4.1 Review

Belimumab in the Treatment of Connective Tissue Disease-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease: Case Report and Literature Review

期刊

CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE
卷 13, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.19218

关键词

interstitial lung disease; belimumab; pulmonary hypertension; ground-glass opacities; nonspecific interstitial pneumonitis; systemic lupus erythromatosus; connective tissue disease associated interstitial lung disease; scleroderma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ILD is a group of heterogeneous parenchymal lung disorders characterized by inflammation, fibrosis, or scarring of the lung's interstitial, which often leads to dyspnea. It is commonly associated with connective tissue diseases and is a serious pulmonary complication with limited therapeutic options, resulting in significant morbidity. Emerging biologic therapies are being investigated for the treatment of various forms of ILD, such as the use of belimumab in cases associated with systemic lupus erythematosus and scleroderma overlap.
Interstitial lung disease or ILD can be described as inflammation, fibrosis, or scarring of the lung's interstitial, resulting in dyspnea. ILD represents a group of heterogeneous parenchymal lung disorders with complex pathophysiology, differentiated by the clinical and radiological patterns. ILD is one of the most serious pulmonary complications associated with connective tissue diseases (CTDs), resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Nonspecific interstitial pneumonia is the most common morphological and pathological pattern of ILD seen in CTDs. There are limitations in the therapeutic options resulting in significant morbidity. Certain biologic therapies are being evaluated for the various forms of ILD. The ILD, in this case, is associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and scleroderma overlap that was effectively treated with belimumab, a recombinant monoclonal antibody against the B-cell activating factor (B-lymphocyte stimulator).

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

4.1
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