Aim: This cross-sectional multicenter study was performed aimed at describing the clinical characteristics of women with COPD attended in routine daily practice in Spain. Methods and results: Of a total of 1610 consecutive patients diagnosed with COPD recruited in primary care centers and pneumology services throughout Spain over a 90-day period, 17.9% (n=286) were women, with a median age of 62 years. Differences in COPD phenotypes by sex were statistically significant (P = 0.002). Males as compared with females showed a higher prevalence of non-exacerbator (47.9% vs 42.2%) and exacerbator with chronic bronchitis (22.9% vs 18.8%) phenotypes, whereas the ACOS phenotype was more common among females (21.7% vs 12.9%). The mean (SD) CAT score was similar in men than in women (20.8 [9.0] vs 21.2 [8.7], P = 0.481), as well as the impact of the disease on the quality of life according to CAT scores of 20 (high), and >30 (very high). Sex-related differences according to smoking status were statistically significant (P < 0.001), with a higher percentage of men as compared with women in the groups of current smokers and ex-smokers; never-smokers were higher in women (9.1%) than in men (0.6%). The mean number of comorbidities was 2.01 (1.43) (95% CI 1.93–2.09) in males and 1.99 (1.42) (95% CI 1.83–2.16) (P = 0.930) in females, but cardiovascular diseases (hypertension, ischemic heart disease, chronic heart failure) were more frequent in men, whereas metabolic disorders (osteoporosis) were more frequent in women. Conclusion: This study highlights the impact of COPD in women and the importance of continuing sex-based research in tobacco-related respiratory diseases.

Purpose: Smoking can affect both the phenotypic expression of COPD and factors such as disease severity, quality of life, and comorbidities. Our objective was to evaluate if the impact of active smoking on these factors varies according to the disease phenotype. Patients and methods: This was a Spanish, observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study of patients with a diagnosis of COPD. Smoking rates were described among four different phenotypes (non-exacerbators, asthma-COPD overlap syndrome [ACOS], exacerbators with emphysema, and exacerbators with chronic bronchitis), and correlated with disease severity (body mass index, obstruction, dyspnea and exacerbations [BODEx] index and dyspnea grade), quality of life according to the COPD assessment test (CAT), and presence of comorbidities, according to phenotypic expression. Results: In total, 1,610 patients were recruited, of whom 46.70% were classified as non-exacerbators, 14.53% as ACOS, 16.37% as exacerbators with emphysema, and 22.40% as exacerbators with chronic bronchitis. Smokers were predominant in the latter 2 groups (58.91% and 57.67%, respectively, P=0.03). Active smoking was significantly associated with better quality of life and a higher dyspnea grade, although differences were observed depending on clinical phenotype. Conclusion: Active smoking is more common among exacerbator phenotypes and appears to affect quality of life and dyspnea grade differently, depending on the clinical expression of the disease.

Purpose: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) vs twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) in patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) at risk of exacerbations, from the Spanish National Healthcare System perspective. Patients and Methods: The validated GALAXY-COPD model was used to simulate disease progression and predict healthcare costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) over a 3-year time horizon for a Spanish population. Patient characteristics from published literature were supplemented by data from FULFIL (NCT02345161), which compared FF/UMEC/VI vs BUD/FOR in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations. Treatment effects, extrapolated to 3 years, were based on Week 24 results in the FULFIL intent-to-treat population, including change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score, and exacerbation rates. Treatment, exacerbations, and COPD management costs (2019€) were informed by Spanish public sources and published literature. A 3% discount rate for costs and benefits was applied. One-way sensitivity and scenario analyses, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), were performed. Results: FF/UMEC/VI treatment led to fewer moderate and severe exacerbations (2.126 and 0.306, respectively) vs BUD/FOR (2.608 and 0.515, respectively), with a mean incremental cost of € 69 and gain of 0.107 QALYs, which resulted in an ICER of € 642 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analyses, the ICER was most sensitive to treatment effect variations in exacerbations and healthcare resource utilization/event costs. Overall, 95% of 1000 PSA simulations resulted in an ICER less than € 11,000 per QALY gained for FF/UMEC/VI vs BUD/FOR, confirming robustness of the results. The probability of FF/UMEC/VI being cost-effective vs BUD/FOR was 100% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of € 30,000 per QALY gained. Conclusion: At the accepted Spanish ICER threshold of € 30,000, FF/UMEC/VI represents a cost-effective treatment option vs BUD/FOR in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations.

