Global survey of physician testing practices for nontuberculous mycobacteria

Michael R. Loebinger, Roald van der Laan, Marko Obradovic, Jakko van Ingen
ERJ Open Research 2023 9: 00737-2022; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00737-2022

Abstract

Background Certain patients are at greater risk of developing nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease (NTM-PD), including those with lung conditions such as bronchiectasis. Testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) in patients at risk is necessary to identify NTM-PD and start appropriate management. The aim of this survey was to evaluate current testing practices for NTM and identify testing triggers.

Methods Physicians (n=455) who see at least one patient with NTM-PD in a typical 12-month period and test for NTM as part of practice from Europe, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan participated in a 10-min anonymised survey on NTM testing practices.

Results Bronchiectasis, COPD and use of immunosuppressants were the factors most likely to prompt testing among physicians in this survey (90%, 64% and 64%, respectively), with radiological findings the most common reason leading to considering NTM testing in patients with bronchiectasis and COPD (62% and 74%, respectively). Macrolide monotherapy in patients with bronchiectasis and inhaled corticosteroid use in patients with COPD were not important triggers for testing (15% and 9% of physicians, respectively). Persistent cough and weight loss triggered testing in >75% of physicians. Testing triggers were markedly different for physicians in Japan, with cystic fibrosis prompting testing in fewer physicians compared with other regions.

Conclusions Testing for NTM is influenced by underlying disease, clinical symptoms or radiological changes, but clinical practice varies considerably. Adherence to guideline recommendations for NTM testing is limited in certain patient subgroups and varies across regions. Clear recommendations on NTM testing are needed.

Abstract

Testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria is influenced by underlying disease, symptoms and radiological changes. For some patients, such as those initiating macrolide therapy, guidelines are not being followed and clear testing recommendations are needed. https://bit.ly/3Km1l1X

Introduction

Nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease (NTM-PD) is a rare, difficult-to-treat lung condition that is associated with a substantial patient burden [1–4]. The prevalence of NTM-PD is increasing globally [5] and recent predictions estimate many patients are undiagnosed [6, 7]. NTM-PD is associated with significant mortality [8–11], therefore timely diagnosis is important. However, NTM-PD can be challenging to diagnose because of a low index of suspicion and symptoms that are nonspecific and overlap with those of coexisting lung conditions [12, 13].

Certain patient groups have been demonstrated to have an increased risk of NTM-PD, such as those with underlying lung conditions, including cystic fibrosis (CF), non-CF bronchiectasis and chronic COPD, as well as those treated with immunosuppressants and systemic or inhaled steroids [14, 15]. Other commonly associated factors include low body mass index and thoracic skeletal abnormalities [16, 17]. Testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) in patients at risk is important to identify NTM-PD early and start treatment in appropriate patients; early recognition, diagnosis and treatment may prevent disease progression [4, 18, 19].

A patient survey highlighted the need to raise awareness of NTM among all healthcare professionals, including primary care physicians, as well as the need for faster diagnosis and access to NTM-PD specialists [20]. A physician survey of perceived risk of NTM-PD in patients with bronchiectasis across Europe found physicians understand the risk of NTM-PD and associated morbidity in patients with bronchiectasis; however, most do not test for NTM-PD even in circumstances where guidelines recommend it [21]. The aim of the current survey was to evaluate current testing practices for NTM across geographies and identify testing triggers and adherence to current guideline recommendations.

Methods

Physicians from Europe (UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands), USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan were invited to participate in a 10-min anonymised survey on NTM testing practices via a secure online platform. Physicians invited to take part were recruited as part of the Sermo clinician networking platform (www.sermo.com) panel members and recruitment took place via e-mail. All panellists active in the past 365 days who were registered as practicing in the target specialties of respiratory medicine, pulmonary medicine, internal medicine or infectious diseases were invited to be screened on study eligibility. Inclusion criteria were set for the parameters of NTM caseload and testing; physicians were required to see at least one patient with NTM-PD in a typical 12-month period and requested or referred for NTM testing as part of their practice. Target sample sizes for each country were designed in consideration of 1) the estimated number of physicians seeing NTM within the target specialties and 2) specialty-specific response rates observed on prior surveys in the field of NTM. A breakdown of response rates observed in this study is presented in supplementary table S3.

