Background: Spirometry is the most common pulmonary function test. It is widely used in the assessment of lung function to provide objective information used in the diagnosis of lung diseases and monitoring lung health. In 2005, the American Thoracic Society and the European Respiratory Society jointly adopted technical standards for conducting spirometry. Improvements in instrumentation and computational capabilities, together with new research studies and enhanced quality assurance approaches, have led to the need to update the 2005 technical standards for spirometry to take full advantage of current technical capabilities. Methods: This spirometry technical standards document was developed by an international joint task force, appointed by the American Thoracic Society and the European Respiratory Society, with expertise in conducting and analyzing pulmonary function tests, laboratory quality assurance, and developing international standards. A comprehensive review of published evidence was performed. A patient survey was developed to capture patients’ experiences. Results: Revisions to the 2005 technical standards for spirometry were made, including the addition of factors that were not previously considered. Evidence to support the revisions was cited when applicable. The experience and expertise of task force members were used to develop recommended best practices. Conclusions: Standards and consensus recommendations are presented for manufacturers, clinicians, operators, and researchers with the aims of increasing the accuracy, precision, and quality of spirometric measurements and improving the patient experience. A comprehensive guide to aid in the implementation of these standards was developed as an online supplement.

Rationale: Ensifentrine is a novel, selective, dual phosphodiesterase (PDE)3 and PDE4 inhibitor with bronchodilator and antiinflammatory effects. Replicate phase III trials of nebulized ensifentrine were conducted (ENHANCE-1 and ENHANCE-2) to assess these effects in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of ensifentrine compared with placebo for lung function, symptoms, quality of life, and exacerbations in patients with COPD. Methods: These phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials were conducted between September 2020 and December 2022 at 250 research centers and pulmonology practices in 17 countries. Patients aged 40–80 years with moderate to severe symptomatic COPD were enrolled. Measurements and Main Results: Totals of 760 (ENHANCE-1) and 789 (ENHANCE-2) patients were randomized and treated, with 69% and 55% receiving concomitant long-acting muscarinic antagonists or long-acting β2-agonists, respectively. Post-bronchodilator FEV1 percentage predicted values were 52% and 51% of predicted normal. Ensifentrine treatment significantly improved average FEV1 area under the curve at 0–12 hours versus placebo (ENHANCE-1, 87 ml [95% confidence interval, 55, 119]; ENHANCE-2, 94 ml [65, 124]; both P < 0.001). Ensifentrine treatment significantly improved symptoms (Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms) and quality of life (St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire) versus placebo at Week 24 in ENHANCE-1 but not in ENHANCE-2. Ensifentrine treatment reduced the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations versus placebo over 24 weeks (ENHANCE-1, rate ratio, 0.64 [0.40, 1.00]; P = 0.050; ENHANCE-2, rate ratio, 0.57 [0.38, 0.87]; P = 0.009) and increased time to first exacerbation (ENHANCE-1, hazard ratio, 0.62 [0.39, 0.97]; P = 0.038; ENHANCE-2, hazard ratio, 0.58 [0.38, 0.87]; P = 0.009). Adverse event rates were similar to those for placebo. Conclusions: Ensifentrine significantly improved lung function in both trials, with results supporting exacerbation rate and risk reduction in a broad COPD population and in addition to other classes of maintenance therapies. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov and EudraCT (ENHANCE-1, www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT04535986, EudraCT identifier 2020-002086-34; ENHANCE-2, www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT04542057, EudraCT identifier 2020-002069-32).

BACKGROUND. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous smoking-related disease characterized by airway obstruction and inflammation. This inflammation may persist even after smoking cessation and responds variably to corticosteroids. Personalizing treatment to biologically similar “molecular phenotypes” may improve therapeutic efficacy in COPD. IL-17A is involved in neutrophilic inflammation and corticosteroid resistance, and thus may be particularly important in a COPD molecular phenotype. METHODS. We generated a gene expression signature of IL-17A response in bronchial airway epithelial brushings from smokers with and without COPD (n = 238), and validated it using data from 2 randomized trials of IL-17 blockade in psoriasis. This IL-17 signature was related to clinical and pathologic characteristics in 2 additional human studies of COPD: (a) SPIROMICS (n = 47), which included former and current smokers with COPD, and (b) GLUCOLD (n = 79), in which COPD participants were randomized to placebo or corticosteroids. RESULTS. The IL-17 signature was associated with an inflammatory profile characteristic of an IL-17 response, including increased airway neutrophils and macrophages. In SPIROMICS the signature was associated with increased airway obstruction and functional small airways disease on quantitative chest CT. In GLUCOLD the signature was associated with decreased response to corticosteroids, irrespective of airway eosinophilic or type 2 inflammation. CONCLUSION. These data suggest that a gene signature of IL-17 airway epithelial response distinguishes a biologically, radiographically, and clinically distinct COPD subgroup that may benefit from personalized therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01969344. FUNDING. Primary support from the NIH, grants K23HL123778, K12HL11999, U19AI077439, DK072517, U01HL137880, K24HL137013 and R01HL121774 and contracts HHSN268200900013C, HHSN268200900014C, HHSN268200900015C, HHSN268200900016C, HHSN268200900017C, HHSN268200900018C, HHSN268200900019C and HHSN268200900020C.

