Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10316/106107
Title: Managing Granulomatous-Lymphocytic Interstitial Lung Disease in Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorders: e-GLILDnet International Clinicians Survey
Authors: van de Ven, Annick A. J. M.
Alfaro, Tiago M. 
Robinson, Alexandra
Baumann, Ulrich
Bergeron, Anne
Burns, Siobhan O.
Condliffe, Alison M.
Fevang, Børre
Gennery, Andrew R..
Haerynck, Filomeen
Jacob, Joseph
Jolles, Stephen
Malphettes, Marion
Meignin, Véronique
Milota, Tomas
van Montfrans, Joris
Prasse, Antje
Quinti, Isabella
Renzoni, Elisabetta
Stolz, Daiana
Warnatz, Klaus
Hurst, John R.
Keywords: CVID; GLILD; diagnosis; e-GLILDnet; follow-up; interstitial lung disease; treatment
Issue Date: 2020
Publisher: Frontiers Media S.A.
Project: The e-GLILDnet Clinical research Collaboration was funded by a Clinical Research Collaboration grant of the ERS 
Serial title, monograph or event: Frontiers in Immunology
Volume: 11
Abstract: Background: Granulomatous–lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD) is a rare, potentially severe pulmonary complication of common variable immunodeficiency disorders (CVID). Informative clinical trials and consensus on management are lacking. Aims: The European GLILD network (e-GLILDnet) aims to describe how GLILD is currently managed in clinical practice and to determine the main uncertainties and unmet needs regarding diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Methods: The e-GLILDnet collaborators developed and conducted an online survey facilitated by the European Society for Immunodeficiencies (ESID) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS) between February–April 2020. Results were analyzed using SPSS. Results: One hundred and sixty-one responses from adult and pediatric pulmonologists and immunologists from 47 countries were analyzed. Respondents treated a median of 27 (interquartile range, IQR 82–maximum 500) CVID patients, of which a median of 5 (IQR 8– max 200) had GLILD. Most respondents experienced difficulties in establishing the diagnosis of GLILD and only 31 (19%) had access to a standardized protocol. There was little uniformity in diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. Fewer than 40% of respondents saw a definite need for biopsy in all cases or performed bronchoalveolar lavage for diagnostics. Sixty-six percent used glucocorticosteroids for remission-induction and 47% for maintenance therapy; azathioprine, rituximab and mycophenolate mofetil were the most frequently prescribed steroid-sparing agents. Pulmonary function tests were the preferred modality for monitoring patients during follow-up. Conclusions: These data demonstrate an urgent need for clinical studies to provide more evidence for an international consensus regarding management of GLILD. These studies will need to address optimal procedures for definite diagnosis and a better understanding of the pathogenesis of GLILD in order to provide individualized treatment options. Nonavailability of well-established standardized protocols risks endangering patients.
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/10316/106107
ISSN: 1664-3224
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.606333
Rights: openAccess
Appears in Collections:FMUC Medicina - Artigos em Revistas Internacionais

Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

10
checked on Apr 15, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

10
checked on Apr 2, 2024

Page view(s)

37
checked on Apr 23, 2024

Download(s)

18
checked on Apr 23, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons