LAUSR

Rationale: There is continuing debate about whether to define airflow obstruction by a post‐bronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) below 0.70, or by ratio values falling below the age‐dependent lower limit of normal (LLN) derived from general population data. Objectives: To determine whether using the LLN criterion affects the classification and outcomes of patients previously defined as having chronic obstructive pulmonary disease by the fixed FEV1/FVC ratio. Methods: We applied the LLN definition to pooled data from the Tiotropium Safety and Performance in Respimat study that used the fixed FEV1/FVC ratio for the clinical diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Results: A total of 17,072 patients were analyzed; of these, 1,807 (10.6%) patients had a ratio greater than or equal to LLN. Patients with a ratio greater than or equal to LLN had similar risks of death from any cause and fatal major adverse cardiovascular (CV) event as those below LLN. Patients with a ratio below LLN had a significantly lower risk of major adverse CV events (hazard ratio = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.55‐0.86; P = 0.001), and had significantly greater risks of moderate to severe exacerbation (rate ratio = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.36‐1.61; P < 0.0001) and severe exacerbation (rate ratio = 2.01; 95% CI = 1.68‐2.40; P < 0.0001) when compared with patients greater than or equal to LLN. Study outcomes by treatment arm (5 &mgr;g tiotropium Respimat vs. 18 &mgr;g HandiHaler) were comparable. Conclusions: Using the LLN to define airflow obstruction would have excluded patients in the Tiotropium Safety and Performance in Respimat study with a higher risk of nonfatal major adverse CV events and a lower risk of exacerbation; study outcomes by treatment arm (2.5 &mgr;g/5 &mgr;g tiotropium Respimat vs. 18 &mgr;g HandiHaler) remained similar. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01126437).