The survey was conducted in the physician's native language. Physicians received an honorarium for completing the survey in line with current accepted standards. All registered panellist credentials were verified against bodies that maintain official registers of pulmonologists in each country. Sermo processes are in line with ISO 20252.

The survey instrument was developed in consultation with a range of stakeholders, including external experts (M.L. and J.v.I.) and Insmed BV (Utrecht, The Netherlands), and implemented by Porterhouse Insights (Reading, UK). Respondents were recruited by Porterhouse Insights. Informed consent was collected, in adherence with the British Healthcare Business Intelligence Association and Market Research Society and European Pharmaceutical Market Research Association guidelines [22, 23].

The survey was conducted between 6 August and 2 September 2021. The full survey questionnaire included five screening questions and 14 survey questions on NTM testing practice (supplementary tables S1 and S2). The survey data were analysed using contingency tables that were created using QPSMR version CL 64 2021.2c (www.qpsmr.org.uk). Descriptive statistics were employed looking at the subgroups and populations with the use of t-tests to highlight statistically significant differences.

Results

Survey respondent demographics

Overall, 455 physicians completed the survey across Europe (61% (n=276)), North America (23% (n=104)), Australasia (5% (n=25)) and Japan (11% (n=50)). The majority were in the specialty of pulmonology or respiratory medicine (63% (n=288)), with smaller numbers in internal medicine (11% (n=49)) and infectious diseases (25% (n=113)). A full breakdown of respondents’ countries and specialties is presented in table 1. Physicians’ caseloads varied, with 42% seeing >10 patients, 28% seeing 6–10 patients and 29% seeing ≤5 patients with NTM-PD in a typical 12-month period.

View this table:
TABLE 1

Survey respondent demographics

Patient profiles prompting NTM testing

Most regions were generally aligned regarding the patient profiles that prompted testing. Patients with bronchiectasis were the most frequently tested for NTM, with 90% of physicians globally considering testing patients with this condition (figure 1). For those who tested patients with bronchiectasis (n=409), testing was primarily considered following the results of radiological examination (62% (n=254)) or on presentation of specific clinical symptoms (such as weight loss or haemoptysis) (56% (n=230)), while few considered testing patients at initial presentation (24% (n=100)) (figure 2).

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1

Factors that prompt testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria infection. AUS/NZ: Australia/New Zealand; CF: cystic fibrosis; TB: tuberculosis; ICS: inhaled corticosteroids. *: p<0.05 versus at least one other region.

FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2

Reasons prompting testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) infection in patients with bronchiectasis. AUS/NZ: Australia/New Zealand; ICS: inhaled corticosteroids. *: p<0.05 versus at least one other region.

In contrast, macrolide use was rarely mentioned, with 24% of physicians overall considering testing for NTM in patients receiving long-term macrolide therapy (figure 1) and a similarly low number considered testing patients with bronchiectasis before initiating macrolide monotherapy (15% (n=61)) (figure 2). The number of physicians testing for NTM in patients with bronchiectasis using inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) was even lower (7% (n=28)).

COPD and use of immunosuppressants were considered important, prompting testing in 64% of physicians globally (figure 1). In physicians who specified testing for NTM in patients with COPD (n=293), almost three-quarters considered testing following the results of radiological examinations (74% (n=218)) or on presentation of specific clinical symptoms (73% (n=213)) (figure 3). Few physicians considered testing all adults with COPD (9% (n=27)). There was greater variability observed between countries for frequent exacerbations as a trigger for NTM testing in patients with COPD, with 23% and 78% of physicians in Japan and Canada, respectively, reporting this as a relevant trigger.

FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3

Reasons prompting testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria infection in patients with COPD. AUS/NZ: Australia/New Zealand; ICS: inhaled corticosteroids. *: p<0.05 versus at least one other region.

