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research, Munich, Germany; 2Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich 80336, Germany; 3Department of Pneumology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover 30625, Germany; 4Pulmonary Research Institute at Lungen Clinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf 22927, Germany; 5Department of General and Interventional Cardiology, University Heart Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany; 6Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University Medical Center Giessen and Marburg, Philipps-University Marburg (UMR), Germany, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg 35043, Germany; 7Department of Diagnostic & Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 8Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht 3584 CM, Netherlands; 9Department of Internal Medicine V, University of Munich (LMU), Comprehensive Pneumology Center, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, 80336, Germany; 10Department of Internal Medicine V – Pulmonology, Allergology, Respiratory Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg 66424, Germany; 11Department of Pneumology, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Universitätsklinikum Salzburg, Salzburg 5020, Austria; 12Institute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University Hospital Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich (LMU), Munich 81377, GermanyCorrespondence: Kathrin KahnertDepartment of Internal Medicine V, University of Munich (LMU), Comprehensive Pneumology Center, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Ziemssenstr. 1, Munich 80336, GermanyEmail Kathrin.Kahnert@med.uni-muenchen.deBackground: Beyond smoking, several risk factors for the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been described, among which socioeconomic status including education is of particular interest. We studied the contribution of education to lung function and symptoms relative to smoking in a group of never-smokers with COPD compared to a group of long-time ex-smokers with COPD.Methods: We used baseline data of the COSYCONET cohort, including patients of GOLD grades 1– 4 who were either never-smokers (n=150, age 68.5y, 53.3% female) or ex-smokers (≥ 10 packyears) for at least 10 years (n=616, 68.3y, 29.9% female). Socioeconomic status was analyzed using education level and mortality was assessed over a follow-up period of 4.5 years. Analyses were performed using ANOVA and regression models.Results: Spirometric lung function did not differ between groups, whereas CO diffusing capacity and indicators of lung hyperinflation/air-trapping showed better values in the never-smoker group. In both groups, spirometric lung function depended on the education level, with better values for higher education. Quality of life and 6-MWD were significantly different in never-smokers as well as patients with higher education. Asthma, alpha-1-antitrypsin deficiency, and bronchiectasis were more often reported in never-smokers, and asthma was more often reported in patients with higher education. Higher education was also associated with reduced mortality (hazard ratio 0.46; 95% CI 0.22– 0.98).Conclusion: Overall, in the COSYCONET COPD cohort, differences in functional status between never-smokers and long-time ex-smokers were not large. Compared to that, the dependence on education level was more prominent, with higher education associated with better outcomes, including mortality. These data indicate that non-smoking COPD patients’ socioeconomic factors are relevant and should be taken into account by clinicians.Keywords: COPD, never-smoker, education, socioeconomic status

Henrik Watz,1 Kathleen Rickard,2 Tara Rheault,2 Thomas Bengtsson,3 Dave Singh4 1Pulmonary Research Institute at Lung Clinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2Verona Pharma Plc, Raleigh, NC, USA; 3StatMind AB, Lund, Sweden; 4Medicines Evaluation Unit, University of Manchester & Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UKCorrespondence: Henrik WatzPulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Centre North (ARCN), German Centre for Lung Research (DZL), Wöhrendamm 80, Grosshansdorf 22927, GermanyTel +49-4102-8881-0Fax +49-4102-8881-114Email h.watz@pulmoresearch.deIntroduction: Ensifentrine is an inhaled first-in-class dual inhibitor of phosphodiesterase (PDE) 3 and 4. In a four-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), nebulized ensifentrine 0.75 to 6mg twice daily significantly improved bronchodilation and symptoms, with all doses being well tolerated. Here, we report data for a number of prespecified exploratory and post hoc endpoints from this study that help to further profile the effect of ensifentrine on symptoms.Methods: Eligible patients were males or females aged 40– 75 years with COPD, post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second 40– 80% predicted. Other than being clinically stable for at least four weeks prior to entry, there were no symptomatic inclusion or exclusion criteria. The outcome measures reported in this manuscript are the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms [E-RS™:COPD] questionnaire total score and subscales (breathlessness, cough/sputum and chest symptoms) at Weeks 1– 4, Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score at Weeks 2 and 4, and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire – COPD Specific (SGRQ-C) total score and domain data (symptoms, activity and impacts) at Week 4.Results: There was a gradual improvement versus placebo with all ensifentrine doses for all three E-RS™:COPD subscales from Week 1 to Week 4, with the greatest ensifentrine effect on the breathlessness subscale, and all four doses superior to placebo from Week 2 onwards (p< 0.05). For TDI focal score, all ensifentrine doses were superior to placebo at Weeks 2 and 4 (p< 0.05). In the individual SGRQ-C domains at Week 4, ensifentrine had the greatest effect on the symptoms domain, with ensifentrine 6mg superior to placebo (p< 0.05).Conclusion: In these analyses, ensifentrine demonstrated a notable early and meaningful effect on dyspnea, with this effect observed across two different assessment tools.Keywords: phosphodiesterase inhibitors, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, signs and symptoms, respiratory, drug therapy

