Department of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Sciences, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Channing Division of Network Medicine and.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2024 Dec 1;210(11):1317-1328. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202311-2145OC.
For spirometry interpretation, the European Respiratory Society (ERS) and American Thoracic Society (ATS) recommend using -scores, and the ATS has recommended using Global Lung Initiative (GLI) "Global" race-neutral reference equations. However, these recommendations have been variably implemented, and the impact has not been widely assessed in clinical or research settings. To evaluate the ERS/ATS classification of airflow obstruction severity. In COPDGene (Genetic Epidemiology of COPD Study) ( = 10,108), airflow obstruction has been defined by an FEV/FVC ratio <0.70, with spirometric severity graded from class 1 to class 4 based on race-specific percent predicted (pp) FEV cutoff points as recommended by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). We compared the GOLD approach, using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III race-specific equations, versus the application of GLI Global equations using the ERS/ATS definition of airflow obstruction as an FEV/FVC ratio below the lower limit of normal and z-score-based FEV cutoff points of -1.645, -2.5, and -4 ("zGLI Global"). We tested the four-tier severity scheme for association with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease outcomes. The lowest agreement between ERS/ATS with zGLI Global and the GOLD classification was observed in individuals with milder disease (56.9% and 42.5% in GOLD stages 1 and 2, respectively), and race was a major determinant of redistribution. After adjustment for relevant covariates, zGLI Global distinguished all-cause mortality risk between normal spirometry and the first grade of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.44; = 0.014) and showed a linear increase in exacerbation rates with increasing disease severity in comparison with GOLD. The zGLI Global severity classification outperformed the GOLD criteria in the discrimination of survival, exacerbations, and imaging characteristics.
对于肺量计解读,欧洲呼吸学会(ERS)和美国胸科学会(ATS)建议使用 Z 评分,ATS 建议使用全球肺倡议(GLI)“全球”不分种族的参考方程。然而,这些建议的实施情况各不相同,其在临床或研究环境中的影响尚未得到广泛评估。
评估 ERS/ATS 气流阻塞严重程度分类。在 COPDGene(COPD 遗传流行病学研究)( = 10108)中,气流阻塞通过 FEV/FVC 比值<0.70 定义,根据全球倡议慢性阻塞性肺疾病(GOLD)建议的种族特异性预测值(pp)FEV 截断点,将肺量计严重程度从 1 级到 4 级分级。我们比较了 GOLD 方法,使用国家健康和营养检查调查 III 种族特异性方程,与使用 ERS/ATS 气流阻塞定义(FEV/FVC 比值低于正常值下限和基于 z 分数的 FEV 截断点-1.645、-2.5 和-4 的 zGLI 全球)的 GLI 全球方程的应用。我们测试了四级严重程度方案与慢性阻塞性肺疾病结局的关联。
在疾病较轻的个体中,ERS/ATS 与 zGLI Global 之间的最低一致性观察到(GOLD 1 期和 2 期分别为 56.9%和 42.5%),种族是再分配的主要决定因素。在调整相关协变量后,zGLI Global 区分了正常肺量计和慢性阻塞性肺疾病 1 级之间的全因死亡率风险(风险比,1.23;95%置信区间,1.04-1.44; = 0.014),并且与 GOLD 相比,随着疾病严重程度的增加,恶化率呈线性增加。与 GOLD 标准相比,zGLI Global 严重程度分类在生存、恶化和影像学特征的区分方面表现更好。