Agreement between chronic bronchitis definitions in young adult smokers: BEACON Cohort
Résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Chronic bronchitis is a marker of COPD development and a potential therapeutic target in early-stage disease. Multiple questionnaires are used to detect chronic bronchitis. We assessed inter-questionnaire agreeability to determine if they identify the same/different young adult smokers. METHODS: The British Early COPD Network (BEACON) enrolled 30-45 year-old smokers with ≥10 pack year smoking history and FEV1 percent predicted (FEV1%)≥80%. At enrolment in BEACON, we identified chronic bronchitis using clinical, COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Medical Research Council Chronic Bronchitis Questionnaire (MRCQ) and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) definitions and assessed their agreeability. RESULTS: Among 404 BEACON participants (60% male; 82% Caucasian; median age 39.0 (IQR 35.3-42.1) years; median pack years 16 (IQR 12-21); median CAT score 10 (IQR 6-15); FEV1% 100% (IQR 93-109)), a total of 192 (47.5%) reported bronchitis by any of the four possible definitions: Clinical 24.8%, CAT 22.8%, MRCQ 28.5%, SGRQ 39.1%. Figure 1 shows 41 (21.3%) of cases were identified by only one definition, while the four questionnaires unanimously agreed in only 35 (18.2%) of cases. CONCLUSION: Chronic bronchitis is highly prevalent among young adult smokers, but different questionnaires identify different subject groups. Identifying which subgroups indicate disease development could guide therapies to prevent COPD. erj;66/suppl_69/OA6440/F1 F1 F1
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Agreement between chronic bronchitis definitions in young adult smokers: BEACON Cohort
- Date Crossref
- 27/09/2025
- Éditeur
- European Respiratory Society
- Type
- proceedings-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.