Progressive Fibrosing Interstitial Lung Disease: from Bench to Bedside

Progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (PF-ILDs) represent a group of conditions of both known and unknown origin which continue to worsen despite standard treatments, leading to respiratory failure and early mortality. Given the potential to slow down progression by initiating antifibrotic therapies where appropriate, there is ample opportunity to implement innovative strategies for early diagnosis and monitoring with the goal of improving clinical outcomes. Early diagnosis can be facilitated by standardizing ILD multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussions, implementing machine learning algorithms for chest computed-tomography quantitative analysis and novel magnetic-resonance imaging techniques, as well as measuring blood biomarker signatures and genetic testing for telomere length and identification of deleterious mutations in telomere-related genes and other single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) linked to pulmonary fibrosis such as rs35705950 in the MUC5B promoter region. Assessing disease progression in the post COVID-19 era also led to a number of advances in home monitoring using digitally-enabled home spirometers, pulse oximeters and other wearable devices. While validation for many of these innovations is still in progress, significant changes to current clinical practice for PF-ILDs can be expected in the near future.

Background and objective: Rheumatoid arthritis associated-interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD) is the most common pulmonary manifestation of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an important cause of mortality. In patients suffering from interstitial lung diseases (ILD) from different etiologies (including RA-ILD), a significant proportion is exhibiting a fibrotic progression despite immunosuppressive therapies, defined as progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease (PF-ILD). Here, we report the frequency of RA-ILD and PF-ILD in all RA patients’ cohort at University Hospital of Liège and compare their characteristics and outcomes.

Methods: Patients were retrospectively recruited from 2010 to 2020. PF-ILD was defined based on functional, clinical and/or iconographic progression criteria within 24 months despite specific anti-RA treatment.

Results: Out of 1,500 RA patients, about one third had high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) performed, 89 showed RA-ILD and 48 PF-ILD. RA-ILD patients were significantly older than other RA patients (71 old of median age vs. 65, p < 0.0001), with a greater proportion of men (46.1 vs. 27.7%, p < 0.0001) and of smoking history. Non-specific interstitial pneumonia pattern was more frequent than usual interstitial pneumonia among RA-ILD (60.7 vs. 27.0%) and PF-ILD groups (60.4 vs. 31.2%). The risk of death was 2 times higher in RA-ILD patients [hazard ratio 2.03 (95% confidence interval 1.15–3.57), p < 0.01] compared to RA.

Conclusion: We identified a prevalence of PF-ILD of 3% in a general RA population. The PF-ILD cohort did not seem to be different in terms of demographic characteristics and mortality compared to RA-ILD patients who did not exhibit the progressive phenotype yet.