Pulmonary Alveolar Proteinosis

What Is Pulmonary Alveolar Proteinosis?
The Three Forms of PAP
Autoimmune PAP: Anti-GM-CSF Antibodies
Clinical Features and Symptoms
Imaging and Diagnosis: The Crazy-Paving Pattern
Whole Lung Lavage: The Primary Treatment
GM-CSF Therapy and Emerging Treatments
Prognosis and Complications
Key Research Papers
Featured Videos

What Is Pulmonary Alveolar Proteinosis?

Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (PAP) is a rare lung disorder in which the tiny air sacs of the lungs — the alveoli — gradually fill with a thick, milky material made of surfactant proteins and lipids. Surfactant is normally produced by specialized lung cells (type II pneumocytes) and is essential for keeping the alveoli open during breathing. In a healthy lung, alveolar macrophages continuously clear used surfactant to prevent it from accumulating. In PAP, this clearance mechanism breaks down, and the lipoproteinaceous material builds up to a degree that seriously impairs oxygen transfer from air into the bloodstream.

Under the microscope, the alveolar material stains strongly positive with periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) stain, appearing as amorphous globular deposits filling the air spaces. The surrounding lung architecture — the walls, blood vessels, and airways — is typically preserved, distinguishing PAP from fibrotic or inflammatory lung diseases where the structure itself is destroyed. This makes PAP potentially reversible if the underlying cause can be corrected or the material physically removed.

PAP is estimated to affect roughly 6–7 people per million worldwide. Although rare in absolute numbers, it is not vanishingly so, and it appears in clinical practice in pulmonary referral centers with regularity. Delayed diagnosis is common because its symptoms — gradually worsening breathlessness and a dry cough — overlap with many far more common conditions including heart failure, pneumonia, and interstitial lung disease. The average time from first symptoms to diagnosis has historically been one to two years.

Understanding PAP has been transformed over the past three decades. What was once considered a single mysterious disease is now recognized as at least three biologically distinct conditions that share the same final anatomic picture — alveolar filling with surfactant material — but have different causes, different patient populations, and increasingly different treatments.

Back to Table of Contents

The Three Forms of PAP

PAP is not one disease but a syndrome — a shared anatomical outcome that can be reached by three different biological routes. Distinguishing between them matters enormously because the treatment strategies diverge completely.

Autoimmune PAP (primary PAP) accounts for more than 90% of all adult cases. The cause is the production of autoantibodies — IgG antibodies directed against the body's own granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). These antibodies circulate in the blood and reach the lungs, where they neutralize GM-CSF signaling. Because GM-CSF is the critical cytokine required for alveolar macrophages to mature and to maintain their surfactant-clearing function, its blockade leads to macrophage dysfunction. Used surfactant accumulates progressively in the alveolar spaces. This form predominantly affects middle-aged adults (peak diagnosis at age 35–45) with a male-to-female ratio of approximately 2.5:1. Cigarette smoking is strongly associated, appearing in roughly 72% of patients with autoimmune PAP — though whether smoking triggers the autoimmune response or simply worsens the disease course remains under investigation.

Secondary PAP comprises 5–10% of cases. Here the macrophage dysfunction is not caused by anti-GM-CSF antibodies but by a reduction in the number or functional capacity of alveolar macrophages due to an underlying systemic condition. The most important causes include:

Hematological malignancies: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is the most common single cause of secondary PAP, but myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), lymphoma, and chemotherapy-related immunosuppression also feature prominently. Post-bone marrow transplant patients are at particular risk.
Inhalational exposures: Silica dust inhalation produces a variant called silicoproteinosis, which can be clinically severe and rapid in progression. Other implicated dusts include aluminum, titanium, and indium tin oxide — the latter increasingly recognized in workers in the electronics and solar-cell industries.
Rare metabolic disorders: Lysinuric protein intolerance (LPI), a disorder of amino acid transport, is associated with secondary PAP through unclear mechanisms involving macrophage function.

Congenital/hereditary PAP is rare, accounting for less than 1% of cases, and presents in neonates or infants rather than adults. It results from mutations in genes encoding either the surfactant proteins themselves (SFTPB, SFTPC, ABCA3 — the gene for a lipid transporter critical for surfactant packaging) or the GM-CSF receptor subunits (CSF2RA encoding the α chain, or CSF2RB encoding the shared β chain). When the GM-CSF receptor is nonfunctional due to mutation, GM-CSF signaling is completely absent even though circulating GM-CSF levels are normal and anti-GM-CSF antibodies are absent. The result is profound alveolar macrophage dysfunction from birth, often presenting as neonatal respiratory distress syndrome that fails to resolve or that recurs after initial stabilization.

Back to Table of Contents

Autoimmune PAP: Anti-GM-CSF Antibodies

The discovery that anti-GM-CSF autoantibodies are the cause of primary PAP transformed the understanding of this disease. Before this was established in the 1990s and 2000s, PAP was thought to be an idiopathic disorder of unknown origin. Today, measuring these antibodies in blood or bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid is both diagnostically definitive and biologically illuminating.

GM-CSF (granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor) is a cytokine that plays a central role in the maturation and functional maintenance of alveolar macrophages. In the alveolar environment, GM-CSF signals through its receptor on macrophage surfaces, activating transcription factors (particularly PU.1) that drive the expression of proteins required for surfactant catabolism — the breaking down and clearance of the lipid and protein components of used surfactant. Without this signaling, alveolar macrophages remain functionally immature: they are present in the alveolar space but cannot process surfactant effectively. Instead, they accumulate surfactant lipids within their cytoplasm, becoming the characteristic "foamy alveolar macrophages" seen in BAL specimens and biopsies from PAP patients.

In autoimmune PAP, IgG antibodies bind GM-CSF with high affinity and neutralize it before it can engage its receptor. These antibodies are polyclonal, meaning they arise from many different B-cell clones, which is characteristic of an autoimmune rather than a monoclonal (paraneoplastic) origin. Critically, anti-GM-CSF antibodies are present in essentially all patients with autoimmune PAP, are absent in healthy controls and in patients with secondary or congenital PAP, and their titer correlates with disease activity. A serum anti-GM-CSF antibody titer greater than 19 µg/mL is considered diagnostic for autoimmune PAP in the right clinical context.

The antibodies are also detectable in BAL fluid, where their local concentration in the lung environment contributes directly to macrophage dysfunction at the site of disease. Measuring BAL anti-GM-CSF levels adds sensitivity and can help in cases where serum levels are borderline.

One important consequence of macrophage dysfunction in PAP extends beyond surfactant clearance: alveolar macrophages are the lung's primary innate immune defense against inhaled pathogens. Their dysfunction in PAP explains the elevated risk of opportunistic pulmonary infections — particularly with organisms that are normally controlled by macrophage-mediated immunity, including Nocardia, Cryptococcus, Aspergillus, and Histoplasma. Nocardia in particular appears with striking frequency in PAP case series and should always be considered when a PAP patient develops fever, productive cough, or worsening infiltrates that don't fit the expected PAP pattern.

Back to Table of Contents

Clinical Features and Symptoms

PAP typically announces itself gradually and without drama, which is one reason diagnosis is so often delayed. The disease does not usually cause fever, chills, or the acute systemic upset of pneumonia. Instead, it behaves more like a slowly progressive breathlessness that patients often attribute to deconditioning, weight gain, or aging — until the limitation becomes severe enough to prompt medical evaluation.

Dyspnea on exertion is the most common presenting symptom, reported by over 80% of patients. Early in the disease, it appears only with vigorous activity. As alveolar filling progresses, the threshold for breathlessness falls until patients are limited by ordinary activities like climbing stairs or walking short distances. In advanced disease, breathlessness at rest and hypoxemia at rest develop.

Dry cough is present in about half of patients, though it is rarely severe or productive. The cough of PAP is thought to arise from stimulation of irritant receptors in airways partially obstructed by alveolar material, rather than from airway inflammation.

Physical examination findings in PAP are often surprisingly minimal relative to the extent of radiographic disease. Fine bibasilar crackles — similar to the velcro-like crackles of pulmonary fibrosis — are present in about 50% of patients. Clubbing of the fingers is seen but is less common than in fibrotic diseases. Cyanosis indicates severe disease. The absence of fever, wheezing, or pleural rub helps distinguish PAP from more common diagnoses.

Laboratory findings are largely nonspecific. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) is elevated in most patients with active PAP, reflecting cellular turnover in the alveoli. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and CA-125 can be elevated — these tumor markers are found in high concentrations in surfactant proteins and leak into the bloodstream when surfactant processing is disrupted; they have been used as biomarkers for monitoring disease activity and treatment response. Polycythemia is occasionally present in response to chronic hypoxemia. The definitive laboratory finding is elevated serum anti-GM-CSF antibody titer (above 19 µg/mL) in autoimmune PAP.

Pulmonary function tests typically show a restrictive pattern — reduced total lung capacity (TLC) and forced vital capacity (FVC) with a preserved or elevated FEV1/FVC ratio — along with a reduced diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), reflecting impaired gas exchange across the alveolar-capillary membrane. Arterial blood gas analysis may show hypoxemia with an elevated alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient, often more severe with exercise than at rest early in the disease course.

Back to Table of Contents

Imaging and Diagnosis: The Crazy-Paving Pattern

The chest CT findings of PAP are among the most recognizable in pulmonary radiology. The classic and highly characteristic pattern is called "crazy paving" — a combination of ground-glass opacity (hazy increased attenuation that does not obscure underlying vascular markings) with superimposed thickening of the interlobular septa (the thin walls that divide lung lobules) and intralobular lines. When these two findings coexist, the resulting CT image resembles irregular stone cobblestones or the pattern of crazy-paving stonework, with geometric shapes outlined against a hazy background.

Several features of PAP's CT pattern help distinguish it from other causes of crazy paving (which include pneumocystis pneumonia, pulmonary edema, and mucinous adenocarcinoma):

Geographic distribution: Areas of ground-glass opacity in PAP are often sharply demarcated from adjacent areas of completely normal lung, creating a patchy or map-like appearance. This sharp boundary between affected and unaffected lung is quite characteristic.
Bilateral and symmetric: PAP typically affects both lungs and tends to be fairly symmetric, often with a basal predominance, though the distribution can vary.
Absence of nodules, cavitation, or honeycombing: PAP does not typically cause the nodular densities of hypersensitivity pneumonitis, the cavities of necrotizing pneumonia, or the honeycombing of end-stage fibrosis.

Plain chest radiography shows bilateral alveolar infiltrates — often described as having a "bat-wing" or perihilar distribution — which can closely mimic pulmonary edema. CT is far more specific and should be obtained in any patient with unexplained bilateral infiltrates.

Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is the gold standard for diagnosis. In PAP, BAL fluid is characteristically milky or opalescent in appearance. When a BAL specimen is left to stand, the white material settles to form a visible white precipitate at the bottom of the collection tube — a finding so distinctive that an experienced bronchoscopist will recognize PAP immediately. Microscopically, BAL cytology shows PAS-positive amorphous globular extracellular material filling the background of the specimen, along with large foamy alveolar macrophages whose cytoplasm is packed with lipid-laden vacuoles and surfactant debris. These findings together are diagnostic of PAP.

Surgical lung biopsy (video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, VATS) is occasionally performed when BAL is nondiagnostic or when another diagnosis needs to be excluded. Transbronchial biopsy is less reliable for PAP because the specimens may not capture the alveolar filling pattern adequately.

The diagnostic algorithm in a patient with suspicious CT findings should include: serum anti-GM-CSF antibody titer (if positive at diagnostic threshold, confirms autoimmune PAP without need for biopsy in most cases), BAL with cytology and PAS staining, and evaluation for secondary causes (complete blood count with differential, bone marrow evaluation if hematological malignancy is suspected, occupational exposure history).

Back to Table of Contents

Whole Lung Lavage: The Primary Treatment

Whole lung lavage (WLL) is the cornerstone treatment for symptomatic PAP and has been in use since the 1960s. Despite being a technically demanding procedure performed under general anesthesia, it remains the most effective single intervention for clearing the alveolar material and restoring gas exchange. When performed at experienced centers, WLL produces rapid and often dramatic improvement in symptoms and oxygenation.

How WLL is performed: The patient is placed under general anesthesia and intubated with a double-lumen endotracheal tube — a specialized airway device that has separate channels for the left and right mainstem bronchi, allowing each lung to be independently ventilated or isolated. While one lung is continuously ventilated to maintain oxygenation, the contralateral lung is filled with warmed sterile normal saline, which is then drained by gravity and suction. This cycle of filling and draining is repeated with sequential 1-liter aliquots until the effluent fluid runs clear — typically requiring 10 to 50 liters per lung. The procedure takes several hours. After completing one lung, the same process is performed on the other lung, either in the same session (if the patient tolerates it) or a few days later.

The physical process of repeated lavage dislodges the PAS-positive surfactant material from the alveolar surfaces and washes it out of the lung. In addition to mechanical clearance, WLL may have some immunomodulatory benefit — removing anti-GM-CSF antibodies from the alveolar compartment and allowing partial recovery of macrophage function after the procedure.

Outcomes of WLL: Immediate improvement in oxygenation is seen in 75–85% of patients following bilateral WLL. Gas exchange typically improves within hours to days as the cleared alveoli re-aerate. Functional improvement (better exercise tolerance, reduced dyspnea) follows over the subsequent weeks. A single bilateral WLL induces sustained remission — defined as freedom from PAP symptoms without further treatment — in approximately 40–70% of patients. Those who do not achieve remission or who relapse after initial response can undergo repeat WLL; there is no fixed limit to the number of WLL procedures a patient can have.

Limitations of WLL: The procedure requires general anesthesia, a specialized anesthesia team experienced with double-lumen intubation in an unstable respiratory patient, and a capable bronchoscopy suite. Not all hospitals have this expertise, and patients in some regions must travel significant distances to specialized PAP centers. Patients with severe hypoxemia may not tolerate single-lung ventilation during the procedure. Post-procedure complications including pneumothorax, fluid overload, and saline flooding of the ventilated lung are uncommon but possible.

WLL is used across all three forms of PAP, including secondary PAP (where it provides symptom relief while the underlying cause is addressed) and even congenital PAP (where it is used as a bridge while more definitive treatments are considered). However, in autoimmune PAP specifically, WLL addresses the consequence (alveolar filling) but not the cause (anti-GM-CSF antibodies), which is why disease-modifying therapies targeting the antibody are increasingly important.

Back to Table of Contents

GM-CSF Therapy and Emerging Treatments

The recognition that anti-GM-CSF autoantibodies neutralize GM-CSF signaling in autoimmune PAP created an obvious therapeutic hypothesis: if you restore GM-CSF activity in the lungs, alveolar macrophage function might recover, surfactant clearance would resume, and the disease would improve without requiring the heroic physical intervention of WLL. This hypothesis has been validated in clinical trials and is increasingly part of standard practice.

Inhaled GM-CSF (sargramostim) is the most carefully studied disease-modifying approach. Sargramostim (recombinant human GM-CSF) is delivered directly to the alveolar compartment via inhalation, where it can engage GM-CSF receptors on alveolar macrophages at concentrations sufficient to override the neutralizing effect of anti-GM-CSF antibodies in the local microenvironment — even though the same antibodies in the bloodstream would neutralize systemically administered GM-CSF. This is the key pharmacological rationale for the inhaled route.

The landmark ITOMAP trial (published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2019 by Tazawa and colleagues) randomized patients with autoimmune PAP to inhaled sargramostim (250 µg twice daily) or placebo. Treatment with inhaled sargramostim significantly improved the alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient — the primary outcome measure of gas exchange — compared to placebo, with a response rate in the range of 45–70% across published studies. The response is gradual, occurring over weeks to months rather than the immediate effect of WLL. Inhaled GM-CSF is now considered particularly useful for patients with mild-to-moderate disease, those who are poor candidates for general anesthesia, and those with incomplete response to or relapse after WLL.

Subcutaneous GM-CSF has also been studied and shows benefit in some patients, though the systemic route requires higher doses and may be associated with more side effects (including bone pain and flu-like symptoms) compared to the inhaled route.

Rituximab — a monoclonal antibody that depletes B lymphocytes — addresses the autoimmune root cause of autoimmune PAP by reducing the number of B cells capable of producing anti-GM-CSF antibodies. As B cells are depleted, anti-GM-CSF antibody titers gradually fall over months, and alveolar macrophage function may recover. Early case series and small trials have reported favorable responses in refractory autoimmune PAP patients — those who have failed both WLL and GM-CSF therapy. Rituximab is not yet standard of care but is a reasonable option for treatment-resistant disease at expert centers.

Spontaneous remission occurs in approximately 15–20% of patients with autoimmune PAP, without any specific treatment. This observation supports a watchful waiting approach for patients with mild disease, acceptable oxygenation, and stable symptoms — monitoring with serial imaging, PFTs, and symptom assessment every 3–6 months and reserving WLL or GM-CSF therapy for those who progress.

Secondary PAP responds best to treating the underlying cause: cytoreduction for AML/MDS, reduction of immunosuppression where safe after bone marrow transplant, removal from silica exposure in silicoproteinosis. WLL remains useful for symptomatic relief in secondary PAP regardless of cause.

Congenital PAP from GM-CSF receptor mutations does not respond to exogenous GM-CSF (the receptor is absent or nonfunctional) and is managed with serial WLL as a bridge. Lung transplantation has been performed for severe congenital PAP with good outcomes, though the disease can rarely recur in the transplanted lung.

Back to Table of Contents

Prognosis and Complications

The prognosis of PAP has improved substantially since effective treatments — particularly WLL and inhaled GM-CSF — became available and better understood. Most patients with autoimmune PAP can expect to maintain a good quality of life and near-normal lung function if the disease is identified and managed appropriately.

Overall survival in modern cohorts of autoimmune PAP is excellent. The 5-year survival rate exceeds 90% in most published series. Death directly attributable to PAP — from progressive respiratory failure — is now uncommon with access to WLL. Historical series from the pre-WLL era reported mortality rates of 30% or higher, underscoring how much the availability of effective treatment has changed the natural history.

