Doyle, Tracy J.

Objective We provide evidence‐based recommendations regarding the treatment of interstitial lung disease (ILD) in adults with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). Methods We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions. A systematic literature review was then performed, and the available evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. A panel of clinicians and patients reached consensus on the direction and strength of the recommendations. Results Thirty‐five recommendations were generated (including two strong recommendations) for first‐line SARD‐ILD treatment, treatment of SARD‐ILD progression despite first‐line ILD therapy, and treatment of rapidly progressive ILD. The strong recommendations were against using glucocorticoids in systemic sclerosis–ILD as a first‐line ILD therapy and after ILD progression. Otherwise, glucocorticoids are conditionally recommended for first‐line ILD treatment in all other SARDs. Conclusion This clinical practice guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and American College of Chest Physicians for the treatment of ILD in people with SARDs.

Objective We provide evidence‐based recommendations regarding the treatment of interstitial lung disease (ILD) in adults with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). Methods We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions. A systematic literature review was then performed, and the available evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. A panel of clinicians and patients reached consensus on the direction and strength of the recommendations. Results Thirty‐five recommendations were generated (including two strong recommendations) for first‐line SARD‐ILD treatment, treatment of SARD‐ILD progression despite first‐line ILD therapy, and treatment of rapidly progressive ILD. The strong recommendations were against using glucocorticoids in systemic sclerosis–ILD as a first‐line ILD therapy and after ILD progression. Otherwise, glucocorticoids are conditionally recommended for first‐line ILD treatment in all other SARDs. Conclusion This clinical practice guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and American College of Chest Physicians for the treatment of ILD in people with SARDs.

ObjectiveWe provide evidence‐based recommendations regarding screening for interstitial lung disease (ILD) and the monitoring for ILD progression in people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs), specifically rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, mixed connective tissue disease, and Sjögren disease.MethodsWe developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions related to screening and monitoring for ILD in patients with SARDs. A systematic literature review was performed, and the available evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. A Voting Panel of interdisciplinary clinician experts and patients achieved consensus on the direction and strength of each recommendation.ResultsFifteen recommendations were developed. For screening people with these SARDs at risk for ILD, we conditionally recommend pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and high‐resolution computed tomography of the chest (HRCT chest); conditionally recommend against screening with 6‐minute walk test distance (6MWD), chest radiography, ambulatory desaturation testing, or bronchoscopy; and strongly recommend against screening with surgical lung biopsy. We conditionally recommend monitoring ILD with PFTs, HRCT chest, and ambulatory desaturation testing and conditionally recommend against monitoring with 6MWD, chest radiography, or bronchoscopy. We provide guidance on ILD risk factors and suggestions on frequency of testing to evaluate for the development of ILD in people with SARDs.ConclusionThis clinical practice guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and American College of Chest Physicians for the screening and monitoring of ILD in people with SARDs.

Objective We provide evidence‐based recommendations regarding screening for interstitial lung disease (ILD) and the monitoring for ILD progression in people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs), specifically rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, mixed connective tissue disease, and Sjögren disease. Methods We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions related to screening and monitoring for ILD in patients with SARDs. A systematic literature review was performed, and the available evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. A Voting Panel of interdisciplinary clinician experts and patients achieved consensus on the direction and strength of each recommendation. Results Fifteen recommendations were developed. For screening people with these SARDs at risk for ILD, we conditionally recommend pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and high‐resolution computed tomography of the chest (HRCT chest); conditionally recommend against screening with 6‐minute walk test distance (6MWD), chest radiography, ambulatory desaturation testing, or bronchoscopy; and strongly recommend against screening with surgical lung biopsy. We conditionally recommend monitoring ILD with PFTs, HRCT chest, and ambulatory desaturation testing and conditionally recommend against monitoring with 6MWD, chest radiography, or bronchoscopy. We provide guidance on ILD risk factors and suggestions on frequency of testing to evaluate for the development of ILD in people with SARDs. Conclusion This clinical practice guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and American College of Chest Physicians for the screening and monitoring of ILD in people with SARDs.

