Austin Health

Title
Bronchodilator reversibility as a diagnostic test for adult asthma: findings from the population-based Tasmanian Longitudinal Health Study.
Publication Date
2021-02-08
Author(s)
Tan, Daniel J
Lodge, Caroline J
Lowe, Adrian J
Bui, Dinh S
Bowatte, Gayan
Johns, David P
Hamilton, Garun S
Thomas, Paul S
Abramson, Michael J
Walters, E Haydn
Perret, Jennifer L
Dharmage, Shyamali C
Type of document
Journal Article
OrcId
0000-0002-9954-0538
0000-0001-7034-0615
DOI
10.1183/23120541.00042-2020
Abstract
Bronchodilator reversibility (BDR) is often used as a diagnostic test for adult asthma. However, there has been limited assessment of its diagnostic utility. We aimed to determine the discriminatory accuracy of common BDR cut-offs in the context of current asthma and asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) in a middle-aged community sample. The Tasmanian Longitudinal Health Study is a population-based cohort first studied in 1968 (n=8583). In 2012, participants completed respiratory questionnaires and spirometry (n=3609; mean age 53 years). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were fitted for current asthma and ACO using continuous BDR measurements. Diagnostic parameters were calculated for different categorical cut-offs. Area under the ROC curve (AUC) was highest when BDR was expressed as change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) as a percentage of initial FEV1, as compared with predicted FEV1. The corresponding AUC was 59% (95% CI 54-64%) for current asthma and 87% (95% CI 81-93%) for ACO. Of the categorical cut-offs examined, the European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society threshold (≥12% from baseline and ≥200 mL) was assessed as providing the best balance between positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-, respectively), with corresponding sensitivities and specificities of 9% and 97%, respectively, for current asthma (LR+ 3.26, LR- 0.93), and 47% and 97%, respectively, for ACO (LR+ 16.05, LR- 0.55). With a threshold of ≥12% and ≥200 mL from baseline, a positive BDR test provided a clinically meaningful change in the post-test probability of disease, whereas a negative test did not. BDR was more useful as a diagnostic test in those with co-existent post-bronchodilator airflow obstruction (ACO).
Link
Citation
ERJ open research 2021; 7(1): 00042-2020
Jornal Title
ERJ open research
ISSN
2312-0541

Files:

NameSizeformatDescriptionLink