Risk factors for acute exacerbation of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia in patients undergoing lung cancer treatment

Acute exacerbation predicting poor outcomes in idiopathic interstitial pneumonia and advanced lung cancer patients undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy

Effective treatment for advanced lung cancer and idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP) remains an unmet medical need. The relationship between chemotherapy's effectiveness in advanced lung cancer and the risk of acute exacerbation of IIP is poorly investigated. There is limited evidence that patients who experience an acute exacerbation of IIPs during cytotoxic chemotherapy have poorer outcomes than those who do not. Among 1004 patients with advanced lung cancer and IIPs enrolled in our published multi-centre retrospective study from 110 Japanese institutions, 708 patients (male: female, 645:63; mean age, 70.4) received first-line chemotherapy. The occurrence of chemotherapy-triggered acute exacerbations of IIPs and overall survival (OS) were analysed. The OS between groups of patients with and without the occurrence of acute exacerbation was compared at four landmark time points (30, 60, 90, and 120 days), starting from the first-line chemotherapy, using the landmark method. The incidence of acute exacerbation in patients who received first-line chemotherapy with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was more frequent in NSCLC patients than in SCLC (4.2% vs 12.6%; odds ratio [OR]: 3.316; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-8.8). Median survival time was 9.9 months (95% CI 9.2-10.7). Patients who experienced acute exacerbation had significant worse survival outcomes than those who did not at various time points (30 days, hazard ratio [HR]: 5.191, 95% CI 2.889-9.328; 60 days, HR: 2.351, 95% CI 1.104-5.009; 90 days, HR: 2.416, 95% CI 1.232-4.739; and 120 days, HR: 2.521, 95% CI 1.357-4.681). Acute exacerbation during first-line chemotherapy can predict poor survival.Trial Registration number: UMIN000018227.

Japanese guidelines for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis 2023:Revised edition

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is an interstitial lung disease with a poor prognosis and an unknown cause that generally progresses to pulmonary fibrosis and leads to irreversible tissue alteration. The "Guidelines for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis 2017," specializing in the treatment of IPF for the first time in Japan and presenting evidence-based standard treatment methods suited to the state of affairs in Japan, was published in 2017, in line with the 2014 version of "Formulation procedure for Minds Clinical Practice Guidelines." Because new evidence had accumulated, we formulated the "Guidelines for the treatment of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis 2023 (revised 2nd edition)." While keeping the revision consistent with the ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT IPF treatment guidelines, new clinical questions (CQs) on pulmonary hypertension were added to the chronic stage, in addition to acute exacerbation and comorbid lung cancer, which greatly affect the prognosis but are not described in the ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT IPF guidelines. Regarding the advanced stages, we additionally created expert consensus-based advice for palliative care and lung transplantation. The number of CQs increased from 17 in the first edition to 24. It is important that these guidelines be used not only by respiratory specialists but also by general practitioners, patients, and their families; therefore, we plan to revise them appropriately in line with ever-advancing medical progress.

Efficacy and safety of local ablative therapy for patients with NSCLC and coexisting interstitial lung disease

BACKGROUND

The effective therapeutic approach is still an unmet need for patients diagnosed with both lung cancer and interstitial lung disease (ILD). This is primarily due to the possible risk of ILD exacerbation caused by surgery or radiotherapy. The current study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of local ablative therapy (LAT) for this specific population.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and ILD who received LAT between January 2018 and August 2022 were enrolled, and propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to match the non-ILD group. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS), and secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), adverse events (AEs) and hospital length of stay (HLOS).

RESULTS

The PSM algorithm yielded matched pairs in the ILD group (n = 25) and non-ILD group (n = 72) at a ratio of 1:3. There were no statistically significant differences in RFS (median 16.4 vs. 18 months; HR = 1.452, p = 0.259) and OS (median: not reached vs. 47.9 months; HR = 1.096, p = 0.884) between the two groups. Meanwhile, no acute exacerbation of ILD was observed in the ILD group. However, the incidence of pneumothorax, especially pneumothorax requiring chest tube drainage, was significantly higher (36.0% vs. 11.2%, p = 0.005) among patients with NSCLC and co-existing ILD, which resulted in longer HLOS (p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Although ILD was associated with a higher incidence of pneumothorax, the efficacy of LAT for NSCLC patients with ILD was comparable to those without ILD, suggesting that LAT might be a reliable and effective treatment option for this population, particularly in the early stage.

Chemotherapy versus best supportive care in advanced lung cancer and idiopathic interstitial pneumonias: A retrospective multi-centre cohort study

BACKGROUND

The clinical questions of whether chemotherapy as initial treatment, compared with best supportive care (BSC), improves overall survival (OS) and whether it increases the occurrence risk of acute exacerbation of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP) in patients with advanced-stage lung cancer and IIP remain inconclusive. This study addresses these issues, given that chemotherapy-related acute exacerbation of IIP may be a direct cause of mortality in these patients.

METHODS

We enrolled 1003 patients from 110 Japanese institutions and collected clinical profiles from 707 and 296 patients in the chemotherapy (men: women, 645:62; mean age, 70.4 ± 6.9 years) and BSC (men: women, 261:35; mean age, 75.2 ± 7.8) groups, respectively. We used propensity score matching to create 222 matched pairs from both groups using patient demographic data (age, sex, smoking status, performance status, history of acute exacerbation of IIP, desaturation on exertion, clinical diagnosis of IIP, high-resolution computed tomography findings, serum fibrotic markers, pulmonary function status, and lung cancer histopathology). Logistic or Cox regression analyses were performed using matched data to assess the effects of chemotherapy on the risk of acute exacerbation of IIP or OS, respectively.

RESULTS

In the well-matched cohort, chemotherapy improved OS (hazard ratio: 0.629, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.506-0.783, p < 0.0001); however, it involved significant acute exacerbation of IIP (odds ratio: 1.787, 95% CI: 1.026-3.113) compared to BSC.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with BSC, chemotherapy can improve OS in patients with advanced-stage lung cancer and IIP; however, it increases the risk of acute exacerbation of IIP.

Is Thoracic Radiotherapy an Absolute Contraindication for Treatment of Lung Cancer Patients With Interstitial Lung Disease? A Systematic Review

Thoracic radiotherapy decisions in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) are complex due to concerns about severe or even fatal radiation pneumonitis. This systematic review analysed the published evidence regarding the incidence of radiation pneumonitis and mortality after thoracic radiotherapy and investigated clinical and dosimetric predictors of radiation pneumonitis in lung cancer patients with ILD. A systematic search was carried out in PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane database for articles published between January 2000 and April 2021. Two authors independently screened eligible studies that met our predefined criteria. Studies were assessed for design and quality and a qualitative data synthesis was carried out. The search strategy resulted in 1750 articles. After two rounds of screening, 24 publications were included. The median overall incidence of grade ≥3 radiation pneumonitis was 19.7% (range 8-46%). The incidence was greater in conventional radical radiotherapy-treated patients (median 31.8%) compared with particle beam therapy- or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy-treated patients (median 12.5%). The median rate of grade 5 radiation pneumonitis was 11.9% (range 0-60%). The presence of ILD was an independent predictor of severe radiation pneumonitis. Severe radiation pneumonitis was more common in the presence of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern or idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) than non-UIP or non-IPF subtype. Several other clinical predictors were reported in the literature. V5, V10, V20 and mean lung dose were the most common dosimetric predictors for severe radiation pneumonitis, often with stricter dose constraints than conventionally used. Patients with lung cancer associated with ILD had a poorer overall survival compared with patients without ILD. In conclusion, patients with lung cancer associated with ILD have a poor prognosis. They are at high risk of severe and even fatal radiation pneumonitis. Careful patient selection is necessary, appropriate high-risk consenting and strict lung dose-volume constraints should be used, if these patients are to be treated with thoracic radiotherapy.

KL-6 as an Immunological Biomarker Predicts the Severity, Progression, Acute Exacerbation, and Poor Outcomes of Interstitial Lung Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Object

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a specific form of chronic fibrosing interstitial pneumonia with various etiology. The severity and progression of ILD usually predict the poor outcomes of ILD. Otherwise, Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) is a potential immunological biomarker reflecting the severity and progression of ILD. This meta-analysis is to clarify the predictive value of elevated KL-6 levels in ILD.

Method

EBSCO, PubMed, and Cochrane were systematically searched for articles exploring the prognosis of ILD published between January 1980 and April 2021. The Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) and 95% Confidence Interval (CI) were computed as the effect sizes for comparisons between groups. For the relationship between adverse outcome and elevated KL-6 concentration, Hazard Ratio (HR), and its 95%CI were used to estimate the risk factor of ILD.

Result

Our result showed that ILD patients in severe and progressive groups had higher KL-6 levels, and the KL-6 level of patients in the severe ILD was 703.41 (U/ml) than in mild ILD. The KL-6 level in progressive ILD group was 325.98 (U/ml) higher than that in the non-progressive ILD group. Secondly, the KL-6 level of patients in acute exacerbation (AE) of ILD was 545.44 (U/ml) higher than stable ILD. Lastly, the higher KL-6 level in ILD patients predicted poor outcomes. The KL-6 level in death of ILD was 383.53 (U/ml) higher than in survivors of ILD. The pooled HR (95%CI) about elevated KL-6 level predicting the mortality of ILD was 2.05 (1.50–2.78), and the HR (95%CI) for progression of ILD was 1.98 (1.07–3.67).

Conclusion

The elevated KL-6 level indicated more severe, more progressive, and predicted the higher mortality and poor outcomes of ILD.

A clinical practice guideline using percentage of predicted forced vital capacity improves resource allocation for rib fracture patients

BACKGROUND

Predicting rib fracture patients that will require higher-level care is a challenge during patient triage. Percentage of predicted forced vital capacity (FVC%) incorporates patient-specific factors to customize the measurements to each patient. A single institution transitioned from a clinical practice guideline (CPG) using absolute forced vital capacity (FVC) to one using FVC% to improve triage of rib fracture patients. This study compares the outcomes of patients before and after the CPG change.

METHODS

A review of rib fracture patients was performed over a 3-year retrospective period (RETRO) and 1-year prospective period (PRO). RETRO patients were triaged by absolute FVC. Percentage of predicted FVC was used to triage PRO patients. Demographics, mechanism, Injury Severity Score, chest Abbreviated Injury Scale score, number of rib fractures, tube thoracostomy, intubation, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), transfer to ICU, hospital length of stay (LOS), ICU LOS, and mortality data were compared. A multivariable model was constructed to perform adjusted analysis for LOS.

RESULTS

There were 588 patients eligible for the study, with 269 RETRO and 319 PRO patients. No significant differences in age, gender, or injury details were identified. Fewer tube thoracostomy were performed in PRO patients. Rates of intubation, admission to ICU, and mortality were similar. The PRO cohort had fewer ICU transfers and shorter LOS and ICU LOS. Multivariable logistic regression identified a 78% reduction in odds of ICU transfer among PRO patients. Adjusted analysis with multiple linear regression showed LOS was decreased 1.28 days by being a PRO patient in the study (B = -1.44; p < 0.001) with R2 = 0.198.

CONCLUSION

Percentage of predicted FVC better stratified rib fracture patients leading to a decrease in transfers to the ICU, ICU LOS, and hospital LOS. By incorporating patient-specific factors into the triage decision, the new CPG optimized triage and decreased resource utilization over the study period.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management. Trauma, Rib, Triage, level IV.

Outcome of Hospitalization for COVID-19 in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease. An International Multicenter Study

Rationale: The impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) has not been established.Objectives: To assess outcomes in patients with ILD hospitalized for COVID-19 versus those without ILD in a contemporaneous age-, sex-, and comorbidity-matched population.Methods: An international multicenter audit of patients with a prior diagnosis of ILD admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 between March 1 and May 1, 2020, was undertaken and compared with patients without ILD, obtained from the ISARIC4C (International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium) cohort, admitted with COVID-19 over the same period. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary analysis distinguished idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis from non-idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis ILD and used lung function to determine the greatest risks of death.Measurements and Main Results: Data from 349 patients with ILD across Europe were included, of whom 161 were admitted to the hospital with laboratory or clinical evidence of COVID-19 and eligible for propensity score matching. Overall mortality was 49% (79/161) in patients with ILD with COVID-19. After matching, patients with ILD with COVID-19 had significantly poorer survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; confidence interval, 1.17-2.18; P = 0.003) than age-, sex-, and comorbidity-matched controls without ILD. Patients with an FVC of <80% had an increased risk of death versus patients with FVC ≥80% (HR, 1.72; 1.05-2.83). Furthermore, obese patients with ILD had an elevated risk of death (HR, 2.27; 1.39-3.71).Conclusions: Patients with ILD are at increased risk of death from COVID-19, particularly those with poor lung function and obesity. Stringent precautions should be taken to avoid COVID-19 in patients with ILD.