Norbert Königsdorfer,1 Rudolf A Jörres,1 Sandra Söhler,2 Tobias Welte,3 Jürgen Behr,4 Joachim H Ficker,5 Robert Bals,6 Henrik Watz,7 Johanna I Lutter,8 Tanja Lucke,1 Frank Biertz,9 Peter Alter,10 Claus F Vogelmeier,10 Kathrin Kahnert4 1Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich 80336, Germany; 2ASCONET Study Coordination Office, University of Marburg, Marburg 35043, Germany; 3Department of Pneumology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover 30625, Germany; 4Department of Internal Medicine V, University of Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center, Member of the German Center for Lung Research, Munich 80336, Germany; 5Department of Respiratory Medicine, Allergology and Sleep Medicine, General Hospital Nuernberg, Paracelsus Medical University, Nuernberg, Germany; 6Department of Internal Medicine V, Pneumology, Allergology, Respiratory Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg 66424, Germany; 7Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North, Member of the German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf 22927, Germany; 8Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München GmbH – German Research Center for Environmental Health, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Munich 85764, Germany; 9Institute for Biostatistics, Hannover Medical School, Hannover 30625, Germany; 10Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University Medical Center Giessen and Marburg, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg 35043, GermanyCorrespondence: Kathrin KahnertDepartment of Internal Medicine V, University of Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center, Member of the German Center for Lung Research, Ziemssenstr. 1, Munich 80336, GermanyTel +49 89 4400 2590Email Kathrin.Kahnert@med.uni-muenchen.deBackground: Adherence to COPD medication is often considered to be lower than in other chronic diseases. In view of the frequent comorbidities of COPD, the economic impact of nonadherence and the potential for adverse effects, a direct comparison between the adherence to respiratory and nonrespiratory medication in the same patients seems of particular interest.Objectives: We aimed to investigate the intake of respiratory and nonrespiratory medication in the same patients with COPD and frequent comorbidities.Method: Within the COPD cohort COSYCONET, we contacted 1042 patients, mailing them a list with all medication regarding all their diseases, asking for regular, irregular and non-intake.Results: Valid responses were obtained in 707 patients covering a wide spectrum of drugs. Intake of LABA, LAMA or ICS was regular in 91.9% of patients, even higher for cardiovascular and antidiabetes medication but lower for hyperlipidemia and depression/anxiety medication. Regular intake of respiratory medication did not depend on GOLD groups A-D or grades 1–4, was highest in patients with concomitant cardiovascular disorders and was lowest for concomitant asthma. It was slightly larger for LAMA and LABA administered via combined compared to single inhalers, and lower when similar compounds were prescribed twice. Most differences did not reach statistical significance owing to the overall high adherence.Conclusion: Our results indicate a high adherence to respiratory medication in participants of a COPD cohort, especially in those with cardiovascular comorbidities. Compared to the lower adherence reported in the literature for COPD patients, our observations still suggest some room for improvement, possibly through disease management programs.Keywords: COPD, treatment adherence, respiratory medication, nonrespiratory medication

