Abstract
Background
Factors influencing the decline in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) progression remain uncertain. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with rapid FEV1/FVC decline in patients with COPD.
Methods
This multi-center observational study was conducted from January 2012 to December 2022. Eligible patients were monitored with symptoms, spirometric tests, and treatment patterns over 3 years. Rapid FEV1/FVC decliners were defined as the quartile of patients exhibiting the highest annualized percentage decline in FEV1/FVC.
Results
Among 1,725 patients, 435 exhibited rapid FEV1/FVC decline, with an annual change of −2.5%p (interquartile range, −3.5 to −2.0). Rapid FEV1/FVC decliners exhibited lower body mass index (BMI), higher smoking rates, elevated post-bronchodilator (BD) FEV1, higher post-BD FEV1/FVC, and a lower prevalence of Staging of Airflow Obstruction by Ratio (STAR) stage IV. Rapid FEV1/FVC decline was not linked to the annual exacerbation rate, but there was an association with symptom deterioration and FEV1 decline. In multivariable analyses, low BMI, current smoking, increased modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea score, low post-BD FEV1, low STAR stage, high forced mid-expiratory flow (FEF25-75%), accelerated FEV1 decline, and not initiating dual BD therapy were identified as independent risk factors for rapid FEV1/FVC decline.
Conclusion
We identified the risk factors for rapid FEV1/FVC decline, including BMI, smoking, symptoms deterioration, FEV1 decline, and adherence to standard inhaler treatment. Our findings underscore the potential benefits of maintaining consistent use of long-acting beta-agonist/long-acting muscarinic antagonist even in the presence of worsening symptoms, in attenuating FEV1/FVC decline.
Keywords: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Cohort Studies, Forced Expiratory Volume, Forced Vital Capacity, Respiratory Function Tests, Risk Factors
Graphical Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous airway disease characterized by irreversible airflow limitation.1 Airflow obstruction has been typically measured by the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio. In addition, the severity of COPD is usually evaluated using post-bronchodilator (BD) percentage predicted of FEV1 (ppFEV1), which has significant correlations with symptoms,2,3 acute exacerbations,4 and mortality.5 The ppFEV1 can be estimated by age, height, and gender-adjusted reference values.6 However, the use of ppFEV1 has limitations due to factors like obesity,7 genetics,8 and lung volume variations.9 Therefore, alternative approaches for assessing the severity of airway obstruction such as the FEV1/FVC ratio, have been proposed for COPD patients.10,11 In the COPDgene study, the Staging of Airflow Obstruction by Ratio (STAR) stage, based on the FEV1/FVC ratio, demonstrated an enhanced performance for predicting mortality, especially in mild COPD patients, compared to conventional FEV1 severity assessments.11
Physiological decline in lung function begins in early adulthood and progresses with aging; however, COPD patients experience faster and more heterogenous lung function decline compared to the general population.12 It is well known that a rapid decline in lung function is associated with an increased risk of COPD-related hospitalization13 and death.14 Recently, the clinical significance of the annual FEV1/FVC decline rate has been evaluated in the general population.15 This study suggested that a rapid FEV1/FVC decline in the general population is linked to the development of obstructive lung disease and higher mortality rates.15 Certain studies showed that occupational dust exposure16 and narcotic use17 were associated with a decrease in FEV1/FVC. However, previous studies were conducted in the general population, and there has been a scarcity of studies examining the association between FEV1/FVC decline specifically in COPD patients.
The identification of risk factors for COPD progression stands as a pivotal role in the strategic landscape of COPD management. Most studies on the risk factors for COPD progression have predominantly focused on changes in FEV1, leaving the investigation of rapid declines in FEV1/FVC relatively underexplored. Hence, our study aimed to identify independent risk factors associated with a rapid decline in post-BD FEV1/FVC (%p/year).
METHODS
Our study adhered to the guidelines outlined in the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement.18
Study design and eligibility criteria
Our nested case-control study used database of the Korea COPD Subgroup Study (KOCOSS) cohort (NCT02800499), which prospectively enrolled individuals diagnosed with COPD from January 2012 to December 2022 at 54 medical institutions in South Korea. Detailed information on study design and methodology is available in a prior study.19 In KOCOSS cohort, COPD patients ≥ 40 years and post-BD FEV1/FVC ratio < 0.7 were included.20 In our study, inclusion criteria required patients to have baseline and at least one follow-up post-BD spirometric assessment over the 3-year follow-up period. Regarding exclusion criteria, patients with statistically significant outliers in annual changes of post-BD FEV1/FVC were excluded, given that their spirometric assessments were considered unreliable, unrepeatable, or non-predictable.
Baseline variables
In the baseline assessment, we compiled demographic details from eligible patients, covering age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking habits, respiratory and non-respiratory comorbidities, as well as a history of previous exacerbations. We acquired information on baseline symptoms, including the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale, the COPD assessment test (CAT) score, and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD Patients (SGRQ-C) score. Additionally, we checked the current inhaled therapies and oral medications being prescribed at the baseline.
Baseline spirometric data included post-BD FEV1, FVC, FEV1/FVC, diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), DLCO/alveolar volume (VA), and total lung capacity. Evaluation of exercise capacity involved the assessment of the 6-minute walking distance (6MWD). For laboratory analysis, the information on complete blood cells with differential counts was collected. Radiological assessment entailed an exploration of structural abnormalities, including emphysema, bronchiectasis, and tuberculosis-induced destructed lung, based on chest computed tomography (CT) scans.
Dynamically changing variables
We investigated dynamically changing variables over a 3-year period, including moderate-to-severe or severe exacerbation rates, mMRC change, CAT score change, SGRQ-C score change, 6MWD change, annual FEV1 change, annual FVC change, and inhaled therapy treatment patterns, to investigate their association with a rapid decline in FEV1/FVC. The analyses for dynamically changing variables were conducted with available data, excluding cases with missing values. Annual FEV1 change (mL/yr), annual FVC change (mL/yr), and annual FEV1/FVC change (%p/yr) were estimated for each patient by dividing the difference between baseline lung function and the last follow-up lung function values by the duration of the follow-up period.
