Interstitial Lung Disease in Japanese Patients with Lung Cancer: A Cohort and Nested Case-Control Study

2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 ◽  
pp. 143-145
Author(s):  
L.T. Tanoue
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Interstitial Lung Disease ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Nested Case Control ◽  
Control Study

scholarly journals Interstitial Lung Disease Associated with Lung Cancer: A Case–Control Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 700
Author(s):  
Quentin Gibiot ◽  
Isabelle Monnet ◽  
Pierre Levy ◽  
Anne-Laure Brun ◽  
Martine Antoine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Interstitial Lung Disease ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Control Study

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) seems to be associated with an increased risk of lung cancer (LC) and to have a poorer prognosis than LC without ILD. The frequency of ILD in an LC cohort and its prognosis implication need to be better elucidated. This retrospective, observational, cohort study evaluated the frequency of ILD among LC patients (LC–ILD) diagnosed over a 2-year period. LC–ILD patients’ characteristics were compared to those with LC without ILD (LC–noILD). Lastly, we conducted a case–control study within this cohort, matching three LC–noILDs to each LC–ILD patient, to evaluate the ILD impact on LC patients’ prognoses. Among 906 LC patients, 49 (5.4%) also had ILD. Comparing LC–ILD to LC–noILD patients, respectively, more were men (85.7% vs. 66.2%; p = 0.02); adenocarcinomas were less frequent (47.1% vs. 58.7%, p = 0.08); median [range] and overall survival was shorter: (9 [range: 0.1–39.4] vs. 17.5 [range: 0.8–50.4] months; p = 0.01). Multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]) retained two factors independently associated with LC risk of death: ILD (1.79 [1.22–2.62]; p = 0.003) and standard-of-care management (0.49 [0.33–0.72]; p < 0.001). Approximately 5% of patients with a new LC diagnosis had associated ILD. ILD was a major prognosis factor for LC and should be taken into consideration for LC management. Further studies are needed to determine the best therapeutic strategy for the LC–ILD population.

scholarly journals What does it mean if a patient is positive for anti-Jo-1 in routine hospital practice? A retrospective nested case-control study

F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 698
Author(s):  
Paresh Jobanputra ◽  
Feryal Malick ◽  
Emma Derrett-Smith ◽  
Tim Plant ◽  
Alex Richter
Keyword(s):  
Interstitial Lung Disease ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Trna Synthetase ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Nested Case Control ◽  
Control Study

Background:  It is widely believed that patients bearing auto-antibodies to histidyl tRNA synthetase (anti-Jo-1) very likely have a connective tissue disease including myositis and interstitial lung disease.  The value of positive tests in low disease prevalence settings such as those tested in routine care is unknown.  We sought to determine the value of anti-Jo-1 auto-antibodies in routine practice. Methods: Our study was a nested case control study within a retrospective cohort of all patients tested for anti-ENA our hospital, from any hospital department, between January 2013 and December 2014.  Data was extracted from electronic records of anti-Jo-1 positive patients and randomly selected ENA negative patients (ratio of 1:2), allowing for a minimum follow up of at least 12 months after first testing. Results: 4009 samples (3581 patients) were tested.  Anti-ENA was positive in 616 (17.2%) patients, 40 (1.1%) were anti-Jo-1 positive. Repeat ENA testing was done for 350/3581 (9.8%) patients (428 of 4009 (10.7%) samples) and in 7/40 (17.5%) of anti-Jo-1 positive patients. The median interval between the first and second request was 124 days (inter-quartile range 233 days).  The frequencies of interstitial lung disease (ILD), myositis and Raynaud’s were comparable for anti-Jo-1 positive patients (n=40) and 80 randomly selected ENA negative controls.  Positive tests led to additional diagnostic testing in the absence of clinical disease.  Sensitivity of Jo-1 for ILD was 50% (CI 19-81%), specificity 68% (CI 59-77%), positive predictive value 12.5% (CI 4 to 27%) and negative predictive value 93.8% (CI 86-98%). Of 10 (25%) patients with high anti-Jo1 levels, 3 had ILD, one myositis and two a malignancy (disseminated melanoma and CML).  Conclusion: Anti-Jo-1 is uncommon in a heterogenous hospital population and is only weakly predictive for ILD.  Repeated test requests were common and potentially unnecessary indicating that controls over repeat requests could yield significant cost savings.

