[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This document is an international evidence-based guideline on the diagnosis and management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and is a collaborative effort of the American Thoracic Society, the European Respiratory Society, the Japanese Respiratory Society, and the Latin American Thoracic Association. It represents the current state of knowledge regarding idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), and contains sections on definition and epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, natural history, staging and prognosis, treatment, and monitoring disease course. For the diagnosis and treatment sections, pragmatic GRADE evidence-based methodology was applied in a question-based format. For each diagnosis and treatment question, the committee graded the quality of the evidence available (high, moderate, low, or very low), and made a recommendation (yes or no, strong or weak). Recommendations were based on majority vote. It is emphasized that clinicians must spend adequate time with patients to discuss patients' values and preferences and decide on the appropriate course of action.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 03/2011; 183(6):788-824. DOI:10.1164/rccm.2009-040GL · 11.99 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is characterized by formation and proliferation of fibroblast foci. Endothelin-1 induces lung fibroblast proliferation and contractile activity via the endothelin A (ETA) receptor.
To determine whether ambrisentan, an ETA receptor-selective antagonist, reduces the rate of IPF progression.
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00768300) SETTING: Academic and private hospitals.
Patients with IPF aged 40 to 80 years with minimal or no honeycombing on high-resolution computed tomography scans.
Ambrisentan, 10 mg/d, or placebo.
Time to disease progression, defined as death, respiratory hospitalization, or a categorical decrease in lung function.
The study was terminated after enrollment of 492 patients (75% of intended enrollment; mean duration of exposure to study medication, 34.7 weeks) because an interim analysis indicated a low likelihood of showing efficacy for the end point by the scheduled end of the study. Ambrisentan-treated patients were more likely to meet the prespecified criteria for disease progression (90 [27.4%] vs. 28 [17.2%] patients; P = 0.010; hazard ratio, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.66]). Lung function decline was seen in 55 (16.7%) ambrisentan-treated patients and 19 (11.7%) placebo-treated patients (P = 0.109). Respiratory hospitalizations were seen in 44 (13.4%) and 9 (5.5%) patients in the ambrisentan and placebo groups, respectively (P = 0.007). Twenty-six (7.9%) patients who received ambrisentan and 6 (3.7%) who received placebo died (P = 0.100). Thirty-two (10%) ambrisentan-treated patients and 16 (10%) placebo-treated patients had pulmonary hypertension at baseline, and analysis stratified by the presence of pulmonary hypertension revealed similar results for the primary end point.
The study was terminated early.
Ambrisentan was not effective in treating IPF and may be associated with an increased risk for disease progression and respiratory hospitalizations.
Annals of internal medicine 05/2013; 158(9):641-649. DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-158-9-201305070-00003 · 16.10 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Present guidelines for the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis require histological confirmation of surgical lung biopsy samples when high-resolution CT images are not definitive for usual interstitial pneumonia. We aimed to assess the predictive value of high-resolution CT in a cohort of patients with suspected idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis from a previous randomised trial.
ARTEMIS-IPF was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 3 trial of ambrisentan for adults aged 40-80 years with well-defined idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and 5% or less honeycombing on high-resolution CT. In December, 2010, an interim analysis showed lack of efficacy and the trial was stopped. In the present follow-on analysis, we assessed patients who were screened for ARTEMIS-IPF who underwent high-resolution CT as part of screening and surgical lung biopsy as part of standard clinical care. A radiologist and a pathologist from a central panel independently assessed anonymised CT scans and biopsy samples. We calculated the positive and negative predictive value of high-resolution CT (classified as usual interstitial pneumonia, possible usual interstitial pneumonia, and inconsistent with usual interstitial pneumonia) for confirmation of histological patterns of usual interstitial pneumonia. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00768300.
315 (29%) of 1087 consecutively screened patients in ARTEMIS-IPF had both high-resolution CT and surgical lung biopsy samples. 108 of 111 patients who met high-resolution CT criteria for usual interstitial pneumonia had histologically confirmed usual interstitial pneumonia (positive predictive value 97·3%, 95% CI 92·3-99·4), as did 79 of 84 patients who met high-resolution CT criteria for possible usual interstitial pneumonia (94·0%, 86·7-98·0). 22 of 120 patients had an inconsistent high-resolution CT pattern for usual interstitial pneumonia that was histologically confirmed as not or possible usual interstitial pneumonia (negative predictive value 18·3%, 95% CI 11·9-26·4).
In the appropriate clinical setting, for patients with possible usual interstitial pneumonia pattern on high resolution CT, surgical lung biopsy sampling might not be necessary to reach a diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis if high-resolution CT scans are assessed by experts at regional sites familiar with patterns of usual interstitial pneumonia and management of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia.
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine 04/2014; 2(4):277-84. DOI:10.1016/S2213-2600(14)70011-6
Note: Although carefully collected, accuracy of this list of references cannot be guaranteed.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.