Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2020 Nov 26:11:606333.
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.606333. eCollection 2020.

Managing Granulomatous-Lymphocytic Interstitial Lung Disease in Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorders: e-GLILDnet International Clinicians Survey

Annick A J M van de Ven  1 , Tiago M Alfaro  2 , Alexandra Robinson  3 , Ulrich Baumann  4 , Anne Bergeron  5 , Siobhan O Burns  6 , Alison M Condliffe  7 , Børre Fevang  8 , Andrew R Gennery  9 , Filomeen Haerynck  10 , Joseph Jacob  3   11 , Stephen Jolles  12 , Marion Malphettes  13 , Véronique Meignin  14 , Tomas Milota  15 , Joris van Montfrans  16 , Antje Prasse  17 , Isabella Quinti  18 , Elisabetta Renzoni  19 , Daiana Stolz  20 , Klaus Warnatz  21   22 , John R Hurst  3
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Managing Granulomatous-Lymphocytic Interstitial Lung Disease in Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorders: e-GLILDnet International Clinicians Survey

Annick A J M van de Ven et al. Front Immunol. .

Abstract

Background: Granulomatous-lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD) is a rare, potentially severe pulmonary complication of common variable immunodeficiency disorders (CVID). Informative clinical trials and consensus on management are lacking.

Aims: The European GLILD network (e-GLILDnet) aims to describe how GLILD is currently managed in clinical practice and to determine the main uncertainties and unmet needs regarding diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.

Methods: The e-GLILDnet collaborators developed and conducted an online survey facilitated by the European Society for Immunodeficiencies (ESID) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS) between February-April 2020. Results were analyzed using SPSS.

Results: One hundred and sixty-one responses from adult and pediatric pulmonologists and immunologists from 47 countries were analyzed. Respondents treated a median of 27 (interquartile range, IQR 82-maximum 500) CVID patients, of which a median of 5 (IQR 8-max 200) had GLILD. Most respondents experienced difficulties in establishing the diagnosis of GLILD and only 31 (19%) had access to a standardized protocol. There was little uniformity in diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. Fewer than 40% of respondents saw a definite need for biopsy in all cases or performed bronchoalveolar lavage for diagnostics. Sixty-six percent used glucocorticosteroids for remission-induction and 47% for maintenance therapy; azathioprine, rituximab and mycophenolate mofetil were the most frequently prescribed steroid-sparing agents. Pulmonary function tests were the preferred modality for monitoring patients during follow-up.

Conclusions: These data demonstrate an urgent need for clinical studies to provide more evidence for an international consensus regarding management of GLILD. These studies will need to address optimal procedures for definite diagnosis and a better understanding of the pathogenesis of GLILD in order to provide individualized treatment options. Non-availability of well-established standardized protocols risks endangering patients.

Keywords: CVID; GLILD; diagnosis; e-GLILDnet; follow-up; interstitial lung disease; treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Immunosuppressive therapy in GLILD. (A) Top-three ranking of non-steroidal immunosuppressive drugs. (B) Estimated patient response rates to the 5 most highly ranked non-steroidal immunosuppressive agents according to the treating clinicians. (C) Percentage of respondents that would encourage the use of the non-steroidal immunosuppressive drug. Aza, azathioprine; HCQ, hydroxychloroquine; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; MTX, methotrexate; RTX, rituximab.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Prescription of Pneumocytis jiroveci pneumonia (PCP) antimicrobial prophylaxis varies within and between specialties. IS, immunosuppression.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bonilla FA, Barlan I, Chapel H, Costa-Carvalho BT, Cunningham-Rundles C, de la Morena MT, et al. International Consensus Document (ICON): Common Variable Immunodeficiency Disorders. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract (2016) 4(1):38–59. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Notarangelo LD, Fischer A, Geha RS, Casanova JL, Chapel H, Conley ME, et al. Primary immunodeficiencies: 2009 update. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2009) 124(6):1161–78. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Orange JS, Glessner JT, Resnick E, Sullivan KE, Lucas M, Ferry B, et al. Genome-wide association identifies diverse causes of common variable immunodeficiency. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2011) 127(6):1360–7.e6. - PMC - PubMed
    1. de Valles-Ibáñez G, Esteve-Solé A, Piquer M, González-Navarro EA, Hernandez-Rodriguez J, Laayouni H, et al. Evaluating the Genetics of Common Variable Immunodeficiency: Monogenetic Model and Beyond. Front Immunol (2018) 9:636. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Verma N, Grimbacher B, Hurst JR. Lung disease in primary antibody deficiency. Lancet Respir Med (2015) 3(8):651–60. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms