4.5 Article

Cluster analysis-based clinical phenotypes of idiopathic interstitial pneumonias: associations with acute exacerbation and overall survival

期刊

BMC PULMONARY MEDICINE
卷 21, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12890-021-01428-3

关键词

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; Interstitial lung disease; Interstitial pneumonia; IPAF; IPF

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cluster analysis identified four clinical phenotypes of IIPs, which may be useful for predicting the risk of acute exacerbation and overall survival.
BackgroundThe precise classification of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP) is essential for selecting treatment as well as estimating clinical outcomes; however, this is sometimes difficult in clinical practice. Therefore, cluster analysis was used to identify the clinical phenotypes of IIPs, and its usefulness for predicting clinical outcomes was evaluated.MethodsCluster analysis was performed using clinical features including patients' demographics; histories; pulmonary function test data; and laboratory, physical and radiological findings.ResultsIn 337 patients with IIPs, four clusters were identified: Cluster I, in which>80% of the patients had autoimmune features; Cluster II, which had the lowest rate of smoking, the lowest percent predicted forced vital capacity (%FVC) and the lowest body mass index (BMI); Cluster III, which had the highest rate of smoking, the highest rate of dust exposure, the second lowest %FVC and normal BMI; and Cluster IV, which exhibited maintenance of %FVC and normal BMI. Cluster IV had significantly longer overall survival than Clusters II and III. Clusters I and III had significantly longer overall survival than Cluster II. Clusters II and III had a significantly higher cumulative incidence of acute exacerbation than Cluster IV.ConclusionCluster analysis using clinical features identified four clinical phenotypes of IIPs, which may be useful for predicting the risk of acute exacerbation and overall survival.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据