copd

A Multidimensional Diagnostic Approach for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

PMID (1):

40549395

MeSH

Pulmonary Disease

Chronic Obstructive

Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines for use of inhaled medications for treatment of patients with COPD. James W. Mold, MPH

Free full text

View

This JAMA Clinical Guidelines Synopsis summarizes the 2025 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) recommendations for inhaled pharmacotherapy for stable COPD.

Author/s:

Nathan C Nowalk, Andrew M Davis, Krysta S Wolfe

A Multidimensional Diagnostic Approach for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Alex Haga — Mon, 19 May 2025 15:22:35 +0000

Date Added:

May 19, 2025

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publication Date:

May 18, 2025

URL:

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2025.7358

Keywords

Dupilumab for COPD with Blood Eosinophil Evidence of Type 2 Inflammation

pulmonary disease

PMID (1):

40382791

MeSH

Multidimensional criteria for the diagnosis of COPD. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: Individuals at risk for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but without spirometric airflow obstruction can have respiratory symptoms and structural lung disease on chest computed tomography. Current guidelines recommend COPD diagnostic schemas that do not incorporate imaging abnormalities.

Objective: To determine whether a multidimensional COPD diagnostic schema that includes respiratory symptoms and computed tomographic imaging abnormalities identifies additional individuals with disease.

Design, setting, and participants: This cohort study included 2 longitudinal cohorts: the Genetic Epidemiology of COPD (COPDGene), which enrolled 10 305 participants between November 9, 2007, and April 15, 2011, with longitudinal follow-up through August 31, 2022; and the Canadian Cohort Obstructive Lung Disease (CanCOLD), which enrolled 1561 participants between November 26, 2009, and July 15, 2015, with follow-up through December 31, 2023.

Exposure: Exposure included the new multidimensional COPD diagnostic schema, defined by (1) major diagnostic category: presence of the major criterion (airflow obstruction based on postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration [FEV1]/forced vital capacity ratio <0.70) and at least 1 of 5 minor criteria (emphysema or bronchial wall thickening on computed tomography, dyspnea, poor respiratory quality of life, and chronic bronchitis); or (2) minor diagnostic category: presence of least 3 of 5 minor criteria (which must include emphysema and bronchial wall thickening for individuals with respiratory symptoms potentially due to other causes).

Main outcomes and measures: All-cause mortality, respiratory cause-specific mortality, exacerbations, and annualized change in FEV1.

Results: Among 9416 adults in COPDGene (mean [SD] age at enrollment, 59.6 [9.0] years; 5035 [53.5%] were men; 3071 [32.6%] were Black; 6345 (67.4%) were White; 4943 [52.5%] currently smoked), 811 of 5250 individuals (15.4%) without airflow obstruction were newly classified as having COPD by minor diagnostic category, and 282 of 4166 individuals (6.8%) with airflow obstruction were classified as not having COPD. Reclassified individuals with a new COPD diagnosis had greater all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.67-2.35; P < .001) and respiratory-specific mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.58; 95% CI, 1.56-8.20; P = .003), more exacerbations (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.79-2.44; P < .001), and more rapid FEV1 decline (adjusted β = -7.7 mL/y; 95% CI, -13.2 to -2.3; P = .006) compared with individuals classified as not having COPD. Among individuals with airflow obstruction on spirometry, those no longer classified as having COPD based on this new diagnostic schema had outcomes similar to those without airflow obstruction. Among 1341 adults in CanCOLD, individuals newly classified as having COPD experienced more exacerbations (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.25-3.51; P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance: A new COPD diagnostic schema integrating respiratory symptoms, respiratory quality of life, spirometry, and structural lung abnormalities on computed tomographic imaging newly classified some individuals as having COPD. These individuals had an increased risk of all-cause and respiratory-related death, frequent exacerbations, and rapid lung function decline compared with individuals classified as not having COPD. Some individuals with airflow obstruction without respiratory symptoms or evidence of structural lung disease were no longer classified as having COPD.