Abstract Objectives To establish a framework by which experts define disease subsets in systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD). Methods A conceptual framework for subclinical, clinical and progressive ILD was provided to 83 experts, asking them to use the framework and classify actual SSc-ILD patients. Each patient profile was designed to be classified by at least four experts in terms of severity and risk of progression at baseline; progression was based on 1-year follow-up data. A consensus was reached if ≥75% of experts agreed. Experts provided information on which items were important in determining classification. Results Forty-four experts (53%) completed the survey. Consensus was achieved on the dimensions of severity (75%, 60 of 80 profiles), risk of progression (71%, 57 of 80 profiles) and progressive ILD (60%, 24 of 40 profiles). For profiles achieving consensus, most were classified as clinical ILD (92%), low risk (54%) and stable (71%). Severity and disease progression overlapped in terms of framework items that were most influential in classifying patients (forced vital capacity, extent of lung involvement on high resolution chest CT [HRCT]); risk of progression was influenced primarily by disease duration. Conclusions Using our proposed conceptual framework, international experts were able to achieve a consensus on classifying SSc-ILD patients along the dimensions of disease severity, risk of progression and progression over time. Experts rely on similar items when classifying disease severity and progression: a combination of spirometry and gas exchange and quantitative HRCT.

Abstract Objectives To investigate the associations of the common MUC5B promoter variant with timing of RA-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD) and RA onset. Methods We identified patients with RA meeting 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria and available genotype information in the Mass General Brigham Biobank, a multihospital biospecimen and clinical data collection research study. We determined RA-ILD presence by reviewing all RA patients who had CT imaging, lung biopsy or autopsy results. We determined the dates of RA and RA-ILD diagnoses by manual records review. We examined the associations of the MUC5B promoter variant (G>T at rs35705950) with RA-ILD, RA-ILD occurring before or within 2 years of RA diagnosis and RA diagnosis at age >55 years. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for each outcome by MUC5B promoter variant status, adjusting for potential confounders including genetic ancestry and smoking. Results We identified 1005 RA patients with available genotype data for rs35705950 (mean age 45 years, 79% female, 81% European ancestry). The MUC5B promoter variant was present in 155 (15.4%) and was associated with RA-ILD [multivariable OR 3.34 (95% CI 1.97, 5.60)], RA-ILD before or within 2 years of RA diagnosis [OR 4.01 (95% CI 1.78, 8.80)] and RA onset after age 55 years [OR 1.52 (95% CI 1.08, 2.12)]. Conclusions The common MUC5B promoter variant was associated with RA-ILD onset earlier in the RA disease course and older age of RA onset. These findings suggest that the MUC5B promoter variant may impact RA-ILD risk early in the RA disease course, particularly in patients with older-onset RA.

ObjectiveTo investigate the independent relationship of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to the type and severity of pulmonary patterns on spirometry compared to the pulmonary patterns in general population controls.MethodsIn this cross‐sectional study, we investigated the association of RA with pulmonary function measures on spirometry among subjects in the UK Biobank who underwent spirometry for research purposes. RA cases were identified based on self‐report and current disease‐modifying antirheumatic drug/glucocorticoid use. Controls were subjects without RA from the general population. Outcome measures included continuous forced expiratory volume in 1 second percent predicted (FEV1%) and forced vital capacity percent predicted (FVC%), type of spirometric pattern (restrictive or obstructive), and severity of the restrictive or obstructive pattern. We used multivariable regression to estimate the effects in RA cases compared to the effects in controls, adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, and smoking status/pack‐years.ResultsAmong 350,776 analyzed subjects who underwent spirometry (mean age 56.3 years; 55.8% female; 45.5% ever smokers), we identified 2,008 cases of treated RA. In multivariable analyses, RA was associated with lower FEV1% (β = –2.93 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) –3.63, –2.24]), FVC% (β = –2.08 [95% CI –2.72, –1.45]), and FEV1/FVC (β = –0.008 [95% CI –0.010, –0.005]) compared to controls. RA was additionally associated with restrictive patterns (odds ratio [OR] 1.36 [95% CI 1.21, 1.52]) and obstructive patterns (OR 1.21 [95% CI 1.07, 1.37]) independent of confounders, and was most strongly associated with severe restrictive and obstructive patterns.ConclusionRA is associated with increased odds of restrictive and obstructive patterns, and this relationship is not explained by confounders, including smoking status. In addition to restrictive lung disease, clinicians should also be aware that airway obstruction may be a pulmonary manifestation of RA.