Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic, progressive, fibrosing interstitial lung disease (ILD) of unknown aetiology, with a median survival of 2–4 years from the time of diagnosis. Although IPF has unknown aetiology by definition, there have been identified several risks factors increasing the probability of the onset and progression of the disease in IPF patients such as cigarette smoking and environmental risk factors associated with domestic and occupational exposure. Among them, cigarette smoking together with concomitant emphysema might predispose IPF patients to lung cancer (LC), mostly to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), increasing the risk of lung cancer development. To this purpose, IPF and LC share several cellular and molecular processes driving the progression of both pathologies such as fibroblast transition proliferation and activation, endoplasmic reticulum stress, oxidative stress, and many genetic and epigenetic markers that predispose IPF patients to LC development. Nintedanib, a tyrosine–kinase inhibitor, was firstly developed as an anticancer drug and then recognized as an anti-fibrotic agent based on the common target molecular pathway. In this review our aim is to describe the updated studies on common cellular and molecular mechanisms between IPF and lung cancer, knowledge of which might help to find novel therapeutic targets for this disease combination.

Laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS) is a complex and heterogeneous disease whose pathogenesis remains unclear. LTS is considered to be the result of aberrant wound-healing process that leads to fibrotic scarring, originating from different aetiology. Although iatrogenic aetiology is the main cause of subglottic or tracheal stenosis, also autoimmune and infectious diseases may be involved in causing LTS. Furthermore, fibrotic obstruction in the anatomic region under the glottis can also be diagnosed without apparent aetiology after a comprehensive workup; in this case, the pathological process is called idiopathic subglottic stenosis (iSGS). So far, the laryngotracheal scar resulting from airway injury due to different diseases was considered as inert tissue requiring surgical removal to restore airway patency. However, this assumption has recently been revised by regarding the tracheal scarring process as a fibroinflammatory event due to immunological alteration, similar to other fibrotic diseases. Recent acquisitions suggest that different factors, such as growth factors, cytokines, altered fibroblast function and genetic susceptibility, can all interact in a complex way leading to aberrant and fibrotic wound healing after an insult that acts as a trigger. However, also physiological derangement due to LTS could play a role in promoting dysregulated response to laryngo-tracheal mucosal injury, through biomechanical stress and mechanotransduction activation. The aim of this narrative review is to present the state-of-the-art knowledge regarding molecular mechanisms, as well as mechanical and physio-pathological features behind LTS.

Lung fibrosis results from the synergic interplay between regenerative deficits of the alveolar epithelium and dysregulated mechanisms of repair in response to alveolar and vascular damage, which is followed by progressive fibroblast and myofibroblast proliferation and excessive deposition of the extracellular matrix. The increased parenchymal stiffness of fibrotic lungs significantly affects respiratory mechanics, making the lung more fragile and prone to non-physiological stress during spontaneous breathing and mechanical ventilation. Given their parenchymal inhomogeneity, fibrotic lungs may display an anisotropic response to mechanical stresses with different regional deformations (micro-strain). This behavior is not described by the standard stress–strain curve but follows the mechano-elastic models of “squishy balls”, where the elastic limit can be reached due to the excessive deformation of parenchymal areas with normal elasticity that are surrounded by inelastic fibrous tissue or collapsed induration areas, which tend to protrude outside the fibrous ring. Increasing evidence has shown that non-physiological mechanical forces applied to fibrotic lungs with associated abnormal mechanotransduction could favor the progression of pulmonary fibrosis. With this review, we aim to summarize the state of the art on the relation between mechanical forces acting on the lung and biological response in pulmonary fibrosis, with a focus on the progression of damage in the fibrotic lung during spontaneous breathing and assisted ventilatory support.

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) that are known as diffuse parenchymal lung diseases (DPLDs) lead to the damage of alveolar epithelium and lung parenchyma, culminating in inflammation and widespread fibrosis. ILDs that account for more than 200 different pathologies can be divided into two groups: ILDs that have a known cause and those where the cause is unknown, classified as idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP). IIPs include idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), non-specific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP), cryptogenic organizing pneumonia (COP) known also as bronchiolitis obliterans organizing pneumonia (BOOP), acute interstitial pneumonia (AIP), desquamative interstitial pneumonia (DIP), respiratory bronchiolitis-associated interstitial lung disease (RB-ILD), and lymphocytic interstitial pneumonia (LIP). In this review, our aim is to describe the pathogenic mechanisms that lead to the onset and progression of the different IIPs, starting from IPF as the most studied, in order to find both the common and standalone molecular and cellular key players among them. Finally, a deeper molecular and cellular characterization of different interstitial lung diseases without a known cause would contribute to giving a more accurate diagnosis to the patients, which would translate to a more effective treatment decision.

Background: Although patients with interstitial pneumonia pattern (ILD-UIP) and acute exacerbation (AE) leading to severe acute respiratory failure may require invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), physiological data on lung mechanics during MV are lacking. We aimed at describing the physiological effect of lung-protective ventilation in patients with AE-ILD-UIP compared with primary ARDS. Methods: Partitioned lung and chest wall mechanics were assessed in a series of AE-ILD-UIP patients matched 1:1 with primary ARDS as controls (based on BMI and PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio). Three PEEP levels (zero = ZEEP, 4–8 cmH₂O = PEEP_LOW, and titrated to achieve positive end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure P_L,EE = PEEP_TITRATED) were used for measurements. Results: Ten AE-ILD-UIP patients and 10 matched ARDS were included. In AE-ILD-UIP median P_L,EE at ZEEP was − 4.3 [− 7.6– − 2.3] cmH₂O and lung elastance (E_L) 44 [40–51] cmH₂O/L. At PEEP_LOW, P_L,EE remained negative and E_L did not change (p = 0.995) versus ZEEP. At PEEP_TITRATED, P_L,EE increased to 0.8 [0.3–1.5] cmH₂O and E_L to 49 [43–59] (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001 compared to ZEEP and PEEP_LOW, respectively). ΔP_L decreased at PEEP_LOW (p = 0.018) and increased at PEEP_TITRATED (p = 0.003). In matched ARDS control PEEP titration to obtain a positive P_L,EE did not result in significant changes in E_L and ΔP_L. Conclusions: In mechanically ventilated AE-ILD-UIP patients, differently than in patients with primary ARDS, PEEP titrated to obtain a positive P_L,EE significantly worsened lung mechanics.