Of physicians who specified testing for NTM in patients on immunosuppressants (n=291), 66% (n=192) of them consider testing for NTM in certain patients using steroids including corticosteroids (figure 4), yet few tested patients with COPD who were receiving ICS (9% (n=27)) (figure 3). Few physicians considered receiving anticancer agents (19%) or anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors (10%) as important prompts to test for NTM.

FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4

Immunosuppressant therapies prompting testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria infection. AUS/NZ: Australia/New Zealand; mTOR: mechanistic target of rapamycin; TNF: tumour necrosis factor. *: p<0.05 versus at least one other region.

Physicians in Japan considered different patient profiles for NTM testing compared with other regions. More physicians in Japan considered testing for NTM in patients with asthma (38% versus 24% globally) or age (42% versus 24% globally) compared with other cohorts (figure 1). Additionally, only 20% of physicians in Japan considered testing in patients with CF.

In contrast, CF was an important prompt for testing in all other regions (53–70% of physicians), particularly in European countries (70%). In the physicians who specified testing for patients with CF (60% (n=274)), half (50% (n=137)) considered testing all adults with CF. Physicians in Canada and Australia/New Zealand were more likely to consider testing all adults with CF compared with other regions (71% and 73%, respectively). Physicians in the USA and Japan were more likely to consider testing patients following the results of radiological examinations (50% and 60%, respectively) than testing all adults with CF (43% and 40%, respectively).

Symptoms prompting NTM testing

Signs and symptoms that most commonly prompted NTM testing were persistent cough and weight loss, with >75% of physicians globally considering each of these symptoms as a trigger to test (figure 5). Assessing the correlations between primary symptoms and specific patient factors, such as underlying respiratory conditions, was not possible. Haemoptysis, increased or purulent sputum and fatigue were also frequently mentioned (71%, 70% and 66%, respectively), whereas physicians rarely considered testing for NTM important for patients with persistent reflux.

FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5

Clinical symptoms that prompt testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria infection. AUS/NZ: Australia/New Zealand. *: p<0.05 versus at least one other region.

There was marked variability in the symptom profiles frequently prompting testing for NTM across regions, with physicians in Japan reporting different symptom profiles compared with other countries (figure 5). Physicians with larger NTM-PD caseloads (>10 patients annually) were significantly more likely (p<0.05) to test a patient with increased or purulent sputum, fever, increased exacerbation frequency or worsening lung function compared with those with smaller caseloads (≤10 patients annually).

Risk factor combinations prompting NTM testing

The majority of physicians considered testing for NTM in patients presenting with a combination of symptoms and underlying disease, but generally underlying disease alone, with the exception of bronchiectasis, or medication alone rarely triggered NTM testing without the presence of clinical symptoms (figure 6). Combinations of symptoms without underlying disease or medication use were more likely to prompt testing for physicians in Japan compared with other regions. Respondents indicated they would test patients for NTM when a combination of symptoms or clinical conditions were present; on average five different risk factors were needed to prompt testing for NTM. Symptom profiles that included persistent cough with weight loss were the most frequently mentioned, with 62% of physicians mentioning this combination of symptoms in at least one of their patient profiles that would prompt testing for NTM. Physicians also frequently mentioned profiles including persistent cough with persistent fatigue (49% of physicians) as well as persistent cough with bronchiectasis (48%), followed by combinations containing weight loss with fatigue (47%) and persistent cough with sputum production (46%).

FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6

Combinations that prompt testing for nontuberculous mycobacteria infection. AUS/NZ: Australia/New Zealand. *: p<0.05 versus at least one other region.

NTM testing patterns

Upon worsening of clinical symptoms, most physicians repeated testing every 6 months. Physicians in Japan were more likely to not repeat microbiological testing compared with other regions (14% versus 3–5% of physicians, respectively) and perform radiological testing every 6 months (80% versus 54–67%, respectively). Physicians who saw >10 patients with NTM-PD per year were significantly more likely (p<0.05) to conduct microbiological testing every 6 months compared with those with ≤10 patients per year, but no differences were seen for radiological imaging between physicians managing different caseloads of NTM-PD patients.

Overall, mycobacterial sputum cultures were the tests most used to rule out NTM infection (91%). However, in Japan, high-resolution computed tomography scans and direct molecular tests were the more commonly used (76% and 74%, respectively), with mycobacterial sputum culture considered by 62% of physicians.

Reasons not to test for NTM were varied, with many physicians choosing not to test patients without specific symptoms suggesting NTM-PD. In the USA and Australia/New Zealand many physicians decide against testing for NTM because they believe their patient is too frail to receive treatment for NTM-PD (39% and 36%, respectively). Other reasons physicians cited for not testing for NTM included ones related to lack of sufficient infrastructure, e.g. lack of access to microbiological laboratories (22%), insufficient funding (12%) and lack of expert support (12%) in Europe, whereas 21% of physicians in the USA did not test because there was no satisfactory patient pathway to refer or manage patients after testing (figure 7).

FIGURE 7
FIGURE 7

Reasons physicians choose not to test for nontuberculous mycobacteria infection, beyond that of no clinical suspicion. AUS/NZ: Australia/New Zealand; NTM-PD: nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease. *: p<0.05 versus at least one other region.

Discussion

Results from this survey indicate a high threshold for NTM testing among physicians globally, but it is clear that certain symptoms, radiological changes and predisposing conditions are important drivers to test for NTM. Persistent cough and weight loss were key clinical symptoms prompting testing for respondents, suggesting that they are commonly testing patients with more advanced disease. The patients considered for testing most often were those with bronchiectasis followed by COPD, with radiological features specifically being the most common reason for NTM testing in these patients. However, despite growing evidence [14, 24, 25] and/or guideline recommendations, macrolide monotherapy in patients with bronchiectasis and ICS use in patients with COPD were not important triggers for testing in this survey.

There were marked differences in the symptom and disease profiles that prompted testing among physicians in Japan compared with other regions, particularly for CF, which was considered an important risk factor to prompt testing by only 20% of physicians in Japan compared with 60% globally. However, CF is rare in Asian populations and physicians in Japan are less likely to see these patients, potentially leading to CF being considered less relevant for testing for these physicians.

Guidelines on NTM testing for patients with predisposing conditions are limited to bronchiectasis and CF. Regional bronchiectasis guidelines, including the European Respiratory Society guidelines, recommend testing for NTM when NTM is suspected as the cause of bronchiectasis or at initial evaluation, in patients with radiological or clinical features of NTM-PD, or prior to initiating long-term antibiotic therapy such as macrolide monotherapy [26–32]; some guidelines also recommend regularly testing all patients with bronchiectasis, where possible [26, 29–31]. CF recommendations specify that cultures for NTM should be performed annually in spontaneously expectorating individuals with a stable course [33]. No guidelines or recommendations specifically address testing for NTM in patients with COPD.

Findings from this survey showed that 90% of physicians considered testing patients with bronchiectasis for NTM, most commonly following the results of a radiology examination or on presentation of specific clinical symptoms, in line with guideline recommendations. These findings support recent reports by Wagner et al. [21], who demonstrated in a European survey that 85% of physicians tested at least some of their patients with bronchiectasis. Data from the EMBARC registry also highlighted wide regional variation in testing frequency in the UK, ranging from 8.3% to 35.5% of patients with bronchiectasis [34]. In the current survey, 60% of physicians considered testing patients with CF and only 50% of these tested all adults with CF despite guideline recommendations. Patients with CF are often treated in specialised CF centres and therefore physicians who participated in the survey may not see these patients or only see them as part of shared care constructions, leading them to be less likely to consider these patients for NTM testing. It was notable that in this patient group in the USA and Japan testing was more likely to be considered after suspicions raised following radiology examinations. These results may suggest that radiological examinations in vulnerable patients are undertaken regularly in these countries.

Guideline recommendations are frequently not being followed with respect to which patients should be tested: in this survey 24% of physicians globally tested patients for NTM at initial presentation of bronchiectasis and very few physicians tested patients with bronchiectasis prior to receiving long-term macrolide monotherapy (15%). Results are similar to a survey of testing practice in patients with bronchiectasis in the Asia-Pacific region that noted that 21% of physicians performed acid-fast bacilli smear tests and cultures at the initial visit [35]. Findings from previous surveys also report low levels of testing in patients with bronchiectasis prior to initiating long-term macrolide therapy [21, 34]. Macrolides are the backbone of NTM-PD therapy and macrolide monotherapy in the presence of NTM infection is a risk factor for macrolide resistance [25, 36]; therefore, testing patients for NTM when considering use of macrolides should be undertaken, in line with guidelines, to retain possible future treatment options.

The decision to test for NTM should consider the overall patient profile and is usually based on a combination of factors, rather than individual clinical symptoms or patient types. Patients receiving immunosuppressants who also present with respiratory symptoms or have predisposing conditions may be at risk of NTM-PD and testing is warranted. For example, it is well established that anti-TNF-α therapies are associated with an increased risk for NTM disease including NTM-PD and experts advise a low threshold to test for NTM in these patients [37, 38]. In this survey, physicians were most likely to consider testing for NTM in patients presenting with combinations of symptoms that included persistent cough and weight loss, suggesting many physicians look for at least one of these symptoms before testing or they are the most consistently presented symptoms in patients. Physicians generally did not consider testing for NTM in patients with underlying disease or using certain medications without the presence of clinical symptoms suggestive of NTM-PD and physicians considered clinical symptoms in combination with underlying disease to be the most important prompt for testing. It is likely that certain symptoms prompt testing primarily in patients with other indicators of clinical suspicion for NTM-PD, e.g. underlying bronchiectasis. Survey data cannot explore in detail correlations between multiple symptoms prompting clinical suspicion and in which patients.

Experts who see many patients with NTM-PD are more likely to have their clinical suspicion of NTM infection raised following a broad range of, often, nonspecific or diffuse symptoms, with the most common suspicious symptoms including persistent cough, haemoptysis, night sweats, weight loss, persistent fatigue, increased or purulent sputum, fever and an increase in exacerbation frequency of their underlying condition. Use of ICS in patients with COPD, anti-TNF-α therapies and persistent reflux have been linked to an increased risk for NTM-PD and are also considered important prompts to test by experts [14, 15, 39]. These factors were considered less important by physicians in the survey, suggesting clear disparities between physician practice and expert opinion.

These survey data highlight different approaches of physicians to NTM testing, influenced by factors such as access to mycobacteriological laboratories or in some cases because respondents believed testing was not useful in patients they deemed too frail to complete the challenging and lengthy treatment regimens required to treat NTM-PD appropriately. Tolerable, shorter and more effective treatments are urgently needed to lower the threshold to treat. In addition, supportive therapies aimed at airway clearance may provide benefit for patients deemed too frail for antibiotic therapies, providing an argument to test and diagnose even in those too frail to treat [40]. Importantly, some of the testing approaches identified in this survey suggest that some patient groups may be missing out on appropriate testing.

Limitations inherent to surveys and their design, with a risk of selection and perception bias in the questionnaire, apply to this research. The combination of symptoms and risk factors that lead physicians to test a particular patient for NTM can be considered as subjective and can be difficult to capture in surveys in general. In addition, survey participation was limited to physicians who see at least one patient with NTM per year and who test for NTM as part of clinical practice. It would be important to survey NTM testing practices in physicians who do not manage patients with NTM-PD, as it is likely that this group does not test appropriately, and may even further highlight the disparities in testing practices between physicians and experts who frequently see patients with NTM-PD.

In conclusion, testing for NTM is influenced by underlying disease and the presence of clinical symptoms or radiological changes. However, clinical practice varies considerably across geographies and is not aligned with existing recommendations for NTM testing in certain patient subgroups. The symptoms that often trigger testing for NTM are those seen in later-stage NTM-PD, which can potentially lead to late diagnoses of NTM-PD with a negative impact on patient outcomes. Including NTM-PD in other respiratory disease guidelines, such as COPD, with clear recommendations on NTM testing, monitoring and management in these patient groups is warranted.

Supplementary material

Supplementary Material

Please note: supplementary material is not edited by the Editorial Office, and is uploaded as it has been supplied by the author.

Supplementary material 00737-2022.SUPPLEMENT

Acknowledgements

The survey was developed and conducted by Porterhouse Insights (Reading, UK). Medical writing support was provided by Highfield (Oxford, UK), funded by Insmed BV (Utrecht, The Netherlands).

Footnotes

  • Provenance: Submitted article, peer reviewed.

  • Author contributions: All authors were involved in the development of the survey questionnaire. All authors critically appraised the manuscript and reviewed and approved the final draft.

  • Conflict of interest: M.R. Loebinger reports receiving honoraria from Insmed, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Grifols, Savara, Armata, Parion, Zambon, 30T, Electromed and AN2 Therapeutics. R. van der Laan is an employee of Insmed BV. M. Obradovic is an employee of Insmed Germany GmbH. J. van Ingen reports honoraria for speaking or advisory boards from Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Insmed, Spero Therapeutics, Paratek and AN2 Therapeutics.

  • Support statement: The survey was funded by Insmed BV (Utrecht, The Netherlands). Funding information for this article has been deposited with the Crossref Funder Registry.

  • Received December 22, 2022.
  • Accepted February 14, 2023.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence 4.0.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Asakura T,
    2. Ishii M,
    3. Ishii K, et al.
    Health-related QOL of elderly patients with pulmonary M. avium complex disease in a university hospital. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2018; 22: 695–703. doi:10.5588/ijtld.17.0433
    OpenUrl
    1. Mehta M,
    2. Marras TK
    . Impaired health-related quality of life in pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial disease. Respir Med 2011; 105: 1718–1725. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2011.08.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Park HY,
    2. Jeong BH,
    3. Chon HR, et al.
    Lung function decline according to clinical course in nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease. Chest 2016; 150: 1222–1232. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2016.06.005
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. ↵
    1. Park TY,
    2. Chong S,
    3. Jung JW, et al.
    Natural course of the nodular bronchiectatic form of Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease: long-term radiologic change without treatment. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0185774. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0185774
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. van Ingen J,
    2. Obradovic M,
    3. Hassan M, et al.
    Nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease caused by Mycobacterium avium complex – disease burden, unmet needs, and advances in treatment developments. Expert Rev Respir Med 2021; 15: 1387–1401. doi:10.1080/17476348.2021.1987891
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Doyle OM,
    2. van der Laan R,
    3. Obradovic M, et al.
    Identification of potentially undiagnosed patients with nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease using machine learning applied to primary care data in the UK. Eur Respir J 2020; 56: 2000045. doi:10.1183/13993003.00045-2020
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Ringshausen FC,
    2. Ewen R,
    3. Multmeier J, et al.
    Predictive modeling of nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease epidemiology using German health claims data. Int J Infect Dis 2021; 104: 398–406. doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2021.01.003
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Diel R,
    2. Lipman M,
    3. Hoefsloot W
    . High mortality in patients with Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease: a systematic review. BMC Infect Dis 2018; 18: 206. doi:10.1186/s12879-018-3113-x
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Diel R,
    2. Ringshausen F,
    3. Richter E, et al.
    Microbiological and clinical outcomes of treating non-Mycobacterium avium complex nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest 2017; 152: 120–142. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2017.04.166
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Fleshner M,
    2. Olivier KN,
    3. Shaw PA, et al.
    Mortality among patients with pulmonary non-tuberculous mycobacteria disease. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2016; 20: 582–587. doi:10.5588/ijtld.15.0807
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. ↵
    1. Marras TK,
    2. Vinnard C,
    3. Zhang Q, et al.
    Relative risk of all-cause mortality in patients with nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease in a US managed care population. Respir Med 2018; 145: 80–88. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2018.10.022
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Griffith DE,
    2. Aksamit T,
    3. Brown-Elliott BA, et al.
    An official ATS/IDSA statement: diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nontuberculous mycobacterial diseases. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007; 175: 367–416. doi:10.1164/rccm.200604-571ST
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Ryu YJ,
    2. Koh WJ,
    3. Daley CL
    . Diagnosis and treatment of nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease: clinicians’ perspectives. Tuberc Respir Dis 2016; 79: 74–84. doi:10.4046/trd.2016.79.2.74
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Andrejak C,
    2. Nielsen R,
    3. Thomsen VO, et al.
    Chronic respiratory disease, inhaled corticosteroids and risk of non-tuberculous mycobacteriosis. Thorax 2013; 68: 256–262. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2012-201772
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Prevots DR,
    2. Marras TK
    . Epidemiology of human pulmonary infection with nontuberculous mycobacteria: a review. Clin Chest Med 2015; 36: 13–34. doi:10.1016/j.ccm.2014.10.002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Axson EL,
    2. Bual N,
    3. Bloom CI, et al.
    Risk factors and secondary care utilisation in a primary care population with non-tuberculous mycobacterial disease in the UK. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2019; 38: 117–124. doi:10.1007/s10096-018-3402-8
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Dirac MA,
    2. Horan KL,
    3. Doody DR, et al.
    Environment or host? A case-control study of risk factors for Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2012; 186: 684–691. doi:10.1164/rccm.201205-0825OC
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Eikani MS,
    2. Nugent M,
    3. Poursina A, et al.
    Clinical course and significance of nontuberculous mycobacteria and its subtypes in cystic fibrosis. BMC Infect Dis 2018; 18: 311. doi:10.1186/s12879-018-3200-z
    OpenUrl
  19. ↵
    1. Wagner D,
    2. van Ingen J,
    3. Adjemian J, et al.
    Annual prevalence and treatment estimates of nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease in Europe: a NTM-NET collaborative study. Eur Respir J 2014; 44: Suppl. 58, P1067.
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    1. Shteinberg M,
    2. Boyd J,
    3. Aliberti S, et al.
    What is important for people with nontuberculous mycobacterial disease? An EMBARC-ELF patient survey. ERJ Open Res 2021; 7: 00807-2020. doi:10.1183/23120541.00807-2020
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. Wagner D,
    2. van Ingen J,
    3. van der Laan R, et al.
    Non-tuberculous mycobacterial lung disease in patients with bronchiectasis: perceived risk, severity and guideline adherence in a European physician survey. BMJ Open Respir Res 2020; 7: e000498. doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2019-000498
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. British Healthcare Business Intelligence Association
    . Legal and ethical guidelines for healthcare market research. 2022. www.bhbia.org.uk/guidelines-and-legislation/legal-and-ethical-guidelines Date last accessed: 15 August 2022.
  23. ↵
    Market Research Society and the European Pharmaceutical Market Research Association. Code of conduct 2021. 2021. Available from: www.ephmra.org/
  24. ↵
    1. Brode SK,
    2. Campitelli MA,
    3. Kwong JC, et al.
    The risk of mycobacterial infections associated with inhaled corticosteroid use. Eur Respir J 2017; 50: 1700037. doi:10.1183/13993003.00037-2017
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    1. Kwon YS,
    2. Daley CL,
    3. Koh WJ
    . Managing antibiotic resistance in nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease: challenges and new approaches. Expert Rev Respir Med 2019; 13: 851–861. doi:10.1080/17476348.2019.1638765
    OpenUrl
  26. ↵
    1. Hill AT,
    2. Sullivan AL,
    3. Chalmers JD, et al.
    British Thoracic Society guideline for bronchiectasis in adults. Thorax 2019; 74: Suppl. 1, 1–69. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2018-212463
