PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 8, 2026Journal of Clinical Medicine3 citationsOpen Access

Determinants and Phenotypes of Poorly Controlled COPD Using the RADAR Score: A Cohort in Real-World Primary Care

DMDíaz Rubio MSESoha EsmailiJHJuan Luis Rodríguez Hermosa

Key Points

  • The study aims to determine the frequency and independent determinants of poorly controlled COPD and to characterize the patient population.
  • Conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional analysis of 988 patients with COPD.
  • Used the RADAR score to classify clinical control.
  • Applied multivariable logistic regression and machine learning for determinant analysis.
  • Performed k-medoids cluster analysis on the poorly controlled subgroup.
  • 45.7% of participants exhibited poor clinical control.
  • The strongest independent determinants included exacerbator phenotypes and modifiable factors like smoking and inhaler burden.
  • Agreement between physician assessments and RADAR scores was low, indicating a clinician perception gap.
  • Identified five distinct clinical phenotypes in the poorly controlled cohort.

Abstract

Background: Poor clinical control in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is prevalent, yet the interplay of disease severity, modifiable factors, and clinician perception remains poorly understood. This study aimed to determine the frequency of poor control, identify its independent determinants, and characterize the heterogeneity of the poorly controlled population receiving maintenance inhaled therapy with various devices in primary care. Methods: In a multicenter, cross-sectional analysis of 988 patients from the Study SIMPLIFY, clinical control of COPD was classified using the objective RADAR score. We used multivariable logistic regression and Machine Learning (Random Forest with SHAP analysis) to identify determinants of poor control (RADAR ≥ 4) and k-medoids cluster analysis to characterize the poorly controlled subgroup (n = 452). Results: Nearly half the cohort (45.7%, n = 452) had poor clinical control. Agreement between physician-assessed control (five categories) and RADAR classification was 49.3%, with overestimation in 34.0% and underestimation in 16.7% of cases (Cohen’s κ = −0.081; weighted κ = −0.037). The strongest independent determinants were the exacerbator phenotypes (eosinophilic aOR 6.85; non-eosinophilic aOR 4.91). Key modifiable factors included active smoking (aOR 1.92), lower TAI-12 adherence score (per point; aOR 0.96), high dosing frequency (≥4 inhalations/day; aOR 1.54) and high inhaler burden (≥3 devices; aOR 1.84). Machine learning analysis identified clinical phenotype and adherence behavior as the top two scale-independent predictors of poor control. Cluster analysis of the poorly controlled group revealed five reproducible and clinically meaningful phenotypes (C0–C4), primarily separated by treatment complexity, comorbidities, and adherence. Conclusions: Poor clinical control is common and critically under-recognized in primary care patients with COPD on maintenance inhaled therapy. This is driven by a profound clinician perception gap and a failure to address key modifiable determinants, such as high dosing frequency, regimen complexity, and poor adherence, which likely drives therapeutic inertia. Our findings underscore the need to integrate objective tools to unmask poor control and highlight the importance of treatment simplification. The identification of distinct clinical phenotypes provides a roadmap toward a more personalized, evidence-based standard of care.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

M et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698827670fc35cd7a88461d0https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15031283
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper