Impact of comorbidities in COPD clinical control criteria. The CLAVE study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) frequently coexists with other chronic diseases, namely comorbidities. They negatively impact prognosis, exacerbations and quality of life in COPD patients. However, no studies have been performed to explore the impact of these comorbidities on COPD clinical control criteria. RESEARCH QUESTION: Determine the relationship between individualized comorbidities and COPD clinical control criteria. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study performed in Spain involving 4801 patients with severe COPD (< 50 predicted forced expiratory volume in the first second [FEV1%]). Clinical control criteria were defined by the combination of COPD assessment test (CAT) scores (≤16 vs ≥17) and exacerbations in the previous three months (none vs ≥1). Binary logistic regression adjusted by age and FEV1% was performed to identify comorbidities potentially associated with the lack of control of COPD. Secondary endpoints were the relationship between individualized comorbidities with COPD assessment test and exacerbations within the last three months. RESULTS: Most frequent comorbidities were arterial hypertension (51.2%), dyslipidemia (36.0%), diabetes (24.9%), obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (14.9%), anxiety (14.1%), heart failure (11.6%), depression (11.8%), atrial fibrillation (11.5%), peripheral arterial vascular disease (10.4%) and ischemic heart disease (10.1%). After age and FEV1% adjustment, comorbidities related to lack of clinical control were cardiovascular diseases (heart failure, peripheral vascular disease and atrial fibrillation; p < 0.0001), psychologic disorders (anxiety and depression; all p < 0.0001), metabolic diseases (diabetes, arterial hypertension and abdominal obesity; all p < 0.001), sleep disorders (p < 0.0001), anemia (p = 0.015) and gastroesophageal reflux (p < 0.0001). These comorbidities were also related to previous exacerbations and COPD assessment test scores. INTERPRETATION: Comorbidities are frequent in patients with severe COPD, negatively impacting COPD clinical control criteria. They are related to health-related quality of life measured by the COPD assessment test. Our results suggest that comorbidities should be investigated and treated in these patients to improve their clinical control. TAKE-HOME POINTS: Study question: What is the impact of comorbidities on COPD clinical control criteria? RESULTS: Among 4801 patients with severe COPD (27.5% controlled and 72.5% uncontrolled), after adjustment by age and FEV1%, comorbidities related to lack of clinical control were cardiovascular diseases (heart failure, peripheral vascular disease and atrial fibrillation; p < 0.0001), psychologic disorders (anxiety and depression; p < 0.0001), metabolic diseases (diabetes, arterial hypertension and abdominal obesity; p < 0.001), obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (p < 0.0001), anaemia (p = 0.015) and gastroesophageal reflux (p < 0.0001), which were related to previous exacerbations and COPD assessment test scores. INTERPRETATION: Comorbidities are related to health-related quality of life measured by the COPD assessment test scores and history of exacerbations in the previous three months.

Lack of Clinical Control in COPD Patients Depending on the Target and the Therapeutic Option.

Introduction: According to the Global Initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease (GOLD), when a treatment is not achieving an appropriate response it should be switched taking into account the predominant treatable trait to target (dyspnea or exacerbations). The objective of the present study was to investigate the lack of clinical control according to the target and medication groups. Materials and Methods: This was a post-hoc analysis of the CLAVE study, an observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study which evaluated the clinical control, and related-factors, in a cohort of 4801 patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The primary endpoint was the percentage of uncontrolled patients defined as COPD Assessment Test (CAT) >16 or presence of exacerbations in the last 3 months despite receiving long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and/or long-acting antimuscarinic antagonist (LAMA) with or without inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Secondary objectives included the description of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients by therapeutic group and the identification of characteristics potentially associated with the lack of control of COPD including low adherence measured by the test to adherence to inhalers (TAI). Results: In the dyspnea pathway, lack of clinical control was of 25.0% of patients receiving LABA or LAMA in monotherapy, 29.5% by those with LABA + LAMA, 38.3% with LABA + ICS and 37.0% with triple therapy (LABA + LAMA + ICS). In the exacerbation pathway, percentages were 87.1%, 76.7%, 83.3%, and 84.1%, respectively. Low physical activity and high Charlson comorbidity index were independent factor of non-control in all therapeutic groups. Additional factors were lower post-bronchodilator FEV1 and poor adherence to inhalers. Conclusion: There are still room for improvement in COPD control. From the pharmacological perspective, every step in treatment have a pool of uncontrolled patients in which a step-up could be considered according to a trait to target strategy.