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    1. Polverino E,
    2. Goeminne PC,
    3. McDonnell MJ, et al.
    European Respiratory Society guidelines for the management of adult bronchiectasis. Eur Respir J 2017; 50: 1700629. doi:10.1183/13993003.00629-2017
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Smith D,
    2. Du Rand I,
    3. Addy CL, et al.
    British Thoracic Society guideline for the use of long-term macrolides in adults with respiratory disease. Thorax 2020; 75: 370–404. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2019-213929
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    1. Chang AB,
    2. Bell SC,
    3. Torzillo PJ, et al.
    Chronic suppurative lung disease and bronchiectasis in children and adults in Australia and New Zealand: Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand guidelines. Med J Aust 2015; 202: 21–23. doi:10.5694/mja14.00287
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Martínez-García MÁ,
    2. Máiz L,
    3. Olveira C, et al.
    Spanish guidelines on treatment of bronchiectasis in adults. Arch Bronconeumol 2018; 54: 88–98. doi:10.1016/j.arbr.2017.07.014
    OpenUrl
  31. ↵
    1. Pereira MC,
    2. Athanazio RA,
    3. Dalcin PTR, et al.
    Brazilian consensus on non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis. J Bras Pneumol 2019: 45: e20190122. doi:10.1590/1806-3713/e20190122
    OpenUrl
  32. ↵
    1. Al-Jahdali H,
    2. Alshimemeri A,
    3. Mobeireek A, et al.
    The Saudi Thoracic Society guidelines for diagnosis and management of noncystic fibrosis bronchiectasis. Ann Thorac Med 2017: 12: 135–161. doi:10.4103/atm.ATM_171_17
    OpenUrl
  33. ↵
    1. Floto RA,
    2. Olivier KN,
    3. Saiman L, et al.
    US Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and European Cystic Fibrosis Society consensus recommendations for the management of non-tuberculous mycobacteria in individuals with cystic fibrosis: executive summary. Thorax 2016; 71: 88–90. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207983
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    1. Finch S,
    2. van der Laan R,
    3. Crichton M, et al.
    M8 Non-tuberculous mycobacteria testing in bronchiectasis in the UK: data from the EMBARC registry. Thorax 2019; 74: Suppl. 2, A238–A239. doi:10.1136/thorax-2019-BTSabstracts2019.416
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    1. Kim HC,
    2. Suzuki M,
    3. Lim HF, et al.
    Survey of the management of patients with bronchiectasis: a pilot investigation in Asian populations. Korean J Intern Med 2021; 36: 1402–1409. doi:10.3904/kjim.2020.223
    OpenUrl
  36. ↵
    1. Daley CL,
    2. Iaccarino JM,
    3. Lange C, et al.
    Treatment of nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease: an official ATS/ERS/ESCMID/IDSA clinical practice guideline. Eur Respir J 2020; 56: 2000535. doi:10.1183/13993003.00535-2020
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. ↵
    1. van Ingen J,
    2. Boeree MJ,
    3. Dekhuijzen PN, et al.
    Mycobacterial disease in patients with rheumatic disease. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol 2008; 4: 649–656. doi:10.1038/ncprheum0949
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Winthrop KL,
    2. Yamashita S,
    3. Beekmann SE, et al.
    Mycobacterial and other serious infections in patients receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor and other newly approved biologic therapies: case finding through the Emerging Infections Network. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46: 1738–1740. doi:10.1086/587989
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Winthrop KL,
    2. Baxter R,
    3. Liu L, et al.
    Mycobacterial diseases and antitumour necrosis factor therapy in USA. Ann Rheum Dis 2013; 72: 37–42. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-200690
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. ↵
    1. Huiberts A,
    2. Zweijpfenning SMH,
    3. Pennings LJ, et al.
    Outcomes of hypertonic saline inhalation as a treatment modality in nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease. Eur Respir J 2019; 54: 1802143. doi:10.1183/13993003.02143-2018
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
Back to top
Email
Print
Citation Tools
Global survey of physician testing practices for nontuberculous mycobacteria
Michael R. Loebinger, Roald van der Laan, Marko Obradovic, Jakko van Ingen
ERJ Open Research May 2023, 9 (3) 00737-2022; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00737-2022
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

Subjects