Peter Alter,1 Barbara A Mayerhofer,2 Kathrin Kahnert,3 Henrik Watz,4 Benjamin Waschki,5,6 Stefan Andreas,7,8 Frank Biertz,9 Robert Bals,10 Claus F Vogelmeier,1 Rudolf A Jörres2 1Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany; 2Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 3Department of Internal Medicine V, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 4Pulmonary Research Institute at Lungen Clinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 5Department of Pneumology, LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 6Department of General and Interventional Cardiology, University Heart Center, Hamburg, Germany; 7Department of Cardiology and Pneumology, University Medical Center, Goettingen, Germany; 8Lung Clinic, Immenhausen, Germany; 9Institute for Biostatistics, Center for Biometry, Medical Informatics and Medical Technology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany; 10Department of Internal Medicine V - Pulmonology, Allergology, Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, GermanyCorrespondence: Peter AlterDepartment of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Philipps University of Marburg (UMR), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Baldingerstrasse 1, Marburg 35033, GermanyTel +49 6 421 586 6140Email Alter@uni-marburg.de&#x00A0Rudolf A JörresInstitute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the Center for Lung Research (DZL), Ziemssenstrasse 1, Munich 80336, GermanyTel +49 8 944 005 2466Email Rudolf.Joerres@med.uni-muenchen.de &#x00A0Background: A substantial prevalence of cardiovascular disease is known for COPD, but detection of its presence, relationship to functional findings and contribution to symptoms remains challenging. The present analysis focusses on the cardiovascular contribution to COPD symptoms and their relationship to the patients’ diagnostic status, medication and echocardiographic findings.Methods: Patients from the COPD cohort COSYCONET with data on lung function, including FEV1, residual volume/total lung capacity (RV/TLC) ratio, diffusing capacity TLCO, and echocardiographic data on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), medical history, medication, modified British Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (mMRC) and Saint Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) were analyzed.Results: A total of 1591 patients (GOLD 0–4: n=230/126/614/498/123) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Ischemic heart disease, myocardial infarction or heart failure were reported in 289 patients (18.2%); 860 patients (54%) received at least one cardiovascular medication, with more than one in many patients. LVEF56 mm was found in 204 patients (12.8%), of whom 74 (36.3%) had neither a cardiovascular history nor medication. Among 948 patients (59.6%) without isolated hypertension, there were 21/55 (38.2%) patients with LVEF56 mm, who lacked both a cardiac diagnosis and medication. LVEDD and LVEF were linked to medical history; LVEDD was dependent on RV/TLC and LVEF on FEV1. Exertional COPD symptoms were best described by mMRC and the SGRQ activity score. Beyond lung function, an independent link from LVEDD on symptoms was revealed.Conclusion: A remarkable proportion of patients with suspicious echocardiographic findings were undiagnosed and untreated, implying an increased risk for an unfavorable prognosis. Cardiac size and function were dependent on lung function and only partially linked to cardiovascular history. Although the contribution of LV size to COPD symptoms was small compared to lung function, it was detectable irrespective of all other influencing factors. However, only the mMRC and SGRQ activity component were found to be suitable for this purpose.Keywords: COPD, heart failure, echocardiography, medication, dyspnea, symptoms

Sanjay Sethi,1 Edward Kerwin,2 Henrik Watz,3 Gary T Ferguson,4 Robert M Mroz,5,6 Rosa Segarra,7 Eduard Molins,7 Diana Jarreta,7 Esther Garcia Gil7 1Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, SUNY, Buffalo, NY, USA; 2Clinical Research Institute, Medford, OR, USA; 3Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North, German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 4Pulmonary Research Institute of Southeast Michigan, Farmington Hills, MI, USA; 5Centrum Medycyny Oddechowej, Białystok, Poland; 6Medical University of Białystok, Białystok, Poland; 7AstraZeneca, Barcelona, Spain Background: AMPLIFY assessed the efficacy and safety of aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate (AB/FF) vs its monocomponents and tiotropium (TIO) in patients with moderate-to-very severe symptomatic COPD (NCT02796677).Methods: In this 24-week, Phase III, double-dummy, active-controlled study, symptomatic patients (COPD Assessment Test score ≥10) were randomized to twice-daily AB/FF 400/12 µg, AB 400 µg, or FF 12 µg, or once-daily TIO 18 µg. Co-primary endpoints were change from baseline at week 24 in 1-hour morning post-dose FEV1 (AB/FF vs AB) and in pre-dose (trough) FEV1 (AB/FF vs FF). Non-inferiority of AB vs TIO in pre-dose FEV1 was also an objective. Normalized area under the curve (AUC)0–3/3 h FEV1 and nighttime and early morning symptoms were also assessed. A subgroup participated in a 24-hour serial spirometry sub-study.Results: A total of 1,594 patients were randomized; 566 entered the sub-study. At week 24, 1-hour post-dose FEV1 significantly improved with AB/FF vs AB, FF, and TIO (84, 84, and 92 mL; all P