Medium and long-term prognosis in hospitalised older adults with multimorbidity. A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data about long-term prognosis after hospitalisation of elderly multimorbid patients remains scarce. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate medium and long-term prognosis in hospitalised patients older than 75 years of age with multimorbidity. Explore the impact of gender, age, frailty, physical dependence, and chronic diseases on mortality over a seven-year period. METHODS: We included prospectively all patients hospitalised for medical reasons over 75 years of age with two or more chronic illnesses in a specialised ward. Data on chronic diseases were collected using the Charlson comorbidity index and a questionnaire for disorders not included in this index. Demographic characteristics, Clinical Frailty Scale, Barthel index, and complications during hospitalisation were collected. RESULTS: 514 patients (46% males) with a mean age of 85 (± 5) years were included. The median follow-up was 755 days (interquartile range 25-75%: 76-1,342). Mortality ranged from 44% to 68%, 82% and 91% at one, three, five, and seven years. At inclusion, men were slightly younger and with lower levels of physical impairment. Nevertheless, in the multivariate analysis, men had higher mortality (p<0.001; H.R.:1.43; 95% C.I.95%:1.16-1.75). Age, Clinical Frailty Scale, Barthel, and Charlson indexes were significant predictors in the univariate and multivariate analysis (all p<0.001). Dementia and neoplastic diseases were statistically significant in the unadjusted but not the adjusted model. In a cluster analysis, three patterns of patients were identified, with increasing significant mortality differences between them (p<0.001; H.R.:1.67; 95% CI: 1.49-1.88). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, individual diseases had a limited predictive prognostic capacity, while the combination of chronic illness, frailty, and physical dependence were independent predictors of survival.

Impact of Spirometrically Confirmed Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease on Arterial Stiffness and Surfactant Protein D After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. The CATEPOC Study.

Background: Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain why chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) impairs the prognosis of coronary events. We aimed to explore COPD variables related to a worse prognosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: Patients with an acute coronary event treated by PCI were prospectively included. One month after discharge, clinical characteristics, comorbidities measured with the Charlson index, and prognostic coronary scales (logistic EuroSCORE; GRACE 2.0) were collected. Post-bronchodilator spirometry, arterial stiffness, and serum inflammatory and myocardial biomarkers were measured. Lung plasmatic biomarkers (Surfactant protein D, desmosine, and Clara cell secretory protein-16) were determined with ELISA. COPD was defined by the fixed ratio (FEV1/FVC <70%). Spirometric values were also analyzed as continuous variables using adjusted and non-adjusted ANCOVA analysis. Finally, we evaluated the presence of a respiratory pattern defined by non-stratified spirometric values and pulmonary biomarkers. Results: A total of 164 patients with a mean age of 65 (±10) years (79% males) were included. COPD was diagnosed in 56 (34%) patients (68% previously undiagnosed). COPD patients had a longer smoking history, higher scores on the EuroSCORE (p < 0.0001) and GRACE 2.0 (p < 0.001) scales, and more comorbidities (p = 0.006). Arterial stiffness determined by pulse wave velocity was increased in COPD patients (7.35 m/s vs 6.60 m/s; p = 0.006). Serum values of high sensitive T troponin (p = 0.007) and surfactant protein D (p = 0.003) were also higher in COPD patients. FEV1% remained significantly associated with arterial stiffness and surfactant protein D in the adjusted ANCOVA analysis. In the cluster exploration, 53% of the patients had a respiratory pattern. Conclusion: COPD affects one-third of patients with an acute coronary event and frequently remains undiagnosed. Several mechanisms, including arterial stiffness and SPD, were increased in COPD patients. Their relationship with the prognosis should be confirmed with longitudinal follow-up of the cohort.

[Translated article] Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021 Update. Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD Exacerbation Syndrome.

This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (≥ 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/mm3. Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment.

