Eirini Vasarmidi

Patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection frequently experience symptom burden post-acute infection or post-hospitalisation. We aimed to identify optimal strategies for follow-up care that may positively impact the patient's quality of life (QoL). A European Respiratory Society (ERS) Task Force convened and prioritised eight clinical questions. A targeted search of the literature defined the timeline of "long COVID" as 1-6 months post-infection and identified clinical evidence in the follow-up of patients. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria report an association of characteristics of acute infection with persistent symptoms, thromboembolic events in the follow-up period, and evaluations of pulmonary physiology and imaging. Importantly, this statement reviews QoL consequences, symptom burden, disability and home care follow-up. Overall, the evidence for follow-up care for patients with long COVID is limited.

The year 2020 is characterized by the COVID-19 pandemic that has resulted in more than half a million deaths in recent months. The high mortality is associated with acute severe respiratory failure that results in ICU admission and intubation. While facing this fatal disease, research and clinical observations need to be carried out in order to evaluate the long-term effects of the COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Potent clinical and laboratory biomarkers should be studied to be able to predict the subgroup of patients that are going to deteriorate or develop lung fibrosis. The opportunity of personalized medicine is a good way to consider for these patients.

In this study we investigated the implication of NLRP3 inflammasomes in the pathogenesis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and rheumatoid arthritis-usual interstitial pneumonia (RA-UIP).NLRP3 inflammasome activation at baseline and following stimulation with lipopolysaccharide/ATP was evaluated by measuring interleukin (IL)-1β and IL-18 levels released in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) fluid and by cultures of BALF cells. IL-1β and IL-18 levels were significantly elevated in the BALF and BALF macrophage cultures from RA-UIP patients, consistent with pre-existing inflammasome activation in these patients. In contrast, in IPF, BALF levels of IL-1β were significantly less elevated relative to RA-UIP and IL-18 was lower than controls. Furthermore, upon inflammasome stimulation, IPF BALF macrophage cultures failed to upregulate IL-1β and partly IL-18 secretion, in contrast to controls, which showed robust IL-1β and IL-18 upregulation. Interestingly, RA-UIP BALF cell cultures treated with lipopolysaccharide/ATP showed a potent stimulation of IL-18 secretion but not IL-1β, the latter being already elevated in the unstimulated cultures, while examination of the intracellular IL-1β levels in RA-UIP BALF cells upon NLRP3 inflammasome stimulation showed a significant upregulation of IL-1β suggesting the NLRP3 pathway could be further activated.Taken together, our results suggest distinct inflammasome activation profiles between autoimmune and idiopathic lung fibrosis.

For many years has been well known that smoking could cause lung damage. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer have been the two most common smoking-related lung diseases. In the recent years, attention has also focused on the role of smoking in the development of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). Indeed, there are three diseases, namely respiratory bronchiolitis-associated ILD, desquamative interstitial pneumonia and pulmonary Langerhans cell histiocytosis, that are currently considered aetiologically linked to smoking and a few others which are more likely to develop in smokers. Here, we aim to focus on the most recent findings regarding the role of smoking in the pathogenesis and clinical behaviour of ILDs.

BACKGROUND: Pirfenidone is an antifibrotic compound approved for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). We present our real-world experience in terms of Pirfenidone's effect on mortality and adverse events profile outside the restrictions of a clinical trial. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational intention to treat study of 82 consecutive IPF patients (UHH cohort). RESULTS: We observed a high 3-years survival rate of 73% without excluding patients who discontinued treatment for different reasons. The survival was compared to the survival of an IPF cohort from a tertiary referral center (RBH cohort). After exclusion of severe cases (DLco< 30%), in unadjusted analysis, the survival in the UHH cohort was better than in the RBH cohort (HR:0.32, 95% CI: 0.19-0.53, p < 0.0001). After adjustment for age, gender and FVC, the survival remained higher in the UHH cohort (HR:0.28, 95% CI: 0.16-0.48, p < 0.0001). We observed a similar safety profile compared to previously published data and a lower rate of drug discontinuation due to photosensitivity reactions. CONCLUSION: Pirfenidone provides a survival benefit in a real-life IPF cohort compared to previously used medications. Counselling patients and proactively managing possible adverse effects can reduce the necessity to discontinue pirfenidone.