Screening for Lung Cancer: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

Peripheral Extracellular Vesicles for Diagnosis and Prognosis of Resectable Lung Cancer: The LUCEx Study Protocol

Background/Objectives: Lung cancer is the primary cause of cancer-related deaths. Most patients are typically diagnosed at advanced stages. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has been proven to reduce lung cancer mortality, but screening programs using LDCT are associated with a high number of false positives and unnecessary thoracotomies. It is therefore imperative that a certain diagnosis is refined, especially in cases of solitary pulmonary nodules that are difficult to technically access for an accurate preoperative diagnosis. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) involved in intercellular communication may be an innovative biomarker for diagnosis and therapeutic strategies in lung cancer, regarding their ability to carry tumor-specific cargo. The aim of the LUCEx study is to determine if extracellular vesicle cargoes from both lung tissue and blood could provide complementary information to screen lung cancer patients and enable personalized follow-up after the surgery. Methods: The LUCEx study is a prospective study aiming to recruit 600 patients with lung cancer and 50 control subjects (false positives) undergoing surgery after diagnostic imaging for suspected pulmonary nodules using computed tomography (CT) scans. These patients will undergo curative surgery at the Department of Thoracic Surgery of the Miguel Servet Hospital in Zaragoza, Spain, and will be followed-up for at least 5 years. At baseline, samples from both tumor distal lung tissue and preoperative peripheral blood will be collected and processed to compare the quantity and content of EVs, particularly their micro-RNA (miRNA) cargo. At the third and fifth years of follow-up, CT scans, functional respiratory tests, and blood extractions will be performed. Discussion: Extracellular vesicles and their miRNA have emerged as promising tools for the diagnosis and prognosis of several diseases, including cancer. The LUCEx study, based on an observational clinical cohort, aims to understand the role of these vesicles and their translational potential as complementary tools for imaging diagnosis and prognosis.

Application of deep learning model based on unenhanced chest CT for opportunistic screening of osteoporosis: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

A large number of middle-aged and elderly patients have an insufficient understanding of osteoporosis and its harm. This study aimed to establish and validate a convolutional neural network (CNN) model based on unenhanced chest computed tomography (CT) images of the vertebral body and skeletal muscle for opportunistic screening in patients with osteoporosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our team retrospectively collected clinical information from participants who underwent unenhanced chest CT and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) examinations between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2022, at four hospitals. These participants were divided into a training set (n = 581), an external test set 1 (n = 229), an external test set 2 (n = 198) and an external test set 3 (n = 118). Five CNN models were constructed based on chest CT images to screen patients with osteoporosis and compared with the SMI model to predict the performance of osteoporosis patients.

RESULTS

All CNN models have good performance in predicting osteoporosis patients. The average F1 score of Densenet121 in the three external test sets was 0.865. The area under the curve (AUC) of Desenet121 in external test set 1, external test set 2, and external test set 3 were 0.827, 0.859, and 0.865, respectively. Furthermore, the Densenet121 model demonstrated a notably superior performance compared to the SMI model in predicting osteoporosis patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The CNN model based on unenhanced chest CT vertebral and skeletal muscle images can opportunistically screen patients with osteoporosis. Clinicians can use the CNN model to intervene in patients with osteoporosis and promptly avoid fragility fractures.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

The CNN model based on unenhanced chest CT vertebral and skeletal muscle images can opportunistically screen patients with osteoporosis. Clinicians can use the CNN model to intervene in patients with osteoporosis and promptly avoid fragility fractures.

KEY POINTS

The application of unenhanced chest CT is increasing. Most people do not consciously use DXA to screen themselves for osteoporosis. A deep learning model was constructed based on CT images from four institutions.

A combined model of circulating tumor DNA methylated SHOX2/SCT/HOXA7 and clinical features facilitates the discrimination of malignant from benign pulmonary nodules

BACKGROUND

Despite the advancements in early lung cancer detection attributed to the widespread use of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT), this technology has also led to an increasing number of pulmonary nodules (PNs) of indeterminate significance being identified. Therefore, this study was aimed to develop a model that leverages plasma methylation biomarkers and clinical characteristics to distinguish between malignant and benign PNs.

METHODS

In a training cohort of 210 patients with PNs, we evaluated plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for the presence of three lung cancer-specific methylation markers: SHOX2, SCT, and HOXA7. Subsequently, we constructed a combined model utilizing methylated SHOX2/SCT/HOXA7 (mSHOX2/SCT/HOXA7) ctDNA levels, the largest nodule size measured by LDCT, and age, employing the binary logistic regression algorithm. Furthermore, we compared the diagnostic performances of the combined model with the Mayo Clinic model and the single mSHOX2/SCT/HOXA7 model by analyzing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for each.

RESULTS

The combined model demonstrated an impressive AUC of 0.87 and an accuracy of 0.75 in the training cohort, using pathologic diagnoses as the gold standard. This performance was significantly superior to that of the single mSHOX2/SCT/HOXA7 panel (AUC = 0.81, P < 0.0001) and the Mayo model (AUC = 0.65, P = 0.0005). Further validation in a cohort of 82 patients with PNs confirmed the diagnostic value of the combined model. Additionally, we observed that as the size of the nodule increased, the diagnostic accuracy of the combined model also improved.

CONCLUSIONS

A combined model incorporating the ctDNA-based methylation status of SHOX2/SCT/HOXA7 genes, the largest nodule size measured by LDCT, and age can serve as a supplementary approach to LDCT for lung cancer. This model enhances the precision in identifying high-risk individuals and optimizes the clinical management strategies for PNs detected by CT.

Clinical effect of Almonertinib in treating epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive residual ground-glass opacities after stage I lung cancer resection

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical effect of Almonertinib in in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive residual ground-glass opacities following resection of stage I lung cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 75 patients with EGFR mutation-positive residual ground-glass opacities post-stage I lung cancer surgery was conducted at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between January 2021 and December 2023. Patients were categorized into the control group (CG, n = 33, treated with pemetrexed and cisplatin) and the observation group (OG, n = 42, treated with Almonertinib). Cellular immune markers, tumor markers, CT nodule characteristics (size, density), malignancy risk scores before (T0) and after treatment (T1), treatment efficacy at T1, and adverse drug reactions were evaluated.

RESULTS

At T1, both groups showed an increase in CD3+ and CD4+ levels, and a decrease in CD8+ levels compared to T0. The OG group had significantly higher CD3+ and CD4+ levels and lower CD8+ levels compared to the CG group (all P < 0.05). Serum levels of IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α decreased significantly in both groups at T1, with greater reductions observed in the OG group (all P < 0.05). Additionally, the OG group demonstrated a more substantial reduction in serum carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen 125, carbohydrate antigen 50, cytokeratin 19 fragment antigen 21-1, neuron-specific enolase, and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels compared to the CG group (all P < 0.05). Nodule size and density also decreased in both groups, with more significant reductions in the OG group at T1 (all P < 0.05). The Mayo and Brock model predictions indicated a significantly lower risk of malignancy at T1 in the OG group compared to T0 (all P < 0.05). The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were significantly higher in the OG group (P < 0.05), and adverse reaction rates were lower in the OG group compared to the CG group at T1 (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Almonertinib demonstrates good clinical efficacy and safety for the treatment of EGFR mutation-positive residual ground-glass opacities following stage I lung cancer resection.