Actualización de la Guía Española de la EPOC (GesEPOC): comorbilidades, automanejo y cuidados paliativos / Spanish COPD Guideline (GesEPOC) Update: Comorbidities, Self-Management and Palliative Care

Los modelos de atención sanitaria actuales descritos en GesEPOC indican la mejor manera de hacer un diagnóstico correcto, la categorización de los pacientes, la adecuada selección de la estrategia terapéutica y el manejo y la prevención de las agudizaciones. Además, en la EPOC concurren diversos aspectos que resultan cruciales en una aproximación integrada de la atención sanitaria a estos pacientes. La evaluación de las comorbilidades en el paciente con EPOC representa un reto asistencial. Dentro de una valoración integral debe estudiarse la presencia de comorbilidades que tengan relación con la presentación clínica, con alguna técnica diagnóstica o con algunos tratamientos relacionados con la EPOC. Asimismo, son necesarias intervenciones en hábitos de vida saludables, la adhesión a tratamientos complejos, desarrollar capacidades para poder reconocer los signos y síntomas de la exacerbación, saber qué hacer para prevenirlos y tratarlos enmarcados en un plan de automanejo. Finalmente, los cuidados paliativos constituyen uno de los pilares en el tratamiento integral del paciente con EPOC, con los que se buscan prevenir o tratar los síntomas de una enfermedad, los efectos secundarios del tratamiento, y los problemas físicos, psicológicos y sociales de los pacientes y sus cuidadores. Por tanto, el objetivo principal de estos cuidados paliativos no es prolongar la esperanza de vida, sino mejorar su calidad. En este capítulo de GesEPOC 2021 se presenta una actualización sobre las comorbilidades más importantes, las estrategias de automanejo y los cuidados paliativos en la EPOC, y se incluye una recomendación sobre el uso de opiáceos para el tratamiento de la disnea refractaria en la EPOC. (AU)

The current health care models described in GesEPOC indicate the best way to make a correct diagnosis, the categorization of patients, the appropriate selection of the therapeutic strategy and the management and prevention of exacerbations. In addition, COPD involves several aspects that are crucial in an integrated approach to the health care of these patients. The evaluation of comorbidities in COPD patients represents a healthcare challenge. As part of a comprehensive assessment, the presence of comorbidities related to the clinical presentation, to some diagnostic technique or to some COPD-related treatments should be studied. Likewise, interventions on healthy lifestyle habits, adherence to complex treatments, developing skills to recognize the signs and symptoms of exacerbation, knowing what to do to prevent them and treat them within the framework of a self-management plan are also necessary. Finally, palliative care is one of the pillars in the comprehensive treatment of the COPD patient, seeking to prevent or treat the symptoms of a disease, the side effects of treatment, and the physical, psychological and social problems of patients and their caregivers. Therefore, the main objective of this palliative care is not to prolong life expectancy, but to improve its quality. This chapter of GesEPOC 2021 presents an update on the most important comorbidities, self-management strategies, and palliative care in COPD, and includes a recommendation on the use of opioids for the treatment of refractory dyspnea in COPD. (AU)

[Translated article] Spanish COPD Guideline (GesEPOC) Update: Comorbidities, Self-Management and Palliative Care / Actualización de la Guía Española de la EPOC (GesEPOC): comorbilidades, automanejo y cuidados paliativos

The current health care models described in GesEPOC indicate the best way to make a correct diagnosis, the categorization of patients, the appropriate selection of the therapeutic strategy and the management and prevention of exacerbations. In addition, COPD involves several aspects that are crucial in an integrated approach to the health care of these patients. The evaluation of comorbidities in COPD patients represents a healthcare challenge. As part of a comprehensive assessment, the presence of comorbidities related to the clinical presentation, to some diagnostic technique or to some COPD-related treatments should be studied. Likewise, interventions on healthy lifestyle habits, adherence to complex treatments, developing skills to recognize the signs and symptoms of exacerbation, knowing what to do to prevent them and treat them within the framework of a self-management plan are also necessary. Finally, palliative care is one of the pillars in the comprehensive treatment of the COPD patient, seeking to prevent or treat the symptoms of a disease, the side effects of treatment, and the physical, psychological and social problems of patients and their caregivers. Therefore, the main objective of this palliative care is not to prolong life expectancy, but to improve its quality. This chapter of GesEPOC 2021 presents an update on the most important comorbidities, self-management strategies, and palliative care in COPD, and includes a recommendation on the use of opioids for the treatment of refractory dyspnea in COPD. (AU)

