Evidence Hub

Incidence and predictors of pulmonary exacerbations in primary ciliary dyskinesia: an international prospective cohort study

L. Schreck, M. Goutaki, E. S. Pedersen, F. Copeland, T. Fernandez, Living With Pcd Patient Advisory Group, J. Lucas, C. E. Kuehni

medRxiv, 2025

408 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Introduction Pulmonary exacerbations contribute to disease progression in chronic lung diseases. In a large prospective cohort study, we studied the incidence and predictors of pulmonary exacerbations among persons with primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD), which can inform follow-up care. We also assessed healthcare use, changes in management, and pathogens during exacerbations. Methods Participants in the Living with PCD study reported increased respiratory symptoms in the past seven days, indicating a pulmonary exacerbation, from June 2020 through May 2022 via online questionnaires. We derived incidence rates and studied predictors of pulmonary exacerbation incidence by fitting multivariable negative binomial regression models. Results We obtained data from 660 persons (408 adults, 57 adolescents, 195 children) who completed 17,853 follow-up questionnaires (median 17, range 1-84). The 1026 reported exacerbations indicate an incidence rate of 3.1 pulmonary exacerbations per person per year, with minor variation across age groups, but changes over time. Incidence was higher among adult females [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-2.7] and those in whom Pseudomonas aeruginosa was isolated (children IRR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.6; adults IRR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-1.9). Participants saw a health professional during only 185 of 1404 exacerbation weeks (13%). Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the pathogen most frequently observed during exacerbations in children (18 of 118…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 408 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free