Frauke Pedersen,1,2 Ulrich M Zissler,3 Henrik Watz,2 Klaus F Rabe,1 Jens M Hohlfeld,4,5 Olaf Holz41LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 3Center of Allergy & Environment (ZAUM), Technical University of Munich and Helmholtz Center Munich, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Germany, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 4Fraunhofer ITEM, Clinical Airway Research – Biomedical Research in End-stage and Obstructive Lung Disease Hannover (BREATH), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany; 5Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hannover Medical School (MHH), Biomedical Research in End-stage and Obstructive Lung Disease Hannover (BREATH), Hannover, GermanyBackgroundInduced sputum is a method to assess airway inflammation in clinical trials for asthma and COPD.1–3 Sputum is a heterogeneous, viscous material containing inflammatory cell plugs, cellular debris, mucus, and saliva with squamous cells.The quality of sputum cell preparations for differential cell count analysis depends on multiple factors and can be highly variable.4,5 Percentage of squamous cell contamination (SQ%) is often used to assess the quality of sputum cell preparations.6Here, we evaluated a comprehensive quality score,7 which also includes an assessment of the inflammatory cell morphology and amount of cellular debris.

Timm Greulich,1 Sina Mager,1 Tanja Lucke,2 Andreas Rembert Koczulla,1 Robert Bals,3 Sebastian Fähndrich,3 Rudolf A Jörres,2 Peter Alter,1 Anne Kirsten,4 Claus Franz Vogelmeier,1 Henrik Watz4 1Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University Medical Centre Giessen and Marburg, Philipps-University, Member of the German Centre for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany; 2Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany; 3Department of Internal Medicine V, Pulmonology, Allergology, Respiratory and Intensive Care Medicine, Saarland Hospital, Homburg/Saar, Germany; 4Pulmonary Research Institute at Lungen Clinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North (ARCN), Member of the German Centre for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, GermanyIt has been increasingly recognized that the numbers of blood eosinophils (eos) might be an important biomarker in patients with COPD to identify patients at risk for exacerbations and for treatment to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment or anti-interleukin-5 therapy.1–3 However, data about the stability of blood eos counts over time are rare. We used data from the multicenter COSYCONET study to analyze the variability of eos by strata over a period of 18 months.4

Lena Heinbockel,1,2 Sebastian Marwitz,1,2 Andra B Schromm,3 Henrik Watz,2,4 Christian Kugler,2,5 Ole Ammerpohl,2,6 Karoline Schnepf,7 Klaus F Rabe,2,5 Daniel Droemann,2,7 Torsten Goldmann1,2 1Pathology of the University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Campus Luebeck and Research Center Borstel, Borstel, Germany; 2Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Großhansdorf, Germany; 3Immunobiophysics, Research Center Borstel, Borstel, Germany; 4Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 5LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 6Institute of Human Genetics, University Medical Center Ulm, Ulm, Germany; 7Medical Clinic III, Pulmonology/Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, Luebeck, Germany Introduction: As part of a study aimed at illuminating at least some of the complex molecular events taking place in COPD, we screened tissues by means of transcriptome analyses. Materials and methods: Tissues were subjected to transcriptome analysis. Candidate genes were identified and validated by immunohistochemistry. Primary human lung cells were subjected to stimulation with cigarette smoke extract for further validation by real time PCR. Results: Six candidate genes were selected for further investigations: Aquaporin 3 (AQP3), extracellular matrix protein 1 (ECM1), four and a half LIM domain 1 (FHL1), milk fat globule epidermal growth factor 8 (MFGE8, lactadherin), phosphodiesterase 4D-interacting protein (PDE4DIP), and creatine transporter SLC6A8. All six proteins were allocated to distinct cell types by immunohistochemistry. Upon stimulation with cigarette smoke extract, human type II pneumocytes showed a dose-dependent down-regulation of MFGE8, while ECM1 and FHL1 also tended to be down-regulated. Although present, none of the candidates was regulated by cigarette smoke extract in primary human macrophages. Discussion: MFGE8 turned out to be an interesting new candidate gene in COPD deserving further studies. Keywords: COPD, transcriptome, MFGE8, CSE, cigarette smoke extract, ETS2

