Citations

Abstract Rationale An efficacious medical therapy for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) remains elusive. Objectives To explore the efficacy and safety of etanercept in the treatment of IPF. Methods This was a randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter exploratory trial in subjects with clinically progressive IPF. Primary endpoints included changes in the percentage of predicted FVC and lung diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide corrected for hemoglobin (DlCOHb) and change in the alveolar to arterial oxygen pressure difference P(a–a)O2 at rest from baseline over 48 weeks. Measurements and Main Results Eighty-eight subjects received subcutaneous etanercept (25 mg) or placebo twice weekly as their sole treatment for IPF. No differences in baseline demographics and disease status were detected between treatment groups; the mean time from first diagnosis was 13.6 months and mean FVC was 63.9% of predicted. At 48 weeks, no significant differences in efficacy endpoints were observed between the groups. A nonsignificant reduction in disease progression was seen in several physiologic, functional, and quality-of-life endpoints among subjects receiving etanercept. There was no difference in adverse events between treatment groups. Conclusions In this exploratory study in patients with clinically progressive IPF, etanercept was well tolerated. Although there were no differences in the predefined endpoints, a decreased rate of disease progression was observed on several measures. Further evaluation of TNF antagonists in the treatment of IPF may be warranted. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 00063869).

Abstract Rationale The 2002 American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society classification of idiopathic interstitial pneumonias identified nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) as a provisional diagnosis. Concern was expressed that NSIP was a “wastebasket” category, difficult to distinguish from other idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Objectives The following questions were addressed: (1) Is idiopathic NSIP a distinct entity? 2) If so, what are its clinical, radiologic and pathologic characteristics? (3) What is the role of radiology and pathology in establishing the diagnosis? (4) To make a diagnosis of idiopathic NSIP, what other disorders need to be excluded and how should this be done? Methods Investigators who had previously reported cases of idiopathic NSIP were invited to submit cases for review (n = 305). After initial review, cases with complete clinical, radiologic, and pathologic information (n = 193) were reviewed in a series of workshops. Measurements and Main Results Sixty-seven cases were identified as NSIP. Mean age was 52 years, 67% were women, 69% were never-smokers, and 46% were from Asian countries. The most common symptoms were dyspnea (96%) and cough (87%); 69% had restriction. By high-resolution computed tomography, the lower lung zones were predominantly involved in 92% of cases; 46% had a peripheral distribution; 47% were diffuse. Most showed a reticular pattern (87%) with traction bronchiectasis (82%) and volume loss (77%). Lung biopsies showed uniform thickening of alveolar walls with a spectrum of cellular to fibrosing patterns. Five-year survival was 82.3%. Conclusions Idiopathic NSIP is a distinct clinical entity that occurs mostly in middle-aged women who are never-smokers. The prognosis of NSIP is very good.

Abstract The natural history of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) has been characterized as a steady, predictable decline in lung function over time. Recent evidence suggests that some patients may experience a more precipitous course, with periods of relative stability followed by acute deteriorations in respiratory status. Many of these acute deteriorations are of unknown etiology and have been termed acute exacerbations of IPF. This perspective is the result of an international effort to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding acute exacerbations of IPF. Acute exacerbations of IPF are defined as acute, clinically significant deteriorations of unidentifiable cause in patients with underlying IPF. Proposed diagnostic criteria include subjective worsening over 30 days or less, new bilateral radiographic opacities, and the absence of infection or another identifiable etiology. The potential pathobiological roles of infection, disordered cell biology, coagulation, and genetics are discussed, and future research directions are proposed.

Abstract Rationale Treatment and prognoses of diffuse parenchymal lung diseases (DPLDs) varies by diagnosis. Obtaining a uniform diagnosis among observers is difficult. Objectives Evaluate diagnostic agreement between academic and community-based physicians for patients with DPLDs, and determine if an interactive approach between clinicians, radiologists, and pathologists improved diagnostic agreement in community and academic centers. Methods Retrospective review of 39 patients with DPLD. A total of 19 participants reviewed cases at 2 community locations and 1 academic location. Information from the history, physical examination, pulmonary function testing, high-resolution computed tomography, and surgical lung biopsy was collected. Data were presented in the same sequential fashion to three groups of physicians on separate days. Measurements and Main Results Each observer's diagnosis was coded into one of eight categories. A κ statistic allowing for multiple raters was used to assess agreement in diagnosis. Interactions between clinicians, radiologists, and pathologists improved interobserver agreement at both community and academic sites; however, final agreement was better within academic centers (κ = 0.55–0.71) than within community centers (κ = 0.32–0.44). Clinically significant disagreement was present between academic and community-based physicians (κ = 0.11–0.56). Community physicians were more likely to assign a final diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis compared with academic physicians. Conclusions Significant disagreement exists in the diagnosis of DPLD between physicians based in communities compared with those in academic centers. Wherever possible, patients should be referred to centers with expertise in diffuse parenchymal lung disorders to help clarify the diagnosis and provide suggestions regarding treatment options.

Abstract Current guidelines recommend that the clinician, radiologist, and pathologist work together to establish a diagnosis of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia. Three clinicians, two radiologists, and two pathologists reviewed 58 consecutive cases of suspected idiopathic interstitial pneumonia. Each participant was provided information in a sequential manner and was asked to record their diagnostic impression and level of confidence at each step. Interobserver agreement improved from the beginning to the end of the review. After the presentation of histopathologic information, radiologists changed their diagnostic impression more often than did clinicians. In general, as more information was provided the confidence level for a given diagnosis improved, and the diagnoses rendered with a high level of confidence were more likely congruent with the final pathologic consensus diagnosis. The final consensus pathologist diagnosis was idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in 30 cases. Clinicians identified 75% and radiologists identified 48% of these cases before presentation of the histopathologic information. Histopathologic information has the greatest impact on the final diagnosis, especially when the initial clinical/radiographic diagnosis is not idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. We conclude that dynamic interactions between clinicians, radiologists, and pathologists improve interobserver agreement and diagnostic confidence.