Search

Supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Pulmonary Fibrosis (GNT1116371), and by foundation partner, Boehringer Ingelheim, and program partners, Roche and Galapagos. Rationale : The interstitial lung disease (ILD) multidisciplinary meetings (MDM), composed of pulmonologists, radiologists, and pathologists, is integral to the rendering of an accurate ILD diagnosis. However, there is significant heterogeneity in the conduct of ILD MDMs, and questions regarding their best practices remain unanswered. Objectives : To achieve consensus among ILD experts on essential components of an ILD MDM. Methods : Using a Delphi methodology, semi-structured interviews with ILD experts were used to identify key themes and features of ILD MDMs. These items informed two subsequent rounds of online questionnaires that were used to achieve consensus among a broader, international panel of ILD experts. Experts were asked to rate their level of agreement on a five-point Likert scale. An a priori threshold for consensus was set at a median score 4 or 5 with an interquartile range of 0. Results : We interviewed 15 ILD experts, and 102 ILD experts participated in the online questionnaires. Five items and two exploratory statements achieved consensus on being essential for an ILD MDM following two questionnaire rounds. There was consensus that the presence of at least one radiologist, a quiet setting with a visual projection system, a high-quality chest high-resolution computed tomography, and a standardized template summarizing collated patient data are essential components of an ILD MDM. Experts also agreed that it would be useful for ILD MDMs to undergo an annual benchmarking process and a validation process by fulfilling a minimum number of cases annually. Twenty-seven additional features were considered to be either highly desirable or desirable features based on the degree of consensus. Although our findings on desirable features are similar to the current literature, several of these remain controversial and warrant further research. The study also showed an agreement among participants on several future concepts to improve the ILD MDM, such as performing regular self-assessments and conducting research into shared practices to develop an international expert guideline statement on ILD MDMs. Conclusions : This Delphi study showed consensus among international ILD experts on essential and desirable features of an ILD MDM. Our data represent an important step toward potential collaborative research into future standardization of ILD MDMs. Postprint

COVID-19 and a low vitamin D state share common risk factors, which might explain why vitamin D deficiency has been linked with higher COVID-19 mortality. Moreover, measures of serum vitamin D may become lower during systemic inflammatory responses, further confounding the association via reverse causality. In this prospective study (recruited over 12 months), we examined whether the association between a low vitamin D state and in-hospital mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in unvaccinated subjects is explained by (i) the presence of shared risk factors (e.g., obesity, advanced age) or (ii) a reduction in serum 25(OH)D due to COVID-19 (i.e., reverse causality). In this cohort of 232 (mean age = 56 years) patients (all had SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed via PCR AND required supplemental oxygen therapy), we failed to find an association between serum vitamin D and levels of CRP, or other inflammatory markers. However, the hazard ratio for mortality for subjects over 70 years of age (13.2) and for subjects with a serum 25(OH)D level less than 30 nmol·L−1 (4.6) remained significantly elevated even after adjustment for gender, obesity and the presence of diabetes mellitus. Subjects 70 years had significantly higher mortality with a serum 25(OH)D less than 30 nmol·L−1 (11.8% and 55%), than with a serum 25(OH)D greater than 30 nmol·L−1 (2.2% and 25%). Unvaccinated Caucasian adults with a low vitamin D state have higher mortality due to SARS CoV-2 pneumonia, which is not explained by confounders and is not closely linked with elevated serum CRP.