Screening for Lung Cancer, Overdiagnosis, and Healthcare Utilization: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

INTRODUCTION

Guideline-discordant low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening may cause lung cancer (LC) overdiagnosis, but its extent and consequences are unclear. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of self-initiated, non-reimbursed LDCT screening in a predominantly non-smoking population and its impact on LC epidemiology and healthcare utilization.

METHODS

This nationwide cohort study analyzed data from Korea's National Health Information Database and 11 academic hospital screening centers (1999-2022). The overall analysis encompassed the entire Korean population. For non-reimbursed LDCT screening prevalence, which the National Health Information Database does not capture, a separate analysis was conducted on a cohort of 1.7 million adults to extrapolate nationwide rates. Outcomes included trends in self-initiated, non-reimbursed LDCT screening, LC incidence, mortality, stage and age at diagnosis, 5-year survival, and LC-related healthcare utilization, including surgeries and biopsies. Joinpoint regression assessed trend changes.

RESULTS

Self-initiated, non-reimbursed LDCT screening during health check-ups increased from 29% to 60% in men and 7% to 46% in women, despite only 2.4% of men and 0.04% of women qualifying for risk-based screening. In women, localized-stage LC incidence nearly doubled (age-standardized incidence rate: from 7.6 to 13.7 per 100,000), whereas distant-stage incidence decreased (age-standardized incidence rate: from 16.1 to 15.0 per 100,000). LC mortality declined (age-standardized mortality rate: from 23.3 to 19.8 per 100,000), whereas 5-year survival rates improved substantially. LC diagnoses in women shifted towards earlier stages and younger ages. Lung surgeries for both malignant and benign lesions, frequently lacking nonsurgical biopsies, increased sharply in women.

CONCLUSIONS

Widespread guideline-discordant LDCT screening correlates with LC overdiagnosis and increased healthcare utilization, particularly in women. Randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the risks and benefits of screening in low-risk populations to determine its efficacy and consequences.

Calls to action on lung cancer management and research

Lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally, remains a pressing health issue despite significant medical advances. The New York Lung Cancer Foundation brought together experts from academia, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries as well as organizational leaders and patient advocates, to thoroughly examine the current state of lung cancer diagnosis, treatment, and research. The goal was to identify areas where our understanding is incomplete and to develop collaborative public health and scientific strategies to generate better patient outcomes, as highlighted in our "Calls to Action." The consortium prioritized 8 different calls to action. These include (1) develop strategies to cure more patients with early-stage lung cancer, (2) investigate carcinogenesis leading to lung cancers in patients without a history of smoking, (3) harness precision medicine for disease interception and prevention, (4) implement solutions to deliver prevention measures and effective therapies to individuals in under-resourced countries, (5) facilitate collaborations with industry to collect and share data and samples, (6) create and maintain open access to big data repositories, (7) develop new immunotherapeutic agents for lung cancer treatment and prevention, and (8) invest in research in both the academic and community settings. These calls to action provide guidance to representatives from academia, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries, organizational and regulatory leaders, and patient advocates to guide ongoing and planned initiatives.

Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose CT: A Systematic Review

Lung cancer is highly prevalent worldwide and is the leading cause of cancer-related death in Portugal. There is increasing evidence that low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening reduces mortality; however, few countries have implemented screening strategies. This review aims to gather the best evidence to assess the relevance of implementing lung cancer screening. A search was conducted for clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), systematic reviews (SRs), and meta-analyses (MAs) published between January 1, 2010, and January 31, 2024, as well as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1, 2019, and January 31, 2024, indexed in databases such as the National Guideline Clearinghouse, Cochrane Library, Guideline Finder, Canadian Medical Association, Evidence-Based Medicine Online, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE), and PubMed. The MeSH terms used were "lung cancer" and "screening". To evaluate the level of evidence (LE) and strength of recommendation (SR) in the included MAs, the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) from the American Academy of Family Physicians was applied. A total of 460 articles were found, with two CPGs, six MAs, two SRs, and one RCT being selected. The CPGs recommend screening with LDCT for smokers with a smoking history of more than 20 pack-years, aged between 50 and 80 years. All MAs show statistically significant evidence of reduced mortality in screened patients, although without a reduction in all-cause mortality. However, there was some heterogeneity regarding the age of the target population and the screening follow-up period. Overdiagnosis rates varied between MAs. The SRs and RCT also demonstrated a reduction in lung cancer mortality, but not in all-cause mortality. LDCT lung cancer screening shows a reduction in disease-related mortality, suggesting that the implementation of organized screening for at-risk populations could have a significant positive impact. Some uncertainties remain regarding the best strategy for implementing organized screening programs.

Healthcare disparities, screening, and molecular testing in the changing landscape of non-small cell lung cancer in the United States: a review

Inequitable access to care continues to hinder improvements in diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. This review describes healthcare disparities in the changing landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the United States, focusing on racial, ethnic, sex-based, and socioeconomic trends. Furthermore, strategies to address disparities, overcome challenges, and improve patient outcomes are proposed. Barriers exist across lung cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment regimens, varying by sex, age, race and ethnicity, geography, and socioeconomic status. Incidence and mortality rates of lung cancer are higher among Black men than White men, and incidences in young women are substantially greater than in young men. Disparities may be attributed to geographic differences in screening access, with correlating higher incidence and mortality rates in rural versus urban areas. Lower socioeconomic status is also linked to lower survival rates. Several strategies could help reduce disparities and improve outcomes. Current guidelines could improve screening eligibility by incorporating sex, race, and socioeconomic status variables. Patient and clinician education on screening guidelines and patient-level barriers to care are key, and biomarker testing is critical since ~ 70% of patients with NSCLC have an actionable biomarker. Timely diagnosis, staging, and comprehensive biomarker testing, including cell-free DNA liquid biopsy, may provide valuable treatment guidance for patients with NSCLC. Efforts to improve lung cancer screening and biomarker testing access, decrease bias, and improve education about screening and testing are needed to reduce healthcare disparities in NSCLC.

The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan: Current challenges and future directions for shared decision making for lung cancer screening

Shared decision making (SDM) between health care professionals and patients is essential to help patients make well informed choices about lung cancer screening (LCS). Patients who participate in SDM have greater LCS knowledge, reduced decisional conflict, and improved adherence to annual screening compared with patients who do not participate in SDM. SDM tools are acceptable to patients and clinicians. The importance of SDM in LCS is emphasized in recommendations from professional organizations and highlighted as a priority in the 2022 President's Cancer Panel Report. The updated 2022 national coverage determination from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reaffirms the value of SDM in offering LCS to eligible beneficiaries. The Shared Decision-Making Task Group of the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable undertook a group consensus process to identify priorities for research and implementation related to SDM for LCS and then evaluated current knowledge in these areas. Priority areas included: (1) developing feasible, adaptable SDM training programs for health care professionals; (2) understanding the impact of alternative health system LCS models on SDM practice and outcomes; (3) developing and evaluating new patient decision aids for use with diverse populations and in varied settings; (4) offering conceptual clarity about what constitutes a high-quality decision and developing appropriate quality measures; and (5) studying the use of prediction-augmented screening to support SDM in practice. Gaps in current research in all areas were observed. The authors conclude with a research and implementation agenda to advance the quality and implementation of SDM for persons who might benefit from LCS.

