Clinical impacts of the classification by 2017 GOLD guideline comparing previous ones on outcomes of COPD in real-world cohorts

11Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose: While GOLD classification has been revised, its clinical impacts on outcomes of COPD patients have not been widely evaluated in real-world cohorts. Materials and methods: According to 2007, 2013, and 2017 GOLD classifications, distribution and clinical characteristics of group-shifted patients and the risk of acute exacerbation were analyzed in combined Korean COPD cohorts. Future risk for annual moderate-to-severe exacerbation was estimated as incidence rate ratio (IRR) and compared by groups. Results: Among 1,880 COPD patients, in GOLD 2017 classification, groups B and A were increased to 61.2% and 22.2% of total population, while group C was shrunken to 2.2% and patients with higher risk were decreased (16.6% in GOLD 2017 vs 44.7% in GOLD 2013). The kappa coefficient of agreement of both systems was 0.581 (agreement 71.7%). Groups B and D showed higher IRR of moderate-to-severe exacerbation than group A (IRR 2.4 and 5.3 respectively, P<0.001), whereas group C was not different from group A. When groups C and D were combined, the IRR for acute exacerbation for each group showed good linear trends (2.5 [1.6-3.7] for group B and 4.8 [3.0-7.7] for combined group [C+D], P<0.001). Conclusions: In the revised GOLD 2017 system, COPD patients with higher risk were much decreased in Korean cohorts, and group C was negligible in size and clinical impacts on expecting future exacerbation. Serial increase in the risk for exacerbation was more concrete and predictable when group C was combined with group D.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Song, J. H., Lee, C. H., Um, S. J., Park, Y. B., Yoo, K. H., Jung, K. S., … Kim, D. K. (2018). Clinical impacts of the classification by 2017 GOLD guideline comparing previous ones on outcomes of COPD in real-world cohorts. International Journal of COPD, 13, 3473–3484. https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S177238

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free