scholarly journals Risk of drug-induced interstitial lung disease in hospitalised patients: a nested case–control study

Thorax ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. thoraxjnl-2020-215824
Author(s):  
Taisuke Jo ◽  
Nobuaki Michihata ◽  
Hayato Yamana ◽  
Kojiro Morita ◽  
Miho Ishimaru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interstitial Lung Disease ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Potential Risk ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Main Diagnosis ◽  
Drug Induced ◽  
Hospitalised Patients ◽  
Nested Case Control ◽  
Control Study

IntroductionInformation on drug-induced interstitial lung disease (DILD) is limited due to its low incidence. This study investigated the frequencies of drug categories with potential risk in patients developing DILD during hospitalisation and analysed the risk of developing DILD associated with each of these drugs.MethodsUsing a Japanese national inpatient database, we identified patients without interstitial pneumonia on admission who developed DILD and required corticosteroid therapy during hospitalisation from July 2010 to March 2016. We conducted a nested case–control study; four controls from the entire non-DILD patient cohort were matched to each DILD case on age, sex, main diagnosis, admission year and hospital. We defined 42 classified categories of drugs with 216 generic names as drugs with potential risk of DILD, and we identified the use of these drugs during hospitalisation for each patient. We analysed the association between each drug category and DILD development using conditional logistic regression analyses.ResultsWe retrospectively identified 2342 patients who developed DILD. After one-to-four case–control matching, 1541 case patients were matched with 5677 control patients. Six drug categories were significantly associated with the increased occurrence of DILD. These included epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (OR: 16.84, 95% CI 9.32 to 30.41) and class III antiarrhythmic drugs (OR: 7.01, 95% CI 3.86 to 12.73). Statins were associated with reduced risk of DILD (OR: 0.68, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.92).ConclusionsWe demonstrated significant associations between various drug categories and DILD. Our findings provide useful information on drug categories with potential risk to help physicians prevent and treat DILD.

scholarly journals Interstitial lung disease increases susceptibility to and severity of COVID-19

2021 ◽  
pp. 2004125
Author(s):  
Hyun Lee ◽  
Hayoung Choi ◽  
Bumhee Yang ◽  
Sun-Kyung Lee ◽  
Tai Sun Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interstitial Lung Disease ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Matched Cohort ◽  
Limited Data ◽  
Nested Case Control ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Control Study

BackgroundThere are limited data regarding the relationship between interstitial lung disease (ILD) and the natural course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this study, we investigate whether patients with ILD are more susceptible to COVID-19 than those without ILD and evaluate the impact of ILD on disease severity in patients with COVID-19.MethodsA nationwide cohort of patients with COVID-19 (n=8070) and a 1:15 age-, sex-, and residence-matched cohort (n=121 050) were constructed between January 1, 2020 and May 30, 2020 in Korea. We performed a nested case-control study to compare the proportions of patients with ILD between the COVID-19 cohort and the matched cohort. Using the COVID-19 cohort, we also evaluated the risk of severe COVID-19 in patients with ILD versus those without ILD.ResultsThe proportion of patients with ILD was significantly higher in the COVID-19 cohort than in the matched cohort (0.8% versus 0.4%, p<0.001). The odds ratio [OR] of having ILD was significantly higher in the COVID-19 cohort than in the matched cohort (adjusted OR=2.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.54–2.61). Among patients in the COVID-19 cohort, patients with ILD were more likely to have severe COVID-19 than patients without ILD (49.3% versus 13.1%), including mortality (13.4% versus 2.8%) (all p<0.01). The risk of severe COVID-19 was significantly higher in patients with ILD than in those without ILD (adjusted OR=2.32, 95% CI=1.24–4.01).ConclusionThe risks of COVID-19 and severe presentation were significantly higher in patients with ILD than in those without ILD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document