Prevalence of persistent blood eosinophilia: relation to outcomes in patients with COPD.

The impact of blood eosinophilia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains controversial.To evaluate the prevalence and stability of a high level of blood eosinophils (≥300 cells·µL-1) and its relationship to outcomes, we determined blood eosinophils at baseline and over 2 years in 424 COPD patients (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 60% predicted) and 67 smokers without COPD from the CHAIN cohort, and in 308 COPD patients (FEV1 60% predicted) in the BODE cohort. We related eosinophil levels to exacerbations and survival using Cox hazard analysis.In COPD patients, 15.8% in the CHAIN cohort and 12.3% in the BODE cohort had persistently elevated blood eosinophils at all three visits. A significant proportion (43.8%) of patients had counts that oscillated above and below the cut-off points, while the rest had persistent eosinophil levels <300 cells·µL-1 A similar eosinophil blood pattern was observed in controls. Exacerbation rates did not differ in patients with and without eosinophilia. All-cause mortality was lower in patients with high eosinophils compared with those with values <300 cells·µL-1 (15.8% versus 33.7%; p=0.026).In patients with COPD, blood eosinophils ≥300 cells·µL-1 persisting over 2 years was not a risk factor for COPD exacerbations. High eosinophil count was associated with better survival.

Differential Effect of Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea, COPD Assessment Test, and Clinical COPD Questionnaire for Symptoms Evaluation Within the New GOLD Staging and Mortality in COPD.

OBJECTIVE: The modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea, the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) have been interchangeably proposed by GOLD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) for assessing symptoms in patients with COPD. However, there are no data on the prognostic value of these tools in terms of mortality. We endeavored to evaluate the prognostic value of the CAT and CCQ scores and compare them with mMRC dyspnea. METHODS: We analyzed the ability of these tests to predict mortality in an observational cohort of 768 patients with COPD (82% men; FEV1, 60%) from the COPD History Assessment in Spain (CHAIN) study, a multicenter observational Spanish cohort, who were monitored annually for a mean follow-up time of 38 months. RESULTS: Subjects who died (n = 73; 9.5%) had higher CAT (14 vs 11, P = .022), CCQ (1.6 vs 1.3, P = .033), and mMRC dyspnea scores (2 vs 1, P < .001) than survivors. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that higher CAT, CCQ, and mMRC dyspnea scores were associated with higher mortality (area under the curve: 0.589, 0.588, and 0.649, respectively). CAT scores ≥ 17 and CCQ scores > 2.5 provided a similar sensitivity than mMRC dyspnea scores ≥ 2 to predict all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The CAT and the CCQ have similar ability for predicting all-cause mortality in patients with COPD, but were inferior to mMRC dyspnea scores. We suggest new thresholds for CAT and CCQ scores based on mortality risk that could be useful for the new GOLD grading classification. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01122758; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.