Disease course variability is wide. Some patients have a single episode of PAP, respond to one or two WLL procedures, and remain in long-term remission without further therapy. Others have a relapsing-remitting course requiring periodic WLL — sometimes annually or more frequently — to control symptoms. A minority have progressive disease refractory to WLL and GM-CSF therapy, in whom experimental approaches (rituximab, plasmapheresis to remove antibodies) or lung transplantation are considered.

Opportunistic infections represent the most serious and potentially life-threatening complication of PAP. Alveolar macrophage dysfunction impairs the innate immune defense against fungi, Nocardia, and other pathogens that are normally controlled at the alveolar level. Reported rates of opportunistic infection in PAP range from 5–10% in large cohorts. Nocardia species are particularly prevalent in PAP — responsible for pneumonia, brain abscess, and disseminated disease — and their occurrence should be considered in any PAP patient who develops fever or worsening infiltrates. Cryptococcus and Aspergillus are also over-represented compared to the general population. Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) can occur in PAP even without classic immunosuppression. Heightened vigilance, low threshold for bronchoscopy in new or changing infiltrates, and prophylactic strategies in severely immunocompromised patients (e.g., those with secondary PAP from BMT) are warranted.

Progression to respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation is rare with modern management but can occur in patients who present very late, have severe secondary PAP with an underlying malignancy, or develop a superimposed infection on a background of severe PAP.

Lung transplantation has been performed for PAP in cases refractory to all medical and procedural therapy, with outcomes comparable to transplantation for other indications. In autoimmune PAP, there is a theoretical risk of recurrence in the transplanted lung if anti-GM-CSF antibodies persist — this has been reported rarely but represents an important long-term consideration.

Monitoring and follow-up for patients with established PAP should include: regular assessment of symptoms and exercise tolerance, serial chest CT (typically every 6–12 months), pulmonary function tests including DLCO, serum anti-GM-CSF antibody titers (as a disease activity marker in autoimmune PAP), serum LDH and CEA (surrogate biomarkers of disease burden), and prompt evaluation of any new or worsening respiratory symptoms for opportunistic infection.

Back to Table of Contents

Key Research Papers

Trapnell BC, Whitsett JA, Nakata K. "Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis." N Engl J Med. 2003;349(26):2527–2539. PMID: 14695413. PubMed
Inoue Y, Trapnell BC, Tazawa R, et al. "Characteristics of a large cohort of patients with autoimmune pulmonary alveolar proteinosis in Japan." Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;177(7):752–762. PMID: 18202343. PubMed
Trapnell BC, Nakata K, Bonella F, et al. "Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis." Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019;5(1):16. PMID: 30846703. PubMed
Seymour JF, Presneill JJ. "Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis: progress in the first 44 years." Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166(2):215–235. PMID: 12119235. PubMed
Tazawa R, Ueda T, Abe M, et al. "Inhaled GM-CSF for pulmonary alveolar proteinosis." N Engl J Med. 2019;381(10):923–932. PMID: 31483963. PubMed
Kavuru MS, Sullivan EJ, Piccin R, Thomassen MJ, Stoller JK. "Exogenous granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor administration for pulmonary alveolar proteinosis." Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;161(4 Pt 1):1143–1148. PMID: 10764301. PubMed
Luisetti M, Kadija Z, Mariani F, Rodi G, Campo I, Trapnell BC. "Therapy options in pulmonary alveolar proteinosis." Ther Adv Respir Dis. 2010;4(4):239–248. PMID: 20439310. PubMed
Bonella F, Bauer PC, Griese M, Ohshimo S, Guzman J, Costabel U. "Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis: new insights from a single-center cohort of 70 patients." Respir Med. 2011;105(12):1908–1916. PMID: 21831632. PubMed
Shah PL, Hansell D, Lawson PR, Reid KB, Morgan C. "Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis: clinical aspects and current concepts on pathogenesis." Thorax. 2000;55(1):67–77. PMID: 10607805. PubMed
Uchida K, Beck DC, Yamamoto T, et al. "GM-CSF autoantibodies and neutrophil dysfunction in pulmonary alveolar proteinosis." N Engl J Med. 2007;356(6):567–579. PMID: 17287477. PubMed
Presneill JJ, Nakata K, Inoue Y, Seymour JF. "Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis." Clin Chest Med. 2004;25(3):593–613. PMID: 15331194. PubMed
Campo I, Mariani F, Rodi G, et al. "Assessment and management of pulmonary alveolar proteinosis in a reference center." Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2013;8:40. PMID: 23497510. PubMed