Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a major public health problem. It is the fourth leading cause of chronic morbidity and mortality in the United States, and is projected to rank fifth in 2020 in burden of disease worldwide, according to a study published by the World Bank/World Health Organization. Yet, COPD remains relatively unknown or ignored by the public as well as public health and government officials. In 1998, in an effort to bring more attention to COPD, its management, and its prevention, a committed group of scientists encouraged the U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the World Health Organization to form the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Among the important objectives of GOLD are to increase awareness of COPD and to help the millions of people who suffer from this disease and die prematurely of it or its complications. The first step in the GOLD program was to prepare a consensus report, Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of COPD, published in 2001. The present, newly revised document follows the same format as the original consensus report, but has been updated to reflect the many publications on COPD that have appeared. GOLD national leaders, a network of international experts, have initiated investigations of the causes and prevalence of COPD in their countries, and developed innovative approaches for the dissemination and implementation of COPD management guidelines. We appreciate the enormous amount of work the GOLD national leaders have done on behalf of their patients with COPD. Despite the achievements in the 5 years since the GOLD report was originally published, considerable additional work is ahead of us if we are to control this major public health problem. The GOLD initiative will continue to bring COPD to the attention of governments, public health officials, health care workers, and the general public, but a concerted effort by all involved in health care will be necessary.

https://www.who.int/respiratory/copd/GOLD_WR_06.pdf

Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: GOLD executive summary.

Global strategy for asthma management and prevention

Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. NHLBI/WHO Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Workshop summary.

Efforts to understand and mitigate the health effects of particulate matter (PM) air pollution have a rich and interesting history. This review focuses on six substantial lines of research that have been pursued since 1997 that have helped elucidate our understanding about the effects of PM on human health. There has been substantial progress in the evaluation of PM health effects at different time-scales of exposure and in the exploration of the shape of the concentration-response function. There has also been emerging evidence of PM-related cardiovascular health effects and growing knowledge regarding interconnected general pathophysiological pathways that link PM exposure with cardiopulmonary morbidity and mortality. Despite important gaps in scientific knowledge and continued reasons for some skepticism, a comprehensive evaluation of the research findings provides persuasive evidence that exposure to fine particulate air pollution has adverse effects on cardiopulmonary health. Although much of this research has been motivated by environmental public health policy, these results have important scientific, medical, and public health implications that are broader than debates over legally mandated air quality standards.

/pdf/health-effects-of-fine-particulate-air-pollution-lines-that-s831sp8jap.pdf

Health effects of fine particulate air pollution: lines that connect

A strategy to understand the microbial components of the human genetic and metabolic landscape and how they contribute to normal physiology and predisposition to disease.

/pdf/the-human-microbiome-project-1armeyuv2c.pdf

The human microbiome project.

To the Editor. —Mullen et al 1 apply a meta-analysis to five epidemiologic studies to conclude that the use of inhaled β-agonists by metered-dose inhaler is not associated with the risk of death from asthma. This conclusion is in direct contradiction to the conclusions of the four largest source studies used in their meta-analysis. We submit that this apparent inconsistency is the result of serious methodological flaws in the comparison of "did vs did not use β-agonist" employed in their meta-analysis. This comparison does not correspond to the contrasts designed or performed in the four principal source studies. The three New Zealand 2-4 studies were clearly comparing fenoterol with albuterol, 2 finding a higher risk for the former. Our study 5 focused on the dose-response analysis, which showed, for example, that in patients using any β-agonist the risk of asthma death for those using more than two canisters per month

β-Agonist Use and Death from Asthma

Purpose Randomized trials report that single-inhaler triple therapy is more effective than dual bronchodilators at reducing exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, this effect may have been influenced by the forced withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at randomization. We used an adaptive selection new-user design to compare single-inhaler triple therapy with dual bronchodilators in real-world clinical practice. Patients and Methods We identified a cohort of COPD patients, 40 years or older, treated during 2017–2020, from the United Kingdom’s Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a real-world practice setting. ICS-naïve patients initiating single-inhaler triple therapy or dual bronchodilators were compared on the incidence of COPD exacerbation and pneumonia over one year, after adjustment by propensity score weighting. Results The cohort included 4106 new users of single-inhaler triple therapy and 29,702 of dual bronchodilators. Single-inhaler triple therapy was the first maintenance treatment in 44% of the users and 43% had no COPD exacerbations in the prior year. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of a first moderate or severe exacerbation with triple therapy relative to dual bronchodilators was 1.08 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00–1.16). Among patients with two or more prior exacerbations the HR was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.74–0.92), while for those with prior asthma diagnosis it was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.70–1.06) and with blood eosinophil count >300 cells/µL it was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.76–1.05). The incidence of severe pneumonia was increased with triple therapy (HR 1.50; 95% CI: 1.29–1.75). Conclusion In a real-world setting of COPD treatment among ICS-naïve patients, thus unaffected by ICS withdrawal, single-inhaler triple therapy was not more effective than dual bronchodilators at reducing the incidence of exacerbation, except among patients with multiple exacerbations. Single-inhaler triple therapy should be initiated mainly in patients with multiple exacerbations while, for most others, dual bronchodilators are just as effective whilst avoiding the excess risk of severe pneumonias.

https://www.dovepress.com/getfile.php?fileID=83452

Pierre Ernst

Papers

β-Agonist Use and Death from Asthma

Single-Inhaler Triple versus Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in COPD: Real-World Comparative Effectiveness and Safety

Gender Differences In Survival Following COPD Hospitalization

Gender Differences In The Medications Dispensed Around The Time Of COPD Hospitalization

End of New Zealand asthma epidemic