Organisation of diagnosis and treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and other interstitial lung diseases in the Nordic countries

Walking the path of treatable traits in interstitial lung diseases

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are complex and heterogeneous diseases. The use of traditional diagnostic classification in ILD can lead to suboptimal management, which is worsened by not considering the molecular pathways, biological complexity, and disease phenotypes. The identification of specific "treatable traits" in ILDs, which are clinically relevant and modifiable disease characteristics, may improve patient's outcomes. Treatable traits in ILDs may be classified into four different domains (pulmonary, aetiological, comorbidities, and lifestyle), which will facilitate identification of related assessment tools, treatment options, and expected benefits. A multidisciplinary care team model is a potential way to implement a "treatable traits" strategy into clinical practice with the aim of improving patients' outcomes. Multidisciplinary models of care, international registries, and the use of artificial intelligence may facilitate the implementation of the "treatable traits" approach into clinical practice. Prospective studies are needed to test potential therapies for a variety of treatable traits to further advance care of patients with ILD.

Antifibrotic effect of AD-1 on lipopolysaccharide-mediated fibroblast injury in L929 cells and bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis in mice

20(R)-25-methoxyl-dammarane-3β,12β,20-triol (25-OCH₃-PPD, AD-1) is a dammarane ginsenoside that is isolated from Panax notoginseng. The present study aimed to explore its anti-pulmonary fibrosis (PF) effect in vitro and in vivo. L929 cells were treated with 10 μg mL^-1 lipopolysaccharide (LPS) to establish a PF model in vitro and mice were administered with 3.5 mg kg^-1 bleomycin (BLM) by endotracheal intubation to establish a PF model in vivo for investigating the anti-PF effect and its potential mechanism. The results demonstrated that AD-1 reduced the injury, extracellular matrix (ECM) buildup and α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) protein expression levels of L929 induced by LPS. Oral administration of AD-1 downregulated the expression of interleukins (such as IL-1β, IL-6 and IL-18), increased the expression of superoxide dismutase (SOD) and glutathione (GSH), reduced the lung coefficient and the content of hydroxyproline (HYP), and mediated the Bax/Bcl-2 protein ratio and P-p53, β-catenin and SIRT3 expression in the lung tissue of mice. Furthermore, AD-1 inhibited the expression levels of TGF-β1, TIMP-1 and α-SMA and reduced inflammatory cell infiltration and collagen deposition in the lung tissue of PF mice. These results indicated that AD-1 could alleviate PF both in vitro and in vivo, and the underlying mechanism may be related to the decrease in ECM deposition and inflammation, the enhancement of antioxidant capacity, and the mediation of lung cell apoptosis and the TGF-β1/TIMP-1/α-SMA signaling pathway, which provide a theoretical basis for the rehabilitation treatment of PF.

Differences in Baseline Characteristics and Access to Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Patients With IPF in the EMPIRE Countries

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a rare lung disease with poor prognosis. The diagnosis and treatment possibilities are dependent on the health systems of countries. Hence, comparison among countries is difficult due to data heterogeneity. Our aim was to analyse patients with IPF in Central and Eastern Europe using the uniform data from the European Multipartner IPF registry (EMPIRE), which at the time of analysis involved 10 countries. Newly diagnosed IPF patients (N = 2,492, between March 6, 2012 and May 12, 2020) from Czech Republic (N = 971, 39.0%), Turkey (N = 505, 20.3%), Poland (N = 285, 11.4%), Hungary (N = 216, 8.7%), Slovakia (N = 149, 6.0%), Israel (N = 120, 4.8%), Serbia (N = 95, 3.8%), Croatia (N = 87, 3.5%), Austria (N = 55, 2.2%), and Bulgaria (N = 9, 0.4%) were included, and Macedonia, while a member of the registry, was excluded from this analysis due to low number of cases (N = 5) at this timepoint. Baseline characteristics, smoking habit, comorbidities, lung function values, CO diffusion capacity, high-resolution CT (HRCT) pattern, and treatment data were analysed. Patients were significantly older in Austria than in the Czech Republic, Turkey, Hungary, Slovakia, Israel, and Serbia. Ever smokers were most common in Croatia (84.1%) and least frequent in Serbia (39.2%) and Slovakia (42.6%). The baseline forced vital capacity (FVC) was >80% in 44.6% of the patients, between 50 and 80% in 49.3%, and <50% in 6.1%. Most IPF patients with FVC >80% were registered in Poland (63%), while the least in Israel (25%). A typical usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern was present in 67.6% of all patients, ranging from 43.5% (Austria) to 77.2% (Poland). The majority of patients received antifibrotic therapy (64.5%); 37.4% used pirfenidone (range 7.4–39.8% between countries); and 34.9% nintedanib (range 12.6–56.0% between countries) treatment. In 6.8% of the cases, a therapy switch was initiated between the 2 antifibrotic agents. Significant differences in IPF patient characteristics and access to antifibrotic therapies exist in EMPIRE countries, which needs further investigation and strategies to improve and harmonize patient care and therapy availability in this region.

Epidemiology of interstitial lung diseases and their progressive-fibrosing behaviour in six European countries

The PERSEIDS study aimed to estimate incidence/prevalence of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs), fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (F-ILDs), idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), systemic sclerosis-associated ILD (SSc-ILD), other non-IPF F-ILDs and their progressive-fibrosing (PF) forms in six European countries, as current data are scarce.

This retrospective, two-phase study used aggregate data (2014–2018). In Phase 1, incident/prevalent cases of ILDs above were identified from clinical databases through an algorithm based on codes/keywords, and incidence/prevalence was estimated. For non-IPF F-ILDs, the relative percentage of subtypes was also determined. In Phase 2, a subset of non-IPF F-ILD cases was manually reviewed to determine the percentage of PF behaviour and usual interstitial pneumonia-like (UIP-like) pattern. A weighted mean percentage of progression was calculated for each country and used to extrapolate incidence/prevalence of progressive-fibrosing ILDs (PF-ILDs).

In 2018, incidence/10⁵ person-years ranged between 9.4 and 83.6 (ILDs), 7.7 and 76.2 (F-ILDs), 0.4 and 10.3 (IPF), 6.6 and 71.7 (non-IPF F-ILDs), and 0.3 and 1.5 (SSc-ILD); and prevalence/10⁵ persons ranged between 33.6 and 247.4 (ILDs), 26.7 and 236.8 (F-ILDs), 2.8 and 31.0 (IPF), 22.3 and 205.8 (non-IPF F-ILDs), and 1.4 and 10.1 (SSc-ILD). Among non-IPF F-ILDs, sarcoidosis was the most frequent subtype. PF behaviour and UIP-like pattern were present in a third of non-IPF F-ILD cases each and hypersensitivity pneumonitis showed the highest percentage of progressive behaviour. Incidence of PF-ILDs ranged between 2.1 and 14.5/10⁵ person-years, and prevalence between 6.9 and 78.0/10⁵ persons.

To our knowledge, PERSEIDS is the first study assessing incidence, prevalence and rate of progression of ILDs across several European countries. Still below the threshold for orphan diseases, the estimates obtained were higher and more variable than reported in previous studies, but differences in study design/population must be considered.

The PERSEIDS study provides updated and detailed epidemiological data for ILDs across six European countries. Prevalences ranged between 26.7–236.8 (F-ILDs), 2.8–31.0 (IPF), 22.3–205.8 (non-IPF F-ILDs). A third of non-IPF F-ILD cases showed PF behaviour.https://bit.ly/3wLH7pF

Delay and inequalities in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: the case of two Nordic countries

Background

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is characterized by progressive loss of lung function with high mortality within the first 5 years from diagnosis. In 2011-2014, two drugs, pirfenidone and nintedanib, have been approved worldwide for prevention of IPF progression. National IPF-registries have been established in both Finland and Sweden. Our study explored potential differences in the care of IPF in these two countries.

Methods

Patients included consecutively in the Finnish and Swedish IPF-registries from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2016 were included in the study. Data on demographics and lung function at the time of inclusion were collected. Access to antifibrotic drugs and data on disease outcomes, mortality and the proportion of patients who underwent lung transplantation, was collected during a 3-year follow up.

Results

One-hundred and fifty-two patients from the Finnish and 160 patients from the Swedish IPF-cohorts were included in the study. At inclusion, Finnish patients were significantly older than the Swedish patients (74.6 years vs 72.5 years, p = 0.017). The proportion of non-smokers was significantly higher in the Finnish cohort (41.7% vs 26.9%, p = 0.007). Forced vital capacity (FVC), % of predicted (78.2 vs 71.7 for Finnish and Swedish patients, respectively, p = 0.01) and diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DL_CO), % of predicted (53.3 vs 48.2 for Finnish and Swedish patients, respectively, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in the Finnish cohort compared to the Swedish cohort at the time of inclusion. During the 3-year follow up period, 45 (29.6%) Finnish and 111 (69.4%) Swedish patients, respectively, were initiated on treatment with an antifibrotic drug (pirfenidone or nintedanib) (p <  0.001). When comparing possible determinants of treatment, patients with higher FVC % were less likely to start antifibrotic drugs (OR 0.96, 95%CI 0.93-1.00, p <  0.024). To be resident in Sweden was the main determinant for receiving antifibrotic drugs (OR 5.48, 95%CI 2.65-11.33, p < 0.0001). No significant difference in number of deaths and lung transplantation during the follow up period was found.

Conclusions

This study highlights differences concerning how IPF patients are treated in Finland and Sweden. How these differences will influence the long-term outcome of these patients is unknown.

Best supportive care for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: current gaps and future directions

Best supportive care (BSC) is generally defined as all the interventions and the multiprofessional approach aimed to improve and optimise quality of life (QoL) in patients affected by progressive diseases. In this sense, it excludes and might be complementary to other interventions directly targeting the disease. BSC improves survival in patients with different types of cancer. Patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) experience a vast range of symptoms during the natural history of the disease and might have a beneficial effect of BSC interventions. This review highlights the current evidence on interventions targeting QoL and gaps for the clinical assessment of BSC in the treatment of IPF patients. Very few interventions to improve QoL or improve symptom control are currently supported by well-designed studies. Sound methodology is paramount in evaluating BSC in IPF, as well as the use of validated tools to measure QoL and symptom control in this specific group of patients.

Treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a position paper from a Nordic expert group

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a fatal progressive lung disease occurring in adults. In the last decade, the results of a number of clinical trials based on the updated disease classification have been published. The registration of pirfenidone and nintedanib, the first two pharmacological treatment options approved for IPF, marks a new chapter in the management of patients with this disease. Other nonpharmacological treatments such as lung transplantation, rehabilitation and palliation have also been shown to be beneficial for these patients. In this review, past and present management is discussed based on a comprehensive literature search. A treatment algorithm is presented based on available evidence and our overall clinical experience. In addition, unmet needs with regard to treatment are highlighted and discussed. We describe the development of various treatment options for IPF from the first consensus to recent guidelines based on evidence from large-scale, multinational, randomized clinical trials, which have led to registration of the first drugs for IPF.