Definition of rapid decliners
We employed the definition of rapid FEV1/FVC decline based on quartiles of the annual changes in FEV1/FVC, as introduced in a previous study.15 Patients with the most negative change in FEV1/FVC (1st quartile) were categorized as rapid FEV1/FVC decliners, while patients with the remaining quartiles (2nd, 3rd, and 4th quartiles) were designated as non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
Statistical analysis
We used Student’s t-test for the comparison of continuous variables and the χ2 test for categorical variables between rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors associated with rapid FEV1/FVC decliners. Significant covariates identified from the univariable analysis as risk factors for rapid FEV1/FVC decline were included in the multivariable analysis. We assessed significant multicollinearity with a variance inflation factor > 4.0. Variables exhibiting multicollinearity were analyzed in separate logistic regression models. For multivariable analyses, handling missing values included the use of the ‘mice’ R package, leveraging associations with other variables for imputation. We thoroughly checked the similarity in data distribution and representative values before and after the imputation process. Statistical significance was determined at a P < 0.05. R statistical software, version 4.3.2 (R Core Team [2021], Vienna, Austria), was employed for all statistical analyses.
Ethics statement
The study protocol received approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at each hospital (Seoul Metropolitan Government-Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, IRB No. 06-2012-36). All participants provided written informed consent at the time of enrollment. This study adhered to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki.
RESULTS
Among the 3,477 patients with COPD, 1,992 underwent both baseline and follow-up pulmonary function tests over a 3-year observation period (Fig. 1). We included the remaining eligible 1,725 patients with a reliably estimated post-BD FEV1/FVC decline rate. The median annual post-BD FEV1/FVC change rate was 0%p/year (−1.3 to 1.5) (Supplementary Fig. 1). The patients were categorized according to the quartiles of the annual post-BD FEV1/FVC change rate. The 1st quartile, representing the fastest FEV1/FVC decline, was defined as the rapid FEV1/FVC decliners (n = 435, 25.2%). The median change of FEV1/FVC in rapid decliner was −2.5 (interquartile range [IQR], −3.5 to −2.0) (Supplementary Fig. 2).
Fig. 1. Flow diagram for the inclusion of patients.
COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in 1 second, FVC = forced vital capacity.
Demographic and clinical features
Rapid FEV1/FVC decliners had lower BMI and exhibited a higher proportion of current smokers (Table 1). There were no significant differences in terms of comorbidities, exacerbations, symptoms, or treatments between the rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners. In the baseline spirometric assessment, rapid FEV1/FVC decliners showed higher values in post-BD FEV1 (%), post-BD FEV1/FVC (%), and forced mid-expiratory flow (FEF25-75%), and there was a significantly lower prevalence of STAR stage IV (Table 2). The percentage of blood eosinophil counts (BECs) exceeding 300 /uL did not show a significant association with a rapid FEV1/FVC decline. Additionally, radiologic findings in CT showed no significant differences between the two groups.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics according to FEV1/FVC decline rate.
| Characteristics | Non-rapid decliner (n = 1,290) | Rapid decliner (n = 435) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, yr | 68.1 ± 7.8 | 68.6 ± 8.0 | 0.217 | |
| Female | 100 (7.8) | 28 (6.4) | 0.424 | |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 23.4 ± 3.4 | 22.7 ± 3.2 | < 0.001 | |
| Smoking status | 0.002 | |||
| Never smoker | 125 (9.7) | 31 (7.1) | ||
| Ex-smoker | 860 (66.7) | 265 (60.9) | ||
| Current smoker | 305 (23.7) | 139 (32.0) | ||
| Ever smokers, pack/yr | 40.5 ± 25.2 | 40.5 ± 24.9 | 0.971 | |
| Respiratory comorbidity | ||||
| Asthma | 97 (7.5) | 27 (6.2) | 0.418 | |
| History of pulmonary tuberculosis | 325 (25.3) | 98 (22.6) | 0.303 | |
| Comorbidity | ||||
| MI | 59 (4.6) | 13 (3.0) | 0.199 | |
| HF | 51 (4.0) | 8 (1.8) | 0.052 | |
| HTN | 497 (38.5) | 155 (35.7) | 0.323 | |
| DM | 215 (16.6) | 74 (17.1) | 0.917 | |
| Chronic liver disease | 13 (1.8) | 1 (0.4) | 0.224 | |
| Chronic kidney disease | 9 (1.2) | 2 (0.8) | 0.817 | |
| GERD | 115 (8.9) | 30 (6.9) | 0.232 | |
| Malignancy | 23 (3.2) | 8 (3.4) | 1.000 | |
| Previous history of exacerbation | ||||
| Moderate-to-severe exacerbation | 171 (19.2) | 49 (17.6) | 0.615 | |
| Moderate exacerbation | 158 (17.8) | 44 (15.8) | 0.516 | |
| Severe exacerbation | 68 (7.6) | 23 (8.3) | 0.829 | |
| Symptoms | ||||
| Cough | 293 (22.7) | 81 (18.8) | 0.085 | |
| Sputum | 381 (29.6) | 131 (30.5) | 0.866 | |
| mMRC score | 1.3 ± 0.9 | 1.3 ± 0.9 | 0.075 | |
| CAT score | 14.2 ± 7.9 | 13.8 ± 7.4 | 0.401 | |
| SGRQ-C score | 30.7 ± 20.5 | 28.8 ± 19.3 | 0.094 | |
| Inhaled therapy | ||||
| No treatment | 34 (2.6) | 8 (1.8) | 0.351 | |
| LABA | 68 (5.3) | 25 (5.7) | 0.704 | |
| LAMA | 341 (26.4) | 110 (25.3) | 0.638 | |
| LABA/LAMA | 337 (26.1) | 97 (22.2) | 0.112 | |
| ICS/LABA | 182 (14.1) | 77 (17.8) | 0.070 | |
| ICS/LABA/LAMA | 328 (25.4) | 118 (27.1) | 0.484 | |
| Oral medication | ||||
| Methylxanthine | 261 (20.2) | 95 (21.8) | 0.517 | |
| PDE4 inhibitor | 78 (6.0) | 32 (7.4) | 0.393 | |
| LTRA | 63 (4.9) | 31 (7.1) | 0.097 | |
| Erdosteine | 41 (3.2) | 20 (4.6) | 0.216 | |
| Acetylcysteine | 10 (0.8) | 1 (0.2) | 0.375 | |
| Macrolide | 6 (0.5) | 2 (0.5) | 1.000 | |
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or number (percentage).
FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in one second, FVC = forced vital capacity, BMI = body mass index, MI = myocardial infarction, HF = heart failure, HTN = hypertension, DM = diabetes mellitus, GERD = gastroesophageal reflux disease, mMRC = modified Medical Research Council, COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, CAT = COPD assessment test, SGRQ-C = St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD Patients, LABA = long-acting beta-agonist, LAMA = long-acting muscarinic antagonist, ICS = inhaled corticosteroid, PDE-4 = phosphodiesterase-4, LTRA = leukotriene receptor agonist.
Table 2. Lung function, laboratory, and radiological findings according to FEV1/FVC decline rate.
| Variables | Non-rapid decliner (n = 1,290) | Rapid decliner (n = 435) | P value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lung function tests | |||||
| Post-BD FEV1, L | 1.7 ± 0.6 | 1.7 ± 0.6 | 0.134 | ||
| Post-BD FEV1, % | 57.9 ± 18.2 | 60.1 ± 17.8 | 0.026 | ||
| GOLD stage I (FEV1 ≥ 80%) | 165 (12.9) | 59 (13.7) | 0.732 | ||
| GOLD stage II (80% > FEV1 ≥ 50%) | 689 (53.8) | 254 (58.9) | 0.074 | ||
| GOLD stage III (50% > FEV1 ≥ 30%) | 357 (27.9) | 102 (23.7) | 0.099 | ||
| GOLD stage IV (30% > FEV1) | 69 (5.4) | 16 (3.7) | 0.208 | ||
| Post-BD FVC, L | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 3.3 ± 0.8 | 0.949 | ||
| Post-BD FVC, % | 81.0 ± 16.1 | 81.4 ± 15.8 | 0.701 | ||
| Post-BD FEV1/FVC, % | 50.8 ± 12.5 | 52.6 ± 12.0 | 0.009 | ||
| STAR stage I (70% > FEV1/FVC ≥ 60%) | 383 (29.7) | 141 (32.4) | 0.314 | ||
| STAR stage II (60% > FEV1/FVC ≥ 50%) | 332 (25.7) | 120 (27.6) | 0.487 | ||
| STAR stage III (50% > FEV1/FVC ≥ 40%) | 302 (23.4) | 112 (25.7) | 0.357 | ||
| STAR stage IV (40% > FEV1/FVC) | 273 (21.2) | 62 (14.3) | 0.002 | ||
| Post-BD FEF25–75%, L | 0.7 ± 0.4 | 0.8 ± 0.4 | 0.012 | ||
| Post-BD FEF25–75%, % | 27.9 ± 15.6 | 30.7 ± 16.6 | 0.001 | ||
| DLCO, mL/min/mmHg | 13.3 ± 4.6 | 13.2 ± 4.5 | 0.632 | ||
| DLCO, % | 64.7 ± 20.2 | 64.7 ± 20.5 | 0.980 | ||
| DLCO/VA, mL/min/mmHg | 3.2 ± 1.0 | 3.1 ± 1.0 | 0.181 | ||
| DLCO/VA, % | 76.5 ± 22.6 | 75.5 ± 22.6 | 0.445 | ||
| TLC, La | 5.9 ± 1.15 | 5.92 ± 1.22 | 0.426 | ||
| TLC, %a | 98.0 ± 17.8 | 98.4 ± 19.6 | 0.658 | ||
| RV, La | 2.6 ± 1.1 | 2.6 ± 1.1 | 0.400 | ||
| RV, %a | 107.5 ± 44.2 | 108.5 ± 48.6 | 0.683 | ||
| RV/TLC, %a | 43.0 ± 12.0 | 43.2 ± 11.5 | 0.771 | ||
| 6MWD, m | 389 ± 116 | 399 ± 105 | 0.138 | ||
| Laboratory tests | |||||
| WBC, /uL | 7,352 ± 2,376 | 7,387 ± 2,494 | 0.790 | ||
| Neutrophil, /uL | 3,280 ± 2,024 | 4,470 ± 2,221 | 0.433 | ||
| Lymphocyte, /uL | 2,078 ± 780 | 2,034 ± 753 | 0.306 | ||
| Eosinophil, /uL | 239 ± 280 | 232 ± 246 | 0.645 | ||
| > 300 /uL | 303 (23.5) | 106 (24.4) | 0.758 | ||
| Hemoglobin, mg/dL | 14.4 ± 1.5 | 14.4 ± 1.4 | 0.358 | ||
| Radiologic findings on chest CT scanb | |||||
| Emphysema | 452 (55.2) | 144 (54.5) | 0.911 | ||
| Old TB sequalae | 163 (23.4) | 57 (24.3) | 0.847 | ||
| Bronchiectasis | 145 (17.7) | 38 (14.4) | 0.249 | ||
| TB destroyed lung | 33 (4.0) | 9 (3.4) | 0.787 | ||
| Lung fibrosis | 15 (2.3) | 3 (1.3) | 0.543 | ||
| No abnormality | 197 (24.1) | 76 (28.8) | 0.145 | ||
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or number (percentage).
FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in 1 second, FVC = force volume capacity, BD = bronchodilator, GOLD = Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease, STAR = Staging of Airflow Obstruction by Ratio, FEF25-75% = forced mid-expiratory flow, DLco = diffusing capacity for carbon dioxide, VA = alveolar volume, TLC = total lung capacity, RV = residual volume, 6MWD = 6-minute walking distance, WBC = white blood cell, CT = computed tomography, TB = tuberculosis.
aLung volume measurements were underwent in 872 (67.6%) of non-rapid decliners and 279 (64.1%) of rapid decliners.
bChest CT scans were underwent in 819 (63.5%) of non-rapid decliners and 264 (60.7%) of rapid decliners.
FEV1/FVC decline and change of clinical features
The annual change was −2.5%p (IQR, −3.5 to −2.0) in rapid FEV1/FVC decliners, while it increased by 0.6%p (IQR, −0.3 to 2.0) annually in non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners (Supplementary Fig. 3). Rapid FEV1/FVC decline was not associated with the annual exacerbation rate, but was associated with the worsening of symptoms and FEV1 decline (Table 3). A significant increase in the deterioration of patient reported outcomes (PROs) beyond the minimum clinically important difference (MCID), including mMRC, CAT score, and SGRQ-C, was observed in rapid FEV1/FVC decliners during the 3-year follow-up. In addition, the annual change in FEV1 for rapid FEV1/FVC decliners was −71.0 mL/yr (IQR, −122.5 to −12.5), which deteriorated at a faster rate compared to non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners with −7.0 mL/yr (IQR, −71.75 to 46.75). A higher proportion of rapid FEV1/FVC decliners experienced a decline in FEV1 ≥ 60 mL/yr or 100 mL/yr. However, 20% of rapid FEV1/FVC decliners had an annual FEV1 decline rate slower than the median value of −10 mL/yr, and notably, these patients commonly showed an increasing trend in annual FVC (Supplementary Fig. 4).
Table 3. Comparison of dynamic changes in clinical parameters according to FEV1/FVC decline rate.
| Variables | Non-rapid decliner | Rapid decliner | P value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD or median (IQR) | No. (%) | Mean ± SD or median (IQR) | No. (%) | |||
| Annual moderate-to-severe exacerbation rate, /yr | 0.98 ± 1.12 | 1.08 ± 1.12 | 0.120 | |||
| Annual severe exacerbation rate, /yr | 0.16 ± 0.30 | 0.14 ± 0.24 | 0.300 | |||
| Change of mMRC grade for 3 yr | 0.04 ± 1.13 | 0.26 ± 1.19 | < 0.001 | |||
| mMRC change ≥ 1 | 402 (31.2) | 162 (37.2) | 0.023 | |||
| mMRC change ≤ −1 | 381 (29.5) | 101 (23.2) | 0.013 | |||
| Change of CAT score for 3 yr | −1.30 ± 9.42 | −0.17 ± 9.42 | 0.030 | |||
| CAT change ≥ 2 | 452 (35.0) | 192 (44.1) | 0.001 | |||
| CAT change ≤ −2 | 612 (47.4) | 188 (43.2) | 0.141 | |||
| Change of SGRQ-C for 3 yr | −2.60 ± 23.90 | 2.39 ± 23.27 | < 0.001 | |||
| SGRQ-C change ≥ 4 | 462 (35.8) | 180 (41.4) | 0.043 | |||
| SGRQ-C change ≤ −4 | 597 (46.3) | 169 (38.9) | 0.008 | |||
| Change of 6MWD for 3 yr, m | 4.43 ± 142.44 | −9.69 ± 136.89 | 0.071 | |||
| 6MWD change ≥ 30 m | 531 (41.2) | 163 (37.5) | 0.193 | |||
| 6MWD change ≤ −30 m | 491 (38.1) | 172 (39.5) | 0.623 | |||
| Annual FEV1 change, mL/yr | −7.0 (−71.75 to 46.75) | −71.0 (−122.5 to −12.5) | < 0.001 | |||
| Annual FEV1 change ≤ −60 mL/yr | 262 (20.3) | 272 (62.5) | < 0.001 | |||
| Annual FEV1 change ≤ −100 mL/yr | 135 (10.5) | 186 (42.8) | < 0.001 | |||
| Annual FVC change, mL/yr | −30.5 (−138.0 to 70.0) | −40.0 (−144.5 to 47.0) | 0.243 | |||
The total number of patients analyzed for each variable is described, listed in the order of non-rapid decliners and rapid decliners within bracket.
FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in 1 second, FVC = force volume capacity, SD = standard deviation, IQR = interquartile range, COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, mMRC = modified Medical Research Council, CAT = COPD assessment test, SGRQ-C = St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD Patients, 6MWD = 6-minute walking distance.
FEV1/FVC decline and treatment change
At the baseline, the rapid FEV1/FVC decliners predominantly were treated with triple therapy, with no significant differences in treatment compared to the non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners. Over the 3-year tracking period of inhaler therapy usage, it was observed that the use of long-acting beta-agonist (LABA)/long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in the non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners increased over time, and the difference compared to the rapid FEV1/FVC decliners became more pronounced (P < 0.05) (Fig. 2, Supplementary Fig. 5). There was a tendency for more inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA use in the rapid FEV1/FVC decliners over the 3-year period, although a consistent statistical significance was not observed. Additionally, in the patients with BEC < 100 /uL, there was a significantly higher proportion of rapid FEV1/FVC decliners using ICS-containing medications at the 1-year follow-up. (Supplementary Fig. 6).
Fig. 2. Dynamic treatment changes in rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners. For the evaluation of dynamic treatment changes, a total of 662 patients were analyzed, comprising 514 in the non-rapid FEV1/FVC group and 148 in the rapid FEV1/FVC group.
FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in 1 second, FVC = forced vital capacity, LABA = long-acting beta-agonist, LAMA = long-acting muscarinic antagonist, ICS = inhaled corticosteroid.
*P < 0.05.
Risk factors related to rapid FEV1/FVC decline
In univariable logistic regression analysis, BMI, current smoker status, cardiovascular disease, post-BD FEV1 (%), STAR stage IV, FEF25-75%, and annual FEV1 change were significantly associated with rapid FEV1/FVC decline. Change of PROs (mMRC, CAT score, and SGRQ-C) and change to dual-BD were also found to be factors associated with the rapid FEV1/FVC decline (Table 4). In multivariable analyses, model 1 showed low BMI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.946; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.909–0.984), current smoking (aOR, 1.850; 95% CI, 1.118–3.062), increased mMRC (aOR, 1.155; 95% CI, 1.037–1.286) over 3 years, low post-BD FEV1 (%) (aOR, 0.972; 95% CI, 0.959–0.985), low STAR stage (STAR stage IV: aOR, 0.361; 95% CI, 0.204–0.639), high FEF25-75% (%) (aOR, 1.021; 95% CI, 1.006–1.037), accelerated FEV1 decline (mL/yr) (aOR, 0.992; 95% CI, 0.991–0.993), not initiating dual BD therapy (aOR, 0.526; 95% CI, 0.322–0.859) were identified as independent risk factors for rapid FEV1/FVC decline. In Model 2, CAT score was included instead of mMRC, showing no significant association with rapid FEV1/FVC decline. In Model 3, SGRQ-C was included, revealing a significant association with rapid FEV1/FVC decline (aOR, 1.006; 95% CI, 1.001–1.012). Especially, in the subgroup patients who showed mMRC, CAT score, or SGRQ-C deterioration beyond the MCID over 3 years, the patients who continued using dual BDs exhibited a lower risk of rapid FEV1/FVC decline (aOR, 0.708; 95% CI, 0.508–0.987), while those who discontinued using dual BDs showed a higher risk of rapid FEV1/FVC decline (aOR, 1.526; 95% CI, 1.191–1.955) (Table 5).
Table 4. Risk factors for rapid FEV1/FVC decline.
| Variables | Univariable analysis | Multivariable analysis | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | P value | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |||||
| OR (95% CI) | P value | OR (95% CI) | P value | OR (95% CI) | P value | ||||
| Body mass index | 0.936 (0.905–0.968) | < 0.001 | 0.946 (0.909–0.984) | 0.006 | 0.944 (0.908–0.983) | 0.005 | 0.947 (0.91–0.986) | 0.008 | |
| Smoking status (reference: never smoker) | |||||||||
| Ex-smoker | 1.323 (0.862–2.030) | 0.201 | 1.403 (0.875–2.249) | 0.160 | 1.428 (0.890–2.29) | 0.139 | 1.413 (0.881–2.265) | 0.152 | |
| Current smoker | 1.944 (1.235–3.060) | 0.004 | 1.850 (1.118–3.062) | 0.017 | 1.860 (1.123–3.079) | 0.016 | 1.833 (1.107–3.034) | 0.019 | |
| Cardiovascular disease | 0.565 (0.345–0.926) | 0.023 | 0.643 (0.375–1.101) | 0.108 | 0.652 (0.381–1.117) | 0.119 | 0.648 (0.378–1.112) | 0.116 | |
| Change of mMRC grade for 3 yr | 1.183 (1.074–1.303) | < 0.001 | 1.155 (1.037–1.286) | 0.009 | - | - | - | - | |
| Change of CAT score for 3 yr | 1.014 (1.002–1.026) | 0.022 | - | - | 1.008 (0.995–1.021) | 0.246 | - | - | |
| Change of SGRQ-C for 3 yr | 1.009 (1.004–1.014) | < 0.001 | - | - | - | - | 1.006 (1.001–1.012) | 0.015 | |
| Post-BD FEV1 | 1.007 (1.001–1.013) | 0.032 | 0.972 (0.959–0.985) | < 0.001 | 0.972 (0.959–0.985) | < 0.001 | 0.972 (0.959–0.985) | < 0.001 | |
| STAR stage (reference: stage I) | |||||||||
| Stage II | 0.961 (0.719–1.285) | 0.788 | 0.998 (0.678–1.468) | 0.990 | 0.985 (0.670–1.450) | 0.940 | 0.997 (0.677–1.469) | 0.988 | |
| Stage II | 1.039 (0.775–1.393) | 0.799 | 0.757 (0.481–1.194) | 0.231 | 0.743 (0.472–1.170) | 0.200 | 0.754 (0.478–1.189) | 0.225 | |
| Stage IV | 0.628 (0.447–0.882) | 0.007 | 0.361 (0.204–0.639) | < 0.001 | 0.350 (0.198–0.618) | < 0.001 | 0.359 (0.203–0.635) | < 0.001 | |
| FEF25–75% | 1.010 (1.004–1.017) | 0.002 | 1.021 (1.006–1.037) | 0.007 | 1.020 (1.005–1.036) | 0.011 | 1.020 (1.005–1.036) | 0.011 | |
| Annual FEV1 change | 0.992 (0.991–0.993) | < 0.001 | 0.992 (0.991–0.993) | < 0.001 | 0.992 (0.991–0.993) | < 0.001 | 0.992 (0.991–0.993) | < 0.001 | |
| Initiating dual-BD therapy | 0.452 (0.284–0.720) | < 0.001 | 0.526 (0.322–0.859) | 0.010 | 0.532 (0.327–0.868) | 0.012 | 0.532 (0.326–0.868) | 0.016 | |
| Addition of ICS | 1.250 (1.000–1.562) | 0.050 | 1.109 (0.857–1.437) | 0.431 | 1.106 (0.855–1.431) | 0.443 | 1.106 (0.854–1.432) | 0.445 | |
FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in 1 second, FVC = force volume capacity, OR = odds ratio, CI = confidence interval, mMRC = modified Medical Research Council, COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, CAT = COPD assessment test, SGRQ-C = St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD Patients, BD = bronchodilator, STAR = Staging of Airflow Obstruction by Ratio, FEF25-75% = forced mid-expiratory flow, ICS = inhaled corticosteroid.
Table 5. Risk factors for rapid FEV1/FVC decline in subgroups with deterioration beyond minimal clinically important difference in mMRC, CAT, or SGRQ-C.
| Variables | Multivariable analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | ||||
| OR (95% CI) | P value | OR (95% CI) | P value | ||
| Body mass index | 0.955 (0.919–0.993) | 0.019 | 0.944 (0.907–0.982) | 0.004 | |
| Smoking status (reference: never smoker) | |||||
| Ex-smoker | 1.320 (0.827–2.108) | 0.245 | 1.426 (0.890–2.283) | 0.140 | |
| Current smoker | 1.755 (1.064–2.895) | 0.028 | 1.871 (1.132–3.095) | 0.015 | |
| Cardiovascular disease | 0.661 (0.388–1.128) | 0.129 | 0.628 (0.366–1.077) | 0.091 | |
| Post-BD FEV1 | 0.983 (0.971–0.995) | 0.006 | 0.972 (0.959–0.985) | < 0.001 | |
| STAR stage (reference: stage I) | |||||
| Stage II | 0.976 (0.664–1.434) | 0.900 | 0.977 (0.665–1.437) | 0.908 | |
| Stage III | 0.741 (0.471–1.165) | 0.194 | 0.738 (0.469–1.161) | 0.189 | |
| Stage IV | 0.344 (0.195–0.606) | < 0.001 | 0.348 (0.197–0.615) | < 0.001 | |
| FEF25–75% | 1.023 (1.010–1.037) | < 0.001 | 1.020 (1.005–1.035) | 0.011 | |
| Annual FEV1 change | 0.992 (0.991–0.994) | < 0.001 | 0.992 (0.991–0.993) | < 0.001 | |
| Continued use of dual-BD (reference: no initiation of treatment with dual-BD or discontinuation of dual-BD during the follow-up) | 0.708 (0.508–0.987) | 0.042 | - | - | |
| Discontinued use of dual-BD (reference: no initiation of treatment with dual-BD or continued use of dual-BD during the follow-up) | - | - | 1.526 (1.191–1.955) | < 0.001 | |
| Addition of ICS | 1.120 (0.870–1.443) | 0.379 | 1.144 (0.885–1.479) | 0.303 | |
FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in 1 second, FVC = forced vital capacity, mMRC = modified Medical Research Council, COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, CAT = COPD assessment test, SGRQ-C = St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD Patients, BD = bronchodilator, STAR = Staging of Airflow Obstruction by Ratio, FEF25-75% = forced mid-expiratory flow, ICS = inhaled corticosteroid.
