Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) assessment test scores corresponding to modified Medical Research Council grades among COPD patients.
10.3904/kjim.2015.30.5.629
- Author:
Chang Hoon LEE
1
;
Jinwoo LEE
;
Young Sik PARK
;
Sang Min LEE
;
Jae Joon YIM
;
Young Whan KIM
;
Sung Koo HAN
;
Chul Gyu YOO
Author Information
1. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. cgyoo@snu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Evaluation Studies ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive;
Symptoms;
Classification;
COPD assessment test;
Modified Medical Round Council
- MeSH:
Aged;
Algorithms;
Area Under Curve;
*Decision Support Techniques;
Decision Trees;
Female;
Humans;
Lung/*physiopathology;
Male;
Middle Aged;
Predictive Value of Tests;
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/classification/*diagnosis/physiopathology;
ROC Curve;
Regression Analysis;
Reproducibility of Results;
Republic of Korea;
Retrospective Studies;
Risk Factors;
Severity of Illness Index
- From:The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine
2015;30(5):629-637
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND/AIMS: In assigning patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to subgroups according to the updated guidelines of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease, discrepancies have been noted between the COPD assessment test (CAT) criteria and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) criteria. We investigated the determinants of symptom and risk groups and sought to identify a better CAT criterion. METHODS: This retrospective study included COPD patients seen between June 20, 2012, and December 5, 2012. The CAT score that can accurately predict an mMRC grade > or = 2 versus < 2 was evaluated by comparing the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) and by classification and regression tree (CART) analysis. RESULTS: Among 428 COPD patients, the percentages of patients classif ied into subgroups A, B, C, and D were 24.5%, 47.2%, 4.2%, and 24.1% based on CAT criteria and 49.3%, 22.4%, 8.9%, and 19.4% based on mMRC criteria, respectively. More than 90% of the patients who met the mMRC criteria for the 'more symptoms group' also met the CAT criteria. AUROC and CART analyses suggested that a CAT score > or = 15 predicted an mMRC grade > or = 2 more accurately than the current CAT score criterion. During follow-up, patients with CAT scores of 10 to 14 did not have a different risk of exacerbation versus those with CAT scores < 10, but they did have a lower exacerbation risk compared to those with CAT scores of 15 to 19. CONCLUSIONS: A CAT score > or = 15 is a better indicator for the 'more symptoms group' in the management of COPD patients.
