
Why Is Europe Neglecting Chronic Respiratory Disease?
The magnitude of chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) across Europe has been overlooked, leading to under- and misdiagnosis, poor management, and inadequate funding, according to a new report.
Published by the World Health Organization (WHO) Europe and the European Respiratory Society, the report found that 81.7 million people in the region are living with a CRD — including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, and other lung diseases — and 6.8 million are newly diagnosed each year.
CRDs are the sixth leading cause of death in the WHO European region, with almost 400,000 dying from a CRD every year, nearly 80% of which are caused by COPD. However, most of these deaths are driven by preventable risk factors, primarily tobacco use and indoor and outdoor air pollution. The region has one of the highest rates of tobacco use, with one fourth of its adults being smokers, and more than 90% breathing air that is polluted with dangerous levels of particulate matter.
Answering the Whys
So why are CRDs so vastly underdiagnosed in Europe? Why do healthcare professionals not have the skills and expertise to identify them, as stated in the report? And what resources are required to bridge this gap?
On a policy level, the report noted an important paradox: Earlier progress led to a decline in CRD mortality, but this consequently led to reduced research funding and weakened surveillance. Without understanding the true burden of disease, it is difficult to advocate for increased policy focus and additional funding.
'Unfortunately, due to complexity with their definitions and absence of unanimously agreed targets, CRD surveillance and monitoring systems are not well designed,' the report said. 'Determining the real magnitude of the CRD burden is fundamental to identifying unmet needs at population level.'
'There has been a reduction in investment for CRD research compared with other noncommunicable diseases, where epidemiological studies have defined their global burden and priority actions; there are only a handful of population-based studies on CRDs,' the report continued.
Numerous health system and health worker challenges prevent the timely and correct diagnosis of CRDs. These include overlapping symptoms with other respiratory conditions and frequent comorbidities; limited healthcare provider knowledge and skills, especially at the primary healthcare level; inadequate access to diagnostic tools; lack of respiratory health specialists; and lack of awareness among patients, all of which can contribute to under- and misdiagnosis and thus delays in accessing treatment.
Respiratory Diseases Not so Glamorous
Philip Bardin, FRACP, PhD, professor and director of Lung and Sleep Medicine at Monash University and Medical Centre, Melbourne, Australia, and an international authority in the field of asthma and COPD, told Medscape Medical News that the impact of CRDs in the community has long been underappreciated.
Philip Bardin, FRACP, PhD
'We compete in the health space with other chronic diseases that use shock and awe tactics such as: 'You will have a stroke, a heart attack, or your foot will fall off' to gain public attention and funding,' he said. 'Historically, [there has been] poor advocacy by craft groups.'
Peter Burney, MD, professor of respiratory epidemiology and public health at the National Heart and Lung Institute at Imperial College London and honorary consultant physician at Royal Brompton Hospital, London, England, echoed Bardin's thoughts.
Peter Burney, MD
'Respiratory diseases are not glamourous; there is little sympathy for the old and the poor, and even less if they have been smokers. Asthma research has always been better funded with publicity that focuses on childhood [exposure to] smoking. Governments ought to be spurred on by the high costs of COPD in [terms of] direct costs of hospitalization.'
He cited a 2015 study published in the journal Chest that reviewed population-based prevalence studies that measured lung function and looked for undiagnosed COPD.
Undiagnosed COPD was high in almost all locations studied, he said.
'London (UK) had a high prevalence of disease, but approximately 80% [of detected COPD cases were] undiagnosed. The why is complicated,' he said. 'Firstly, COPD is a very recent invention, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease may mean more to average Americans than others. We used to call it bronchitis or chronic obstructive bronchitis.'
The Primary Care Challenge
With a shortage of respiratory specialists, some countries are expanding the role of primary healthcare to include the identification of CRDs, joining many other countries that have for decades put primary providers on the front line of respiratory medicine.
But while spirometry is one of the essential tools for diagnosing and monitoring CRDs, it remains limited as it requires well-trained staff, reliable equipment, and standardized procedures.
'Spirometry is not commonly done in general practice, and it was more or less stopped during COVID. It is difficult to do well, and quality assurance is a problem,' Burney said. 'If a practitioner is not using skills learned in medical school and in early training, the skill in interpreting spirometry results soon atrophies. In addition, primary care is feeling a bit put upon, and it is difficult in these circumstances to launch a whole new initiative.'
Promise in Education
Expanding education and using innovative technology appear to hold some promise in overcoming such challenges.
The report cited Spain, which has a new e-learning program, Spirometry Simplified, for primary healthcare providers to expand their knowledge. Also, Italy and Spain are testing tele-spirometry. Here, a technician remotely controls from within a hospital a computer with spirometer software that is connected to a primary care patient. The aim is to help overcome the issue of poor-quality spirometry use in primary care.
'Solutions need to come via patient participation and teamwork by doctors, nurses, and others to improve care. Waiting for governments and bureaucrats to solve problems will take us nowhere,' Bardin said. 'Doing better what we've always done will get us what we've always had.'
Bardin and Burney reported having no relevant financial relationships.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Medscape
31 minutes ago
- Medscape
Integrating CAR T and Bispecific Antibodies in MM Treatment
MILAN — The treatment landscape for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has shifted dramatically with the emergence of immunotherapies such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies and bispecific antibodies (bsAbs). These novel approaches have delivered unprecedented outcomes in heavily pretreated patients. Yet determining the optimal treatment strategy remains a clinical challenge. Here at the 2025 European Hematology Association (EHA) Annual Meeting in Milan, Italy, leading experts weighed the strengths and limitations of both approaches, emphasizing that it is not a contest of superiority but a question of sequence and patient selection. Bispecific Antibodies: Off-the-Shelf Convenience With Strong Responses BsAbs work by redirecting T cells toward myeloma cells, binding simultaneously to a tumor antigen and CD3. In his presentation, Philippe Moreau, MD, head of the hematology department at the University Hospital of Nantes, France, reviewed the four agents approved in Europe: teclistamab, elranatamab, and linvoseltamab, which target beta cell maturation antigen (BCMA); and talquetamab, which targets G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D (GPRC5D). These agents deliver overall response rates (ORRs) of 60%-70% in heavily pretreated patients, with median progression-free survival (PFS) of 12-18 months and overall survival (OS) of 24-30 months. Talquetamab in particular induces rapid responses within 1 month but is associated with unique toxicities — such as skin reactions, dysgeusia, and mucosal effects — related to GPRC5D expression in nonhematopoietic tissues like skin. BsAbs offer immediate treatment without the delays associated with CAR T manufacturing. They are also viable for frail patients and more broadly accessible outside of specialized centers. Toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome and infections, are generally manageable with step-up dosing and prophylactic tocilizumab. However, resistance remains a main concern. Roughly one third of patients — particularly those with high-risk cytogenetics, International Staging System stage III disease, or extramedullary disease — exhibit primary resistance. CAR T-Cell Therapy: Durable Outcomes With Earlier Use CAR T-cell therapies have redefined expectations in RRMM, particularly with ciltacabtagene autoleucel, which has achieved a median PFS of 35 months and a median OS approaching 61 months in heavily pretreated populations. Notably, recent data show that one third of patients remain progression-free at 5 years: an unprecedented milestone. 'Phase 3 trials now show improved PFS, OS, and quality of life compared to standard-of-care regimens,' said Paula Rodriguez-Otero, MD, medical coordinator of the Central Unit for Clinical Trials at the University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. However, CAR T therapy faces logistical hurdles, including manufacturing delays and the need for specialized infrastructure. High-risk patients with rapid progression or poor bridging therapy responses may still experience suboptimal results, but these challenges are mitigated when CAR T therapy is used earlier in the disease course, before T-cell exhaustion occurs. It's Not One or the Other Both speakers agreed that the future of MM treatment is not about choosing between CAR T and bsAbs but about defining the optimal sequence and integrating both modalities based on patient needs and disease features. BsAbs offer fast, outpatient-ready options for frail or rapidly progressing patients. CAR T therapies, though more complex, offer long remissions and potential treatment-free intervals, especially when used early. Still, Moreau cautioned, many questions remain. What is the best treatment sequence? Should clinicians switch targets — for example from BCMA to GPRC5D — or stick with the same? How should resistance mechanisms, such as antigen loss, be tackled? Can we move toward fixed-duration therapy to reduce costs? Scientific progress must also account for patient priorities. As Solène Clavreul, PhD, noted in an interview with Medscape Medical News , longer survival for myeloma patients means that quality of life is increasingly central. Clavreul is patient advocate and head of medical education and scientific engagement at Myeloma Patients Europe. 'The treatment choices should always be based on research data, but understanding patients' preferences is critical for shared decision-making,' she said. What's Next: BsAb Combinations and Trispecifics 'With 19 new drugs or combinations approved in the past two decades, we've made incredible progress,' said Jesús San Miguel Izquierdo, MD, PhD, director of clinical and translational medicine at the University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain, in his EHA 2025 Lifetime Achievement Award lecture. Two industry-sponsored studies presented at EHA 2025 point to the next wave of innovation. RedirecTT-1: Dual-Antigen BsAb Combination The phase 2 RedirecTT-1 trial evaluated the combination of talquetamab and teclistamab in patients with extramedullary disease. 'Patients with true extramedullary disease are up to 87% less likely to respond to conventional therapy,' said Shaji Kumar, MD, consultant, professor, and researcher at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA. The combination treatment in the trial yielded an ORR of 78.9% and a complete response rate of 54.4%, with a 12-month PFS rate of 61% and OS rate of 74.5%. Adverse events were not significantly higher than in monotherapy trials, and less frequent dosing (biweekly or monthly) improved tolerability. 'These results showed deep and durable responses in a population with a significant unmet need,' Kumar said. Moreau, who was not involved in the study, added, 'This could be the pivotal trial that leads to approval of the first bsAb combination.' JNJ-5322: First-in-Human Trispecific Antibody JNJ-5322, a trispecific antibody targeting both BCMA and GPRC5D, showed remarkable efficacy in BCMA/GPRC5D-naive patients in a phase 1 trial. 'Despite recent progress, we still need to reduce treatment burden and improve outcomes,' said Rakesh Popat, MD, hematologist at University College Hospital, London, UK. Among patients with triple-class exposed RRMM, the ORR was 100%, with a 70.4% complete response rate and 12-month PFS of 95%. Grade 3/4 infections occurred in 28.6% of patients, but the safety profile — including mild cytokine release syndrome — was manageable. 'JNJ-5322 demonstrated manageable safety and an ORR comparable to CAR T, with convenient, off-the-shelf, weekly dosing, with one step-up dosing to facilitate outpatient dosing,' Popat concluded. Popat, Clavreul, and Kumar reported no relevant financial relationships. Moreaureported honoraria from and advisory board memberships with Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, AbbVie, Sanofi, Pfizer, and GSK. Rodriguez Otero reported honoraria from lectures from BMS-Celgene, J&J Innovative Medicines, Sanofi, GSK, Regeneron, and Pfizer; participation in Ad Board meetings for BMS, Janssen, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche, Regeneron, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, H3 Biomedicine, and GSK; consultancy work for BMS-Celgene, AbbVie, Roche, J&J Innovative Medicines, and Pfizer; and research funding and travel support from Pfizer. San Miguel Izquierdo reported participation on advisory boards and consulting services, on behalf of his institution, for AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, GSK, Haemalogix, Janssen-Cilag, Karyopharm, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Secura Bio, and Gilead-Kite. The two industry-sponsored studies mentioned were funded by Johnson & Johnson.