Los modelos de atención sanitaria actuales descritos en GesEPOC indican la mejor manera de hacer un diagnóstico correcto, la categorización de los pacientes, la adecuada selección de la estrategia terapéutica y el manejo y la prevención de las agudizaciones. Además, en la EPOC concurren diversos aspectos que resultan cruciales en una aproximación integrada de la atención sanitaria a estos pacientes. La evaluación de las comorbilidades en el paciente con EPOC representa un reto asistencial. Dentro de una valoración integral debe estudiarse la presencia de comorbilidades que tengan relación con la presentación clínica, con alguna técnica diagnóstica o con algunos tratamientos relacionados con la EPOC. Asimismo, son necesarias intervenciones en hábitos de vida saludables, la adhesión a tratamientos complejos, desarrollar capacidades para poder reconocer los signos y síntomas de la exacerbación, saber qué hacer para prevenirlos y tratarlos enmarcados en un plan de automanejo. Finalmente, los cuidados paliativos constituyen uno de los pilares en el tratamiento integral del paciente con EPOC, con los que se buscan prevenir o tratar los síntomas de una enfermedad, los efectos secundarios del tratamiento, y los problemas físicos, psicológicos y sociales de los pacientes y sus cuidadores. Por tanto, el objetivo principal de estos cuidados paliativos no es prolongar la esperanza de vida, sino mejorar su calidad. En este capítulo de GesEPOC 2021 se presenta una actualización sobre las comorbilidades más importantes, las estrategias de automanejo y los cuidados paliativos en la EPOC, y se incluye una recomendación sobre el uso de opiáceos para el tratamiento de la disnea refractaria en la EPOC. (AU)

Confirmatory Mediastinoscopy after Negative Endobronchial Ultrasound-guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration for Mediastinal Staging of Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Rationale: Current guidelines for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) mediastinal staging recommend starting invasive staging with endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA). However, the indication to confirm a negative result of EBUS-TBNA by means of video-assisted mediastinoscopy (VAM) before resection differs in every guideline. Objectives: Our aim was to evaluate the current evidence regarding the added value of confirmatory VAM after a negative EBUS-TBNA result for mediastinal staging in patients with NSCLC. Methods: Systematic searches of studies on EBUS-TBNA for NSCLC mediastinal staging with or without confirmatory VAM but with surgical confirmation of negative results were conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement in PubMed, SCOPUS, the Cochrane Library, and guidelines from 2005 through November 2021. In the meta-analysis, the sensitivity of confirmatory VAM after a negative EBUS-TBNA result, as well as the sensitivity and negative predictive value of the combination EBUS-TBNA plus confirmatory VAM, alongside the number of confirmatory VAMs required to detect additional N2/3 disease (number needed to treat [NNT]), in patients with a previous negative EBUS-TBNA result were estimated. Results: A total of 5,412 articles were found, of which 29 studies were included. Random effects meta-analysis showed a sensitivity of 66.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55.8-77.1%) for confirmatory VAM, and 96.7% (95% CI, 95.1-98%) for the combination EBUS-TBNA plus confirmatory VAM. Negative predictive value in studies with confirmatory VAM increased of 79.2% (95% CI, 71.4-86.1%) for EBUS-TBNA alone to 91.8% (95% CI, 87.1-95.5%) for EBUS-TBNA plus confirmatory VAM. The NNT of confirmatory VAM in patients with a previous negative EBUS-TBNA result was 23.8 (95% CI, 19.3-31.2). Conclusions: Confirmatory VAM after negative EBUS-TBNA reduces the rate of unforeseen N2/3 disease, but with a high NNT, and it should be recommended only for certain cases yet to be defined.

Spanish COPD Guideline (GesEPOC) Update: Comorbidities, Self-Management and Palliative Care. / Actualización de la Guía Española de la EPOC (GesEPOC): comorbilidades, automanejo y cuidados paliativos.

The current health care models described in GesEPOC indicate the best way to make a correct diagnosis, the categorization of patients, the appropriate selection of the therapeutic strategy and the management and prevention of exacerbations. In addition, COPD involves several aspects that are crucial in an integrated approach to the health care of these patients. The evaluation of comorbidities in COPD patients represents a healthcare challenge. As part of a comprehensive assessment, the presence of comorbidities related to the clinical presentation, to some diagnostic technique or to some COPD-related treatments should be studied. Likewise, interventions on healthy lifestyle habits, adherence to complex treatments, developing skills to recognize the signs and symptoms of exacerbation, knowing what to do to prevent them and treat them within the framework of a self-management plan are also necessary. Finally, palliative care is one of the pillars in the comprehensive treatment of the COPD patient, seeking to prevent or treat the symptoms of a disease, the side effects of treatment, and the physical, psychological and social problems of patients and their caregivers. Therefore, the main objective of this palliative care is not to prolong life expectancy, but to improve its quality. This chapter of GesEPOC 2021 presents an update on the most important comorbidities, self-management strategies, and palliative care in COPD, and includes a recommendation on the use of opioids for the treatment of refractory dyspnea in COPD.

Actualización 2021 de la guía española de la EPOC (GesEPOC). Diagnóstico y tratamiento del síndrome de agudización de la EPOC / Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021 Update Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD Exacerbation Syndrome

En este artículo se presentan las recomendaciones sobre el diagnóstico y tratamiento del síndrome de agudización de la enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) (SAE) de GesEPOC 2021. Como principales novedades, la guía propone una definición y aproximación sindrómica, una nueva clasificación de gravedad y el reconocimiento de diferentes rasgos tratables (RT), lo que supone un nuevo paso hacia la medicina personalizada. La evaluación de la evidencia se realiza mediante la metodología Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), con la incorporación de seis nuevas preguntas con enfoque paciente, intervención, comparación y resultados (PICO). El proceso diagnóstico comprende cuatro etapas: 1) establecer el diagnóstico del SAE, 2) valorar la gravedad del episodio, 3) identificar el factor desencadenante y 4) abordar los RT. En este proceso diagnóstico se diferencia una aproximación ambulatoria, en la que se recomienda incluir una batería básica de pruebas y una hospitalaria, más exhaustiva, en la que se contempla el estudio de diferentes biomarcadores y pruebas de imagen. El tratamiento broncodilatador destinado al alivio inmediato de los síntomas se considera esencial para todos los pacientes, mientras que el uso de antibióticos, corticoides sistémicos, oxigenoterapia, ventilación asistida o el tratamiento de las comorbilidades variará en función de la gravedad y de los posibles RT. El empleo de antibióticos estará especialmente indicado ante un cambio en el color del esputo, cuando se requiera asistencia ventilatoria, en los casos que cursen con neumonía y también para aquellos con proteína-C reactiva elevada (≥ 20 mg/L). Los corticoides sistémicos se recomiendan en el SAE que necesita ingreso y se sugieren en el SAE moderado. La eficacia de estos fármacos es mayor en pacientes con recuento de eosinófilos en sangre ≥ 300 células/mm3. La ventilación mecánica no invasiva en fase aguda se establece fundamentalmente para pacientes con SAE que cursen con acidosis respiratoria, a pesar del tratamiento inicial

This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (≥ 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/mm3. Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment.

Actualización 2021 de la Guía Española de la EPOC (GesEPOC). Tratamiento farmacológico de la EPOC estable / Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021: Updated Pharmacological treatment of stable COPD

La Guía Española de la Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica (GesEPOC) se publicó por primera vez en 2012 y desde entonces ha experimentado una serie de actualizaciones que incorporan las nuevas evidencias sobre el diagnóstico y tratamiento de la EPOC. GesEPOC es una guía de práctica clínica elaborada con la colaboración de las sociedades científicas implicadas en el tratamiento de la EPOC y del Foro Español de Pacientes. Sus recomendaciones se basan en una evaluación de la evidencia mediante la metodología GRADE y en una descripción narrativa de la evidencia en aquellas cuestiones en que la aplicación de GRADE no es posible. En este artículo se resumen las recomendaciones sobre el tratamiento farmacológico de la EPOC estable basadas en la elaboración de nueve preguntas PICO. El proceso de tratamiento de la EPOC comprende cuatro etapas: 1) diagnóstico, 2) determinación del nivel de riesgo, 3) tratamiento inhalado inicial y de continuación e 4) identificación y abordaje de los rasgos tratables. Para la elección del tratamiento inhalado los pacientes de alto riesgo se dividirán en tres fenotipos: no agudizador, agudizador eosinofílico y agudizador no eosinofílico. Los rasgos tratables comprenden unos de tipo general, que deben investigarse en todos los pacientes, como el tabaquismo o la técnica inhalatoria y otros más específicos, que afectan sobre todo a los pacientes graves, como la hipoxemia crónica o la infección bronquial crónica. La base del tratamiento de la EPOC la constituyen los broncodilatadores de larga duración en monoterapia o en combinación según el nivel de riesgo del paciente. Los pacientes agudizadores eosinofílicos deben recibir corticosteroides inhalados y los no eosinofílicos requieren una evaluación más detallada para elegir la mejor opción terapéutica. La nueva GesEPOC también incluye recomendaciones sobre la retirada de corticosteroides inhalados y sobre la indicación de tratamiento con alfa-1 antitripsina. GesEPOC supone una aproximación al tratamiento de la EPOC más individualizada según las características clínicas de los pacientes y su nivel de riesgo o de complejidad. Palabras clave: EPOC Normativa Tratamiento Fenotipos Control

The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) were first published in 2012, and since then have undergone a series of updates incorporating new evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD. GesEPOC was drawn up in partnership with scientific societies involved in the treatment of COPD and the Spanish Patients’ Forum. Their recommendations are based on an evaluation of the evidence using GRADE methodology, and a narrative description of the evidence in areas in which GRADE cannot be applied. In this article, we summarize the recommendations on the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD based on 9 PICO questions. COPD treatment is a 4-step process: 1) diagnosis, 2) determination of the risk level, 3) initial and subsequent inhaled therapy, and 4) identification and management of treatable traits. For the selection of inhaled therapy, high-risk patients are divided into 3 phenotypes: non-exacerbator, eosinophilic exacerbator, and non-eosinophilic exacerbator. Some treatable traits are general and should be investigated in all patients, such as smoking or inhalation technique, while others affect severe patients in particular, such as chronic hypoxemia and chronic bronchial infection. COPD treatment is based on long-acting bronchodilators with single agents or in combination, depending on the patient's risk level. Eosinophilic exacerbators must receive inhaled corticosteroids, while non-eosinophilic exacerbators require a more detailed evaluation to choose the best therapeutic option. The new GesEPOC also includes recommendations on the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids and on indications for alpha-1 antitrypsin treatment. GesEPOC offers a more individualized approach to COPD treatment tailored according to the clinical characteristics of patients and their level of complexity. Keywords: COPD Guidelines Treatment Phenotypes Control

Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021 Update Diagnosis and Treatment of COPD Exacerbation Syndrome. / Actualización 2021 de la guía española de la EPOC (GesEPOC). Diagnóstico y tratamiento del síndrome de agudización de la EPOC.

This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (≥ 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/mm3. Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment.

Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021: Updated Pharmacological treatment of stable COPD. / Actualización 2021 de la Guía Española de la EPOC (GesEPOC). Tratamiento farmacológico de la EPOC estable.

The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) were first published in 2012, and since then have undergone a series of updates incorporating new evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD. GesEPOC was drawn up in partnership with scientific societies involved in the treatment of COPD and the Spanish Patients' Forum. Their recommendations are based on an evaluation of the evidence using GRADE methodology, and a narrative description of the evidence in areas in which GRADE cannot be applied. In this article, we summarize the recommendations on the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD based on 9 PICO questions. COPD treatment is a 4-step process: 1) diagnosis, 2) determination of the risk level, 3) initial and subsequent inhaled therapy, and 4) identification and management of treatable traits. For the selection of inhaled therapy, high-risk patients are divided into 3 phenotypes: non-exacerbator, eosinophilic exacerbator, and non-eosinophilic exacerbator. Some treatable traits are general and should be investigated in all patients, such as smoking or inhalation technique, while others affect severe patients in particular, such as chronic hypoxemia and chronic bronchial infection. COPD treatment is based on long-acting bronchodilators with single agents or in combination, depending on the patient's risk level. Eosinophilic exacerbators must receive inhaled corticosteroids, while non-eosinophilic exacerbators require a more detailed evaluation to choose the best therapeutic option. The new GesEPOC also includes recommendations on the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids and on indications for alpha-1 antitrypsin treatment. GesEPOC offers a more individualized approach to COPD treatment tailored according to the clinical characteristics of patients and their level of complexity.

Impact of the iCODEX tool in routine clinical practice in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: The prognosis of COPD patients can be calculated using multidimensional indexes that improve the predictive capacity of the individual variables. The CODEX index can be calculated using iCODEX, a digital support tool available on the web and in an app. The aim of this study was to evaluate how the usefulness and applicability of iCODEX and its recommendations in routine clinical practice are perceived by specialists in internal medicine, pneumology, and primary care. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from November 2019 to February 2020 with the participation of specialists in internal medicine, primary care, and pneumology. All respondents completed a survey consisting of 104 questions on their perception of the iCODEX tool. RESULTS: Overall, 335 physicians responded. Of these, 95.2% had no difficulty accessing the tool and 83.1% were quite or very satisfied with it. Regarding the applicability and implementation of iCODEX recommendations in routine clinical practice, respondents reported that the recommendations were generally applicable: most questions obtained a median score of ≥ 4 out of 5. The recommendations with the greatest expected clinical benefit are listed. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that the iCODEX tool is easy for participating specialists to use and identifies the recommendations that have the greatest clinical impact in areas such as lung obstruction, severe exacerbations, exercise, smoking, and patient follow-up.