The risk and benefit profiles of US-eligible lung cancer screening attendees vs nonattendees

BACKGROUND

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommend lung cancer screening for individuals aged 50-80 years with at least 20 pack-years and no more than 15 quit-years, but uptake is low. The risk and benefit profiles of screening attendees are unknown; consequently, the impact and lost opportunity of ongoing lung cancer screening in the United States remains unclear.

METHODS

We estimated lung cancer death risk (using the Lung Cancer Death Risk Assessment Tool) and life gained from screening (using the Life Years Gained From Screening-Computed Tomography model) for individuals aged 50-79 years who ever-smoked in the US representative 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We compared lung cancer death risk and life gained among USPSTF-eligible individuals by screening status (self-reported screened vs not screened in past year) and estimated the number of lung cancer deaths averted and life-years gained under current screening levels and if everyone eligible was screened.

RESULTS

USPSTF eligibility was 33.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 33.1% to 34.4%), of whom 17.9% (95% CI = 17.0% to 18.8%) self-reported screening. Screening uptake increased with increasing lung cancer death risk quintile (Q1 = 5.2%, 95% CI = 3.0% to 8.8%; Q5 = 21.8%, 95% CI = 20.3% to 23.3%) and life-gain from screening quintile (Q1 = 6.2%, 95% CI = 3.8% to 9.9%; Q5 = 20.8%, 95% CI = 19.5% to 22.2%). Screened individuals had higher lung cancer death risk (risk ratio [RR] = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.26 to 1.46) and life-years gained (RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.25) than unscreened individuals. Currently, screening averts 19 306 lung cancer deaths and gains 237 564 life-years; screening everyone eligible would additionally avert 56 956 lung cancer deaths and gain 751 850 life-years. Two-thirds of USPSTF lung-eligible women were up to date with breast cancer screening, but only 17.3% attended lung screening in the past year.

CONCLUSIONS

Eligible screening attendees had higher lung cancer death risk and benefit from screening. Higher rates of screening could substantially increase the number of lung cancer deaths prevented.

The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan: Provider engagement and outreach

The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan for provider engagement and outreach addresses barriers to the uptake of lung cancer screening, including lack of provider awareness and guideline knowledge about screening, concerns about potential harms from false-positive examinations, lack of time to implement workflows within busy primary care practices, insufficient infrastructure and administrative support to manage a screening program and patient follow-up, and implicit bias based on sex, race/ethnicity, social class, and smoking status. Strategies to facilitate screening include educational programming, clinical reminder systems within the electronic medical record, decision support aids, and tools to track nodules that can be implemented across a diversity of practices and health care organizational structures. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan to reduce deaths from lung cancer includes strategies designed to support health care professionals, to better understand lung cancer screening, and to support adults who are eligible for lung cancer screening by providing counseling, referral, and follow-up.

Lung cancer research and treatment: global perspectives and strategic calls to action

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer remains a critical public health issue, presenting multifaceted challenges in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. This article aims to review the current landscape of lung cancer research and management, delineate the persistent challenges, and outline pragmatic solutions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Global experts from academia, regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), professional societies, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries, and patient advocacy groups were gathered by the New York Lung Cancer Foundation to review the state of the art in lung cancer and to formulate calls to action.

RESULTS

Improving lung cancer management and research involves promoting tobacco cessation, identifying individuals at risk who could benefit from early detection programs, and addressing treatment-related toxicities. Efforts should focus on conducting well-designed trials to determine the optimal treatment sequence. Research into innovative biomarkers and therapies is crucial for more personalized treatment. Ensuring access to appropriate care for all patients, whether enrolled in clinical trials or not, must remain a priority.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung cancer is a major health burden worldwide, and its treatment has become increasingly complex over the past two decades. Improvement in lung cancer management and research requires unified messaging and global collaboration, expanded education, and greater access to screening, biomarker testing, treatment, as well as increased representativeness, participation, and diversity in clinical trials.

The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan: Implementation of high-quality lung cancer screening

More than a decade has passed since researchers in the Early Lung Cancer Action Project and the National Lung Screening Trial demonstrated the ability to save lives of high-risk individuals from lung cancer through regular screening by low dose computed tomography scan. The emergence of the most recent findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung-cancer screening trial (Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek [NELSON]) further strengthens and expands on this evidence. These studies demonstrate the benefit of integrating lung cancer screening into clinical practice, yet lung cancer continues to lead cancer mortality rates in the United States. Fewer than 20% of screen eligible individuals are enrolled in lung cancer screening, leaving millions of qualified individuals without the standard of care and benefit they deserve. This article, part of the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable (ACS NLCRT) strategic plan, examines the impediments to successful adoption, dissemination, and implementation of lung cancer screening. Proposed solutions identified by the ACS NLCRT Implementation Strategies Task Group and work currently underway to address these challenges to improve uptake of lung cancer screening are discussed. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The evidence supporting the benefit of lung cancer screening in adults who previously or currently smoke has led to widespread endorsement and coverage by health plans. Lung cancer screening programs should be designed to promote high uptake rates of screening among eligible adults, and to deliver high-quality screening and follow-up care.

The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan: Introduction

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States and across the world. The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable (ACS NLCRT) was established in 2017 as a consortium of public, private, and voluntary organizations with a mission to lower the impact of lung cancer via prevention, early detection, and optimal therapy. The ACS NLCRT supports a comprehensive scope of work that covers the lung cancer continuum, from risk reduction, tobacco prevention and control, and early detection (screening and incidental lung nodule management) to guideline-based staging, biomarker testing, treatment, and survivorship and overarching issues such as stigma and nihilism, health equity, and tactical approaches such as state coalition efforts and policy initiatives. Applying a multidimensional and multisector approach, over 220 public, private, and government agency member organizations and 250 volunteer experts, patients, and caregiver advocate representatives collaborate to address challenges across the lung cancer continuum by catalyzing action to conceive, build, and strengthen innovative solutions. The wide-ranging membership allows the ACS NLCRT to harness the collective power and expertise of the entire lung cancer community by connecting leaders, communities, and systems to improve equity and access. These national, state, and local relationships provide partnerships for the dissemination of ACS NLCRT-developed tools and resources. This article describes the ACS NLCRT and introduces the series of accompanying and future articles that together make up the ACS NLCRT strategic plan, which provides a roadmap for future research, investment, and collaboration to reduce lung cancer mortality and lung cancer-related stigma and enhance survivorship.

