Background: This American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Asociación Latinoamericana de Tórax guideline updates prior idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) guidelines and addresses the progression of pulmonary fibrosis in patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) other than IPF. Methods: A committee was composed of multidisciplinary experts in ILD, methodologists, and patient representatives. 1) Update of IPF: Radiological and histopathological criteria for IPF were updated by consensus. Questions about transbronchial lung cryobiopsy, genomic classifier testing, antacid medication, and antireflux surgery were informed by systematic reviews and answered with evidence-based recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. 2) Progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF): PPF was defined, and then radiological and physiological criteria for PPF were determined by consensus. Questions about pirfenidone and nintedanib were informed by systematic reviews and answered with evidence-based recommendations using the GRADE approach. Results: 1) Update of IPF: A conditional recommendation was made to regard transbronchial lung cryobiopsy as an acceptable alternative to surgical lung biopsy in centers with appropriate expertise. No recommendation was made for or against genomic classifier testing. Conditional recommendations were made against antacid medication and antireflux surgery for the treatment of IPF. 2) PPF: PPF was defined as at least two of three criteria (worsening symptoms, radiological progression, and physiological progression) occurring within the past year with no alternative explanation in a patient with an ILD other than IPF. A conditional recommendation was made for nintedanib, and additional research into pirfenidone was recommended. Conclusions: The conditional recommendations in this guideline are intended to provide the basis for rational, informed decisions by clinicians.

Preclinical data have suggested that nintedanib, an intracellular inhibitor of tyrosine kinases, inhibits processes involved in the progression of lung fibrosis. Although the efficacy of nintedanib has been shown in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, its efficacy across a broad range of fibrosing lung diseases is unknown.

Background: This guideline addresses the diagnosis of hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP). It represents a collaborative effort among the American Thoracic Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Asociación Latinoamericana del Tórax. Methods: Systematic reviews were performed for six questions. The evidence was discussed, and then recommendations were formulated by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in the field of interstitial lung disease and HP using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Results: The guideline committee defined HP, and clinical, radiographic, and pathological features were described. HP was classified into nonfibrotic and fibrotic phenotypes. There was limited evidence that was directly applicable to all questions. The need for a thorough history and a validated questionnaire to identify potential exposures was agreed on. Serum IgG testing against potential antigens associated with HP was suggested to identify potential exposures. For patients with nonfibrotic HP, a recommendation was made in favor of obtaining bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid for lymphocyte cellular analysis, and suggestions for transbronchial lung biopsy and surgical lung biopsy were also made. For patients with fibrotic HP, suggestions were made in favor of obtaining BAL for lymphocyte cellular analysis, transbronchial lung cryobiopsy, and surgical lung biopsy. Diagnostic criteria were established, and a diagnostic algorithm was created by expert consensus. Knowledge gaps were identified as future research directions. Conclusions: The guideline committee developed a systematic approach to the diagnosis of HP. The approach should be reevaluated as new evidence accumulates.

Background: The presence of emphysema is relatively common in patients with fibrotic interstitial lung disease. This has been designated combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE). The lack of consensus over definitions and diagnostic criteria has limited CPFE research. Goals: The objectives of this task force were to review the terminology, definition, characteristics, pathophysiology, and research priorities of CPFE and to explore whether CPFE is a syndrome. Methods: This research statement was developed by a committee including 19 pulmonologists, 5 radiologists, 3 pathologists, 2 methodologists, and 2 patient representatives. The final document was supported by a focused systematic review that identified and summarized all recent publications related to CPFE. Results: This task force identified that patients with CPFE are predominantly male, with a history of smoking, severe dyspnea, relatively preserved airflow rates and lung volumes on spirometry, severely impaired Dl_CO, exertional hypoxemia, frequent pulmonary hypertension, and a dismal prognosis. The committee proposes to identify CPFE as a syndrome, given the clustering of pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema, shared pathogenetic pathways, unique considerations related to disease progression, increased risk of complications (pulmonary hypertension, lung cancer, and/or mortality), and implications for clinical trial design. There are varying features of interstitial lung disease and emphysema in CPFE. The committee offers a research definition and classification criteria and proposes that studies on CPFE include a comprehensive description of radiologic and, when available, pathological patterns, including some recently described patterns such as smoking-related interstitial fibrosis. Conclusions: This statement delineates the syndrome of CPFE and highlights research priorities.

Background: The 2013 American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society Statement on the classification of the idiopathic interstitial pneumonias described 6 major and 2 rare subtypes of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia, as well as recognising unclassifiable disease. Objective: The objective of this statement is to update the 2013 classification of interstitial pneumonia. Methods: Five co-chairs identified a committee of 32 experts in the field as well as two individuals with lived experience. Creation of the document was supported by a series of video meetings, first including the full committee and then subgroups assigned to draft specific sections of the document. The classification scheme was developed by consensus. Results: The multidisciplinary committee of experts identified four major advances to the classification of interstitial pneumonia: (1) expansion beyond idiopathic interstitial pneumonias to also include secondary causes; (2) identification of new subcategories and updated terms, including addition of bronchiolocentric interstitial pneumonia as a major pattern as well as changing from acute interstitial pneumonia to idiopathic diffuse alveolar damage and desquamative interstitial pneumonia to alveolar macrophage pneumonia; (3) subclassification of interstitial and alveolar filling disorders, with interstitial disorders further subclassified as fibrotic versus non-fibrotic; and (4) consideration of diagnostic confidence in patient evaluation and management. The committee also provided a comprehensive update on the status of potential molecular tools and identified future research priorities. Conclusions: This update builds upon the previous classification approach by describing major advances in the classification of interstitial pneumonia over the last decade.