The authors addressed this by using self-reported patient data, which could undermine the validity of the diagnosis and lead to information bias. We believe that inaccurate measurement of the prevalence of 2 key chronic respiratory diseases, bronchiectasis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), is especially relevant here.First, previous studies showed a bronchiectasis prevalence of ~30% among RA patients (2). However, the current study, which relied on self-reported bronchiectasis, revealed a prevalence of only 0.9%. This vast discrepancy implies that, in many patients with RA-associated bronchiectasis, the disease is clinically silent and unrecognized yet can be readily detected by pulmonary function tests.Second, COPD is notoriously prone to evading clinical detection; one study showed that it was undiagnosed in ~70% of COPD patients worldwide (3). In the current study, mean packyears of smoking and the percentages of participants who were current or past smokers were all higher among RA cases than among controls. These differences suggest that the rate of undiagnosed COPD might have been higher in the RA group and could have contributed in part to the increased odds of obstructive patterns among these patients. Moreover, quitting smoking requires strong personal motivation, and we wonder whether RA patients had a greater prevalence of more severe smoking-related airway symptoms and disease and, in turn, a higher rate of smoking cessation.We understand that image correlation is difficult in databank analysis. However, chest images (if available) from these participants would be very informative for assessing the scale of information bias, if present.Finally, the prevalence of rheumatoid factor (RF) positivity in the RA group (86%) was much higher than typically reported (4). In a small study, we found that 42% of COPD patients tested positive for RF (5). Therefore, we wonder whether the excess RF positivity reported by Prisco et al (1) could have been attributable to undiagnosed COPD among RA cases, since RF positivity was common in this group.We appreciate the robust work done by the authors and look forward to their reply.