The potential high-risk population for lung cancer screening: determination of initial screening age and heterogeneity in histology and sex

Background

In 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force expanded the initial age for lung cancer screening from 55 to 50 years, which other associations have not followed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the beneficiary age range for lung cancer screening and assess the potential heterogeneity in tumor histology and patient sex.

Methods

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) between 2011 and 2016 were included. The estimation of overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) was conducted for survival analysis among three different age groups: 45-49 (n=4,203), 50-54 (n=10,126), and 55-59 years (n=17,122), adjusting for other clinicopathological characteristics.

Results

Significant differences were observed in OS {hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.94 (0.92-0.96)} and LCSS [HR (95% CI): 0.94 (0.91-0.97)] for patients aged 50-54 compared to those aged 55-59. However, no survival advantage was observed for patients aged 45-49 [HR (95% CI) for OS: 0.97 (0.93-1.01), HR (95% CI) for LCSS: 0.98 (0.93-1.02)]. Similar survival trends were observed in patients with adenocarcinoma whereas no difference among those with squamous cell carcinoma across all age groups. Among patients aged 40-45, we observed a significant survival advantage for males, with no corresponding advantage in females.

Conclusions

Patients aged 50 to 54 can benefit from lung cancer screening, in accordance with the recommendations of the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). The benefits are probably more apparent in adenocarcinoma cases. Younger male patients may benefit more than female patients, which may reflect the need for sex differences in cancer screening.

Clinical Validation of a Cell-Free DNA Fragmentome Assay for Augmentation of Lung Cancer Early Detection

Lung cancer screening via annual low-dose computed tomography has poor adoption. We conducted a prospective case-control study among 958 individuals eligible for lung cancer screening to develop a blood-based lung cancer detection test that when positive is followed by a low-dose computed tomography. Changes in genome-wide cell-free DNA fragmentation profiles (fragmentomes) in peripheral blood reflected genomic and chromatin characteristics of lung cancer. We applied machine learning to fragmentome features to identify individuals who were more or less likely to have lung cancer. We trained the classifier using 576 cases and controls from study samples and validated it in a held-out group of 382 cases and controls. The validation demonstrated high sensitivity for lung cancer and consistency across demographic groups and comorbid conditions. Applying test performance to the screening eligible population in a 5-year model with modest utilization assumptions suggested the potential to prevent thousands of lung cancer deaths. Significance: Lung cancer screening has poor adoption. Our study describes the development and validation of a novel blood-based lung cancer screening test utilizing a highly affordable, low-coverage genome-wide sequencing platform to analyze cell-free DNA fragmentation patterns. The test could improve lung cancer screening rates leading to substantial public health benefits. See related commentary by Haber and Skates, p. 2025.

Evaluating the accuracy of lung-RADS score extraction from radiology reports: Manual entry versus natural language processing

INTRODUCTION

Radiology scoring systems are critical to the success of lung cancer screening (LCS) programs, impacting patient care, adherence to follow-up, data management and reporting, and program evaluation. LungCT ScreeningReporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) is a structured radiology scoring system that provides recommendations for LCS follow-up that are utilized (a) in clinical care and (b) by LCS programs monitoring rates of adherence to follow-up. Thus, accurate reporting and reliable collection of Lung-RADS scores are fundamental components of LCS program evaluation and improvement. Unfortunately, due to variability in radiology reports, extraction of Lung-RADS scores is non-trivial, and best practices do not exist. The purpose of this project is to compare mechanisms to extract Lung-RADS scores from free-text radiology reports.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed reports of LCS low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) examinations performed at a multihospital integrated healthcare network in New York State between January 2016 and July 2023. We compared three methods of Lung-RADS score extraction: manual physician entry at time of report creation, manual LCS specialist entry after report creation, and an internally developed, rule-based natural language processing (NLP) algorithm. Accuracy, recall, precision, and completeness (i.e., the proportion of LCS exams to which a Lung-RADS score has been assigned) were compared between the three methods.

RESULTS

The dataset includes 24,060 LCS examinations on 14,243 unique patients. The mean patient age was 65 years, and most patients were male (54 %) and white (75 %). Completeness rate was 65 %, 68 %, and 99 % for radiologists' manual entry, LCS specialists' entry, and NLP algorithm, respectively. Accuracy, recall, and precision were high across all extraction methods (>94 %), though the NLP-based approach was consistently higher than both manual entries in all metrics.

DISCUSSION

An NLP-based method of LCS score determination is an efficient and more accurate means of extracting Lung-RADS scores than manual review and data entry. NLP-based methods should be considered best practice for extracting structured Lung-RADS scores from free-text radiology reports.

The Potential Benefit of a Novel Urine Biosensor Platform for Lung Cancer Detection in the Decision-Making Process: From the Bench to the Bedside

Background: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Lung cancer screening and early detection resulted in a decrease in cancer-specific mortality; however, it introduced additional dilemmas and adherence barriers for patients and providers. Methods: Innovations such as biomolecular diagnosis and biosensor-based technology improve the detection and stratification of high-risk patients and might assist in overcoming adherence barriers, hence providing new horizons for better selection of screened populations. Conclusions: In the present manuscript, we discuss some of the dilemmas clinicians are currently facing during the diagnosis and treatment processes. We further highlight the potential benefits of a novel biosensor platform for lung cancer detection during the decision making process surrounding lung cancer.

Unlocking the Potential of Computed Tomography-Guided Tracers in Pinpointing Lung Lesions during Surgery: A Collaborative Multi-Institutional Journey

Background: Multiple techniques exist for the preoperative localization of small, deeply located solid or subsolid pulmonary nodules to guide limited thoracoscopic resection. This study aims to conduct a multi-institutional comparison of three different tomography-guided tracers' methods. Methods: A retrospective multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted. All patients suitable for CT-guided tracers with microcoil (GROUP1, n = 58), hook wire (GROUP2, n = 86), or bioabsorbable hydrogel plug (GROUP3, n = 33) were scheduled for video-assisted thoracoscopic wedge resection. Outcome variables: successful nodule localization, safety, and the feasibility of the tracers' placement. A χ2 test or Fisher's test for expected numbers less than five and a Kruskal-Wallis test were used to analyze the categorical and continuous variables, respectively. For the power calculations, we used G*Power version 3.1.9.6. Results: One hundred seventy-seven patients underwent the localization and resection of 177 nodules detected with three different CT-guided tracers. A significant difference was recorded for cancer history (p = 0.030), respiratory function, Charlson comorbidity index (p = 0.018), lesion type (p < 0.0001), distance from pleura surface (p < 0.0001), and time between preoperative CT-guided tracers and surgical procedures (p < 0.0001). Four post-procedural complications were recorded and in GROUP2, four cases of tracer dislocations occurred. Finally, hook wire group was associated with the shortest surgical time (93 min, p = 0.001). Conclusions: All methods were feasible and efficient, resulting in a 100% success rate for the microcoils and the bioabsorbable hydrogel plugs and a 94.2% success rate for the hook wires. Our results highlight the need to choose a technique that is less stressful for the patient and helps the surgeon by extending the approach to deep nodules and resecting over the course of several days from deployment.

Economic Evaluation of a Novel Lung Cancer Diagnostic in a Population of Patients with a Positive Low-Dose Computed Tomography Result

Background: Early detection of lung cancer is crucial for improving patient outcomes. Although advances in diagnostic technologies have significantly enhanced the ability to identify lung cancer in earlier stages, there are still limitations. The alarming rate of false positives has resulted in unnecessary utilization of medical resources and increased risk of adverse events from invasive procedures. Consequently, there is a critical need for advanced diagnostics after an initial low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scan. Objectives: This study evaluated the potential cost savings for US payers of CyPath® Lung, a novel diagnostic tool utilizing flow cytometry and machine learning for the early detection of lung cancer, in patients with positive LDCT scans with indeterminate pulmonary nodules (IPNs) ranging from 6 to 29 mm. Methods: A cost offset model was developed to evaluate the net expected savings associated with the use of CyPath® Lung relative to the current standard of care for individuals whose IPNs range from 6 to 29 mm. Perspectives from both Medicare and private payers in a US setting are included, with a 1-year time horizon. Cost calculations included procedure expenses, complication costs, and diagnostic assessment costs per patient. Primary outcomes of this analysis include cost savings per cohort and cost savings per patient. Results: Our analysis showed positive cost savings from a private payer's perspective, with expected savings of 895   202   311 p e r c o h o r t a n d 6460 per patient, across all patients. Scenario analysis resulted in cost savings of 890   829   889 p e r c o h o r t , a n d 6429 per patient. Similarly, savings of 378   689   020 p e r c o h o r t o r 2733 per patient were yielded for Medicare payers, across all patients. In addition, scenario analysis accounting for false negative patients from a Medicare payer perspective yielded savings of 376   902   203 p e r c o h o r t a n d 2720 per patient. Discussion: The results suggest substantial cost savings, primarily due to reductions in follow-up diagnostic assessments and procedures, and highlight the importance of accurate diagnostic tools in reducing unnecessary healthcare expenditures. Conclusion: CyPath® Lung utilization yields savings for private and Medicare payers relative to the current standard of care in a US setting for individuals with 6 to 20 mm IPNs.

The Development and Performance of Alternative Criteria for Lung Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

The recommendation for lung cancer screening (LCS) developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) may exclude some high-benefit people.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether alternative criteria can identify these high-benefit people.

DESIGN

Model-based projections.

SETTING

United States.

PARTICIPANTS

People from the 1997-2014 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to develop alternative criteria using fast-and-frugal tree algorithms and from the 2014-2018 NHIS and the 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for comparisons of USPSTF criteria versus alternative criteria.

MEASUREMENTS

Life-years gained from LCS were estimated using the life-years gained from screening computed tomography (LYFS-CT) model. "High-benefit" was defined as gaining an average of at least 16.2 days of life from 3 annual screenings, which reflects high lung cancer risk and substantial life gains if lung cancer is detected by screening.

RESULTS

The final alternative criteria were 1) people who smoked any amount each year for at least 40 years, or 2) people aged 60 to 80 years with at least 40 pack-years of smoking. The USPSTF and alternative criteria selected similar numbers of people for LCS. Compared with the USPSTF criteria, the alternative criteria had higher sensitivity (91% vs. 78%; P < 0.001) and specificity (86% vs. 84%; P < 0.001) for identifying high-benefit people. For racial and ethnic minorities, the alternative criteria provided greater gains in sensitivity than the USPSTF criteria (Black: 83% vs. 56% [P < 0.001]; Hispanic: 95% vs. 73% [P = 0.086]; Asian: 94% vs. 68% [P = 0.171]) at similar specificity. The alternative criteria identify high-risk, high-benefit groups excluded by the USPSTF criteria (those with a smoking duration of ≥40 years but <20 pack-years and a quit history of >15 years), many of whom are members of racial and ethnic minorities.

LIMITATION

The results were based on model projections.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that simple alternative LCS criteria can identify substantially more high-benefit people, especially in some racial and ethnic groups.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Lung Precision Oncology Program.

Lung Cancer in Missouri

Lung Cancer remains one of the leading causes of cancer related diagnoses and deaths in Missouri and across the United States. It is a major source of morbidity, mortality, and economic impact in Missouri. Over the past several years, major insights to the underlying risk factors of lung cancer have been discovered. Lung cancer screening has evolved and there are new updates to guideline recommendations on screenings. Here we outline the epidemiology and etiology of lung cancer, mitigation strategies for risk factor reduction, and review updates to lung cancer screening recommendations.

Advances in early detection of non-small cell lung cancer: A comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer has the highest mortality rate among malignancies globally. In addition, due to the growing number of smokers there is considerable concern over its growth. Early detection is an essential step towards reducing complications in this regard and helps to ensure the most effective treatment, reduce health care costs, and increase survival rates.

AIMS

To define the most efficient and cost-effective method of early detection in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected the Information used to write this review by searching papers through PUBMED that were published from 2021 to 2024, mainly systematic reviews, meta-analyses and clinical-trials. We also included other older but notable papers that we found essential and valuable for understanding.

RESULTS

EB-OCT has a varied sensitivity and specificity-an average of 94.3% and 89.9 for each. On the other hand, detecting biomarkers via liquid biopsy carries an average sensitivity of 91.4% for RNA molecules detection, and 97% for combined methylated DNA panels. Moreover, CTCs detection did not prove to have a significant role as a screening method due to the rarity of CTCs in the bloodstream thus the need for more blood samples and for enrichment techniques.

DISCUSSION

Although low-dose CT scan (LDCT) is the current golden standard screening procedure, it is accompanied by a highly false positive rate. In comparison to other radiological screening methods, Endobronchial optical coherence tomography (EB-OCT) has shown a noticeable advantage with a significant degree of accuracy in distinguishing between subtypes of non-small cell lung cancer. Moreover, numerous biomarkers, including RNA molecules, circulating tumor cells, CTCs, and methylated DNA, have been studied in the literature. Many of these biomarkers have a specific high sensitivity and specificity, making them potential candidates for future early detection approaches.

CONCLUSION

LDCT is still the golden standard and the only recommended screening procedure for its high sensitivity and specificity and proven cost-effectiveness. Nevertheless, the notable false positive results acquired during the LDCT examination caused a presumed concern, which drives researchers to investigate better screening procedures and approaches, particularly with the rise of the AI era or by combining two methods in a well-studied screening program like LDCT and liquid biopsy. we suggest conducting more clinical studies on larger populations with a clear demographical target and adopting approaches for combining one of these new methods with LDCT to decrease false-positive cases in early detection.

Brazilian Thoracic Society recommendations for the diagnosis and monitoring of asbestos-exposed individuals

Asbestos was largely used in Brazil. It is a mineral that induces pleural and pulmonary fibrosis, and it is a potent carcinogen. Our objective was to develop recommendations for the performance of adequate imaging tests for screening asbestos-related diseases. We searched peer-reviewed publications, national and international technical documents, and specialists' opinions on the theme. Based on that, the major recommendations are: Individuals exposed to asbestos at the workplace for ≥ 1 year or those with a history of environmental exposure for at least 5 years, all of those with a latency period > 20 years from the date of initial exposure, should initially undego HRCT of the chest for investigation. Individuals with pleural disease and/or asbestosis should be considered for regular lung cancer monitoring. Risk calculators should be adopted for lung cancer screening, with a risk estimate of 1.5%.

