Blood eosinophils as predictor of outcomes in patients hospitalized for COPD exacerbations: a prospective observational study

Clinical utilization of airway inflammatory biomarkers in the prediction and monitoring of clinical outcomes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

INTRODUCTION

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) accounts for 545 million people living with chronic respiratory disorders and is the third leading cause of morbidity and mortality around the world. COPD is a progressive disease, characterized by episodes of acute worsening of symptoms such as cough, dyspnea, and sputum production.

AREAS COVERED

Airway inflammation is a prominent feature of COPD. Chronic airway inflammation results in airway structural remodeling and emphysema. Persistent airway inflammation is a treatable trait of COPD and plays a significant role in disease development and progression. In this review, the authors summarize the current and emerging biomarkers that reveal the heterogeneity of airway inflammation subtypes, clinical outcomes, and therapeutic response in COPD.

EXPERT OPINION

Airway inflammation can be broadly categorized as eosinophilic (type 2 inflammation) and non-eosinophilic (non-type 2 inflammation) in COPD. Currently, blood eosinophil counts are incorporated in clinical practice guidelines to identify COPD patients who are at a higher risk of exacerbations and lung function decline, and who are likely to respond to inhaled corticosteroids. As new therapeutics are being developed for the chronic management of COPD, it is essential to identify biomarkers that will predict treatment response.

Exploring Mechanisms in COPD: Time for Biomarker Reappraisal?

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a widespread condition often overlooked in diagnosis [...].

Eosinopenia as a Prognostic Biomarker for Noninvasive Ventilation Use in COPD Exacerbations

BACKGROUND

In recent years, blood eosinophils have been evaluated as a surrogate biomarker for eosinophilic airway inflammation and as a prognostic indicator of the outcomes of hospitalized COPD subjects. During an exacerbation of COPD, eosinopenia has been proposed as a prognostic marker of adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present post hoc analysis was to elucidate the effectiveness of blood eosinophils for predicting the need of NIV in subjects with COPD exacerbation.

METHODS

Consecutive subjects admitted to a hospital for COPD exacerbation were included in the analysis. The eosinophil count from the first complete blood count was used to designate the eosinophil groups. The relationship between the clinical characteristics and blood eosinophil counts, as dichotomized using 150 cells/μL, was evaluated. Results Subjects with blood eosinophil number < 150 k/μL had a more severe disease on admission compared to subjects with ≥150 k/μL, regarding pH 7.400 (7.36, 7.44) vs. 7.42 (7.38, 7.45), p = 0.008, PO₂/FiO₂ levels 238.1 (189.8, 278.6) vs. 276.2 (238.2, 305.6), p < 0.001, CRP (mg/L) levels 7.3 (3.1, 19.9) vs. 3.5 (0.7, 7.8), p < 0.001 and required a longer hospital stay (days) 10.0 (8.0, 14.0) vs. 5.0 (3.0, 7.0) p < 0.001 respectively. The number of blood eosinophils correlated with the levels of CRP upon admission (p < 0.001, r = -0.334), with arterial pH upon admission (p < 0.030, r = 0.121), with PO₂/FiO₂ (p < 0.001, r = -0.248), and with duration of hospital stay (p < 0.001, r = -0.589). In the multinomial logistic regression analysis, blood eosinophil count < 150 k/μL was an independent predictor of the use of NIV during hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

During COPD exacerbation, low blood eosinophil levels upon admission are related to more severe disease and can be used as a predictor of the need of NIV. Further prospective studies are needed to identify the use of blood eosinophil levels as a predictor of unfavorable outcomes.

Stepwise management of COPD: What is next after bronchodilation?

Inhaled bronchodilator therapy with long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) in combination is currently the mainstay of treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Treatment guidelines recommend the addition of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to LABA/LAMA only in patients with a history of frequent/severe exacerbations and high blood eosinophil counts, or in those with concomitant asthma. Despite this, real-world data suggest that clinicians are not adhering to this guidance and that ICS are frequently overused. This is possibly due to the incorrect assumption that when LABA/LAMA therapy is not sufficient, adding an ICS to the treatment regimen is the logical next step. In this narrative review, we describe global and country-specific guideline recommendations from Germany, Spain, and Japan and compare these with real-world data on LABA/LAMA and ICS use in clinical practice. We also provide a clinical guide to the use of add-on therapies with LABA/LAMA for different patient phenotypes, including (1) patients still symptomatic (but not exacerbating) despite LABA/LAMA treatment; (2) patients still exacerbating despite LABA/LAMA treatment who have high blood eosinophil counts; and (3) patients still exacerbating despite LABA/LAMA treatment who do not have high blood eosinophils or concomitant asthma.

The Role of Blood Eosinophils in the Management of COPD: An Attempt to Answer the Important Clinical Questions

Blood eosinophils have been proposed as a surrogate biomarker of airway eosinophilia that can be used for treatment decisions in patients with COPD, mainly for the identification of candidates for the initiation or withdrawal of therapy with inhaled corticosteroids, as well as for the identification of patients at future risk of exacerbations. In this manuscript we review the recent literature on blood eosinophils in the management of patients with COPD, in an attempt to answer the major questions that are relevant for the practicing clinician. A growing body of evidence suggests that eosinophilic COPD may constitute a separate phenotype of the disease with distinct clinical features and blood eosinophils may represent a potential candidate surrogate marker for specific COPD patients. Several points still need to be clarified, including the role of eosinophils for the identification of candidates for future COPD therapies, yet blood eosinophils plausibly represent the most dependable and promising biomarker for the precision management of COPD today.

Corticosteroid Resistance in Smokers-A Substudy Analysis of the CORTICO-COP Randomised Controlled Trial

The CORTICO-COP trial showed that eosinophil-guided corticosteroid-sparing treatment for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was non-inferior to standard of care and decreased the accumulated dose of systemic corticosteroids that patients were exposed to by approximately 60%. Smoking status has been shown to affect corticosteroid responsiveness. This post hoc analysis investigated whether eosinophil-guided treatment is non-inferior to conventional treatment in current smokers. The main analysis of current smokers showed no significant difference in the primary endpoint, days alive, and out of hospital within 14 days between the control group (mean, 9.8 days; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8.7-10.8) and the eosinophil-guided group (mean, 8.7 days; 95% CI, 7.5-9.9; p = 0.34). Secondary analyses of the number of exacerbations or deaths, the number of intensive care unit admissions or deaths, lung function improvement, and change in health-related quality of life also showed no significant differences between the two groups. The results of a sensitivity analysis of ex-smokers are consistent with the main analysis. Our results suggest that eosinophil-guided treatment is non-inferior to standard of care in current smokers and ex-smokers. Because data on the impact of smoking status on eosinophil-guided treatments are sparse, more randomised trials are needed to confirm our results.