Respiratory investigation · 2025
Ability of patient-reported outcomes to predict progression-free survival in patients with mild to moderate fibrosing interstitial lung disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Okamoto Masaki, Yanagihara Toyoshi, Zaizen Yoshiaki, Fujimoto Kiminori, Chikasue Tomonori, Sumi Akiko, Tabata Kazuhiro, Tominaga Masaki, Matsuo Norikazu, Nouno Takashi, Matsuura Shuji, Hamasaki Kenta, Kawaguchi Atsushi, Hoshino Tomoaki
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The prognostic utility of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in mild to moderate fibrosing interstitial lung disease (FILD) remains insufficiently characterized.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, we examined the associations between PROs-Short-Form 36 (SF-36), Nagasaki University Respiratory Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (NRADL), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression (HADS-D) and HADS-Anxiety (HADS-A)-and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with FILD and a gender-age-physiology (GAP) score ≤5. We employed principal component analysis (PCA), hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA), and Cox proportional hazards modeling. PFS events were defined as a >10 % decline in forced vital capacity (FVC), >15 % decline in diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), acute exacerbation, or death from FILD.
RESULTS: Among 115 patients analyzed, PCA revealed that NRADL, select SF-36 subscales, and HADS-D correlated with age, gender, modified Medical Research Council scale, ILD-GAP score, FVC, DLCO, 6-min walk distance, and/or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test (CAT) score. HCA-based clustering of SF-36, NRADL, and HADS-D, and HADS-A-though not individual PRO measures-was independently associated with PFS. Additional independent predictors included lowest SpO2 during 6MWT, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis diagnosis, and CAT score.
CONCLUSION: In patients with mild to moderate FILD, SF-36, NRADL, HADS-D, and HADS-A demonstrated associations with multiple clinical parameters. Clustering based on these PROs was significantly associated with PFS. These findings suggest that a multidimensional evaluation of health-related quality of life, activities of daily living, and mental status using PROs may offer valuable prognostic insights and support risk stratification in clinical practice.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, we examined the associations between PROs-Short-Form 36 (SF-36), Nagasaki University Respiratory Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (NRADL), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression (HADS-D) and HADS-Anxiety (HADS-A)-and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with FILD and a gender-age-physiology (GAP) score ≤5. We employed principal component analysis (PCA), hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA), and Cox proportional hazards modeling. PFS events were defined as a >10 % decline in forced vital capacity (FVC), >15 % decline in diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), acute exacerbation, or death from FILD.
RESULTS: Among 115 patients analyzed, PCA revealed that NRADL, select SF-36 subscales, and HADS-D correlated with age, gender, modified Medical Research Council scale, ILD-GAP score, FVC, DLCO, 6-min walk distance, and/or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test (CAT) score. HCA-based clustering of SF-36, NRADL, and HADS-D, and HADS-A-though not individual PRO measures-was independently associated with PFS. Additional independent predictors included lowest SpO2 during 6MWT, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis diagnosis, and CAT score.
CONCLUSION: In patients with mild to moderate FILD, SF-36, NRADL, HADS-D, and HADS-A demonstrated associations with multiple clinical parameters. Clustering based on these PROs was significantly associated with PFS. These findings suggest that a multidimensional evaluation of health-related quality of life, activities of daily living, and mental status using PROs may offer valuable prognostic insights and support risk stratification in clinical practice.