ABSTRACT
Rationale GOLD grades based on percent-predicted FEV1 poorly predicts mortality. Studies have recommended alternative expressions of FEV1 for the classification of COPD severity and they warrant investigation.
Objective To compare the predictive abilities of ppFEV1 (ppFEV1 quartiles, GOLD grades, ATS/ERS grades), FEV1 z-score (FEV1 z-score quartiles, FEV1 z-score grades), FEV1.Ht-2 (FEV1.Ht-2 quartiles, FEV1.Ht-2 grades), FEV1.Ht-3 (FEV1.Ht-3 quartiles), and FEV1Q (FEV1Q quartiles) to predict clinical outcomes.
Methods People aged ≥40 years with COPD (n=890) who participated in the HUNT Study (1995-1997) were followed for 5 years (short-term) and up to 20.4 years (long-term). Survival analysis and time-dependent area under curve (AUC) were used to compare the predictive abilities. A regression tree approach was applied to obtain optimal cut-offs of different expressions of FEV1. The UK Biobank (n=6495) was used as a replication cohort with a 5-year follow-up.
Results As a continuous variable, FEV1Q had the highest AUCs for all-cause mortality (short-term 70.2, long-term 68.3), respiratory mortality (short-term 68.4, long-term 67.7), cardiovascular mortality (short-term 63.1, long-term 62.3), COPD hospitalization (short-term 71.3, long-term 70.9), and pneumonia hospitalization (short-term 67.8, long-term 66.6), followed by FEV1.Ht-2 or FEV1.Ht-3. Generally, similar results were observed for FEV1Q quartiles. The optimal cut-offs of FEV1Q had higher AUCs compared to GOLD grades for predicting short-term and long-term clinical outcomes. Similar results were found in UK Biobank.
Conclusions FEV1Q best predicted the clinical outcomes and could improve the classification of COPD severity.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by ExtraStiftelsen Helse og Rehabilitering and Landsforeningen for hjerte-og-lungesyke (the Norwegian Extra Foundation for Health and Rehabilitation and the Norwegian Heart and Lung Patient Organization) (project number 2016/FO79031) and the liason committee of the Central Norway Regional Health Authority and NTNU (Norwegian University of Science and Technology).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was obtained from the Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics (2015/1461/REK midt). All participants gave informed written consent.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data are available upon reasonable request and with permission of HUNT Research Centre.