Author/s:

COPDGene 2025 Diagnosis Working Group and CanCOLD Investigators, Surya P Bhatt, Ehsan Abadi, Antonio Anzueto, Sandeep Bodduluri

Dupilumab for COPD with Blood Eosinophil Evidence of Type 2 Inflammation

Alex Haga — Sun, 30 Jun 2024 18:27:10 +0000

Date Added:

June 30, 2024

Journal/Publication:

New England Journal of Medicine

Publication Date:

May 20, 2024

Issue:

Volume:

390

URL:

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1056/NEJMoa2401304

Keywords

PMID (1):

38767614

MeSH

Antibodies

Monoclonal

Humanized* / adverse effects

Humanized* / therapeutic use

Eosinophils*

Forced Expiratory Volume / drug effects

Inflammation

Leukocyte Count

Pulmonary Disease

Chronic Obstructive* / blood

Dupilumab (Dupixent) appears to reduce exacerbations and improve FEV1 in patients with COPD with elevated blood eosinophil counts. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Background: Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation, has shown efficacy and safety in a phase 3 trial involving patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and type 2 inflammation and an elevated risk of exacerbation. Whether the findings would be confirmed in a second phase 3 trial was unclear.

Methods: In a phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned patients with COPD who had a blood eosinophil count of 300 cells per microliter or higher to receive subcutaneous dupilumab (300 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks. The primary end point was the annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations. Key secondary end points, analyzed in a hierarchical manner to adjust for multiplicity, included the changes from baseline in the prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at weeks 12 and 52 and in the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ; scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating better quality of life) total score at week 52.

Results: A total of 935 patients underwent randomization: 470 were assigned to the dupilumab group and 465 to the placebo group. As prespecified, the primary analysis was performed after a positive interim analysis and included all available data for the 935 participants, 721 of whom were included in the analysis at week 52. The annualized rate of moderate or severe exacerbations was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.06) with dupilumab and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.60) with placebo; the rate ratio as compared with placebo was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.82; P<0.001). The prebronchodilator FEV1 increased from baseline to week 12 with dupilumab (least-squares mean change, 139 ml [95% CI, 105 to 173]) as compared with placebo (least-squares mean change, 57 ml [95% CI, 23 to 91]), with a significant least-squares mean difference at week 12 of 82 ml (P<0.001) and at week 52 of 62 ml (P = 0.02). No significant between-group difference was observed in the change in SGRQ scores from baseline to 52 weeks. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups and consistent with the established profile of dupilumab.

Conclusions: In patients with COPD and type 2 inflammation as indicated by elevated blood eosinophil counts, dupilumab was associated with fewer exacerbations and better lung function than placebo.

Author/s:

Surya P Bhatt, Klaus F Rabe, Nicola A Hanania, Claus F Vogelmeier, Mona Bafadhel, Stephanie A Christenson

Management of chronic respiratory diseases during viral pandemics: A concise review of guidance and recommendations

Aubrey Delammermore — Sat, 07 Jan 2023 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

January 7, 2023

Journal/Publication:

Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care

Publisher:

Wolters Kluwer

Publication Date:

November 1, 2022

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

6633-6639

URL:

Management of chronic respiratory diseases during viral pandemics: A concise review of guidance and recommendations

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_974_21

Keywords

asthma

interstitial lung disease

MeSH

Respiration Disorders

Respiratory Insufficiency

COVID-19

Important evidence-based strategies for reducing morbidity and mortality from acute respiratory infections in patients with chronic lung diseases. James W. Mold MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is an acute respiratory disease that can lead to respiratory failure and death. Although anticipated that patients with chronic respiratory diseases would be at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and more severe presentations of COVID-19, it is striking that these diseases appear to be underrepresented in the comorbidities reported for patients with COVID-19. The first wave of COVID-19 has taught us important lessons concerning the enormous burden on the hospitals, shortage of beds, cross infections and transmissions, which we coped together. However, with the subsequent waves of COVID-19 or any other viral pandemic, to ensure that patients with respiratory illnesses receive adequate management for their diseases while minimizing their hospital visits for their own safety. Hence, we prepared an evidence-based summary to manage outpatients and inpatients suspected or diagnosed with COPD, asthma and ILD based on the experience of the first wave of COVID-19 and recommendations by expert societies and organizations.

Author/s:

Sharma, P., Mishra, M., Dua, R., Saini, L. K., Sindhwani, G.

