ILD: Monozytenverhältnis als ergänzender Biomarker für die Prognose

F. Drakopanagiotakis, A. Günther
{"title":"ILD: Monozytenverhältnis als ergänzender Biomarker für die Prognose","authors":"F. Drakopanagiotakis, A. Günther","doi":"10.1159/000540065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The ILD-GAP scoring system is known to be useful in predicting prognosis in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD). An elevated monocyte count was associated with increased risks of IPF poor prognosis. We examined whether the ILD-GAP scoring system combined with the monocyte ratio (ILD-GAPM) is superior to the conventional ILD-GAP model in predicting ILD prognosis. Methods: In patients with ILD treated between April 2013 and April 2017, we were retrospectively assessed the relationships between baseline clinical parameters, including age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index score (CCIS), ILD diagnosis, blood biomarkers, pulmonary function test results, and disease outcomes. In ILD patients were included idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), idiopathic nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (iNSIP), collagen vascular disease-related interstitial pneumonia (CVD-IP), chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (CHP), and unclassifiable ILD (UC-ILD). We also assessed the ability to predict prognosis was compared between the ILD-GAP and ILD-GAPM models. Results: A total of 179 patients (mean age, 73 years) were assessed. All of them were taken pulmonary function test, including percentage predicted diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide. ILD patients included 56 IPF cases, 112 iNSIP and CVD-IP cases, 6 CHP cases and 5 UC-ILD cases. ILD-GAPM provided a greater area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (0.747) than ILD-GAP (0.710) for predicting 3-year ILD-related events. Furthermore, the log-rank test showed that the Kaplan-Meier curves in ILD-GAPM were significantly different by stage (P = 0.015), but not by stage in ILD-GAP (P = 0.074). Conclusions: The ILD-GAPM model may be a more accurate predictor of prognosis for ILD patients than the ILD-GAP model.","PeriodicalId":402207,"journal":{"name":"Kompass Pneumologie","volume":" 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kompass Pneumologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000540065","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The ILD-GAP scoring system is known to be useful in predicting prognosis in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD). An elevated monocyte count was associated with increased risks of IPF poor prognosis. We examined whether the ILD-GAP scoring system combined with the monocyte ratio (ILD-GAPM) is superior to the conventional ILD-GAP model in predicting ILD prognosis. Methods: In patients with ILD treated between April 2013 and April 2017, we were retrospectively assessed the relationships between baseline clinical parameters, including age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index score (CCIS), ILD diagnosis, blood biomarkers, pulmonary function test results, and disease outcomes. In ILD patients were included idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), idiopathic nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (iNSIP), collagen vascular disease-related interstitial pneumonia (CVD-IP), chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (CHP), and unclassifiable ILD (UC-ILD). We also assessed the ability to predict prognosis was compared between the ILD-GAP and ILD-GAPM models. Results: A total of 179 patients (mean age, 73 years) were assessed. All of them were taken pulmonary function test, including percentage predicted diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide. ILD patients included 56 IPF cases, 112 iNSIP and CVD-IP cases, 6 CHP cases and 5 UC-ILD cases. ILD-GAPM provided a greater area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (0.747) than ILD-GAP (0.710) for predicting 3-year ILD-related events. Furthermore, the log-rank test showed that the Kaplan-Meier curves in ILD-GAPM were significantly different by stage (P = 0.015), but not by stage in ILD-GAP (P = 0.074). Conclusions: The ILD-GAPM model may be a more accurate predictor of prognosis for ILD patients than the ILD-GAP model.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
ILD:作为预后辅助生物标志物的单核细胞比率
背景:众所周知,ILD-GAP 评分系统有助于预测间质性肺病(ILD)患者的预后。单核细胞计数升高与 IPF 预后不良的风险增加有关。我们研究了 ILD-GAP 评分系统结合单核细胞比率(ILD-GAPM)在预测 ILD 预后方面是否优于传统的 ILD-GAP 模型。方法在2013年4月至2017年4月期间接受治疗的ILD患者中,我们回顾性评估了基线临床参数(包括年龄、性别、Charlson合并症指数评分(CCIS)、ILD诊断、血液生物标志物、肺功能检查结果)与疾病预后之间的关系。ILD患者包括特发性肺纤维化(IPF)、特发性非特异性间质性肺炎(iNSIP)、胶原血管病相关间质性肺炎(CVD-IP)、慢性超敏性肺炎(CHP)和无法分类的ILD(UC-ILD)。我们还评估了 ILD-GAP 模型和 ILD-GAPM 模型预测预后的能力。结果共评估了 179 名患者(平均年龄 73 岁)。所有患者均接受了肺功能测试,包括一氧化碳扩散能力预测百分比。ILD 患者包括 56 例 IPF、112 例 iNSIP 和 CVD-IP、6 例 CHP 和 5 例 UC-ILD。在预测 3 年 ILD 相关事件方面,ILD-GAPM 的接收器工作特征曲线下面积(0.747)大于 ILD-GAP(0.710)。此外,对数秩检验显示,ILD-GAPM 的 Kaplan-Meier 曲线在不同阶段有显著差异(P = 0.015),而 ILD-GAP 的 Kaplan-Meier 曲线在不同阶段没有显著差异(P = 0.074)。结论ILD-GAPM 模型可能比 ILD-GAP 模型更能准确预测 ILD 患者的预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
COPD, Bronchiektasen und neutrophile Inflammation: Den Einfluss von Atemwegsentzündungen, Infektionen und Rauchen bedenken ILD: Monozytenverhältnis als ergänzender Biomarker für die Prognose Besondere klinische Aspekte bei der Diagnostik und Behandlung der akuten Lungenembolie MPE beim mutierten NSCLC: Intrapleurale Applikation von Bevacizumab stellt effektive Therapie dar Weaning von invasiver Beatmung: Multiresistente Bakterien beeinflussen den Erfolg
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1