Sex differences and racial/ethnic disparities in the presentation and treatment of medullary thyroid cancer

BACKGROUND

This study assessed for disparities in the presentation and management of medullary thyroid cancer (MTC).

METHODS

Patients with MTC (2010-2020) were identified from the National Cancer Database. Differences in disease presentation and likelihood of guideline-concordant surgical management (total thyroidectomy and resection of ≥1 lymph node) were assessed by sex and race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

Of 6154 patients, 68.2% underwent guideline-concordant surgery. Tumors >4 ​cm were more likely in men (vs. women: OR 2.47, p ​< ​0.001) and Hispanic patients (vs. White patients: OR 1.52, p ​= ​0.001). Non-White patients were more likely to have distant metastases (Black: OR 1.63, p ​= ​0.002; Hispanic: OR 1.44, p ​= ​0.038) and experienced longer time to surgery (Black: HR 0.66, p ​< ​0.001; Hispanic: HR 0.71, p ​< ​0.001). Black patients were less likely to undergo guideline-concordant surgery (OR 0.70, p ​= ​0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Male and non-White patients with MTC more frequently present with advanced disease, and Black patients are less likely to undergo guideline-concordant surgery.

Rapid detection of lung cancer based on serum Raman spectroscopy and a support vector machine: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Early screening and detection of lung cancer is essential for the diagnosis and prognosis of the disease. In this paper, we investigated the feasibility of serum Raman spectroscopy for rapid lung cancer screening.

METHODS

Raman spectra were collected from 45 patients with lung cancer, 45 with benign lung lesions, and 45 healthy volunteers. And then the support vector machine (SVM) algorithm was applied to build a diagnostic model for lung cancer. Furthermore, 15 independent individuals were sampled for external validation, including 5 lung cancer patients, 5 benign lung lesion patients, and 5 healthy controls.

RESULTS

The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 91.67%, 92.22%, 90.56% (lung cancer vs. healthy control), 92.22%,95.56%,93.33% (benign lung lesion vs. healthy) and 80.00%, 83.33%, 80.83% (lung cancer vs. benign lung lesion), repectively. In the independent validation cohort, our model showed that all the samples were classified correctly.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, this study demonstrates that the serum Raman spectroscopy analysis technique combined with the SVM algorithm has great potential for the noninvasive detection of lung cancer.

Prediction-Augmented Shared Decision-Making and Lung Cancer Screening Uptake

Importance

Addressing poor uptake of low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening (LCS) is critical, especially for those having the most to gain-high-benefit persons with high lung cancer risk and life expectancy more than 10 years.

Objective

To assess the association between LCS uptake and implementing a prediction-augmented shared decision-making (SDM) tool, which enables clinicians to identify persons predicted to be at high benefit and encourage LCS more strongly for these persons.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Quality improvement interrupted time series study at 6 Veterans Affairs sites that used a standard set of clinical reminders to prompt primary care clinicians and screening coordinators to engage in SDM for LCS-eligible persons. Participants were persons without a history of LCS who met LCS eligibility criteria at the time (aged 55-80 years, smoked ≥30 pack-years, and current smoking or quit <15 years ago) and were not documented to be an inappropriate candidate for LCS by a clinician during October 2017 through September 2019. Data were analyzed from September to November 2023.

Exposure

Decision support tool augmented by a prediction model that helps clinicians personalize SDM for LCS, tailoring the strength of screening encouragement according to predicted benefit.

Main outcome and measure

LCS uptake.

Results

In a cohort of 9904 individuals, the median (IQR) age was 64 (57-69) years; 9277 (94%) were male, 1537 (16%) were Black, 8159 (82%) were White, 5153 (52%) were predicted to be at intermediate (preference-sensitive) benefit and 4751 (48%) at high benefit, and 1084 (11%) received screening during the study period. Following implementation of the tool, higher rates of LCS uptake were observed overall along with an increase in benefit-based LCS uptake (higher screening uptake among persons anticipated to be at high benefit compared with those at intermediate benefit; primary analysis). Mean (SD) predicted probability of getting screened for a high-benefit person was 24.8% (15.5%) vs 15.8% (11.8%) for a person at intermediate benefit (mean absolute difference 9.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.6%-16.5%).

Conclusions and Relevance

Implementing a robust approach to personalized LCS, which integrates SDM, and a decision support tool augmented by a prediction model, are associated with improved uptake of LCS and may be particularly important for those most likely to benefit. These findings are timely given the ongoing poor rates of LCS uptake.

Pack-Year Smoking History: An Inadequate and Biased Measure to Determine Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility

PURPOSE

Pack-year smoking history is an imperfect and biased measure of cumulative tobacco exposure. The use of pack-year smoking history to determine lung cancer screening eligibility in the current US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guideline may unintentionally exclude many high-risk individuals, especially those from racial and ethnic minority groups. It is unclear whether using a smoking duration cutoff instead of a smoking pack-year cutoff would improve the selection of individuals for screening.

METHODS

We analyzed 49,703 individuals with a smoking history from the Southern Community Cohort Study (SCCS) and 22,126 individuals with a smoking history from the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS) to assess eligibility for screening under the USPSTF guideline versus a proposed guideline that replaces the ≥20-pack-year criterion with a ≥20-year smoking duration criterion.

RESULTS

Under the USPSTF guideline, only 57.6% of Black patients with lung cancer in the SCCS would have qualified for screening, whereas a significantly higher percentage of White patients with lung cancer (74.0%) would have qualified (P < .001). Under the proposed guideline, the percentage of Black and White patients with lung cancer who would have qualified for screening increased to 85.3% and 82.0%, respectively, eradicating the disparity in screening eligibility between the groups. In the BWHS, using a 20-year smoking duration cutoff instead of a 20-pack-year cutoff increased the percentage of Black women with lung cancer who would have qualified for screening from 42.5% to 63.8%.

CONCLUSION

Use of a 20-year smoking duration cutoff instead of a 20-pack-year cutoff greatly increases the proportion of patients with lung cancer who would qualify for screening and eliminates the racial disparity in screening eligibility between Black versus White individuals; smoking duration has the added benefit of being easier to calculate and being a more precise assessment of smoking exposure compared with pack-year smoking history.

Lung Cancer Screening Before and After a Multifaceted Electronic Health Record Intervention: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

Importance

Lung cancer is the deadliest cancer in the US. Early-stage lung cancer detection with lung cancer screening (LCS) through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) improves outcomes.

Objective

To assess the association of a multifaceted clinical decision support intervention with rates of identification and completion of recommended LCS-related services.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This nonrandomized controlled trial used an interrupted time series design, including 3 study periods from August 24, 2019, to April 27, 2022: baseline (12 months), period 1 (11 months), and period 2 (9 months). Outcome changes were reported as shifts in the outcome level at the beginning of each period and changes in monthly trend (ie, slope). The study was conducted at primary care and pulmonary clinics at a health care system headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, among patients aged 55 to 80 years who had smoked 30 pack-years or more and were current smokers or had quit smoking in the past 15 years. Data were analyzed from September 2023 through February 2024.

Interventions

Interventions in period 1 included clinician-facing preventive care reminders, an electronic health record-integrated shared decision-making tool, and narrative LCS guidance provided in the LDCT ordering screen. Interventions in period 2 included the same clinician-facing interventions and patient-facing reminders for LCS discussion and LCS.

Main Outcome and Measure

The primary outcome was LCS care gap closure, defined as the identification and completion of recommended care services. LCS care gap closure could be achieved through LDCT completion, other chest CT completion, or LCS shared decision-making.

Results

The study included 1865 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [60-70] years; 759 female [40.7%]). The clinician-facing intervention (period 1) was not associated with changes in level but was associated with an increase in slope of 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 2.4-2.7 percentage points) per month in care gap closure through any means and 1.6 percentage points (95% CI, 1.4-1.8 percentage points) per month in closure through LDCT. In period 2, introduction of patient-facing reminders was associated with an immediate increase in care gap closure (2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.0-3.6 percentage points) and closure through LDCT (2.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.9-3.9 percentage points) but was not associated with an increase in slope. The overall care gap closure rate was 175 of 1104 patients (15.9%) at the end of the baseline period vs 588 of 1255 patients (46.9%) at the end of period 2.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, a multifaceted intervention was associated with an improvement in LCS care gap closure.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04498052.

Interpreting Lung Cancer Screening CTs: Practical Approach to Lung Cancer Screening and Application of Lung-RADS

Lung cancer screening via low-dose computed tomography (CT) reduces mortality from lung cancer, and eligibility criteria have recently been expanded to include patients aged 50 to 80 with at least 20 pack-years of smoking history. Lung cancer screening CTs should be interepreted with use of Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS), a reporting guideline system that accounts for nodule size, density, and growth. The revised version of Lung-RADS includes several important changes, such as expansion of the definition of juxtapleural nodules, discussion of atypical pulmonary cysts, and stepped management for suspicious nodules. By using Lung-RADS, radiologists and clinicians can adopt a uniform approach to nodules detected during CT lung cancer screening and reduce false positives.

Harmonization of clinical practice guidelines for primary prevention and screening: actionable recommendations and resources for primary care

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) synthesize high-quality information to support evidence-based clinical practice. In primary care, numerous CPGs must be integrated to address the needs of patients with multiple risks and conditions. The BETTER program aims to improve prevention and screening for cancer and chronic disease in primary care by synthesizing CPGs into integrated, actionable recommendations. We describe the process used to harmonize high-quality cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) CPGs to update the BETTER program.

METHODS

A review of CPG databases, repositories, and grey literature was conducted to identify international and Canadian (national and provincial) CPGs for CCDPS in adults 40-69 years of age across 19 topic areas: cancers, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, hepatitis C, obesity, osteoporosis, depression, and associated risk factors (i.e., diet, physical activity, alcohol, cannabis, drug, tobacco, and vaping/e-cigarette use). CPGs published in English between 2016 and 2021, applicable to adults, and containing CCDPS recommendations were included. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and a three-step process involving patients, health policy, content experts, primary care providers, and researchers was used to identify and synthesize recommendations.

RESULTS

We identified 51 international and Canadian CPGs and 22 guidelines developed by provincial organizations that provided relevant CCDPS recommendations. Clinical recommendations were extracted and reviewed for inclusion using the following criteria: 1) pertinence to primary prevention and screening, 2) relevance to adults ages 40-69, and 3) applicability to diverse primary care settings. Recommendations were synthesized and integrated into the BETTER toolkit alongside resources to support shared decision-making and care paths for the BETTER program.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive care requires the ability to address a person's overall health. An approach to identify high-quality clinical guidance to comprehensively address CCDPS is described. The process used to synthesize and harmonize implementable clinical recommendations may be useful to others wanting to integrate evidence across broad content areas to provide comprehensive care. The BETTER toolkit provides resources that clearly and succinctly present a breadth of clinical evidence that providers can use to assist with implementing CCDPS guidance in primary care.

Personalised follow-up and management schema for patients with screen-detected pulmonary nodules: A dynamic modelling study

BACKGROUND

Selecting the time target for follow-up testing in lung cancer screening is challenging. We aim to devise dynamic, personalized lung cancer screening schema for patients with pulmonary nodules detected through low-dose computed tomography.

METHODS

We developed and validated dynamic models using data of pulmonary nodule patients (aged 55-74 years) from the National Lung Screening Trial. We predicted patient-specific risk profiles at baseline (R0) and updated the risk evaluation results in repeated screening rounds (R1 and R2). We used risk cutoffs to optimize time-dependent sensitivity at an early decision point (3 months) and time-dependent specificity at a late decision point (1 year).

RESULTS

In validation, area under receiver operating characteristic curve for predicting 12-month lung cancer onset was 0.867 (95 % confidence interval: 0.827-0.894) and 0.807 (0.765-0.948) at R0 and R1-R2, respectively. The personalized schema, compared with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline and Lung-RADS, yielded lower rates of delayed diagnosis (1.7% vs. 1.7% vs. 6.9 %) and over-testing (4.9% vs. 5.6% vs. 5.6 %) at R0, and lower rates of delayed diagnosis (0.0% vs. 18.2% vs. 18.2 %) and over-testing (2.6% vs. 8.3% vs. 7.3 %) at R2. Earlier test recommendation among cancer patients was more frequent using the personalized schema (vs. NCCN: 29.8% vs. 20.9 %, p = 0.0065; vs. Lung-RADS: 33.2% vs. 22.8 %, p = 0.0025), especially for women, patients aged ≥65 years, and part-solid or non-solid nodules.

CONCLUSIONS

The personalized schema is easy-to-implement and more accurate compared with rule-based protocols. The results highlight value of personalized approaches in realizing efficient nodule management.

Lung cancer screening use among screening-eligible adults with disabilities

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer screening (LCS) use among adults with disabilities has not been well characterized. We estimated the prevalence of LCS use by disability types and counts and investigated the association between disability counts and LCS utilization among LCS-eligible adults.

METHODS

We used cross-sectional data from the 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Lung Cancer Screening Module. Based on the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force criteria for LCS, the sample included 4407 LCS-eligible adults, aged 55-79 years, with current or former (quit smoking in the past 15 years) tobacco use history of at least 30 pack-years. Disability types included limitations in hearing, vision, cognition, mobility, self-care, and independent living. We also categorized respondents by number of disabilities (no disability, 1 disability, 2 disabilities, 3+ disabilities). We utilized descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses to determine the association between disability counts and the receipt of LCS (yes/no) in the past 12 months.

