Evidence Hub

Disease progression in patients with usual interstitial pneumonia and probable UIP patterns on computed tomography with various underlying etiologies: a retrospective cohort study

Shu-Qiao Yang, Jing Wang, Di Sun, Yi-Ran Wang, Changjiang Xue, Qiao Ye

Frontiers in Medicine, 2023

591 participants · 12 citations

Abstract

Background Usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) is a pattern of interstitial pneumonia that is caused by different etiologies. This study aimed to investigate the transplant-free survival (TFS) and the decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) of the patients with UIP and probable UIP patterns on CT caused by various underlying conditions. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted, enrolling patients with interstitial lung disease exhibiting a CT pattern consistent with UIP or probable UIP. Clinical and prognostic data of patients categorized by the etiology were compared. Results A total of 591 patients were included and classified into the following groups: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (n = 320), connective tissue disease (CTD)-UIP (n = 229), asbestosis-UIP (n = 28), and hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP)-UIP (n = 14). Advanced age, elevated levels of serum cytokeratin fraction 21-1 and percentage of neutrophils in bronchoalveolar lavage were observed in all groups. IPF patients showed a more rapid decline in FVC (133.9 mL/year) compared to CTD-UIP (24.5 mL/year, p = 0.001) and asbestosis-UIP (61.0 mL/year, p = 0.008) respectively. Sub-analysis of CTD-UIP revealed that patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-UIP (88.1 mL/year) or antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV)-UIP (72.9 mL/year) experienced a faster deterioration in FVC compared to those with primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS)-UIP (25.9 mL/year, p < 0.05). Kaplan–Meier curves showed…

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: 591 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