DISCUSSION
In this observational study, we identified the risk factors associated with rapid FEV1/FVC decline in COPD patients. Our study showed that annual change of FEV1/FVC in COPD patients was 0%p/year, which was attenuated compared to −0.3%p/year in the general population.15 However, rapid FEV1/FVC decliners (1st quartile) in COPD patients exhibited a greater decline of −2.5%p/year compared to those in general population, which showed −0.8%p/year.15 Rapid FEV1/FVC decline was associated with worsening symptoms and accelerated FEV1 decline. The risk factors for rapid FEV1/FVC decline included low BMI, current smoking status, increased mMRC score, low post-BD FEV1, low STAR stage, high FEF25-75%, accelerated FEV1 decline, and not initiating dual BD therapy. Our study found that rapid FEV1/FVC decline was not associated with annual rate of acute exacerbation. This may be because if an exacerbation causes a reduction in both FEV1 and FVC, the patient would be classified as a non-rapid decliner.21 As a result, there would be no significant difference in exacerbation rates between rapid and non-rapid decliners. There was a significantly lower usage of LABA/LAMA in the rapid FEV1/FVC decliners during follow-up period, while there was no meaningful correlation with ICS usage.
The concept of pre-disease stages such as prediabetes and precancer has emerged in COPD to identify and intervene early-stage patients for disease modification, giving rise to the concepts of pre-COPD including preserved ratio impaired spirometry.22 Given that the decline in lung function is faster in early-stage disease than in severe cases,23 it is crucial to recognize high-risk groups prone to the rapid lung function deterioration at the pre-COPD or mild COPD stage. Similarly, in our study, rapid declines in FEV1/FVC were more frequently observed in less advanced stages of COPD, characterized by higher ppFEV1 and FEV1/FVC ratios. Interestingly, both in COPD patients and the general population, rapid FEV1/FVC decliners had higher baseline FEV1/FVC ratios and FEF25-75% values.15 This finding suggests that rapid FEV1/FVC decline may occur before the onset or progression of small airway disease. Therefore, identifying risk factors associated with rapid lung function decline before significant impairment occurs holds significant value. In a similar population, male sex, current smoking, BEC < 150 /µL, and high FVC were associated with an increased risk of rapid FEV1 decline.24 Among these risk factors, current smoking is a common modifiable factor for both rapid FEV1/FVC and FEV1 decline. Cigarette smoking significantly contributes to the development and progression of COPD.25,26 Therefore, smoking cessation can have benefits in preserving FEV1/FVC decline rate and preventing the progression of COPD.
Recently, the COPDgene group introduced a new severity stage for COPD.11 In our study, the proportion of COPD patients classified as severe grade according to STAR stage (IV, FEV1/FVC < 40%) was unexpectedly lower among rapid FEV1/FVC decliners, suggesting a reduced risk of rapid FEV1/FVC decline in STAR stage IV. In COPDgene cohort findings,11 the greatest decline in FEV1 occurred in Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2 and STAR 3, with even less decline in stage 4 of both severity categories. Other recent cohort studies suggest that individuals with mild airflow obstruction experience a faster decline in FEV1 compared to those with more severe disease.23,27 This phenomenon is explained by the idea that individuals with relatively preserved lung function have a greater potential for decline.
Reduced lung function is significantly associated with symptoms, quality of life, and exercise capacity in COPD patients.2 Rapid FEV1 decline and rapid FVC decline are associated with respiratory symptoms and an increased risk of acute exacerbations, garnering attention as prognostic factors for COPD progression.28,29,30,31 However, a single indicator such as FEV1 or FVC may be impacted by several factors such as lung volume and restrictive lung disease,7,9 beyond lung function, thereby leading to limitations. In addition, the decline in FEV1 can be influenced by a decrease in FVC. Previous studies have shown that FEV1 decline can be influenced by FVC (L) in COPD patients24,32 and general population.33 On the other hand, our study and another previous study showed that FEV1/FVC decline rate was not affected by FVC (L) in COPD patients and in general population.15 Therefore, FEV1/FVC decline rate may provide a more reliable clinical indicator for assessing disease progression in COPD patients, particularly when FVC is impaired. Indeed, in a previous study, the decline in FEV1/FVC was more prominent in the emphysema-predominant group, while the decline in FEV1 and FVC in pre-COPD or GOLD 1 stage COPD was more pronounced in the airway-predominant group.34 Therefore, FEV1/FVC decline rate may serve as an indicator of the progression of parenchymal destruction in COPD patients. Considering the association of STAR stage with the prognosis of COPD patients,11 the decline in FEV1/FVC can be considered as an important indicator of COPD progression.
The previous Swedish general population study demonstrated a continuous decrease in the odds of any respiratory symptoms with an increase in FEV1/FVC.35 Similarly, SGRQ and mMRC deteriorated with the progression of STAR stage in COPDgene cohort.11 We also observed a significant increase in mMRC, CAT score, and SGRQ-C beyond MCID in rapid FEV1/FVC decliners. In addition to PROs, we observed a progressive disparity in the proportion of LABA/LAMA usage between rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners throughout the 3-year observation period. There was a gradual and significant increase in LABA/LAMA usage among non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners, and a transition to dual bronchodilators was associated with a potentially reduced risk of rapid FEV1/FVC decline. This suggests that dual bronchodilation, compared to monotherapy, significantly improves FEV1 36 and lowers the risk of FEV1/FVC decline. On the other hand, the impact of ICS on the annual change in FEV1/FVC was not clear. The proposed criteria for recommending ICS use, such as previous exacerbation history and an elevated BEC,37 did not differ between the two groups in baseline characteristics. However, within the BEC <100 group, there was a higher usage of ICS among rapid FEV1/FVC decliners. Therefore, it is speculated that both transitioning to dual bronchodilators and inappropriate use of ICS significantly contribute to the notable differences in FEV1/FVC decline rate. Our findings underscores the role of appropriate inhaled medication selection and adherence in attenuating the lung function decline.