Current guidelines recommend inhalation therapy as the preferred route of drug administration for treating patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Inhalation devices consist of nebulizers and handheld inhalers, such as dry-powder inhalers (DPIs), pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), and soft mist inhalers (SMIs). Although pMDIs, DPIs and SMIs may be appropriate for most patients with COPD, certain patient populations may have challenges with these devices. Patients who have cognitive, neuromuscular, or ventilatory impairments (and receive limited assistance from caregivers), as well as those with suboptimal peak inspiratory flow may not derive the full benefit from handheld inhalers. A considerable number of patients are not capable of producing a peak inspiratory flow rate to overcome the internal resistance of DPIs. Furthermore, patients may have difficulty coordinating inhalation with device actuation, which is required for pMDIs and SMIs. However, inhalation devices such as spacers and valved holding chambers can be used with pMDIs to increase the efficiency of aerosol delivery. Nebulized treatment provides patients with COPD an alternative administration route that avoids the need for inspiratory flow, manual dexterity, or complex hand-breath coordination. The recent approval of two nebulized long-acting muscarinic antagonists has added to the extensive range of nebulized therapies in COPD. Furthermore, with the availability of quieter and more portable nebulizer devices, nebulization may be a useful treatment option in the management of certain patient populations with COPD. The aim of this narrative review was to highlight recent updates and the treatment landscape in nebulized therapy and COPD. We first discuss the pathophysiology of patients with COPD and inhalation device considerations. Second, we review the updates on recently approved and newly marketed nebulized treatments, nebulized treatments currently in development, and technological advances in nebulizer devices. Finally, we discuss the current applications of nebulized therapy in patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND. Matrix metalloprotease 9 (MMP-9) is associated with inflammation and lung remodeling in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We hypothesized that elevated circulating MMP-9 represents a potentially novel biomarker that identifies a subset of individuals with COPD with an inflammatory phenotype who are at increased risk for acute exacerbation (AECOPD). METHODS. We analyzed Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS) and Genetic Epidemiology of COPD (COPDGene) cohorts for which baseline and prospective data were available. Elevated MMP-9 was defined based on >95th percentile plasma values from control (non-COPD) sample in SPIROMICS. COPD subjects were classified as having elevated or nonelevated MMP-9. Logistic, Poisson, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to identify associations with prospective AECOPD in both cohorts. RESULTS. Elevated MMP-9 was present in 95/1,053 (9%) of SPIROMICS and 41/140 (29%) of COPDGene participants with COPD. COPD subjects with elevated MMP-9 had a 13%–16% increased absolute risk for AECOPD and a higher median (interquartile range; IQR) annual AECOPD rate (0.33 [0–0.74] versus 0 [0–0.80] events/year and 0.9 [0.5–2] versus 0.5 [0–1.4] events/year for SPIROMICS and COPDGene, respectively). In adjusted models within each cohort, elevated MMP-9 was associated with increased odds (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95%CI, 1.00–2.90; and OR, 3.03; 95%CI, 1.02–9.01), frequency (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.45; 95%CI, 1.23–1.7; and IRR, 1.24; 95%CI, 1.03–1.49), and shorter time-to-first AECOPD (21.7 versus 31.7 months and 14 versus 21 months) in SPIROMICS and COPDGene, respectively. CONCLUSIONS. Elevated MMP-9 was independently associated with AECOPD risk in 2 well-characterized COPD cohorts. These findings provide evidence for MMP-9 as a prognostic biomarker and potential therapeutic target in COPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01969344 (SPIROMICS) and NCT00608764 (COPDGene). FUNDING. This work was funded by K08 HL123940 to JMW; R01HL124233 to PJC; Merit Review I01 CX000911 to JLC; R01 (R01HL102371, R01HL126596) and VA Merit (I01BX001756) to AG. SPIROMICS (Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcomes in COPD Study) is funded by contracts from the NHLBI (HHSN268200900013C, HHSN268200900014C,HHSN268200900015C HHSN268200900016C, HHSN268200900017C, HHSN268200900018C, HHSN268200900019C, and HHSN268200900020C) and a grant from the NIH/NHLBI (U01 HL137880), and supplemented by contributions made through the Foundation for the NIH and the COPD Foundation from AstraZeneca/MedImmune; Bayer; Bellerophon Therapeutics; Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Chiesi Farmaceutici; Forest Research Institute Inc.; GlaxoSmithKline; Grifols Therapeutics Inc.; Ikaria Inc.; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Nycomed GmbH; ProterixBio; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Sanofi; Sunovion; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company; and Theravance Biopharma and Mylan. COPDGene is funded by the NHLBI (R01 HL089897 and R01 HL089856) and by the COPD Foundation through contributions made to an Industry Advisory Board composed of AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Siemens, and Sunovion.