Cargando…

Does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? A multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years

BACKGROUND: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017 proposed a new classification that reclassified many chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients from group D to B. However, there is a paucity of data related to the comparison between reclassified and non-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cui, Yanan, Ma, Yiming, Dai, Zhongshang, Long, Yingjiao, Chen, Yan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10617920/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37367695
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000002487
_version_ 1785129677849886720
author Cui, Yanan
Ma, Yiming
Dai, Zhongshang
Long, Yingjiao
Chen, Yan
author_facet Cui, Yanan
Ma, Yiming
Dai, Zhongshang
Long, Yingjiao
Chen, Yan
author_sort Cui, Yanan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017 proposed a new classification that reclassified many chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients from group D to B. However, there is a paucity of data related to the comparison between reclassified and non-reclassified COPD patients in terms of long-term prognosis. This study aimed to investigate long-term outcomes of them and determine whether the GOLD 2017 revision improved the assessment of COPD patients. METHODS: This observational, multicenter, prospective study recruited outpatients at 12 tertiary hospitals in China from November 2016 to February 2018 and followed them up until February 2022. All enrolled patients were classified into groups A to D based on GOLD 2017, and the subjects in group B included patients reclassified from group D to B (group DB) and those remaining in group B (group BB). Incidence rates and hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for the exacerbation of COPD and hospitalization in each group. RESULTS: We included and followed up 845 patients. During the first year of follow-up, the GOLD 2017 classification had a better discrimination ability for different risks of COPD exacerbation and hospitalization than GOLD 2013. Group DB was associated with a higher risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbation (HR = 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.37–2.59, P <0.001) and hospitalization for COPD exacerbation (HR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.29–3.85, P = 0.004) than group BB. However, during the last year of follow-up, the differences in the risks of frequent exacerbations and hospitalizations between group DB and BB were not statistically significant (frequent exacerbations: HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.51–2.03, P = 0.955; frequent hospitalizations: HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 0.58–4.78, P = 0.348). The mortality rates of the two groups were both approximately 9.0% during the entire follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term prognosis of patients reclassified into group B and of those remaining in group B was similar, although patients reclassified from group D to group B had worse short-term outcomes. The GOLD 2017 revision could improve the assessment of Chinese COPD patients in terms of long-term prognosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10617920
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106179202023-11-05 Does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? A multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years Cui, Yanan Ma, Yiming Dai, Zhongshang Long, Yingjiao Chen, Yan Chin Med J (Engl) Original Articles BACKGROUND: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017 proposed a new classification that reclassified many chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients from group D to B. However, there is a paucity of data related to the comparison between reclassified and non-reclassified COPD patients in terms of long-term prognosis. This study aimed to investigate long-term outcomes of them and determine whether the GOLD 2017 revision improved the assessment of COPD patients. METHODS: This observational, multicenter, prospective study recruited outpatients at 12 tertiary hospitals in China from November 2016 to February 2018 and followed them up until February 2022. All enrolled patients were classified into groups A to D based on GOLD 2017, and the subjects in group B included patients reclassified from group D to B (group DB) and those remaining in group B (group BB). Incidence rates and hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for the exacerbation of COPD and hospitalization in each group. RESULTS: We included and followed up 845 patients. During the first year of follow-up, the GOLD 2017 classification had a better discrimination ability for different risks of COPD exacerbation and hospitalization than GOLD 2013. Group DB was associated with a higher risk of moderate-to-severe exacerbation (HR = 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.37–2.59, P <0.001) and hospitalization for COPD exacerbation (HR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.29–3.85, P = 0.004) than group BB. However, during the last year of follow-up, the differences in the risks of frequent exacerbations and hospitalizations between group DB and BB were not statistically significant (frequent exacerbations: HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.51–2.03, P = 0.955; frequent hospitalizations: HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 0.58–4.78, P = 0.348). The mortality rates of the two groups were both approximately 9.0% during the entire follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term prognosis of patients reclassified into group B and of those remaining in group B was similar, although patients reclassified from group D to group B had worse short-term outcomes. The GOLD 2017 revision could improve the assessment of Chinese COPD patients in terms of long-term prognosis. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-11-05 2023-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10617920/ /pubmed/37367695 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000002487 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Chinese Medical Association, produced by Wolters Kluwer, Inc. under the CC-BY-NC-ND license. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Articles
Cui, Yanan
Ma, Yiming
Dai, Zhongshang
Long, Yingjiao
Chen, Yan
Does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? A multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years
title Does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? A multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years
title_full Does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? A multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years
title_fullStr Does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? A multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years
title_full_unstemmed Does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? A multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years
title_short Does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? A multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years
title_sort does the 2017 global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease revision really improve the assessment of chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients? a multicenter prospective study for more than 5 years
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10617920/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37367695
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000002487
work_keys_str_mv AT cuiyanan doesthe2017globalinitiativeforchronicobstructivelungdiseaserevisionreallyimprovetheassessmentofchinesechronicobstructivepulmonarydiseasepatientsamulticenterprospectivestudyformorethan5years
AT mayiming doesthe2017globalinitiativeforchronicobstructivelungdiseaserevisionreallyimprovetheassessmentofchinesechronicobstructivepulmonarydiseasepatientsamulticenterprospectivestudyformorethan5years
AT daizhongshang doesthe2017globalinitiativeforchronicobstructivelungdiseaserevisionreallyimprovetheassessmentofchinesechronicobstructivepulmonarydiseasepatientsamulticenterprospectivestudyformorethan5years
AT longyingjiao doesthe2017globalinitiativeforchronicobstructivelungdiseaserevisionreallyimprovetheassessmentofchinesechronicobstructivepulmonarydiseasepatientsamulticenterprospectivestudyformorethan5years
AT chenyan doesthe2017globalinitiativeforchronicobstructivelungdiseaserevisionreallyimprovetheassessmentofchinesechronicobstructivepulmonarydiseasepatientsamulticenterprospectivestudyformorethan5years