The justification for the progressive fibrotic phenotype

Progressive Pulmonary Fibrosis: Where Are We Now?

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are a diverse collection of lung disorders sharing similar features, such as inflammation and fibrosis. The diagnosis and management of ILD require a multidisciplinary approach using clinical, radiological, and pathological evaluation. Progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF) is a distinct form of progressive and fibrotic disease, occurring in ILD cases other than in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). It is defined based on clinical symptoms, lung function, and chest imaging, regardless of the underlying condition. The progression to PPF must be monitored through a combination of pulmonary function tests (forced vital capacity [FVC] and diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide), an assessment of symptoms, and computed tomography scans, with regular follow-up. Although the precise mechanisms of PPF remain unclear, there is evidence of shared pathogenetic mechanisms with IPF, contributing to similar disease behavior and worse prognosis compared to non-PPF ILD. Pharmacological treatment of PPF includes immunomodulatory agents to reduce inflammation and the use of antifibrotics to target progressive fibrosis. Nintedanib, a known antifibrotic agent, was found to be effective in slowing IPF progression and reducing the annual rate of decline in FVC among patients with PPF compared to placebos. Nonpharmacological treatment, including pulmonary rehabilitation, supplemental oxygen therapy, and vaccination, also play important roles in the management of PPF, leading to comprehensive care for patients with ILD. Although there is currently no cure for PPF, there are treatments that can help slow the progression of the disease and improve quality of life.

Key learnings from the INBUILD trial in patients with progressive pulmonary fibrosis

In a patient with interstitial lung disease (ILD) of known or unknown etiology other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF) is defined by worsening lung fibrosis on high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT), decline in lung function, and/or deterioration in symptoms. The INBUILD trial involved 663 patients with PPF who were randomized to receive nintedanib or placebo. The median exposure to trial medication was approximately 19 months. The INBUILD trial provided valuable learnings about the course of PPF and the efficacy and safety of nintedanib. The relative effect of nintedanib on reducing the rate of forced vital capacity decline was consistent across subgroups based on ILD diagnosis, HRCT pattern, and disease severity at baseline, and between patients who were and were not taking glucocorticoids or disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and/or glucocorticoids at baseline. The adverse events most frequently associated with nintedanib were gastrointestinal, particularly diarrhea, but nintedanib was discontinued in only a minority of cases. The results of the INBUILD trial highlight the importance of prompt detection and treatment of PPF and the utility of nintedanib as a treatment option.

Progressive fibrotic interstitial lung disease

Many interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) share mechanisms that result in a progressive fibrosing phenotype. In Brazil, the most common progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (PF-ILDs) are chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, unclassified ILD, and connective tissue diseases. PF-ILD is seen in approximately 30% of patients with ILD. Because PF-ILD is characterized by disease progression after initiation of appropriate treatment, a diagnosis of the disease resulting in fibrosis is critical. Different criteria have been proposed to define progressive disease, including worsening respiratory symptoms, lung function decline, and radiological evidence of disease progression. Although the time elapsed between diagnosis and progression varies, progression can occur at any time after diagnosis. Several factors indicate an increased risk of progression and death. In the last few years, antifibrotic drugs used in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis have been tested in patients with PF-ILD. The effects of nintedanib and placebo have been compared in patients with PF-ILD, a mean difference of 107.0 mL/year being observed, favoring nintedanib. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency have approved the use of nintedanib in such patients on the basis of this finding. Pirfenidone has been evaluated in patients with unclassified ILD and in patients with other ILDs, the results being similar to those for nintedanib. More studies are needed in order to identify markers of increased risk of progression in patients with ILD and determine the likelihood of response to treatment with standard or new drugs.

Usual interstitial pneumonia: a clinically significant pattern, but not the final word

Usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) is a concept that is deeply entrenched in clinical practice and the prognostic significance of UIP is well established, but the field continues to suffer from the lack of a true gold standard for diagnosing fibrotic interstitial lung disease (ILD). The meaning and usage of UIP have shifted over time and this term is prone to misinterpretation and poor diagnostic agreement. For pathologists, it is worth reflecting on the limitations of UIP and our true role in the care of patients with ILD, a controversial topic explored in two point-counterpoint editorials published simultaneously in this journal. Current diagnostic guidelines are ambiguous and difficult to apply in clinical practice. Further complicating matters for the pathologist is the paradigm shift that occurred with the advent of anti-fibrotic agents, necessitating increased focus on the most likely etiology of fibrosis rather than simply the pattern of fibrosis when pulmonologists select appropriate therapy. Despite the wealth of information locked in tissue samples that could provide novel insights into fibrotic ILDs, pulmonologists increasingly shy away from obtaining biopsies, likely because pathologists no longer provide sufficient value to offset the risks of a biopsy procedure, and pathologic assessment is insufficiently reliable to meaningfully inform therapeutic decisionmaking. To increase the value of biopsies, pathologists must first recognize the problems with UIP as a diagnostic term. Second, pathologists must realize that the primary goal of a biopsy is to determine the most likely etiology to target with therapy, requiring a shift in diagnostic focus. Third, pathologists must devise and validate new classifications and criteria that are evidence-based, biologically relevant, easy to use, and predictive of outcome and treatment response. Only after the limitations of UIP are understood will pathologists provide maximum diagnostic value from biopsies to clinicians today and advance the field forward.

Autoimmune Progressive Fibrosing Interstitial Lung Disease: Predictors of Fast Decline

A subset of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) with autoimmune traits-including connective tissue disease-associated ILD (CTD-ILD) and interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features (IPAF)-develops progressive fibrosing (PF)-ILD. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics and predictors of longitudinal lung function (LF) changes in autoimmune PF-ILD patients in a real-world setting. All ILD cases with confirmed or suspected autoimmunity discussed by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) between January 2017 and June 2019 (n = 511) were reviewed, including 63 CTD-ILD and 44 IPAF patients. Detailed medical history, LF test, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), 6-min walk test (6MWT), blood gas analysis (BGA), and high-resolution computer tomography (HRCT) were performed. Longitudinal follow-up for functional parameters was at least 2 years. Women were overrepresented (70.1%), and the age of the IPAF group was significantly higher as compared to the CTD-ILD group (p < 0.001). Dyspnea, crackles, and weight loss were significantly more common in the IPAF group as compared to the CTD-ILD group (84.1% vs. 58.7%, p = 0.006; 72.7% vs. 49.2%, p = 0.017; 29.6% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.001). Forced vital capacity (FVC) yearly decline was more pronounced in IPAF (53.1 ± 0.3 vs. 16.7 ± 0.2 ml; p = 0.294), while the majority of patients (IPAF: 68% and CTD-ILD 82%) did not deteriorate. Factors influencing progression included malignancy as a comorbidity, anti-SS-A antibodies, and post-exercise pulse increase at 6MWT. Antifibrotic therapy was administered significantly more often in IPAF as compared to CTD-ILD patients (n = 13, 29.5% vs. n = 5, 7.9%; p = 0.007), and importantly, this treatment reduced lung function decline when compared to non-treated patients. Majority of patients improved or were stable regarding lung function, and autoimmune-associated PF-ILD was more common in patients having IPAF. Functional decline predictors were anti-SS-A antibodies and marked post-exercise pulse increase at 6MWT. Antifibrotic treatments reduced progression in progressive fibrosing CTD-ILD and IPAF, emphasizing the need for guidelines including optimal treatment start and combination therapies in this special patient group.

Progressive Fibrosing Interstitial Lung Diseases: A Current Perspective

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are a large and diverse group of rare and chronic respiratory disorders, with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) being the most common and best-studied member. Increasing interest in fibrosis as a therapeutic target and the appreciation that fibrotic mechanisms may be a treatable target of IPF prompted the development and subsequent approval of the antifibrotics, pirfenidone and nintedanib. The management of ILDs has changed considerably following an understanding that IPF and some ILDs share similar disease behavior of progressive fibrosis, termed “progressive fibrosing phenotype”. Indeed, antifibrotic treatment has shown to be beneficial in ILDs characterized by the progressive fibrosing phenotype. This narrative review summarizes current knowledge in the field of progressive fibrosing ILDs. Here, we discuss the clinical characteristics and pathogenesis of lung fibrosis and highlight relevant literature concerning the mechanisms underlying progressive fibrosing ILDs. We also summarize current diagnostic approaches and the available treatments of progressive fibrosing ILDs and address the optimization of treating progressive fibrosing ILDs with antifibrotics in clinical practice.

From pulmonary fibrosis to progressive pulmonary fibrosis: a lethal pathobiological jump

The month of September is Pulmonary Fibrosis Awareness Month. In this context, we would like to highlight the concept of progressive pulmonary fibrosis, a common denominator/phenotype of many interstitial lung diseases other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, leading to clinical deterioration, decreased quality of life, and high mortality.