Diffusing Capacity of Carbon Monoxide in Assessment of COPD
Open accessAbstract
Background Diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (Dlco) is inconsistently obtained in patients with COPD, and the added benefit of Dlco testing beyond that of more common tools is unknown. Objective The goal of this study was to determine whether lower Dlco is associated with increased COPD morbidity independent of emphysema assessed via spirometry and CT imaging. Methods Data for 1,806 participants with COPD from the Genetic Epidemiology of COPD (COPDGene) study 5-year visit were analyzed, including pulmonary function testing, quality of life, symptoms, exercise performance, and exacerbation rates. Dlco percent predicted was primarily analyzed as a continuous variable and additionally categorized into four groups: (1) Dlco and FEV 1 > 50% (reference); (2) only Dlco ≤ 50%; (3) only FEV 1 ≤ 50%; and (4) both ≤ 50% predicted. Outcomes were modeled by using multivariable linear and negative binomial regression, including emphysema and FEV 1 percent predicted among other confounders. Results In multivariable analyses, every 10% predicted decrease in Dlco was associated with symptoms and quality of life (COPD Assessment Test, 0.53 [P < .001]; St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire, 1.67 [P < .001]; Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 Physical Function, -0.89 [P < .001]), exercise performance (6-min walk distance, -45.35 feet; P < .001), and severe exacerbation rate (rate ratio, 1.14; P < .001). When categorized, severe impairment in Dlco alone, FEV 1 alone, or both Dlco and FEV 1 were associated with significantly worse morbidity compared with the reference group (P < .05 for all outcomes). Conclusions Impairment in Dlco was associated with increased COPD symptoms, reduced exercise performance, and severe exacerbation risk even after accounting for spirometry and CT evidence of emphysema. These findings suggest that Dlco should be considered for inclusion in future multidimensional tools assessing COPD.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
DLCO is not a criterion for lung transplantation, although it can be considered in patients with severe symptoms accompanied by low DLCO or decreased exercise capacity.
“Diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) is not a criterion for lung transplantation, although it can be considered in patients with severe symptoms accompanied by low DLCO or decreased exercise capacity.”
From Indications for Lung Transplantation and Patient Selection (2022) · cites this paper as [43]
Cites
Miller, M. R., Hankinson, J., Brusasco, V., Burgos, F., Casaburi, R., Coates, A., Crapo, R., Enright, P., van der Grinten, C. P. M., Gustafsson, P., et al. (2005) · European Respiratory Journal · doi:10.1183/09031936.05.00034805 · Cited by 15,627 · see citing works
Self-citationVogelmeier, C. F., Criner, G. J., Martinez, F. J., Anzueto, A., Barnes, P. J., Bourbeau, J., Celli, B. R., Chen, R., Decramer, M., Fabbri, L. M., et al. (2017) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201701-0218pp · Cited by 3,187 · see citing works
Characterisation of COPD heterogeneity in the ECLIPSE cohort
the Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints (ECLIPSE) investigators, Agusti, A., Calverley, P. M., Celli, B., Coxson, H. O., Edwards, L. D., Lomas, D. A., MacNee, W., Miller, B. E., Rennard, S., et al. (2010) · Respiratory Research · doi:10.1186/1465-9921-11-122 · Cited by 1,157 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Leard, L. E., Holm, A. M., Valapour, M., Glanville, A. R., Attawar, S., Aversa, M., Campos, S. V., Christon, L. M., Cypel, M., Dellgren, G., et al. (2021) · The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation · doi:10.1016/j.healun.2021.07.005 · Cited by 821 · see citing works
“179,180 The patient’s perception of an unacceptably poor quality of life may also be a consideration, albeit not the principal driver for referral, given the significant symptomatic benefits that transplant offers this patient population even in the face of an uncertain survival benefit.”
BackgroundThe role of MIF in chronic lung diseases: looking beyond inflammation
Florez-Sampedro, L., Soto-Gamez, A., Poelarends, G. J., & Melgert, B. N. (2020) · American Journal of Physiology-Lung Cellular and Molecular Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajplung.00521.2019 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Indications for Lung Transplantation and Patient Selection
Son, J., & Shin, C. (2022) · Journal of Chest Surgery · doi:10.5090/jcs.22.057 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“Cases in which the patient’s condition worsens despite maximal treatment or the quality of life deteriorates significantly owing to symptoms may be considered for transplantation [43].”
Background
- Authors
- Balasubramanian, A., MacIntyre, N. R., Henderson, R. J., Jensen, R. L., Kinney, G., Stringer, W. W., Hersh, C. P., Bowler, R. P., Casaburi, R., Han, M. K., Porszasz, J., Barr, R. G., Make, B. J., Wise, R. A., & McCormack, M. C.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Duke University (US)
- University of Utah (US)
- Colorado School of Public Health (US)
- The Lundquist Institute (US)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- National Jewish Health (US)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Columbia University (US)
- Corresponding author
- McCormack, Meredith C.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Chest
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-12
- Volume
- 156
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1111-1119
- ISSN
- 0012-3692 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7242635
- OpenAlex
- W2963594894
- Cited by
- 100
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 8.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- CHEST Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- GlaxoSmithKline
- National Jewish Health
- Novartis (24/7)
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NCT00608764, T32 HL007534-36, U01 HL089856, U01 HL089897)
- MedImmune
- North Carolina GlaxoSmithKline Foundation
- Boehringer Ingelheim
- COPD Foundation
- Astellas Pharma US
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
- AstraZeneca
- Sunovion
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cystic Fibrosis Research Advances
- Keywords
- diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, FEV1, COPD exacerbations, exercise performance, quality of life, COPD symptoms, lung function impairment
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Carbon Monoxide, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Forced Expiratory Volume, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pulmonary Diffusing Capacity, Respiratory Function Tests, Spirometry, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review