McDermott, Gregory

Abstract Rationale Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) is characterized by chronic progressive pulmonary fibrosis and high mortality. Genetic markers, summarized into a polygenic risk score (PRS), associate with IPF in well-phenotyped research cohorts. Objectives To evaluate the performance of the PRS using real-world data from routinely captured electronic healthcare records. Methods We conducted an observational study evaluating the association of a PRS for IPF with electronic healthcare record diagnosis of IPF as well as lung transplant-free survival in four independent cohorts; the Mass General Brigham Biobank (MGBB), Mayo Clinic Biobank (MCBB), Mayo Clinic Tapestry Cohort (Tapestry), and U.K. Biobank (UKBB). We used multivariable logistic regression and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for age, gender, and principal components of ancestry. The cohorts then underwent fixed and random effects meta-analysis. Measurements and Main Results Of 37,709; 44,195; 43,202; and 447,422 participants from MGBB, MCBB, Tapestry and UKBB respectively, 1,015 (2.7%) 2,879 (6.5%), 1,310 (3.0%), and 2,742 (0.6%) participants had an IPF diagnosis. Meta-analysis demonstrated a high-risk PRS associated with IPF diagnosis, OR 2.88 (95%CI 2.41-3.44) compared to all other individuals. A high-risk PRS also associated with the composite endpoint of mortality or lung transplant among those with an IPF diagnosis, HR 1.23(95%CI 1.11-1.35) compared to all other individuals. Conclusions A PRS can identify those at risk for an IPF diagnosis and mortality in biobank-scale data, which may have implications for clinical decisions. Further work is necessary to evaluate the utility of adding genetics in clinical settings.

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 Rationale In addition to rare genetic variants and the MUC5B locus, common genetic variants contribute to idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) risk. The predictive power of common variants outside the MUC5B locus for IPF and interstitial lung abnormalities (ILAs) is unknown. Objectives We tested the predictive value of IPF polygenic risk scores (PRSs) with and without the MUC5B region on IPF, ILA, and ILA progression. Methods We developed PRSs that included (PRS-M5B) and excluded (PRS-NO-M5B) the MUC5B region (500-kb window around rs35705950-T) using an IPF genome-wide association study. We assessed PRS associations with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) metrics for IPF, ILA, and ILA progression. Measurements and Main Results We included 14,650 participants (1,970 IPF; 1,068 ILA) from six multi-ancestry population-based and case–control cohorts. In cases excluded from genome-wide association study, the PRS-M5B (odds ratio [OR] per SD of the score, 3.1; P = 7.1 × 10−95) and PRS-NO-M5B (OR per SD, 2.8; P = 2.5 × 10−87) were associated with IPF. Participants in the top PRS-NO-M5B quintile had ∼sevenfold odds for IPF compared with those in the first quintile. A clinical model predicted IPF (AUC, 0.61); rs35705950-T and PRS-NO-M5B demonstrated higher AUCs (0.73 and 0.7, respectively), and adding both genetic predictors to a clinical model yielded the highest performance (AUC, 0.81). The PRS-NO-M5B was associated with ILA (OR, 1.25) and ILA progression (OR, 1.16) in European ancestry participants. Conclusions A common genetic variant risk score complements the MUC5B variant to identify individuals at high risk of interstitial lung abnormalities and pulmonary fibrosis.

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.