TY - JOUR
T1 - Changes in Control Status of COPD Over Time and Their Consequences
T2 - A Prospective International Study
AU - on Behalf of the Respiratory Effectiveness Group (REG)
AU - The following investigators participated in the study
AU - Miravitlles, Marc
AU - Sliwinski, Pawel
AU - Rhee, Chin Kook
AU - Costello, Richard W.
AU - Carter, Victoria
AU - Tan, Jessica H.Y.
AU - Lapperre, Therese Sophie
AU - Alcazar, Bernardino
AU - Gouder, Caroline
AU - Esquinas, Cristina
AU - García-Rivero, Juan Luis
AU - Kemppinen, Anu
AU - Tee, Augustine
AU - Roman-Rodríguez, Miguel
AU - Soler-Cataluña, Juan José
AU - Price, David B.
AU - Barrecheguren, Miriam
AU - Nuñez, Alexa
AU - Hueso, Karina
AU - Iwan, Katarzyna
AU - Kolakowski, Jacek
AU - Ahn, Esther
AU - Tan, Jessica
AU - Laperre, Therese
AU - Leng, Karen Tan Li
AU - Chia, Nicole
AU - How, Ong Thun
AU - Shamsuddin, Syifa Binte
AU - Gim, Sherine Lim Shu
AU - Bee, Yap Chwee
AU - Ya, Soh Rui
AU - Yan, Jun Jie
AU - Hong, Samuel
AU - Tan, William
AU - Hardaker, Latife
AU - McLaughlin, Andrew
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 SEPAR
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Introduction: Control status may be a useful tool to assess response to treatment at each clinical visit in COPD. Control status has demonstrated to have long-term predictive value for exacerbations, but there is no information about the short-term predictive value of the lack of control and changes in control status over time. Method: Prospective, international, multicenter study aimed at describing the short-term (6 months) prognostic value of control status in patients with COPD. Patients with COPD were classified as controlled/uncontrolled at baseline and at 3,6-month follow-up visits using previously validated criteria of control. Moderate and severe exacerbation rates were compared between controlled and uncontrolled visits and between patients persistently controlled, uncontrolled and those changing control status over follow-up. Results: A total of 267 patients were analyzed: 80 (29.8%) were persistently controlled, 43 (16%) persistently uncontrolled and 144 (53.7%) changed control status during follow-up. Persistently controlled patients were more frequently men, with lower (not increased) body mass index and higher FEV1(%). During the 6 months following an uncontrolled patient visit the odds ratio (OR) for presenting a moderate exacerbation was 3.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.47–4.69) and OR = 4.25 (95%CI 2.48–7.27) for hospitalization compared with a controlled patient visit. Conclusions: Evaluation of control status at each clinical visit provides relevant prognostic information about the risk of exacerbation in the next 6 months. Lack of control is a warning signal that should prompt investigation and action in order to achieve control status.
AB - Introduction: Control status may be a useful tool to assess response to treatment at each clinical visit in COPD. Control status has demonstrated to have long-term predictive value for exacerbations, but there is no information about the short-term predictive value of the lack of control and changes in control status over time. Method: Prospective, international, multicenter study aimed at describing the short-term (6 months) prognostic value of control status in patients with COPD. Patients with COPD were classified as controlled/uncontrolled at baseline and at 3,6-month follow-up visits using previously validated criteria of control. Moderate and severe exacerbation rates were compared between controlled and uncontrolled visits and between patients persistently controlled, uncontrolled and those changing control status over follow-up. Results: A total of 267 patients were analyzed: 80 (29.8%) were persistently controlled, 43 (16%) persistently uncontrolled and 144 (53.7%) changed control status during follow-up. Persistently controlled patients were more frequently men, with lower (not increased) body mass index and higher FEV1(%). During the 6 months following an uncontrolled patient visit the odds ratio (OR) for presenting a moderate exacerbation was 3.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.47–4.69) and OR = 4.25 (95%CI 2.48–7.27) for hospitalization compared with a controlled patient visit. Conclusions: Evaluation of control status at each clinical visit provides relevant prognostic information about the risk of exacerbation in the next 6 months. Lack of control is a warning signal that should prompt investigation and action in order to achieve control status.
KW - CAT
KW - COPD
KW - Control
KW - Exacerbations
KW - Outcomes
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85088219423
U2 - 10.1016/j.arbr.2020.06.016
DO - 10.1016/j.arbr.2020.06.016
M3 - Article
C2 - 32709534
AN - SCOPUS:85088219423
SN - 0300-2896
VL - 57
SP - 122
EP - 129
JO - Archivos de Bronconeumologia
JF - Archivos de Bronconeumologia
IS - 2
ER -