Actualización 2021 de la guía española de la EPOC (GesEPOC). Diagnóstico y tratamiento del síndrome de agudización de la EPOC [Pré-print]

En este artículo se presentan las recomendaciones sobre el diagnóstico y tratamiento del síndrome de agudización de la enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) (SAE) de GesEPOC 2021. Como principales novedades, la guía propone una definición y aproximación sindrómica, una nueva clasificación de gravedad y el reconocimiento de diferentes rasgos tratables (RT), lo que supone un nuevo paso hacia la medicina personalizada. La evaluación de la evidencia se realiza mediante la metodología Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), con la incorporación de seis nuevas preguntas con enfoque paciente, intervención, comparación y resultados (PICO). El proceso diagnóstico comprende cuatro etapas: 1) establecer el diagnóstico del SAE, 2) valorar la gravedad del episodio, 3) identificar el factor desencadenante y 4) abordar los RT. En este proceso diagnóstico se diferencia una aproximación ambulatoria, en la que se recomienda incluir una batería básica de pruebas y una hospitalaria, más exhaustiva, en la que se contempla el estudio de diferentes biomarcadores y pruebas de imagen. El tratamiento broncodilatador destinado al alivio inmediato de los síntomas se considera esencial para todos los pacientes, mientras que el uso de antibióticos, corticoides sistémicos, oxigenoterapia, ventilación asistida o el tratamiento de las comorbilidades variará en función de la gravedad y de los posibles RT. El empleo de antibióticos estará especialmente indicado ante un cambio en el color del esputo, cuando se requiera asistencia ventilatoria, en los casos que cursen con neumonía y también para aquellos con proteína-C reactiva elevada (≥ 20 mg/L). Los corticoides sistémicos se recomiendan en el SAE que necesita ingreso y se sugieren en el SAE moderado. La eficacia de estos fármacos es mayor en pacientes con recuento de eosinófilos en sangre ≥ 300 células/mm3. La ventilación mecánica no invasiva en fase aguda se establece fundamentalmente para pacientes con SAE que cursen con acidosis respiratoria, a pesar del tratamiento inicial.

This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (≥ 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/mm3. Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment.

Spanish COPD guidelines (GesEPOC) 2021: updated pharmacological treatment of stable COPD [Pré-print]

The Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) were first published in 2012, and since then have undergone a series of updates incorporating new evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD. GesEPOC was drawn up in partnership with scientific societies involved in the treatment of COPD and the Spanish Patients' Forum. Their recommendations are based on an evaluation of the evidence using GRADE methodology, and a narrative description of the evidence in areas in which GRADE cannot be applied. In this article, we summarize the recommendations on the pharmacological treatment of stable COPD based on 9 PICO questions. COPD treatment is a 4-step process: 1) diagnosis; 2) determination of the risk level; 3) initial and subsequent inhaled therapy; and 4) identification and management of treatable traits. For the selection of inhaled therapy, high-risk patients are divided into 3 phenotypes: non-exacerbator, eosinophilic exacerbator, and non-eosinophilic exacerbator. Some treatable traits are general and should be investigated in all patients, such as smoking or inhalation technique, while others affect severe patients in particular, such as chronic hypoxemia and chronic bronchial infection. COPD treatment is based on long-acting bronchodilators with single agents or in combination, depending on the patient's risk level. Eosinophilic exacerbators must receive inhaled corticosteroids, while non-eosinophilic exacerbators require a detailed evaluation to choose the best therapeutic option. The new GesEPOC also includes recommendations on the withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids and on indications for alpha-1 antitrypsin treatment. GesEPOC offers a more individualized approach to COPD treatment tailored according to the clinical characteristics of patients and their level of complexity.