Why We Should Target Small Airways Disease in Our Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Saige Blanchard — Mon, 03 Jan 2022 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

January 3, 2022

Journal/Publication:

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Publisher:

Elsevier

Publication Date:

June 25, 2021

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

2448-2463

URL:

Why We Should Target Small Airways Disease in Our Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.mayocp.2021.03.016

Keywords

Small Airways Disease

PMID (1):

34183115

MeSH

Humans

Drug Compounding

nebulizers and vaporizers

Spirometry

A summary of what we know about the role of small airway disfunction in COPD and its implications for evaluation and treatment. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

For more than 50 years, small airways disease has been considered a key feature of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a major cause of airway obstruction. Both preventable and treatable, small airways disease has important clinical consequences if left unchecked. Small airways disease is associated with poor spirometry results, increased lung hyperinflation, and poor health status, making the small airways an important treatment target in COPD. The early detection of small airways disease remains the key barrier; if detected early, treatments designed to target small airways may help reduce symptoms and allow patients to maintain their activities. Studies are needed to evaluate the possible role of new drugs and novel drug formulations, inhalers, and inhalation devices for treating small airways disease. These developments will help to improve our management of small airways disease in patients with COPD.

Author/s:

Usmani, O., Dhand, R., Lavorini, F., Price, D.

Association of E-Cigarette Use With Respiratory Disease Among Adults: A Longitudinal Analysis

John Bayhi — Thu, 02 Jan 2020 20:08:03 +0000

Date Added:

January 2, 2020

Journal/Publication:

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Publisher:

Elsevier Inc.

Publication Date:

December 11, 2019

URL:

Association of E-Cigarette Use With Respiratory Disease Among Adults: A Longitudinal Analysis

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.amepre.2019.07.028

Keywords

e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury

PMID (1):

31859175

MeSH

Adult

electronic nicotine delivery systems

This longitudinal study documents an increase in respiratory problems associated with e-cigarette use and supports a mechanism distinct from those associated with respiratory problems associated with standard cigarettes. The combination of e-cigarettes and standard cigarettes appears to be particularly hazardous. James W. Mold, MD, MPH.

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

INTRODUCTION:

E-cigarettes deliver an aerosol of nicotine by heating a liquid and are promoted as an alternative to combustible tobacco. This study determines the longitudinal associations between e-cigarette use and respiratory disease controlling for combustible tobacco use.

METHODS:

This was a longitudinal analysis of the adult Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Waves 1, 2, and 3. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the associations between e-cigarette use and respiratory disease, controlling for combustible tobacco smoking, demographic, and clinical variables. Data were collected in 2013-2016 and analyzed in 2018-2019.

RESULTS:

Among people who did not report respiratory disease (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, or asthma) at Wave 1, the longitudinal analysis revealed statistically significant associations between former e-cigarette use (AOR=1.31, 95% CI=1.07, 1.60) and current e-cigarette use (AOR=1.29, 95% CI=1.03, 1.61) at Wave 1 and having incident respiratory disease at Waves 2 or 3, controlling for combustible tobacco smoking, demographic, and clinical variables. Current combustible tobacco smoking (AOR=2.56, 95% CI=1.92, 3.41) was also significantly associated with having respiratory disease at Waves 2 or 3. Odds of developing respiratory disease for a current dual user (e-cigarette and all combustible tobacco) were 3.30 compared with a never smoker who never used e-cigarettes. Analysis controlling for cigarette smoking alone yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS:

Use of e-cigarettes is an independent risk factor for respiratory disease in addition to combustible tobacco smoking. Dual use, the most common use pattern, is riskier than using either product alone.

Author/s:

Bhatta, DN, Glantz, SA

Pharmacologic and Nonpharmacologic Therapies in Adult Patients With Exacerbation of COPD: A Systematic Review

John Bayhi — Fri, 18 Oct 2019 13:01:46 +0000

Date Added:

October 18, 2019

Journal/Publication:

AHRQ Website

Publisher:

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Publication Date:

October 11, 2019

URL:

Pharmacologic and Nonpharmacologic Therapies in Adult Patients With Exacerbation of COPD

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.23970/AHRQEPCCER221

Keywords

Benralizumab for the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations

therapy

randomized control trial

systematic review

Key points are on page ii. Antibiotics and corticosteroids and some non-pharmacologic strategies are effective. We still don’t know the best corticosteroid dose or route. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

Objectives. To synthesize existing knowledge about the effectiveness and harms of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments for exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ECOPD).

Data sources. Embase®, Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE® Daily, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Registrar of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus from database inception to January 2, 2019.

Review methods. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated pharmacologic intervention or nonpharmacologic interventions for ECOPD. The strength of evidence (SOE) was graded for critical final health outcomes.

Results. We included 98 RCTs (13,401 patients, mean treatment duration 9.9 days, mean followup 3.7 months). Final health outcomes, including mortality, resolution of exacerbation, hospital readmissions, repeat exacerbations, and need for intubation, were infrequently evaluated and often showed no statistically significant differences between groups. Antibiotic therapy increases the clinical cure rate and reduces the clinical failure rate regardless of the severity of ECOPD (moderate SOE). There is insufficient evidence to support a particular antibiotic regimen. Oral and intravenous corticosteroids improve dyspnea and reduce the clinical failure rate (low SOE). Despite the ubiquitous use of inhaled bronchodilators in ECOPD, we found only a small number of trials that assessed lung function tests, and not final health outcomes. The evidence is insufficient to support the effect of aminophyllines, magnesium sulfate, mucolytics, inhaled corticosteroids, inhaled antibiotics, 5-lipoxygenase inhibitor, and statins on final health outcomes. Titrated oxygen reduces mortality compared with high flow oxygen (low SOE). Low SOE suggested benefit from some nonpharmacologic interventions such as chest physiotherapy using vibration/percussion/massage or breathing technique (on dyspnea), resistance training (on dyspnea and quality of life), early pulmonary rehabilitation commenced before hospital discharge during the initial most acute phase of exacerbation rather than the convalescence period (on dyspnea) and whole body vibration training (on quality of life). Vitamin D supplementation may improve quality of life (low SOE).

Conclusions. Although chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a common condition, the evidence base for most interventions in ECOPD remains limited. Systemic antibiotics and corticosteroids are associated with improved outcomes in mild and moderate to severe ECOPD. Titrated oxygen reduces mortality. Future research is required to assess the effectiveness of several emerging nonpharmacologic and dietary treatments.

Author/s:

Dobler, CC, Morrow, AS, Farah, MH, Beuschel, B, Majzoub, AM, Wilson, ME, Hasan, B, Seisa, MO, Daraz, L, Prokop, LJ, Murad, MH, Wang, Z

Benralizumab for the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations

John Bayhi — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:39:58 +0000

Date Added:

September 12, 2019

Journal/Publication:

The New England Journal of Medicine

Publisher:

Massachusetts Medical Society

Publication Date:

September 12, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

381

Pages:

1023-1034

URL:

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1056/NEJMoa1905248

Keywords

benralizumab

PMID (1):

31112385

MeSH

benralizumab

eosinophils

interleukin-5 Receptor alpha subunit

Antibodies

Monoclonal

Humanized

Benralizumab (Fasenra) apparently does not reduce COPD exacerbations so probably no reason to try to remember its name. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

BACKGROUND:

The efficacy and safety of benralizumab, an interleukin-5 receptor alpha-directed cytolytic monoclonal antibody, for the prevention of exacerbations in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are not known.

METHODS:

In the GALATHEA and TERRANOVA trials, we enrolled patients with COPD (at a ratio of approximately 2:1 on the basis of eosinophil count [≥220 per cubic millimeter vs. <220 per cubic millimeter]) who had frequent exacerbations despite receiving guideline-based inhaled treatment. Patients were randomly assigned to receive benralizumab (30 or 100 mg in GALATHEA; 10, 30, or 100 mg in TERRANOVA) every 8 weeks (every 4 weeks for the first three doses) or placebo. The primary end point was the treatment effect of benralizumab, measured as the annualized COPD exacerbation rate ratio (benralizumab vs. placebo) at week 56 in patients with baseline blood eosinophil counts of 220 per cubic millimeter or greater. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS:

In GALATHEA, the estimates of the annualized exacerbation rate were 1.19 per year (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.36) in the 30-mg benralizumab group, 1.03 per year (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19) in the 100-mg benralizumab group, and 1.24 per year (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.42) in the placebo group; the rate ratio as compared with placebo was 0.96 for 30 mg of benralizumab (P = 0.65) and 0.83 for 100 mg of benralizumab (P = 0.05). In TERRANOVA, the estimates of the annualized exacerbation rate for 10 mg, 30 mg, and 100 mg of benralizumab and for placebo were 0.99 per year (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.13), 1.21 per year (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.37), 1.09 per year (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.23), and 1.17 per year (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.32), respectively; the corresponding rate ratios were 0.85 (P = 0.06), 1.04 (P = 0.66), and 0.93 (P = 0.40). At 56 weeks, none of the annualized COPD exacerbation rate ratios for any dose of benralizumab as compared with placebo reached significance in either trial. Types and frequencies of adverse events were similar with benralizumab and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS:

Add-on benralizumab was not associated with a lower annualized rate of COPD exacerbations than placebo among patients with moderate to very severe COPD, a history of frequent moderate or severe exacerbations, and blood eosinophil counts of 220 per cubic millimeter or greater (Funded by AstraZeneca [GALATHEA and TERRANOVA] and Kyowa Hakko Kirin [GALATHEA]; GALATHEA and TERRANOVA ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02138916 and NCT02155660.).