To determine the prevalence of smoking and analyze associated factors in a cohort of patients diagnosed with tuberculosis (TB) in Spain between 2006 and 2013. Multicenter, cross-sectional, descriptive, observational study using a national database of TB patients, using logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (OR) and confidence intervals (CI). We analyzed 5,846 cases (62 % men, mean age 39 years, 33 % foreigners). 23.4 % were alcohol abuser, 1.3 % were injected drug users (IDU), 4.6 % were co-infected with HIV, and 7.5 % had a history of TB treatment. 6.6 % and 0.8 % showed resistance to one and multiple drugs, respectively. The predominant clinical presentation was pulmonary (71 %) with a cavitary radiological pattern in 32.8 % of cases. 82 % of cases were confirmed microbiologically, and 54 % were smear-positive microscopy. 2,300 (39.3 %) patients were smokers. The following factors were associated with smoking: male sex (OR = 2.26;CI:1.97;2.60), Spanish origin (OR = 2.79;CI:2.40–3.24), alcoholism (OR = 2.85;CI:2.46;3.31), IDU (OR = 2.78;CI:1.48;5.52), homelessness (OR = 1.99;CI:1.14–3.57), pulmonary TB (OR = 1.61;CI:1.16;2.24), cavitary radiological pattern (OR = 1.99;CI:1.43;2.79) and a smear-positive microscopy at the time of diagnosis (OR = 1.39;CI:1.14;1.17). The prevalence of smoking among TB patients is high. Smokers with TB have a distinct sociodemographic, clinical, radiological and microbiological profile to non-smokers.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of COPD phenotypes at a national level and to determine their geographic distribution among different autonomous communities in Spain. Patients and methods: A total of 1,610 patients (82% men, median age 67 years) recruited in primary care centers and pneumology services participated in an observational, cross-sectional, and multicenter study. Phenotypes evaluated were the non-exacerbator phenotype, the asthma–COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS), the exacerbator phenotype with emphysema, and the exacerbator phenotype with chronic bronchitis. Results: The non-exacerbator phenotype was the most common (46.7%) followed by exacerbator with chronic bronchitis (22.4%) and exacerbator with emphysema (16.4%). The ACOS phenotype accounted for the lowest rate (14.5%). For each phenotype, the highest prevalence rates were concentrated in two or three autonomous communities, with relatively similar rates for the remaining regions. Overall prevalence rates were higher for the non-exacerbator and the exacerbator with chronic bronchitis phenotypes than for ACOS and the exacerbator with chronic bronchitis phenotypes. Differences in the distribution of COPD phenotypes according to gender, age, physician specialty, smoking habit, number of comorbidities, quality of life assessed with the COPD Assessment Test, and BODEx index (body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exacerbations) were all statistically significant. Conclusion: Differences in the prevalence rates of COPD phenotypes among the Spanish autonomous communities have been documented. Mapping the distribution of COPD phenotypes is useful to highlight regional differences as starting point for comparisons across time. This geographic analysis provides health-care planners a valuable platform to assess changes in COPD burden at nationwide and regional levels.

Background: The concept of clinical control has been proposed as an instrument for evaluating patients with COPD. However, the possible association between clinical control, reduced symptom severity and HRQoL has yet to be confirmed. Methods: This multicentre, prospective and observational study was carried out in 15 pulmonology clinics in Spain. The patients were followed up for six months, with a baseline visit (V0), followed by visits at three months (V1) and six months (V2). Clinical control was determined at V1, with the application of both clinical criteria and the COPD assessment test (CAT). All patients reported their symptoms by a validated symptom diary (E-RS) using a portable device, and their HRQoL was assessed using the EQ5D questionnaire. The relationship between clinical control and E-RS and HRQoL during follow-up was assessed with t-test. Results: A total of 126 patients were screened. After application of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 93 were finally included (mean age 66 ± 8 years, 84.9% male), with a mean FEV₁ predicted of 49.8% ± 16.5%. Of these patients, 44 (47.3%) achieved clinical control at V1, according to CAT criteria, and 50 (53.8%), according to clinical criteria. The E-RS scores differed between controlled and uncontrolled patients at all time points, both according to CAT (mean differences of − 4.6, − 5.6 and − 6.2 units at V0, V1 and V2, respectively, p< 0.005 for all comparisons) and to clinical criteria (mean differences of − 3.3, − 5-6 and − 4.99 units, respectively, p< 0.005 for all comparisons). The controlled patients also presented a significantly better HRQoL, measured by the EQ5D questionnaire (mean difference 0.13 and 0.10 at V2 by CAT or clinical criteria, respectively, p< 0.05). Conclusion: Clinical control in patients with COPD, whether measured by CAT or by clinical criteria, is associated with a lower symptom load and a better HRQoL.