Unmet needs in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis-insights from patient chart review in five European countries

Toby M. Maher*, Maria Molina-Molina, Anne Marie Russell, Francesco Bonella, Stéphane Jouneau, Elena Ripamonti, Judit Axmann, Carlo Vancheri

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Two antifibrotic drugs, pirfenidone and nintedanib, are approved by the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). In this analysis, treatment patterns of European patients with IPF were investigated to understand antifibrotic prescribing and identify unmet needs in IPF treatment practice. Methods: Between February and March 2016, respiratory physicians from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK participated in an online questionnaire designed to collect information on IPF treatment patterns in patients under their care. Patients were categorized as treated (received approved antifibrotics) or untreated (did not receive approved antifibrotics, but may have received other unapproved therapies). Classification of IPF diagnosis (confirmed/suspected) and severity ('mild'/'moderate'/'severe') for each patient was based on the individual physician's report. Patients' perspectives were not recorded in this study. Results: In total, 290 physicians responded to the questionnaire. Overall, 54% of patients with IPF did not receive treatment with an approved antifibrotic. More patients had a confirmed IPF diagnosis in the treated (84%) versus the untreated (51%) population. Of patients with a confirmed diagnosis, 40% did not receive treatment. The treated population was younger than the untreated population (67 vs 70 years, respectively; p ≤ 0.01), with more frequent multidisciplinary team evaluation (83% vs 57%, respectively; p ≤ 0.01). A higher proportion of untreated patients had forced vital capacity > 80% at diagnosis versus treated patients. Of patients with 'mild' IPF, 71% did not receive an approved antifibrotic versus 41% and 60% of patients with 'moderate' and 'severe' IPF, respectively. Conclusions: Despite the availability of antifibrotic therapies, many European patients with confirmed IPF do not receive approved antifibrotic treatment. Importantly, there appears to be a reluctance to treat patients with 'mild' or 'stable' disease, and instead adopt a 'watch and wait' approach. More education is required to address diagnostic uncertainty, poor understanding of IPF and its treatments, and issues of treatment access. There is a need to increase physician awareness of the benefits associated with antifibrotic treatment across the spectrum of IPF severity.

Original languageEnglish
Article number124
JournalBMC Pulmonary Medicine
Volume17
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15 Sept 2017

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This study was sponsored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank the staff at Elma Research for their support with data analysis. Medical writing support was provided by Catherine Stanton on behalf of Complete Medical Communications Ltd., funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The Author(s).

Keywords

  • Antifibrotics
  • Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
  • Questionnaire
  • Treatment patterns
  • Unmet needs

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Unmet needs in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis-insights from patient chart review in five European countries'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this