Author/s:

Criner GJ, Celli, BR, Brightling CE, Agusti, A, Papi, A, Singh, D, Sin, DD, Vogelmeier, CD, Sciurba, FC, Bafadhel, M, Backer, V, Kato, M, Ramirez-Venegas, A, Wei, YF, Bjermer, L, Shih, VH, Jison, M, O'Quinn, S, Makulova, N, Newbold, P, Goldman, M, Martin, UJ

C-Reactive Protein Testing to Guide Antibiotic Prescribing for COPD Exacerbations

John Bayhi — Thu, 11 Jul 2019 19:47:05 +0000

Date Added:

July 11, 2019

Journal/Publication:

New England Journal of Medicine

Publisher:

Massachusetts Medical Society

Publication Date:

July 11, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

381

Pages:

111-120

URL:

C-Reactive Protein Testing to Guide Antibiotic Prescribing for COPD Exacerbations

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1056/NEJMoa1803185

Keywords

C-reactive protein

primary care

technology assessment, biomedical

CRP

randomized control trial

antibiotics

PMID (1):

31291514

MeSH

Point-Of-Care Testing

anti-bacterial agents

Wales

follow-up studies

random allocation

Surveys and Questionnaires

health status

primary health care

referral and consultation

England

In adults with acute COPD exacerbations, serum CRP-based decision-making led to fewer antibiotic prescriptions with no adverse consequences. Physicians and patients in the intervention group were advised to consider all clinically relevant information. However, they were advised to consider that CRP levels < 4omg/L indicated that antibiotics were probably not needed, levels between 20 and 40 mg/L were indeterminant, and levels above 40 mg/L suggested that antibiotics were probably necessary. Note: In this study, physicians were able to obtain CRP levels at the point of care. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care testing of C-reactive protein (CRP) may be a way to reduce unnecessary use of antibiotics without harming patients who have acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial involving patients with a diagnosis of COPD in their primary care clinical record who consulted a clinician at 1 of 86 general medical practices in England and Wales for an acute exacerbation of COPD. The patients were assigned to receive usual care guided by CRP point-of-care testing (CRP-guided group) or usual care alone (usual-care group). The primary outcomes were patient-reported use of antibiotics for acute exacerbations of COPD within 4 weeks after randomization (to show superiority) and COPD-related health status at 2 weeks after randomization, as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, a 10-item scale with scores ranging from 0 (very good COPD health status) to 6 (extremely poor COPD health status) (to show noninferiority).

RESULTS

A total of 653 patients underwent randomization. Fewer patients in the CRP-guided group reported antibiotic use than in the usual-care group (57.0% vs. 77.4%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20 to 0.47). The adjusted mean difference in the total score on the Clinical COPD Questionnaire at 2 weeks was −0.19 points (two-sided 90% CI, −0.33 to −0.05) in favor of the CRP-guided group. The antibiotic prescribing decisions made by clinicians at the initial consultation were ascertained for all but 1 patient, and antibiotic prescriptions issued over the first 4 weeks of follow-up were ascertained for 96.9% of the patients. A lower percentage of patients in the CRP-guided group than in the usual-care group received an antibiotic prescription at the initial consultation (47.7% vs. 69.7%, for a difference of 22.0 percentage points; adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.45) and during the first 4 weeks of follow-up (59.1% vs. 79.7%, for a difference of 20.6 percentage points; adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.46). Two patients in the usual-care group died within 4 weeks after randomization from causes considered by the investigators to be unrelated to trial participation.

CONCLUSIONS

CRP-guided prescribing of antibiotics for exacerbations of COPD in primary care clinics resulted in a lower percentage of patients who reported antibiotic use and who received antibiotic prescriptions from clinicians, with no evidence of harm. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Program; PACE Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN24346473.)

Author/s:

Butler, Christopher C., Gillespie, David, White, Patrick, Bates, Janine, Lowe, Rachel, Thomas-Jones, Emma, Wootton, Mandy, Hood, Kerenza, Phillips, Rhiannon, Melbye, M., Llor, Carl, Cals, Jochen W.L.