La Guía Española de la EPOC (GesEPOC) se publicó por primera vez en 2012 y desde entonces ha experimentado una serie de actualizaciones que incorporan las nuevas evidencias sobre el diagnóstico y tratamiento de la EPOC. GesEPOC es una guía de práctica clínica elaborada con la colaboración de las sociedades científicas implicadas en el tratamiento de la EPOC y del Foro Español de Pacientes. Sus recomendaciones se basan en una evaluación de la evidencia mediante la metodología GRADE y en una descripción narrativa de la evidencia en aquellas cuestiones en que la aplicación de GRADE no es posible. En este artículo se resumen las recomendaciones sobre el tratamiento farmacológico de la EPOC estable basadas en la elaboración de 9 preguntas PICO. El proceso de tratamiento de la EPOC comprende cuatro etapas: 1) diagnóstico; 2) determinación del nivel de riesgo; 3) tratamiento inhalado inicial y de continuación y 4) identificación y abordaje de los rasgos tratables. Para la elección del tratamiento inhalado los pacientes de alto riesgo se dividirán en tres fenotipos: no agudizador, agudizador eosinofílico y agudizador no eosinofílico. Los rasgos tratables comprenden unos de tipo general, que deben investigarse en todos los pacientes, como el tabaquismo o la técnica inhalatoria y otros más específicos, que afectan sobre todo a los pacientes graves, como la hipoxemia crónica o la infección bronquial crónica. La base del tratamiento de la EPOC la constituyen los broncodilatadores de larga duración en monoterapia o en combinación según el nivel de riesgo del paciente. Los pacientes agudizadores eosinofílicos deben recibir corticosteroides inhalados y los no eosinofílicos requieren una evaluación detallada para elegir la mejor opción terapéutica. La nueva GesEPOC también incluye recomendaciones sobre la retirada de corticosteroides inhalados y sobre la indicación de tratamiento con alfa-1 antitripsina. GesEPOC supone una aproximación al tratamiento de la EPOC más individualizada según las características clínicas de los pacientes y su nivel de riesgo o de complejidad.

Clinical Control Criteria to Determine Disease Control in Patients with Severe COPD: The CLAVE Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical control in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been completely characterized. A proposal of clinical control criteria (CCC) has been recently defined and validated as a tool for determining control, but there is scarce information on patients with severe COPD. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical control in severe COPD using the CCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study design was observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study involving 4801 patients with severe COPD in Spain. Clinical control was defined according to clinical impact (dyspnea grade, use of rescue treatment in last week, sputum color, and daily physical activity) and stability (exacerbations in last 3 months and patient's perception about health status). Clinical control of COPD was alternatively evaluated with the COPD assessment test (CAT) and the presence of exacerbations in the last 3 months. RESULTS: According to CCC, 61.0% of patients had low clinical impact, and 41.4% showed clinical stability. Overall, 29.9% of patients had both low clinical impact and stability (controlled), whereas 70.1% showed high clinical impact and/or no clinical stability (non-controlled). COPD control was also assessed by using only the definition of CAT≤16 and no exacerbations in the last 3 months. Results obtained with this definition were similar to those obtained by CCC, and the concordance between both definitions was high (Kappa index = 0.698). CONCLUSION: By using the CCC, approximately only one third of patients with severe COPD were considered as controlled. Physical activity, adherence to inhalers, age, post-bronchodilator FEV1, age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, and healthcare level were independent factors associated with COPD control.

Mortality prediction in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease comparing the GOLD 2015 and GOLD 2019 staging: a pooled analysis of individual patient data.

In 2019, The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) modified the grading system for patients with COPD, creating 16 subgroups (1A-4D). As part of the COPD Cohorts Collaborative International Assessment (3CIA) initiative, we aim to compare the mortality prediction of the 2015 and 2019 COPD GOLD staging systems. We studied 17 139 COPD patients from the 3CIA study, selecting those with complete data. Patients were classified by the 2015 and 2019 GOLD ABCD systems, and we compared the predictive ability for 5-year mortality of both classifications. In total, 17 139 patients with COPD were enrolled in 22 cohorts from 11 countries between 2003 and 2017; 8823 of them had complete data and were analysed. Mean±sd age was 63.9±9.8 years and 62.9% were male. GOLD 2019 classified the patients in milder degrees of COPD. For both classifications, group D had higher mortality. 5-year mortality did not differ between groups B and C in GOLD 2015; in GOLD 2019, mortality was greater for group B than C. Patients classified as group A and B had better sensitivity and positive predictive value with the GOLD 2019 classification than GOLD 2015. GOLD 2015 had better sensitivity for group C and D than GOLD 2019. The area under the curve values for 5-year mortality were only 0.67 (95% CI 0.66-0.68) for GOLD 2015 and 0.65 (95% CI 0.63-0.66) for GOLD 2019. The new GOLD 2019 classification does not predict mortality better than the previous GOLD 2015 system.