Our study has several limitations. First, air trapping and emphysema can reduce FVC, potentially leading to changes in the FEV1/FVC ratio.38 Because of lack of longitudinal information for progression of small airway disease and parenchymal destruction, and therefore, we could not assess the impact of these structural changes on lung function decline. Second, there is a lack of information on comorbid lung disease39 and environmental40 or occupational exposures41 that may influence FEV1 or FVC, and these factors were not included in the analysis as potential risk factors. Third, some patients were excluded from the present analysis due to markedly aberrant changes observed in their FEV1/FVC ratios, which were considered statistically as outliers. Within the cohort dataset, the causes for these abrupt fluctuations could not be clarified. These outliers were likely attributed to various factors, such as suboptimal patient conditions during measurement, procedural errors during pulmonary function testing, or inaccuracies in data entry. Regardless of the underlying cause, the extreme variability in these measurements rendered them unreliable for inclusion in the analysis. Fourth, our cohort consisted of patients recruited from teaching hospitals, which might have led to a higher likelihood of enrolling high-risk patients compared to the general COPD population.
In conclusion, our study identified a significant correlation between rapid decline in post-BD FEV1/FVC and specific baseline characteristics, such as low BMI and current smoking, as well as dynamic changes in clinical parameters, including worsened symptoms, accelerated FEV1 decline, and non-compliance with dual BD therapy in COPD patients. Particularly, noteworthy is the observation that individuals who failed to consistently use LABA/LAMA despite experiencing worsening symptoms were more prevalent among rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
Footnotes
Funding: This work was supported by the Research Program funded Korea National Institute of Health (Fund CODE 2016ER670100, 2016ER670101, 2016ER670102, 2018ER67100, 2018ER67101, 2018ER67102, 2021ER120500, and 2021ER120501, 2021ER120502).
Disclosure: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Data Availability Statement: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the KOrea COpd Subgroup Study (KOCOSS) team but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of the KOCOSS team.
- Conceptualization: Lee HW.
- Data curation: Kim NY, Lee HW.
- Formal analysis: Kim NY, Lee HW.
- Funding acquisition: Yoo KH.
- Methodology: Kim NY, Lee HW.
- Supervision: Kim DK, Park S, Hwang YI, Seo H, Park D, Park SJ, Lee JH, Yoo KH, Lee HW.
- Visualization: Lee HW.
- Writing - original draft: Kim NY, Lee HW.
- Writing - review & editing: Kim DK, Park S, Hwang YI, Seo H, Park D, Park SJ, Lee JH, Yoo KH, Lee HW.
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
Distribution of annual change of FEV1/FVC.
Quartile classification based on annual change in FEV1/FVC.
Difference in annual change in FEV1/FVC between rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
Annual FEV1 and FVC changes in rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
Disparities in treatment patterns at baseline and 3-year follow-up between rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
Differences in patterns of inhaled corticosteroid usage based on blood eosinophil counts in rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
References
- 1.Celli B, Fabbri L, Criner G, Martinez FJ, Mannino D, Vogelmeier C, et al. Definition and nomenclature of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: time for its revision. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2022;206(11):1317–1325. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202204-0671PP. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Lee HW, Lee JK, Hwang YI, Seo H, Ahn JH, Kim SR, et al. Spirometric interpretation and clinical relevance according to different reference equations. J Korean Med Sci. 2024;39(4):e20. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Jakeways N, McKeever T, Lewis SA, Weiss ST, Britton J. Relationship between FEV1 reduction and respiratory symptoms in the general population. Eur Respir J. 2003;21(4):658–663. doi: 10.1183/09031936.03.00069603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Han MK, Muellerova H, Curran-Everett D, Dransfield MT, Washko GR, Regan EA, et al. GOLD 2011 disease severity classification in COPDGene: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Respir Med. 2013;1(1):43–50. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(12)70044-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Bikov A, Lange P, Anderson JA, Brook RD, Calverley PM, Celli BR, et al. FEV1 is a stronger mortality predictor than FVC in patients with moderate COPD and with an increased risk for cardiovascular disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2020;15:1135–1142. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S242809. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Pellegrino R, Viegi G, Brusasco V, Crapo RO, Burgos F, Casaburi R, et al. Interpretative strategies for lung function tests. Eur Respir J. 2005;26(5):948–968. doi: 10.1183/09031936.05.00035205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Doherty DE. A review of the role of FEV1 in the COPD paradigm. COPD. 2008;5(5):310–318. doi: 10.1080/15412550802363386. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Kumar R, Seibold MA, Aldrich MC, Williams LK, Reiner AP, Colangelo L, et al. Genetic ancestry in lung-function predictions. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(4):321–330. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0907897. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Gardner ZS, Ruppel GL, Kaminsky DA. Grading the severity of obstruction in mixed obstructive-restrictive lung disease. Chest. 2011;140(3):598–603. doi: 10.1378/chest.10-2860. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Hegewald MJ, Collingridge DS, DeCato TW, Jensen RL, Morris AH. Airflow obstruction categorization methods and mortality. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2018;15(8):920–925. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201802-104OC. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Bhatt SP, Nakhmani A, Fortis S, Strand MJ, Silverman EK, Sciurba FC, et al. FEV1/FVC severity stages for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2023;208(6):676–684. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202303-0450OC. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Sin DD. The importance of early chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a lecture from 2022 Asian Pacific Society of Respirology. Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul) 2023;86(2):71–81. doi: 10.4046/trd.2023.0005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Mannino DM, Davis KJ. Lung function decline and outcomes in an elderly population. Thorax. 2006;61(6):472–477. doi: 10.1136/thx.2005.052449. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Mannino DM, Reichert MM, Davis KJ. Lung function decline and outcomes in an adult population. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;173(9):985–990. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200508-1344OC. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Choi KY, Lee HJ, Lee JK, Park TY, Heo EY, Kim DK, et al. Rapid FEV1/FVC decline is related with incidence of obstructive lung disease and mortality in general population. J Korean Med Sci. 2023;38(1):e4. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Liao SY, Lin X, Christiani DC. Occupational exposures and longitudinal lung function decline. Am J Ind Med. 2015;58(1):14–20. doi: 10.1002/ajim.22389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Taylor DR, Fergusson DM, Milne BJ, Horwood LJ, Moffitt TE, Sears MR, et al. A longitudinal study of the effects of tobacco and cannabis exposure on lung function in young adults. Addiction. 2002;97(8):1055–1061. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00169.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370(9596):1453–1457. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Lee JY, Chon GR, Rhee CK, Kim DK, Yoon HK, Lee JH, et al. Characteristics of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease at the first visit to a pulmonary medical center in Korea: the KOrea COpd Subgroup Study team cohort. J Korean Med Sci. 2016;31(4):553–560. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.4.553. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Global Strategy for Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of COPD: 2024 Report. Bethesda, MD, USA: GOLD; 2024. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Halpin DM, Decramer M, Celli BR, Mueller A, Metzdorf N, Tashkin DP. Effect of a single exacerbation on decline in lung function in COPD. Respir Med. 2017;128:85–91. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2017.04.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Agustí A, Celli BR, Criner GJ, Halpin D, Anzueto A, Barnes P, et al. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2023 Report: GOLD executive summary. Eur Respir J. 2023;61(4):2300239. doi: 10.1183/13993003.00239-2023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Bhatt SP, Soler X, Wang X, Murray S, Anzueto AR, Beaty TH, et al. Association between functional small airway disease and FEV1 decline in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016;194(2):178–184. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201511-2219OC. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Lee HW, Lee JK, Lee MG, Shin KC, Ra SW, Kim TH, et al. Risk factors of rapid FEV1 decline in a real-world chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort. Respiration. 2022;101(12):1078–1087. doi: 10.1159/000525871. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Løkke A, Lange P, Scharling H, Fabricius P, Vestbo J. Developing COPD: a 25 year follow up study of the general population. Thorax. 2006;61(11):935–939. doi: 10.1136/thx.2006.062802. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Vogelmeier CF, Criner GJ, Martinez FJ, Anzueto A, Barnes PJ, Bourbeau J, et al. Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2017 Report. GOLD executive summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195(5):557–582. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201701-0218PP. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Kim J, Yoon HI, Oh YM, Lim SY, Lee JH, Kim TH, et al. Lung function decline rates according to GOLD group in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:1819–1827. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S87766. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Bae J, Lee HJ, Choi KY, Lee JK, Park TY, Heo EY, et al. Risk factors of acute exacerbation and disease progression in young patients with COPD. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2024;11(1):e001740. doi: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001740. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Whittaker HR, Pimenta JM, Jarvis D, Kiddle SJ, Quint JK. Characteristics associated with accelerated lung function decline in a primary care population with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2020;15:3079–3091. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S278981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.An TJ, Rhee CK, Park YB, Yoo KH, Yoon HK. FVC, but not FEV1, is associated with clinical outcomes of asthma-COPD overlap. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):13820. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-15612-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Cukic V, Lovre V, Ustamujic A. The changes of pulmonary function in COPD during four-year period. Mater Sociomed. 2013;25(2):88–92. doi: 10.5455/msm.2013.25.88-92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Lee HW, Lee JK, Kim Y, Jang AS, Hwang YI, Lee JH, et al. Differential decline of lung function in COPD patients according to structural abnormality in chest CT. Heliyon (Lond) 2024;10(7):e27683. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27683. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Lee HW, Lee HJ, Lee JK, Park TY, Heo EY, Kim DK. Rapid FEV1 decline and lung cancer incidence in South Korea. Chest. 2022;162(2):466–474. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.03.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Young KA, Strand M, Ragland MF, Kinney GL, Austin EE, Regan EA, et al. Pulmonary subtypes exhibit differential Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease spirometry stage progression: the COPDGene® study. Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis (Miami) 2019;6(5):414–429. doi: 10.15326/jcopdf.6.5.2019.0155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Torén K, Schiöler L, Lindberg A, Andersson A, Behndig AF, Bergström G, et al. The ratio FEV1/FVC and its association to respiratory symptoms-a Swedish general population study. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2021;41(2):181–191. doi: 10.1111/cpf.12684. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Rodrigo GJ, Price D, Anzueto A, Singh D, Altman P, Bader G, et al. LABA/LAMA combinations versus LAMA monotherapy or LABA/ICS in COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2017;12:907–922. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S130482. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Agusti A, Fabbri LM, Singh D, Vestbo J, Celli B, Franssen FM, et al. Inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: friend or foe? Eur Respir J. 2018;52(6):1801219. doi: 10.1183/13993003.01219-2018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Gildea TR, McCarthy K. In: Current Clinical Medicine. 2nd ed. Cleveland Clinic, editor. Cleveland, OH, USA: Saunders; 2010. Pulmonary function testing; pp. 1084–1095.e1. [Google Scholar]
- 39.Johannson KA, Chaudhuri N, Adegunsoye A, Wolters PJ. Treatment of fibrotic interstitial lung disease: current approaches and future directions. Lancet. 2021;398(10309):1450–1460. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01826-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Bush A. Impact of early life exposures on respiratory disease. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2021;40:24–32. doi: 10.1016/j.prrv.2021.05.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Ramírez-Venegas A, Sansores RH, Quintana-Carrillo RH, Velázquez-Uncal M, Hernandez-Zenteno RJ, Sánchez-Romero C, et al. FEV1 decline in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease associated with biomass exposure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014;190(9):996–1002. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201404-0720OC. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Distribution of annual change of FEV1/FVC.
Quartile classification based on annual change in FEV1/FVC.
Difference in annual change in FEV1/FVC between rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
Annual FEV1 and FVC changes in rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
Disparities in treatment patterns at baseline and 3-year follow-up between rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.
Differences in patterns of inhaled corticosteroid usage based on blood eosinophil counts in rapid and non-rapid FEV1/FVC decliners.