Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

GOLD 2017 on the way to a phenotypic approach? Analysis from the Phenotypes of COPD in Central and Eastern Europe (POPE) Cohort

Neven Tudoric, Vladimir Koblizek, Marc Miravitlles, Arschang Valipour, Branislava Milenkovic, Adam Barczyk, Attila Somfay, Kirill Zykov, Kosta Kostov, Zuzana Zbozinkova, Michal Svoboda, Jurij Sorli, Alvils Krams, Ruzena Tkacova
European Respiratory Journal 2017 49: 1602518; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02518-2016
Neven Tudoric
1School of Medicine Zagreb, University Hospital Dubrava, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vladimir Koblizek
2Department of Pneumology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Charles University in Prague, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marc Miravitlles
3Pneumology Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, CIBER de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Arschang Valipour
4Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Ludwig-Boltzmann-Institute for COPD and Respiratory Epidemiology, Otto-Wagner-Spital, Wien, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Branislava Milenkovic
5Clinic for Pulmonary Diseases, Clinical Centre of Serbia, Faculty of Medicine, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Adam Barczyk
6Department of Pneumology, School of Medicine in Katowice, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Attila Somfay
7Department of Pulmonology, University of Szeged, Deszk, Hungary
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kirill Zykov
8Laboratory of Pulmonology, Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry named after A.I. Evdokimov, Moscow, Russian Federation
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kosta Kostov
9Clinic of Pulmonary Diseases, Military Medical Academy, Sofia, Bulgaria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zuzana Zbozinkova
10Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michal Svoboda
10Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jurij Sorli
11Pulmonary Department, Topolsica Hospital, Topolsica, Slovenia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alvils Krams
12Faculty of Medicine, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ruzena Tkacova
13Department of Respiratory Medicine and Tuberculosis, Faculty of Medicine, P.J. Safarik University, Kosice, Slovakia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: ruzena.tkacova@upjs.sk
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The distribution of patients based on exacerbations solely is the most profound consequence of the 2017 GOLD Report http://ow.ly/4UJa309fLbM

To the Editor:

Recently, the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) released a revised consensus report (2017 GOLD Report) [1] in which the formerly defined ABCD classification of patients with COPD has been refined. The 2011 GOLD Report and its 2016 Update classified patients on the basis of three variables, i.e. the symptom burden, lung function impairment and exacerbations [2], now the A–D groups are defined solely on the basis of symptoms and history of exacerbations – thus recognising the limitations of the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) in influencing therapeutic decisions in COPD [1]. The obvious consequence of the new classification is a shift of a proportion of patients from the C to the A group, and from the D to the B group. Nevertheless, the magnitude of such redistribution remains unknown.

The aims of the present study were 1) to analyse the effects of applying the new GOLD 2017 recommendations on the distribution of the A–D groups, and 2) to foresee the possible implications of the new GOLD recommendations on the maintenance therapy for COPD. For this purpose, we used data from the POPE (Phenotypes of COPD in Central and Eastern Europe) study, which is an international, multicentre, observational and cross-sectional study of 3361 COPD subjects in 10 countries in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02119494) [3]. The study provided numerous data, including ABCD distribution based on the 2016 GOLD Report and the distribution of predefined clinical COPD phenotypes [3]. Its rationale, organisational structure and methodology have been reported in more detail previously [4]. The study protocol, informed consent and patient information were submitted to ethics committees in the respective countries and to regulatory agencies, where required; as a result, all patients were requested to provide their informed consent (except those in Poland, where formal ethics committee approval and written informed consent was not required due to the observational nature of the study) [3].

Application of the new GOLD 2017 recommendations profoundly affected the distribution of patients in the A–D groups. Classified according to recommendations of the 2016 GOLD Report, 287 (8.5%) of 3361 COPD patients were in class A, 1023 (30.5%) in class B, 125 (3.7%) in class C and 1926 (57.3%) were in class D. Such distribution was consistent with reports of other groups [5, 6]. In contrast, when using the assessment according to the GOLD 2017 recommendations, 346 (10.3%) of the COPD patients were in class A, 1709 (50.8%) in class B, 66 (2.0%) in class C and 1240 (36.9%) in class D (figure 1). Thus, the new classification led to two ‘vertical’ shifts in the distribution of COPD patients: 59 patients (1.8% of the entire cohort and 47.2% of group C) moved from group C to group A, and 686 patients (20.4% of the entire cohort and 35.6% of group D) moved from group D to group B. This ‘vertical’ shift from D to B reflects the situation in which, according to the GOLD 2016 recommendations, only 464 (24.1%) of 1926 patients were in group D because of frequent exacerbations (of these 380 (82%) with two or more exacerbations in the previous year), but 686 (35.6%) were because of poor lung function (FEV1<50%), and the remaining 776 (40.3%) patients fulfilled both criteria (of these 675 (87%) had two or more exacerbations in the previous year). Thus, according to the revised ABCD classification, more than a third of patients formerly classified as ‘D’ solely on the basis of poor lung function moved from the D to the B group.

FIGURE 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1

Comparison of the distribution of COPD patients using the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (GOLD) groups A–D 2016 and 2017 classifications; n = 3361.

Interestingly, in the COPDgene, Copenhagen and ECLIPSE cohorts, the proportions of patients classified as ‘D’ solely based on their poor lung function were even higher than the POPE cohort (64%, 79% and 63%, respectively) [7], implying that the revised assessment of COPD and the new A–D classification may affect an even higher proportion of COPD patients than that observed in the POPE cohort. The higher proportion of exacerbators in the POPE cohort is likely to reflect a higher prevalence of risk factors for exacerbations in CEE such as active smoking, worse FEV1, more comorbidities and/or less adequate or intense treatment. Analyses of these factors are beyond the scope of the present study.

A total of 490 (71.5%) of 686 patients who shifted from the D to the B group were treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Of these, 391 (79.8%) used ICS as a part of triple ICS+long-acting beta-agonist (LABA)+ long-acting muscarinic receptor agonist (LAMA) treatment, 92 (18.8%) used ICS in combination with LABA, and only two (0.4%) used ICS in combination with LAMA, and five (1.0%) patients used ICS as monotherapy. Application of the GOLD 2017 recommendations might lead to the discontinuation of ICS in some of these 490 patients who shifted from D to B because of the lack of exacerbations. Of note, GOLD 2017 recognises that FEV1 can be used to guide therapy in selected circumstances and we believe, in agreement with others [8], that an individualised approach in de-escalation of ICS should be applied.

Dual bronchodilation therapy with LABA and LAMA, which is the recommended first-line treatment for highly symptomatic patients in groups B and D in the new GOLD recommendations, was used only by 136 (11.0%) of patients in the original (i.e. based on GOLD 2016 recommendations) group D. Importantly, 126 (18.4%) of patients who shifted from group D to group B had very severe bronchial obstruction with FEV1≤30%. This might have important clinical implications if these patients, being classified as group B, were prescribed a single long-acting bronchodilator only. However, acknowledging that GOLD 2017 suggests that spirometry may influence treatment decisions in patients with discrepancy between spirometry and the level of symptoms, we believe that the majority of patients who shifted from group D to group B and had poor lung function should be treated with dual bronchodilation.

One more observation deserves attention. Out of 130 patients initially in group D fulfilling the criteria for the asthma–COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) [9], 97 (74.6%) remained in category D but 33 (25.4%) moved to group B after reclassification based on GOLD 2017. Despite the previous GINA/GOLD report [10], ACOS has not been included in the new classification for treatment in GOLD 2017 and it is only mentioned in the text as a factor to choose a treatment option containing ICS in group D. Therefore, patients moving to group B might discontinue ICS with potentially harmful consequences.

In conclusion, we consider the ‘vertical’ shift reflecting the distribution of patients based on exacerbations solely as the most profound clinical consequence of the new 2017 GOLD report. In proposing a distribution of COPD patients into exacerbators and non-exacerbators (CD versus AB), the new GOLD classification seems to be much closer to the phenotypic approach, and on the way to individualised medicine. ‘Horizontal’ division (A versus B; C versus D) may affect the therapeutic decisions to a lower degree, and will be probably reflected in different need for rescue medication. However, the decision for introducing other recommended treatments (roflumilast, ICS, azithromycin) is most likely to be based on phenotype (chronic bronchitis, ACOS, chronic infection) in addition to CAT scores and dyspnoea. As shown in our present study, accurate adherence to the new GOLD 2017 Report will likely promote dual bronchodilator treatments as the core gold standard therapy for majority of patients with COPD, significantly narrowing the use of ICS [11, 12].

Disclosures

Supplementary Material

V. Koblizek ERJ-02518-2016_Koblizek

A. Krams ERJ-02518-2016_Krams

M. Miravitlles ERJ-02518-2016_Miravitlles

A. Somfay ERJ-02518-2016_Somfay

R. Tkacova ERJ-02518-2016_Tkacova

A. Valipour ERJ-02518-2016_Valipour

Z. Zbozinkova ERJ-02518-2016_Zbozinkova

K. Zykov ERJ-02518-2016_Zykov

Footnotes

  • This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov with identifier number NCT02119494.

  • Support statement: Supported by an unrestricted research grant from Boehringer Ingelheim RCV GmbH & Co. KG, which provided partial support for this study but had no influence on the rationale, methodology, or analysis. Funding information for this article has been deposited with the Crossref Funder Registry.

  • Conflict of interest: Disclosures can be found alongside this article at erj.ersjournals.com

  • Received December 22, 2016.
  • Accepted January 18, 2017.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2017

References

  1. ↵
    Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of COPD, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017. http://goldcopd.org Date last accessed: January 8, 2017.
  2. ↵
    Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of COPD, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2016. http://goldcopd.org/global-strategy-diagnosis-management-prevention-copd-2016/ Date last updated: February 1, 2016. Date last accessed: May 26, 2016.
  3. ↵
    1. Koblizek V,
    2. Milenkovic B,
    3. Barczyk A, et al.
    Phenotypes of COPD patients with a smoking history in Central and Eastern Europe – the POPE Study. Eur Respir J 2015; 46: Suppl. 59, PA393.
  4. ↵
    1. Zbozinkova Z,
    2. Barczyk A,
    3. Tkacova R, et al.
    POPE study: rationale and methodology of a study to phenotype patients with COPD in Central and Eastern Europe. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2016; 11: 611–622.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Jones PW,
    2. Nadeau G,
    3. Small M, et al.
    Characteristics of a COPD population categorised using the GOLD framework by health status and exacerbations. Respir Med 2014; 108: 129–135.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Worth H,
    2. Buhl R,
    3. Criée CP, et al.
    The ‘real-life’ COPD patient in Germany: The DACCORD study. Respir Med 2016; 111: 64–71.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Agusti A,
    2. Hurd S,
    3. Jones P, et al.
    FAQs about the GOLD 2011 assessment proposal of COPD: a comparative analysis of four different cohorts. Eur Respir J 2013; 42: 1391–1401.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Kaplan AG
    . Applying the wisdom of stepping down inhaled corticosteroids in patients with COPD: a proposed algorithm for clinical practice. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2015; 10: 2535–4258.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Sin DD,
    2. Miravitlles M,
    3. Mannino DM, et al.
    What is asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS)? Towards a consensus definition from a roundtable discussion. Eur Respir J 2016; 48: 664–673.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Global Initiative for Asthma and Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. 2015 Asthma, COPD and Asthma-COPD Overlap Syndrome (ACOS) http://ginasthma.org/asthma-copd-and-asthma-copd-overlap-syndrome-acos/ Date last accessed: January 8, 2017.
  11. ↵
    1. Wedzicha J,
    2. Banerji D,
    3. Chapman KR, et al.
    Indacaterol-Glycopyrronium versus Salmeterol-Fluticasone for COPD. N Engl J Med 2016; 374: 2222–2234.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Beeh KM,
    2. Burgel PR,
    3. Franssen FM, et al.
    How do dual long-acting bronchodilators prevent exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease? Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2016; in press [https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201609-1794CI].
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 49 Issue 4 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 49 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
GOLD 2017 on the way to a phenotypic approach? Analysis from the Phenotypes of COPD in Central and Eastern Europe (POPE) Cohort
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
GOLD 2017 on the way to a phenotypic approach? Analysis from the Phenotypes of COPD in Central and Eastern Europe (POPE) Cohort
Neven Tudoric, Vladimir Koblizek, Marc Miravitlles, Arschang Valipour, Branislava Milenkovic, Adam Barczyk, Attila Somfay, Kirill Zykov, Kosta Kostov, Zuzana Zbozinkova, Michal Svoboda, Jurij Sorli, Alvils Krams, Ruzena Tkacova
European Respiratory Journal Apr 2017, 49 (4) 1602518; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02518-2016

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
GOLD 2017 on the way to a phenotypic approach? Analysis from the Phenotypes of COPD in Central and Eastern Europe (POPE) Cohort
Neven Tudoric, Vladimir Koblizek, Marc Miravitlles, Arschang Valipour, Branislava Milenkovic, Adam Barczyk, Attila Somfay, Kirill Zykov, Kosta Kostov, Zuzana Zbozinkova, Michal Svoboda, Jurij Sorli, Alvils Krams, Ruzena Tkacova
European Respiratory Journal Apr 2017, 49 (4) 1602518; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02518-2016
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Disclosures
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • COPD and smoking
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Agora

  • Airway immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination in COPD patients
  • Wider access to rifapentine-based regimens is needed for TB care globally
  • Screening for PVOD in heterozygous EIF2AK4 variant carriers
Show more Agora

Research letters

  • Lessons from 2 years of use of the Post-COVID-19 Functional Status scale
  • Beta-blockade improves right ventricular diastolic function in exercising PAH
  • Trends in COVID-19-associated mortality in PH
Show more Research letters

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society