Henrik Watz,1 Nitin Bagul,2 Klaus F Rabe,3,4 Stephen Rennard,5,6 Vijay KT Alagappan,7 Jonas Román,8 Axel Facius,9 Peter MA Calverley10 1Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North, German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2DNA Medical Ltd, Langley, UK; 3Department of Pulmonary Medicine, LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North, German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf, 4Department of Medicine, Christian Albrecht University Kiel, Kiel, Germany; 5Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA; 6AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK; 7AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD, USA; 8AstraZeneca R&D, Gothenburg, Sweden; 9thinkQ2 AG, Baar, Switzerland; 10Department of Clinical Sciences, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK Background: The oral selective phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor roflumilast (ROF) reduces exacerbations in patients with severe COPD. Adverse events (AEs) can cause early ROF discontinuation. Alternative dosing strategies may help patients continue their therapy. Methods: In this multicenter, double-blind trial, 1,321 patients with severe COPD were randomized 1:1:1 to 4 weeks’ treatment with ROF 250 µg once daily (OD), 500 µg every other day (EOD), or 500 µg OD, each followed by ROF 500 µg OD for 8 weeks, plus standard therapy. The primary end point was the percentage of patients prematurely discontinuing study treatment. Results: Patients in the 250 µg OD/500 µg OD group had significantly fewer treatment discontinuations (odds ratio [OR] 0.66 [95% CI 0.47–0.93], p=0.017) and lower rates of AEs of interest such as diarrhea, nausea, headache, decreased appetite, insomnia and abdominal pain (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.47–0.83], p=0.001) compared with those in the 500 µg OD group. Although rates of discontinuation and AEs of interest were numerically lower with ROF 500 µg EOD/500 µg OD, the difference was not significant (OR 0.76, p=0.114, and OR 0.78, p=0.091, respectively) compared with ROF 500 µg OD. Conclusion: A dose of ROF 250 µg OD for 4 weeks before escalation to the approved maintenance dose of 500 µg OD resulted in reduced treatment discontinuation and improved tolerability. Keywords: roflumilast, COPD, discontinuation, adverse event

Henrik Watz,1 Thierry Troosters,2 Kai M Beeh,3 Judith Garcia-Aymerich,4–6 Pierluigi Paggiaro,7 Eduard Molins,8 Massimo Notari,9 Antonio Zapata,10 Diana Jarreta,8 Esther Garcia Gil8 1Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North, German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Pulmonary Rehabilitation and Respiratory Division, University Hospital Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 3insaf Respiratory Research Institute GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany; 4Barcelona Institute of Global Health (ISGlobal), Barcelona, Spain; 5Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain; 6CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain; 7Department of Surgery, Medicine, Molecular Biology and Critical Care, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy; 8AstraZeneca PLC, Barcelona, Spain; 9A. Menarini Farmaceutica Internazionale S.R.L., Firenze, Italy; 10Laboratorios Menarini, S.A., Badalona, Spain Abstract: The Phase IV, 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled ACTIVATE study (NCT02424344) evaluated the effect of aclidinium/formoterol (AB/FF) 400/12 µg twice daily on lung hyperinflation, exercise capacity, and physical activity in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Patients received AB/FF (n=134) or placebo (n=133) (1:1) via the Genuair™/Pressair® dry powder inhaler for 8 weeks. From Weeks 5 to 8, all patients participated in behavioral intervention (BI; daily messages providing step goals). The primary end point was trough functional residual capacity (FRC) at Week 4. Exercise endurance time and physical activity were assessed at Week 4 (pharmacotherapy only) and at Week 8 (8 weeks of pharmacotherapy plus 4 weeks of BI). Other end points included post-dose FRC, residual volume, and inspiratory capacity (IC) at rest and during exercise. After 4 weeks, trough FRC improved with AB/FF versus placebo but did not reach significance (125 mL; P=0.0690). However, post-dose FRC, residual volume, and IC at rest improved significantly with AB/FF at Week 4 versus placebo (all P

