Background: The major reasons to treat sarcoidosis are to lower the morbidity and mortality risk or to improve quality of life (QoL). The indication for treatment varies depending on which manifestation is the cause of symptoms: lungs, heart, brain, skin or other manifestations. While glucocorticoids remain the first choice for initial treatment of symptomatic disease, prolonged use is associated with significant toxicity. Glucocorticoid-sparing alternatives are available. The presented treatment guidelines aim to provide guidance to physicians treating the very heterogenous sarcoidosis manifestations. Methods: A European Respiratory Society Task Force committee composed of clinicians, methodologists and patients with experience in sarcoidosis developed recommendations based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) methodology. The committee developed eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions and these were used to make specific evidence-based recommendations. Results: The Task Force committee delivered 12 recommendations for seven PICOs. These included treatment of pulmonary, cutaneous, cardiac and neurologic disease as well as fatigue. One PICO question regarding small-fibre neuropathy had insufficient evidence to support a recommendation. In addition to the recommendations, the committee provided information on how they use alternative treatments, when there was insufficient evidence to support a recommendation. Conclusions: There are many treatments available to treat sarcoidosis. Given the diverse nature of the disease, treatment decisions require an assessment of organ involvement, risk for significant morbidity, and impact on QoL of the disease and treatment.
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) remains a disease with poor survival. The pathogenesis is complex and encompasses multiple molecular pathways. The first-generation antifibrotics pirfenidone and nintedanib, approved more than 10 years ago, have been shown to reduce the rate of progression, increase the length of life for patients with IPF, and work for other fibrotic lung diseases. In the last two decades, most clinical trials on IPF have failed to meet the primary endpoint and an urgent unmet need remains to identify agents or treatment strategies that can stop disease progression. The pharmacotherapeutic landscape for IPF is moving forward with a number of new drugs currently in clinical development, mostly in phase I and II trials, while only a few phase III trials are running. Since our understanding of IPF pathogenesis is still limited, we should keep focusing our efforts to deeper understand the mechanisms underlying this complex disease and their reflection on clinical phenotypes. This review discusses the key pathogenetic concepts for the development of new antifibrotic agents, presents the newest data on approved therapies, and summarizes new compounds currently in clinical development. Finally, future directions in antifibrotics development are discussed.
Antisynthetase syndrome (ASSD) is a rare clinical condition that is characterized by the occurrence of a classic clinical triad, encompassing myositis, arthritis, and interstitial lung disease (ILD), along with specific autoantibodies that are addressed to different aminoacyl tRNA synthetases (ARS). Until now, it has been unknown whether the presence of a different ARS might affect the clinical presentation, evolution, and outcome of ASSD. In this study, we retrospectively recorded the time of onset, characteristics, clustering of triad findings, and survival of 828 ASSD patients (593 anti-Jo1, 95 anti-PL7, 84 anti-PL12, 38 anti-EJ, and 18 anti-OJ), referring to AENEAS (American and European NEtwork of Antisynthetase Syndrome) collaborative group’s cohort. Comparisons were performed first between all ARS cases and then, in the case of significance, while using anti-Jo1 positive patients as the reference group. The characteristics of triad findings were similar and the onset mainly began with a single triad finding in all groups despite some differences in overall prevalence. The “ex-novo” occurrence of triad findings was only reduced in the anti-PL12-positive cohort, however, it occurred in a clinically relevant percentage of patients (30%). Moreover, survival was not influenced by the underlying anti-aminoacyl tRNA synthetase antibodies’ positivity, which confirmed that antisynthetase syndrome is a heterogeneous condition and that antibody specificity only partially influences the clinical presentation and evolution of this condition.
31 August 2016 in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
Whole lung lavage (WLL) is the current standard of care treatment for patients affected by pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (PAP). However, WLL is not standardized and international consensus documents are lacking. Our aim was to obtain a factual portrayal of WLL as currently practiced with respect to the procedure, indications for its use, evaluation of therapeutic benefit and complication rate. A clinical practice survey was conducted globally by means of a questionnaire and included 27 centers performing WLL in pediatric and/or adult PAP patients. We collected completed questionnaires from 20 centres in 14 countries, practicing WLL in adults and 10 centers in 6 countries, practicing WLL in pediatric patients. WLL is almost universally performed under general anesthesia, with a double-lumen endobronchial tube in two consecutive sessions, with an interval of 1–2 weeks between sessions in approximately 50 % of centres. The use of saline warmed to 37 °C, drainage of lung lavage fluid by gravity and indications for WLL therapy in PAP were homogenous across centres. There was great variation in the choice of the first lung to be lavaged: 50 % of centres based the choice on imaging, whereas 50 % always started with the left lung. The choice of position was also widely discordant; the supine position was chosen by 50 % of centres. Other aspects varied significantly among centres including contraindications, methods and timing of follow up, use of chest percussion, timing of extubation following WLL and lung isolation and lavage methods for small children. The amount of fluid used to perform the WLL is a critical aspect. Whilst a general consensus exists on the single aliquot of fluid for lavage (around 800 ml of warm saline, in adults) great variability exists in the total volume instilled per lung, ranging from 5 to 40 liters, with an average of 15.4 liters/lung. This international survey found that WLL is safe and effective as therapy for PAP. However these results also indicate that standardization of the procedure is required; the present survey represents the a first step toward building such a document.
Granulomatous lung diseases are a heterogeneous group of disorders that have a wide spectrum of pathologies with variable clinical manifestations and outcomes. Precise clinical evaluation, laboratory testing, pulmonary function testing, radiological imaging including high-resolution computed tomography and often histopathological assessment contribute to make a confident diagnosis of granulomatous lung diseases. Differential diagnosis is challenging, and includes both infectious (mycobacteria and fungi) and noninfectious lung diseases (sarcoidosis, necrotising sarcoid granulomatosis, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, hot tub lung, berylliosis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, rheumatoid nodules, talc granulomatosis, Langerhans cell histiocytosis and bronchocentric granulomatosis). Bronchoalveolar lavage, endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration, transbronchial cryobiopsy, positron emission tomography and genetic evaluation are potential candidates to improve the diagnostic accuracy for granulomatous lung diseases. As granuloma alone is a nonspecific histopathological finding, the multidisciplinary approach is important for a confident diagnosis.