Prevalence, Diagnostic Utility and Associated Characteristics of Bronchodilator Responsiveness

Richard Beasley* (Corresponding Author), Rod Hughes, Alvar Agusti, Peter M A Calverley, Bradley Chipps, Ricardo Del Olmo, Alberto Papi, David Price, Helen Reddel, Hana Mullerova, Eleni Rapsomaniki

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)
1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Rationale: The prevalence and diagnostic utility of bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) in a real-life setting is unclear. Objective: To explore this uncertainty in patients aged >12 years with physician-assigned diagnoses of asthma, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or COPD in NOVELTY, a prospective cohort study in primary and secondary care in 18 countries. Methods: The proportion of patients with a positive BDR test in each diagnostic category was calculated using 2005 (DFEV 1 or DFVC >12% and >200 ml) and 2021 (DFEV 1 or DFVC .10% predicted) European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society criteria. Measurements and Main Results: We studied 3,519 patients with a physician-assigned diagnosis of asthma, 833 with a diagnosis of asthma 1 COPD, and 2,436 with a diagnosis of COPD. The prevalence of BDR was 19.7% (asthma), 29.6% (asthma 1 COPD), and 24.7% (COPD) using 2005 criteria and 18.1%, 23.3%, and 18.0%, respectively, using 2021 criteria. Using 2021 criteria in patients diagnosed with asthma, BDR was associated with higher fractional exhaled nitric oxide; lower lung function; higher symptom burden; more frequent hospital admissions; and greater use of triple therapy, oral corticosteroids, or biologics. In patients diagnosed with COPD, BDR (2021) was associated with lower lung function and higher symptom burden. Conclusions: BDR prevalence in patients with chronic airway diseases receiving treatment ranges from 18% to 30%, being modestly lower with the 2021 than with the 2005 European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society criteria, and it is associated with lower lung function and greater symptom burden. These observations question the validity of BDR as a key diagnostic tool for asthma managed in clinical practice or as a standard inclusion criterion for clinical trials of asthma and instead suggest that BDR be considered a treatable trait for chronic airway disease.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)390-401
Number of pages12
JournalAmerican journal of respiratory and critical care medicine
Volume209
Issue number4
Early online date29 Nov 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15 Feb 2024

Bibliographical note

Supported by AstraZeneca.

Data Availability Statement

Data underlying the findings described in this manuscript may be obtained in accordance with AstraZeneca’s data sharing policy described at https://astrazenecagrouptrials.pharmacm.com/ST/Submission/Disclosure . Data for studies directly listed on Vivli can be requested through Vivli at www.vivli.org . Data for studies not listed on Vivli could be requested through Vivli at https://vivli.org/members/enquiries-about-studies-not-listed-on-the-vivli-platform/ . AstraZeneca Vivli member page is also available outlining further details: https://vivli.org/ourmember/astrazeneca/ . The NOVELTY protocol is available at https://astrazenecagrouptrials.pharmacm.com.Page 17 of 66

Keywords

  • asthma
  • bronchodilator responsiveness
  • chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
  • diagnosis
  • Prevalence
  • Prospective Studies
  • Humans
  • Bronchodilator Agents/therapeutic use
  • Asthma/diagnosis
  • Forced Expiratory Volume
  • Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis
  • Vital Capacity
  • Aged

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Prevalence, Diagnostic Utility and Associated Characteristics of Bronchodilator Responsiveness'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this