Different durations of corticosteroid therapy for exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Jeffrey Wilson — Wed, 02 Jan 2019 14:50:14 +0000

Date Added:

January 2, 2019

Journal/Publication:

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Publisher:

Cochrane Library

Publication Date:

March 6, 2018

Pages:

CD006897

URL:

Different durations of corticosteroid therapy for exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1002/14651858.CD006897.pub4

Keywords

corticosteroids

PMID (1):

29553157

MeSH

Different durations of corticosteroid therapy for exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

adrenal cortex hormones

Corticosteroids should be continued for no more than 5 – 7 days when treating patients with severe COPD exacerbations. This is consistent with the updated 2018 GOLD guideline.

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

BACKGROUND:

Current guidelines recommend that patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should be treated with systemic corticosteroid for seven to 14 days. Intermittent systemic corticosteroid use is cumulatively associated with adverse effects such as osteoporosis, hyperglycaemia and muscle weakness. Shorter treatment could reduce adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES:

To compare the efficacy of short-duration (seven or fewer days) and conventional longer-duration (longer than seven days) systemic corticosteroid treatment of adults with acute exacerbations of COPD.

SEARCH METHODS:

Searches were carried out using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials, MEDLINE and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and ongoing trials registers up to March 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA:

Randomised controlled trials comparing different durations of systemic corticosteroid defined as short (i.e. seven or fewer days) or longer (i.e. longer than seven days). Other interventions-bronchodilators and antibiotics-were standardised. Studies with participants requiring assisted ventilation were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS:

Eight studies with 582 participants met the inclusion criteria, of which five studies conducted in hospitals with 519 participants (range 28 to 296) contributed to the meta-analysis. Mean ages of study participants were 65 to 73 years, the proportion of male participants varied (58% to 84%) and COPD was classified as severe or very severe. Corticosteroid treatment was given at equivalent daily doses for three to seven days for short-duration treatment and for 10 to 15 days for longer-duration treatment. Five studies administered oral prednisolone (30 mg in four, tapered in one), and two studies provided intravenous corticosteroid treatment. Studies contributing to the meta-analysis were at low risk of selection, performance, detection and attrition bias. In four studies we did not find a difference in risk of treatment failure between short-duration and longer-duration systemic corticosteroid treatment (n = 457; odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 1.46)), which was equivalent to 22 fewer per 1000 for short-duration treatment (95% CI 51 fewer to 34 more). No difference in risk of relapse (a new event) was observed between short-duration and longer-duration systemic corticosteroid treatment (n = 457; OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.56), which was equivalent to nine fewer per 1000 for short-duration treatment (95% CI 68 fewer to 100 more). Time to the next COPD exacerbation did not differ in one large study that was powered to detect non-inferiority and compared five days versus 14 days of systemic corticosteroid treatment (n = 311; hazard ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.37). In five studies no difference in the likelihood of an adverse event was found between short-duration and longer-duration systemic corticosteroid treatment (n = 503; OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.69, or nine fewer per 1000 (95% CI 44 fewer to 51 more)). Length of hospital stay (n = 421; mean difference (MD) -0.61 days, 95% CI -1.51 to 0.28) and lung function at the end of treatment (n = 185; MD FEV1 -0.04 L; 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10) did not differ between short-duration and longer-duration treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:

Information from a new large study has increased our confidence that five days of oral corticosteroids is likely to be sufficient for treatment of adults with acute exacerbations of COPD, and this review suggests that the likelihood is low that shorter courses of systemic corticosteroids (of around five days) lead to worse outcomes than are seen with longer (10 to 14 days) courses. We graded most available evidence as moderate in quality because of imprecision; further research may have an important impact on our confidence in the estimates of effect or may change the estimates. The studies in this review did not include people with mild or moderate COPD; further studies comparing short-duration systemic corticosteroid versus conventional longer-duration systemic corticosteroid for treatment of adults with acute exacerbations of COPD are required.

Author/s:

Walters, Julia A.E., Tan, Daniel J., White, Clinton J., Wood-Baker, Richard

Different Durations of Corticosteroid therapy for Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Jeffrey Wilson — Wed, 22 Aug 2018 16:34:21 +0000

Date Added:

November 1, 2018

Journal/Publication:

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Publisher:

Cochrane Library

Publication Date:

March 19, 2018

Issue:

URL:

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines, Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1002/14651858.CD006897.pub4

Keywords

corticosteroids

PMID (1):

29553157

MeSH