Washington Post
36 minutes ago
- Washington Post
FDA to offer faster drug reviews to companies promoting 'national priorities'
WASHINGTON — U.S. regulators will begin offering faster reviews to new medicines that administration officials deem as promoting 'the health interests of Americans,' under a new initiative announced Tuesday. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary said the agency will aim to review select drugs in one to two months. FDA's long-standing accelerated approval program generally issues decisions in six months for drugs that treat life-threatening diseases . Regular drug reviews take about 10 months. Since arriving at the FDA in April, Makary has repeatedly told FDA staff they need to 'challenge assumptions' and rethink procedures. In a medical journal commentary published last week, Makary suggested the agency could conduct 'rapid or instant reviews,' pointing to the truncated process used to authorize the first COVID-19 vaccines under Operation Warp Speed. For the new program, the FDA will issue a limited number of 'national priority vouchers' to companies 'aligned with U.S. national priorities,' the agency said in a statement. The special designation will give the selected companies access to extra FDA communications, streamlined staff reviews and the ability to submit much of their product information in advance. Speeding up drug approvals has long been a priority of the pharmaceutical industry, which has successfully lobbied Congress to create a variety of special programs and pathways for faster reviews. Many aspects of the plan announced Tuesday overlap with older programs. But the broad criteria for receiving a voucher will give FDA officials unprecedented discretion in deciding which companies can benefit from the fastest reviews. 'The ultimate goal is to bring more cures and meaningful treatments to the American public,' Makary said in a statement. Makary previously said the FDA should be willing to ease its scientific requirements for certain drugs, for instance, by not always requiring randomized studies in which patients are tracked over time to track safety and effectiveness. Such trials are generally considered the gold standard of medical research, though the FDA has increasingly been willing to accept smaller, less-definitive studies for rare or life-threatening diseases . In several recent cases , the FDA has faced criticism for approving drugs based on preliminary data that didn't ultimately show benefits for patients. The push to rapidly accelerated drug approvals is the opposite approach that Makary and his boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. , have taken on vaccines. Promising a 'return to gold-standard science,' Kennedy previously announced that all new vaccines would have to be compared to placebo, or a dummy shot, to win approval. Kennedy and Makary also have announced a stricter policy on seasonal updates to COVID-19 shots, saying they will have to undergo new testing before they can be approved for use in healthy children and most adults. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Associated Press
39 minutes ago
- Associated Press
FDA to offer faster drug reviews to companies promoting 'national priorities'
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. regulators will begin offering faster reviews to new medicines that administration officials deem as promoting 'the health interests of Americans,' under a new initiative announced Tuesday. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary said the agency will aim to review select drugs in one to two months. FDA's long-standing accelerated approval program generally issues decisions in six months for drugs that treat life-threatening diseases. Regular drug reviews take about 10 months. Since arriving at the FDA in April, Makary has repeatedly told FDA staff they need to 'challenge assumptions' and rethink procedures. In a medical journal commentary published last week, Makary suggested the agency could conduct 'rapid or instant reviews,' pointing to the truncated process used to authorize the first COVID-19 vaccines under Operation Warp Speed. For the new program, the FDA will issue a limited number of 'national priority vouchers' to companies 'aligned with U.S. national priorities,' the agency said in a statement. The special designation will give the selected companies access to extra FDA communications, streamlined staff reviews and the ability to submit much of their product information in advance. Speeding up drug approvals has long been a priority of the pharmaceutical industry, which has successfully lobbied Congress to create a variety of special programs and pathways for faster reviews. Many aspects of the plan announced Tuesday overlap with older programs. But the broad criteria for receiving a voucher will give FDA officials unprecedented discretion in deciding which companies can benefit from the fastest reviews. 'The ultimate goal is to bring more cures and meaningful treatments to the American public,' Makary said in a statement. Makary previously said the FDA should be willing to ease its scientific requirements for certain drugs, for instance, by not always requiring randomized studies in which patients are tracked over time to track safety and effectiveness. Such trials are generally considered the gold standard of medical research, though the FDA has increasingly been willing to accept smaller, less-definitive studies for rare or life-threatening diseases. In several recent cases, the FDA has faced criticism for approving drugs based on preliminary data that didn't ultimately show benefits for patients. The push to rapidly accelerated drug approvals is the opposite approach that Makary and his boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have taken on vaccines. Promising a 'return to gold-standard science,' Kennedy previously announced that all new vaccines would have to be compared to placebo, or a dummy shot, to win approval. Kennedy and Makary also have announced a stricter policy on seasonal updates to COVID-19 shots, saying they will have to undergo new testing before they can be approved for use in healthy children and most adults. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.