Extract
Two guidance documents for the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have been recently published by international experts representing major respiratory and radiological societies [1, 2]. Similar documents from other societies are anticipated. This is clearly a positive sign of the increasing attention being paid by the scientific community to a group of fibrotic lung diseases of which IPF is the prototype.
Abstract
Two new documents on the diagnosis of IPF have been published in 2018: their similarities and differences are described and discussed http://ow.ly/856P30lnB2O
Footnotes
Conflict of interest: L. Richeldi reports personal fees from Sanofi-Aventis (consultancy), Roche (member of advisory board), Celgene (consultancy), Nitto (consultancy), Fibrogen (member of advisory board), Promedior (member of advisory board), Bristol Myers Squibb (consultancy), DynaMed (editorial activity), Pliant Therapeutics (consultancy), Prometic (consultancy), Asahi Kasei (consultancy) and Biogen (consultancy), and grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim (member of Steering Committee), all outside the submitted work.
Conflict of interest: K.C. Wilson reports being the American Thoracic Society Chief of Documents and Patient Education; therefore, he may have an intellectual bias in favour of ATS-sponsored documents.
Conflict of interest: G. Raghu reports other (consultant for IPF studies) from BI, BMS, Biogen, Bellerophan, Fibrogen, Gilead, Nitto, Promedior, Sanofi and Veracyte, and grants from NIH (for IPF studies), all outside the submitted work.
- Received August 4, 2018.
- Accepted August 6, 2018.
- Copyright ©ERS 2018