Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2. Consensus suggestions can standardise care, thereby improving outcomes and facilitating future research.Methods: An International Task Force was composed and agreement regarding courses of action was measured using the Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations and Evidence (CORE) process. 70% agreement was necessary to make a consensus suggestion.Results: The Task Force made consensus suggestions to treat patients with acute COVID-19 pneumonia with remdesivir and dexamethasone but suggested against hydroxychloroquine except in the context of a clinical trial; these are revisions of prior suggestions resulting from the interim publication of several randomised trials. It also suggested that COVID-19 patients with a venous thromboembolic event be treated with therapeutic anticoagulant therapy for 3 months. The Task Force was unable to reach sufficient agreement to yield consensus suggestions for the post-hospital care of COVID-19 survivors. The Task Force fell one vote shy of suggesting routine screening for depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder.Conclusions: The Task Force addressed questions related to pharmacotherapy in patients with COVID-19 and the post-hospital care of survivors, yielding several consensus suggestions. Management options for which there is insufficient agreement to formulate a suggestion represent research priorities.

Background Limited data are available regarding the management of subsolid nodules detected on lung cancer screening with low-dose CT (LDCT). We aimed to determine the characteristics of screen-detected subsolid nodules, and to evaluate the probability of lung cancer and the clinical course of subsolid nodules detected at baseline and during follow-up screening. Methods We evaluated 50 132 asymptomatic adults (22 631 never-smokers and 27 501 ever-smokers) who underwent LDCT screening for lung cancer between May 2003 and June 2019 at a tertiary centre in South Korea. The incidence, characteristics and clinical outcomes of the baseline and new screen-detected subsolid nodules were determined. Results A total of 6725 subsolid nodules (5116 pure ground glass opacity nodules and 1609 part-solid nodules) were detected in 4545 participants (1484 new subsolid nodules detected in 937 (1.9%) participants; the overall incidence of subsolid nodules: 10.7% in never-smokers and 7.7% in ever-smokers, p<0.001). Among 4918 subsolid nodules that underwent follow-up with CT scans (the mean number of CT scans, including the baseline LDCT scan: 4.6), 2116 nodules (30.0% of baseline subsolid nodules and 78.9% of new subsolid nodules) resolved spontaneously. Among 293 biopsied subsolid nodules, 227 (77.5%) nodules were diagnosed as lung cancer, of which 226 (99.6%) were adenocarcinomas. No significant difference was observed in pathological invasiveness or the initial stage between the baseline and new cancerous subsolid nodules. Multivariable analyses revealed that new detection at follow-up screening was significantly associated with a lower probability of lung cancer (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.49) and overall growth (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.59), but with a higher probability of resolution (OR 6.30, 95% CI 5.09 to 7.81). Conclusions LDCT screening led to a considerably high rate of subsolid nodule detection, particularly in never-smokers. Compared with the baseline subsolid nodules, the new subsolid nodules were associated with a lower probability of lung cancer and higher probability of spontaneous resolution, indicating their more inflammatory nature. Less aggressive follow-up may be allowed for new subsolid nodules, particularly in screening programmes for Asian populations.

Background: Although lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is now widely used in clinical practice, the characteristics and outcomes of diagnostic procedures related to screen-detected nodules in never-smokers remain unclear. We aimed to determine the incidence of nodules considered for invasive biopsy and evaluate the final diagnoses and procedure-related complications in never-smokers in comparison to ever-smokers who underwent LDCT screening.Methods: We evaluated 37 436 asymptomatic adults (17 968 never-smokers and 19 468 ever-smokers) who underwent LDCT screening for lung cancer between January 2009 and December 2018 at a tertiary centre in South Korea. The rates of invasive diagnostic procedures for detected nodules and related complications, and the diagnostic outcomes were determined in the never-smoker and ever-smoker groups.Results: Among the never-smokers, 2908 (16.2%) out of 17 968 had positive nodules. Overall, 139 (0.77%) out of 17 968 never-smokers and 194 (1.00%) out of 19 468 ever-smokers underwent invasive biopsy (p=0.022). Lung cancer was diagnosed in 84 (0.47%) out of 17 968 never-smokers and 123 (0.63%) out of 19 468 ever-smokers (p=0.032). The proportions of participants diagnosed with benign disease after invasive biopsy (false-positive) were 50 (0.28%) out of 17 968 and 69 (0.35%) out of 19 468 in the never-smoker and ever-smoker groups, respectively (p=0.191). Multivariate analyses revealed no significant associations of smoking with the risk of a false-positive diagnosis (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.62–1.57) and complications (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.65–3.73) after biopsy. Of the 84 never-smokers with lung cancer, 82 (97.6%) had adenocarcinoma, and 75 (89.3%) were in stage I with a favourable prognosis.Conclusions: LDCT screening in never-smokers resulted in a notable detection rate of lung nodules, which warranted invasive biopsy. The lung cancer detection rate was lower in never-smokers than in ever-smokers. However, no significant differences in the false-positive and complication rates were observed between the two groups. Accordingly, a more specifically tailored management strategy is needed for screen-detected nodules in Asian never-smokers.

The aim of this study is to clarify whether the combined evaluation of resting hyperinflation and emphysema confers any additional advantages in terms of predicting clinical outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. We included COPD patients from the Korean Obstructive Lung Disease (KOLD) cohort. Patients with a residual volume/total lung capacity (RV/TLC) over the upper limit of normal were defined as having resting hyperinflation, and those with an emphysema index >10% were defined as having emphysema. We investigated the impacts of resting hyperinflation and emphysema on exacerbations and mortality. A total of 310 COPD patients were analyzed over a mean of 61.1 months. After adjustment for covariates, resting hyperinflation was an independent predictor of earlier exacerbation (HR = 1.66, CI = 1.24–2.22), more frequent exacerbation (IRR = 1.35, CI = 1.01–1.81), and higher mortality (HR = 2.45, CI = 1.16–5.17) risk. Emphysema was also significantly associated with earlier exacerbation (HR = 1.64, CI = 1.15–2.35), and higher mortality (HR = 3.13, CI = 1.06–9.27) risk. Participants with both resting hyperinflation and emphysema had an additively higher risk of earlier exacerbations (HR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.26–2.33) and mortality (HR = 3.75, 95% CI = 1.81–7.73) compared with those in other groups. In conclusion, resting hyperinflation and emphysema had additional worse impacts on exacerbations and mortality in COPD patients.