Cargando…

Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: The traditional classification of COPD, which relies solely on spirometry, fails to account for the complexity and heterogeneity of the disease. Phenotyping is a method that attempts to derive a single or combination of disease attributes that are associated with clinically meaningful ou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pinto, Lancelot M, Alghamdi, Majed, Benedetti, Andrea, Zaihra, Tasneem, Landry, Tara, Bourbeau, Jean
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4460884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25928208
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-015-0208-4
_version_ 1782375453968826368
author Pinto, Lancelot M
Alghamdi, Majed
Benedetti, Andrea
Zaihra, Tasneem
Landry, Tara
Bourbeau, Jean
author_facet Pinto, Lancelot M
Alghamdi, Majed
Benedetti, Andrea
Zaihra, Tasneem
Landry, Tara
Bourbeau, Jean
author_sort Pinto, Lancelot M
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The traditional classification of COPD, which relies solely on spirometry, fails to account for the complexity and heterogeneity of the disease. Phenotyping is a method that attempts to derive a single or combination of disease attributes that are associated with clinically meaningful outcomes. Deriving phenotypes entails the use of cluster analyses, and helps individualize patient management by identifying groups of individuals with similar characteristics. We aimed to systematically review the literature for studies that had derived such phenotypes using unsupervised methods. METHODS: Two independent reviewers systematically searched multiple databases for studies that performed validated statistical analyses, free of definitive pre-determined hypotheses, to derive phenotypes among patients with COPD. Data were extracted independently. RESULTS: 9156 citations were retrieved, of which, 8 studies were included. The number of subjects ranged from 213 to 1543. Most studies appeared to be biased: patients were more likely males, with severe disease, and recruited in tertiary care settings. Statistical methods used to derive phenotypes varied by study. The number of phenotypes identified ranged from 2 to 5. Two phenotypes, with poor longitudinal health outcomes, were common across multiple studies: young patients with severe respiratory disease, few cardiovascular co-morbidities, poor nutritional status and poor health status, and a phenotype of older patients with moderate respiratory disease, obesity, cardiovascular and metabolic co-morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: The recognition that two phenotypes of COPD were often reported may have clinical implications for altering the course of the disease. This review also provided important information on limitations of phenotype studies in COPD and the need for improvement in future studies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-015-0208-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4460884
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44608842015-06-10 Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review Pinto, Lancelot M Alghamdi, Majed Benedetti, Andrea Zaihra, Tasneem Landry, Tara Bourbeau, Jean Respir Res Research BACKGROUND: The traditional classification of COPD, which relies solely on spirometry, fails to account for the complexity and heterogeneity of the disease. Phenotyping is a method that attempts to derive a single or combination of disease attributes that are associated with clinically meaningful outcomes. Deriving phenotypes entails the use of cluster analyses, and helps individualize patient management by identifying groups of individuals with similar characteristics. We aimed to systematically review the literature for studies that had derived such phenotypes using unsupervised methods. METHODS: Two independent reviewers systematically searched multiple databases for studies that performed validated statistical analyses, free of definitive pre-determined hypotheses, to derive phenotypes among patients with COPD. Data were extracted independently. RESULTS: 9156 citations were retrieved, of which, 8 studies were included. The number of subjects ranged from 213 to 1543. Most studies appeared to be biased: patients were more likely males, with severe disease, and recruited in tertiary care settings. Statistical methods used to derive phenotypes varied by study. The number of phenotypes identified ranged from 2 to 5. Two phenotypes, with poor longitudinal health outcomes, were common across multiple studies: young patients with severe respiratory disease, few cardiovascular co-morbidities, poor nutritional status and poor health status, and a phenotype of older patients with moderate respiratory disease, obesity, cardiovascular and metabolic co-morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: The recognition that two phenotypes of COPD were often reported may have clinical implications for altering the course of the disease. This review also provided important information on limitations of phenotype studies in COPD and the need for improvement in future studies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-015-0208-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-04-18 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4460884/ /pubmed/25928208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-015-0208-4 Text en © Pinto et al. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Pinto, Lancelot M
Alghamdi, Majed
Benedetti, Andrea
Zaihra, Tasneem
Landry, Tara
Bourbeau, Jean
Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review
title Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review
title_full Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review
title_fullStr Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review
title_short Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review
title_sort derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for copd: a systematic review
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4460884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25928208
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-015-0208-4
work_keys_str_mv AT pintolancelotm derivationandvalidationofclinicalphenotypesforcopdasystematicreview
AT alghamdimajed derivationandvalidationofclinicalphenotypesforcopdasystematicreview
AT benedettiandrea derivationandvalidationofclinicalphenotypesforcopdasystematicreview
AT zaihratasneem derivationandvalidationofclinicalphenotypesforcopdasystematicreview
AT landrytara derivationandvalidationofclinicalphenotypesforcopdasystematicreview
AT bourbeaujean derivationandvalidationofclinicalphenotypesforcopdasystematicreview