Cargando…

Measuring disease activity in COPD: is clinically important deterioration the answer?

Given the heterogeneity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), personalized clinical management is key to optimizing patient outcomes. Important treatment goals include minimizing disease activity and preventing disease progression; however, quantification of these components remains a cha...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singh, Dave, Criner, Gerard J., Naya, Ian, Jones, Paul W., Tombs, Lee, Lipson, David A., Han, MeiLan K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7265253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32487202
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-020-01387-z
_version_ 1783541093575426048
author Singh, Dave
Criner, Gerard J.
Naya, Ian
Jones, Paul W.
Tombs, Lee
Lipson, David A.
Han, MeiLan K.
author_facet Singh, Dave
Criner, Gerard J.
Naya, Ian
Jones, Paul W.
Tombs, Lee
Lipson, David A.
Han, MeiLan K.
author_sort Singh, Dave
collection PubMed
description Given the heterogeneity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), personalized clinical management is key to optimizing patient outcomes. Important treatment goals include minimizing disease activity and preventing disease progression; however, quantification of these components remains a challenge. Growing evidence suggests that decline over time in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)), traditionally the key marker of disease progression, may not be sufficient to fully determine deterioration across COPD populations. In addition, there is a lack of evidence showing that currently available multidimensional COPD indexes improve clinical decision-making, treatment, or patient outcomes. The composite clinically important deterioration (CID) endpoint was developed to assess disease worsening by detecting early deteriorations in lung function (measured by FEV(1)), health status (assessed by the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire), and the presence of exacerbations. Post hoc and prospective analyses of clinical trial data have confirmed that the multidimensional composite CID endpoint better predicts poorer medium-term outcomes compared with any single CID component alone, and that it can demonstrate differences in treatment efficacy in short-term trials. Given the widely acknowledged need for an individualized holistic approach to COPD management, monitoring short-term CID has the potential to facilitate early identification of suboptimal treatment responses and patients at risk of increased disease progression. CID monitoring may lead to better-informed clinical management decisions and potentially improved prognosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7265253
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72652532020-06-07 Measuring disease activity in COPD: is clinically important deterioration the answer? Singh, Dave Criner, Gerard J. Naya, Ian Jones, Paul W. Tombs, Lee Lipson, David A. Han, MeiLan K. Respir Res Review Given the heterogeneity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), personalized clinical management is key to optimizing patient outcomes. Important treatment goals include minimizing disease activity and preventing disease progression; however, quantification of these components remains a challenge. Growing evidence suggests that decline over time in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)), traditionally the key marker of disease progression, may not be sufficient to fully determine deterioration across COPD populations. In addition, there is a lack of evidence showing that currently available multidimensional COPD indexes improve clinical decision-making, treatment, or patient outcomes. The composite clinically important deterioration (CID) endpoint was developed to assess disease worsening by detecting early deteriorations in lung function (measured by FEV(1)), health status (assessed by the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire), and the presence of exacerbations. Post hoc and prospective analyses of clinical trial data have confirmed that the multidimensional composite CID endpoint better predicts poorer medium-term outcomes compared with any single CID component alone, and that it can demonstrate differences in treatment efficacy in short-term trials. Given the widely acknowledged need for an individualized holistic approach to COPD management, monitoring short-term CID has the potential to facilitate early identification of suboptimal treatment responses and patients at risk of increased disease progression. CID monitoring may lead to better-informed clinical management decisions and potentially improved prognosis. BioMed Central 2020-06-02 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7265253/ /pubmed/32487202 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-020-01387-z Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
Singh, Dave
Criner, Gerard J.
Naya, Ian
Jones, Paul W.
Tombs, Lee
Lipson, David A.
Han, MeiLan K.
Measuring disease activity in COPD: is clinically important deterioration the answer?
title Measuring disease activity in COPD: is clinically important deterioration the answer?
title_full Measuring disease activity in COPD: is clinically important deterioration the answer?
title_fullStr Measuring disease activity in COPD: is clinically important deterioration the answer?
title_full_unstemmed Measuring disease activity in COPD: is clinically important deterioration the answer?
title_short Measuring disease activity in COPD: is clinically important deterioration the answer?
title_sort measuring disease activity in copd: is clinically important deterioration the answer?
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7265253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32487202
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-020-01387-z
work_keys_str_mv AT singhdave measuringdiseaseactivityincopdisclinicallyimportantdeteriorationtheanswer
AT crinergerardj measuringdiseaseactivityincopdisclinicallyimportantdeteriorationtheanswer
AT nayaian measuringdiseaseactivityincopdisclinicallyimportantdeteriorationtheanswer
AT jonespaulw measuringdiseaseactivityincopdisclinicallyimportantdeteriorationtheanswer
AT tombslee measuringdiseaseactivityincopdisclinicallyimportantdeteriorationtheanswer
AT lipsondavida measuringdiseaseactivityincopdisclinicallyimportantdeteriorationtheanswer
AT hanmeilank measuringdiseaseactivityincopdisclinicallyimportantdeteriorationtheanswer