Benjamin Waschki,1–3 Henrik Watz,2,3 Olaf Holz,4,5 Helgo Magnussen,2,3 Beata Olejnicka,6 Tobias Welte,5,7 Klaus F Rabe,1,3 Sabina Janciauskiene5,7 1Pneumology, LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 2Pulmonary Research Institute at LungenClinic Grosshansdorf, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 3Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Grosshansdorf, Germany; 4Fraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine, Hannover, Germany; 5Biomedical Research in Endstage and Obstructive Lung Disease Hannover (BREATH), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Hannover, Germany; 6Department of Medicine, Trelleborg Hospital, Trelleborg, Sweden; 7Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany Introduction: Plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), a major inhibitor of fibrinolysis, is associated with thrombosis, obesity, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and premature aging, which all are coexisting conditions of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The role of PAI-1 in COPD with respect to metabolic and cardiovascular functions is unclear. Methods: In this study, which was nested within a prospective cohort study, the serum levels of PAI-1 were cross-sectionally measured in 74 stable COPD patients (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] Stages I–IV) and 18 controls without lung disease. In addition, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, fasting plasma glucose, waist circumference, blood pressure, smoking status, high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), adiponectin, ankle–brachial index, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and history of comorbidities were also determined. Results: The serum levels of PAI-1 were significantly higher in COPD patients than in controls, independent of a broad spectrum of possible confounders including metabolic and cardiovascular dysfunction. A multivariate regression analysis revealed triglyceride and hs-CRP levels to be the best predictors of PAI-1 within COPD. GOLD Stages II and III remained independently associated with higher PAI-1 levels in a final regression analysis. Conclusion: The data from the present study showed that the serum levels of PAI-1 are higher in patients with COPD and that moderate-to-severe airflow limitation, hypertriglyceridemia, and systemic inflammation are independent predictors of an elevated PAI-1 level. PAI-1 may be a potential biomarker candidate for COPD-specific and extra-pulmonary manifestations. Keywords: plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, inflammation, hypertriglyceridemia, ankle-brachial index, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide

Roberto Rodriguez-Roisin,1 Kay Tetzlaff,2,3 Henrik Watz,4 Emiel FM Wouters,5 Bernd Disse,2 Helen Finnigan,6 Helgo Magnussen,4 Peter MA Calverley7 1Respiratory Institute, Servei de Pneumologia, Hospital Clínic IDIBAPS-CIBERES, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; 2Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Ingelheim, Germany; 3Department of Sports Medicine, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; 4Pulmonary Research Institute at Lung Clinic Grosshansdorf, Airway Research Center North, German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 5Department of Respiratory Medicine, University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands; 6Department of Biostatistics and Data Sciences, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bracknell, UK; 7Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool, UK Abstract: The WISDOM study (NCT00975195) reported a change in lung function following withdrawal of fluticasone propionate in patients with severe to very severe COPD treated with tiotropium and salmeterol. However, little is known about the validity of home-based spirometry measurements of lung function in COPD. Therefore, as part of this study, following suitable training, patients recorded daily home-based spirometry measurements in addition to undergoing periodic in-clinic spirometric testing throughout the study duration. We subsequently determined the validity of home-based spirometry for detecting changes in lung function by comparing in-clinic and home-based forced expiratory volume in 1 second in patients who underwent stepwise fluticasone propionate withdrawal over 12 weeks versus patients remaining on fluticasone propionate for 52 weeks. Bland–Altman analysis of these data confirmed good agreement between in-clinic and home-based measurements, both across all visits and at the individual visits at study weeks 6, 12, 18, and 52. There was a measurable difference between the forced expiratory volume in 1 second values recorded at home and in the clinic (mean difference of -0.05 L), which may be due to suboptimal patient effort in performing unsupervised recordings. However, this difference remained consistent over time. Overall, these data demonstrate that home-based and in-clinic spirometric measurements were equally valid and reliable for assessing lung function in patients with COPD, and suggest that home-based spirometry may be a useful tool to facilitate analysis of changes in lung function on a day-to-day basis. Keywords: FEV1, home-based spirometry, inhaled corticosteroid, lung function, severe COPD