Suchergebnisse

Jin Hwa Song,1 Chang-Hoon Lee,1 Jin Woo Kim,2 Won-Yeon Lee,3 Ji Ye Jung,4 Joo Hun Park,5 Ki Suck Jung,6 Kwang Ha Yoo,7 Yong Bum Park,8 Deog Keom Kim9 1Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, 2Division of Pulmonology, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, 3Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Gangwon-do, 4Division of Pulmonology, Department of Internal Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, 5Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, 6Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University Medical School, Anyang, Gyeonggi-do, 7Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center, Konkuk University School of Medicine, 8Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, 9Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul Metropolitan Government-Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea Background: Recent studies that assessed the relevance of the blood eosinophil count as a biomarker in patients with COPD may have overestimated it because they included patients with asthma–COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS). We investigated the clinical implications of the blood eosinophil count in patients with non-ACOS COPD.Patients and methods: From a Korean COPD Subtype Study (KOCOSS) cohort, we selected patients with non-ACOS COPD after excluding ACOS patients according to Spanish criteria. Clinical characteristics and the incidence of moderate-to-severe exacerbation were compared among the four groups stratified according to the quartiles of blood eosinophil percent and count.Results: Of the KOCOSS cohort of 1,132 patients with COPD, 467 non-ACOS COPD patients (41.2%) with data of blood eosinophil count remained after excluding those with ACOS based on the Spanish definition. There was no difference in clinical characteristics among groups classified according to the quartiles of eosinophil percent and count. On multivariate logistic regression, eosinophil quartiles in percent and absolute count were not associated with the incidence of moderate-to-severe acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD). The eosinophil count did not affect the risk of AECOPD or forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) changes according to exposure to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). However, by increasing the cutoff value for the eosinophil count from 200/µL to 600/µL, the odds ratio for risk of exacerbation increased serially from 0.82 to 2.96 on trend analysis.Conclusion: In patients with non-ACOS COPD, the blood eosinophil count and percent were not associated with FEV1 changes, quality of life (QoL), AECOPD frequency, or response to ICS. The clinical implication of the blood eosinophil count should not be overestimated in patients with non-ACOS COPD. Keywords: eosinophil, chronic obstructive lung disease, asthma, acute exacerbation, inhaled corticosteroid

Jin Hwa Song,1 Chang-Hoon Lee,1 Soo-Jung Um,2 Yong Bum Park,3 Kwang Ha Yoo,4 Ki Suck Jung,5 Sang-Do Lee,6 Yon-Mok Oh,6 Ji Hyun Lee,7 Eun Kyung Kim,7 Deog Kyeom Kim8,9 On behalf of KOLD, KOCOSS, and SNU airway registry investigators 1Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 2Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Dong-A University Medical Center, Busan, Republic of Korea; 3Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 4Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 5Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University Medical School, Anyang Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea; 6Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine and Clinical Research Center for Chronic Obstructive Airway Diseases, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Songpa-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 7Department of Internal Medicine, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea; 8Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul Metropolitan Government-Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 9Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea Purpose: While GOLD classification has been revised, its clinical impacts on outcomes of COPD patients have not been widely evaluated in real-world cohorts.Materials and methods: According to 2007, 2013, and 2017 GOLD classifications, distribution and clinical characteristics of group-shifted patients and the risk of acute exacerbation were analyzed in combined Korean COPD cohorts. Future risk for annual moderate-to-severe exacerbation was estimated as incidence rate ratio (IRR) and compared by groups.Results: Among 1,880 COPD patients, in GOLD 2017 classification, groups B and A were increased to 61.2% and 22.2% of total population, while group C was shrunken to 2.2% and patients with higher risk were decreased (16.6% in GOLD 2017 vs 44.7% in GOLD 2013). The kappa coefficient of agreement of both systems was 0.581 (agreement 71.7%). Groups B and D showed higher IRR of moderate-to-severe exacerbation than group A (IRR 2.4 and 5.3 respectively, P<0.001), whereas group C was not different from group A. When groups C and D were combined, the IRR for acute exacerbation for each group showed good linear trends (2.5 [1.6–3.7] for group B and 4.8 [3.0–7.7] for combined group [C+D], P<0.001).Conclusions: In the revised GOLD 2017 system, COPD patients with higher risk were much decreased in Korean cohorts, and group C was negligible in size and clinical impacts on expecting future exacerbation. Serial increase in the risk for exacerbation was more concrete and predictable when group C was combined with group D. Keywords: pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive/classification, pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive/diagnosis, chronic obstructive/epidemiology, risk factors, severity of illness index