Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
CONTEXT: Familial idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (F-IIP) describes the unexplained occurrence of diffuse parenchymal lung disease in related individuals. Prevailing wisdom suggests that the histopathology of F-IIP is indistinguishable from that of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, namely, usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP). OBJECTIVE: To define the histopathology of F-IIP in lung tissue samples. DESIGN: Tissue sections from 30 patients with F-IIP, enrolled in a national research program, were evaluated by 3 pulmonary pathologists using 15 predefined histopathologic features. Each feature was recorded independently before a final diagnosis was chosen from a limited list dichotomized between UIP or "not UIP." These 2 groups were then compared to survival. RESULTS: The consensus diagnosis for the F-IIP cohort was an unclassifiable parenchymal fibrosis (60%), with a high incidence of histopathologic honeycombing, fibroblast foci, and smooth muscle in fibrosis. Usual interstitial pneumonia, strictly defined, was identified in less than half of the F-IIP cases (range, 23%-50%). Interobserver agreement was fair (κ = 0.37) for 2 observers for the overall diagnosis of UIP. Findings unexpected in UIP were prevalent. The survival for the entire F-IIP cohort was poor, with an estimated mortality of 93% and a median age at death of 60.9 years. Subjects with UIP had a shorter survival and younger age at death. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary fibrosis was the dominant histopathology identified in our patients, but diagnostic features of UIP were seen in less than 50% of the samples. Overall survival was poor, with mortality accelerated apparently by the presence of a UIP pattern of disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leslie et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: