Tashkin, Donald

Abstract Rationale Individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have airflow obstruction and maldistribution of ventilation. For those living at high altitude, any gas exchange abnormality is compounded by reduced partial pressures of inspired oxygen. Objectives Does residence at higher altitude exposure affect COPD outcomes, including lung function, imaging characteristics, symptoms, health status, functional exercise capacity, exacerbations, and mortality? Methods From the SPIROMICS (Subpopulation and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study) cohort, we identified individuals with COPD living below 1,000 ft (305 m) elevation (n = 1,367) versus above 4,000 ft (1,219 m) elevation (n = 288). Multivariable regression models were used to evaluate associations of exposure to high altitude with COPD-related outcomes. Measurements and Main Results Living at higher altitude was associated with reduced functional exercise capacity as defined by 6-minute-walk distance (−32.3 m [95% confidence interval, −49.8 to −14.8 m]). There were no differences in patient-reported outcomes as defined by symptoms (COPD Assessment Test and modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale), or health status (St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire). Higher altitude was not associated with a different rate of FEV1 decline. Higher altitude was associated with lower odds of severe exacerbations (incidence rate ratio, 0.65 [95% confidence interval, 0.46 to 0.90]). There were no differences in small airway disease, air trapping, or emphysema. In longitudinal analyses, higher altitude was associated with increased mortality (hazard ratio, 1.25 [95% confidence interval, 1.0 to 1.55]); however, this association was no longer significant when accounting for air pollution. Conclusions Long-term altitude exposure is associated with reduced functional exercise capacity in individuals with COPD, but this did not translate into differences in symptoms or health status. In addition, long-term high-altitude exposure did not affect progression of disease as defined by longitudinal changes in spirometry. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01969344).

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.