RESULTS

In 2019, 16.4% of LCS-eligible adults were screened for lung cancer. Overall, 49.6% of participants had no disability, and 14.5% had >3 disabilities. Mobility was the most prevalent disability type (35.4%), followed by cognitive impairment (18.2%) and hearing (16.6%). LCS was more prevalent in adults with disability in self-care versus no disability in self-care (24.0% vs. 15.5%, p = 0.01), disability in independent living versus no disability in independent living (22.2% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.02), and cognitive impairment disability versus no cognitive impairment (22.1% vs. 15.3%, p = 0.03). The prevalence rates of LCS among groups of LCS-eligible adults with different disability counts were not significant (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the lack of clinical guidelines on LCS among individuals with disabilities, some individuals with disabilities are being screened for lung cancer. Future research should address this knowledge gap to determine clinical benefit versus harm of LCS among those with disabilities.

Effect of a Personalized Tobacco Treatment Intervention on Smoking Abstinence in Individuals Eligible for Lung Cancer Screening

INTRODUCTION

To determine whether personalized gain-framed messaging and biomarker feedback related to tobacco cessation or reduction decrease smoking behavior in patients undergoing or eligible for lung cancer screening.

METHODS

Between 2016 and 2020, 188 patients were enrolled in a two-phase, sequential, randomized controlled trial. Phase 1 evaluated whether standard of care (SC) (five in-person counseling sessions and 8 weeks of nicotine patch) plus gain-framed messaging (GFM) versus SC would increase 8-week biochemically verified smoking cessation rates. In 143 participants randomized in phase 2, we tested whether feedback on smoking-related biomarkers would reduce 6-month self-reported number of cigarettes smoked per day compared with a no feedback control. Chi-square test and mixed effects repeated measures analyses were used to evaluate group differences.

RESULTS

Participants were 62.5 ± 5.6 (mean ± SD) years of age, had a 50.3 ± 21 pack-year smoking history, and were smoking 16.9 ± 9.9 cigarettes per day. At 8 weeks, there was no difference in quit rates between those randomized to SC plus GFM (n = 15 of 93, 16.1%) and those randomized to SC (n = 16 of 95, 16.8%), with p equals to 0.90. At the 6-month post-randomization follow-up, number of cigarettes smoked per day was similar in the feedback (least-squares mean = 7.5, 95% confidence interval: 6.0-9.1) and no feedback arms (7.7, 95% confidence interval: 6.2-9.3), with p equals to 0.87.

CONCLUSIONS

Gain-framed messaging and health feedback did not significantly improve quit rates relative to comprehensive standard of care. Nevertheless, the overall program achieved clinically meaningful smoking quit rates in this older high pack-year cohort, highlighting the importance of intensive tobacco treatment for patients undergoing lung cancer screening. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTERED WITH CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT02658032.

Association of patient and health care organization factors with incidental nodule guidelines adherence: A multi-system observational study

BACKGROUND

Health care organizations are increasingly developing systems to ensure patients with pulmonary nodules receive guideline-adherent care. Our goal was to determine patient and organization factors that are associated with radiologist adherence as well as clinician and patient concordance to 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines for incidental pulmonary nodule follow-up.

MATERIALS

Trained researchers abstracted data from the electronic health record from two Veterans Affairs health care systems for patients with incidental pulmonary nodules as identified by interpreting radiologists from 2008 to 2016.

METHODS

We classified radiology reports and patient follow-up into two categories. Radiologist-Fleischner Adherence was the agreement between the radiologist's recommendation in the computed tomography report and the 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines. Clinician/Patient-Fleischner Concordance was agreement between patient follow-up and the guidelines. We calculated multivariable-adjusted predicted probabilities for factors associated with Radiologist-Fleischner Adherence and Clinician/Patient-Fleischner Concordance.

RESULTS

Among 3150 patients, 69% of radiologist recommendations were adherent to 2005 Fleischner guidelines, 4% were more aggressive, and 27% recommended less aggressive follow-up. Overall, only 48% of patients underwent follow-up concordant with 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines, 37% had less aggressive follow-up, and 15% had more aggressive follow-up. Radiologist-Fleischner Adherence was associated with Clinician/Patient-Fleischner Concordance with evidence for effect modification by health care system.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians and patients seem to follow radiologists' recommendations but often do not obtain concordant follow-up, likely due to downstream differential processes in each health care system. Health care organizations need to develop comprehensive and rigorous tools to ensure high levels of appropriate follow-up for patients with pulmonary nodules.

Lung cancer screening in Brazil: recommendations from the Brazilian Society of Thoracic Surgery, Brazilian Thoracic Association, and Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging

Although lung cancer (LC) is one of the most common and lethal tumors, only 15% of patients are diagnosed at an early stage. Smoking is still responsible for more than 85% of cases. Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT (LDCT) reduces LC-related mortality by 20%, and that reduction reaches 38% when LCS by LDCT is combined with smoking cessation. In the last decade, a number of countries have adopted population-based LCS as a public health recommendation. Albeit still incipient, discussion on this topic in Brazil is becoming increasingly broad and necessary. With the aim of increasing knowledge and stimulating debate on LCS, the Brazilian Society of Thoracic Surgery, the Brazilian Thoracic Association, and the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging convened a panel of experts to prepare recommendations for LCS in Brazil. The recommendations presented here were based on a narrative review of the literature, with an emphasis on large population-based studies, systematic reviews, and the recommendations of international guidelines, and were developed after extensive discussion by the panel of experts. The following topics were reviewed: reasons for screening; general considerations about smoking; epidemiology of LC; eligibility criteria; incidental findings; granulomatous lesions; probabilistic models; minimum requirements for LDCT; volumetric acquisition; risks of screening; minimum structure and role of the multidisciplinary team; practice according to the Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System; costs versus benefits of screening; and future perspectives for LCS.

Promoting Lung Cancer Screen Decision-Making and Early Detection Behaviors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Promoting lung cancer screening (LCS) is complex. Previous studies have overlooked that LCS behaviors are stage based and thus did not identify the characteristics of LCS interventions at different screening stages.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to explore the characteristics and efficacy of interventions in promoting LCS decision making and behaviors and to evaluate these interventions.

METHODS

We conducted a study search from the inception of each bibliographic database to April 8, 2023. The precaution adoption process model was used to synthesize and classify the evidence. The RE-AIM framework was used to evaluate the effectiveness of LCS programs. Heterogeneity tests and meta-analysis were performed using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

We included 31 studies that covered 4 LCS topics: knowledge of lung cancer, knowledge of LCS, value clarification exercises, and LCS supportive resources. Patient decision aids outperformed educational materials in improving knowledge and decision outcomes with a significant reduction in decision conflict (standardized mean difference, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, -1.15 to -0.47; P < .001). Completion rates of LCS ranged from 3.6% to 98.8%. Interventions that included screening resources outperformed interventions that used patient decision aids alone in improving LCS completion. The proportions of reported RE-AIM indicators were highest for reach (69.59%), followed by adoption (43.87%), effectiveness (36.13%), implementation (33.33%), and maintenance (9.68%).

CONCLUSION

Evidence from 31 studies identified intervention characteristics and effectiveness of LCS interventions based on different stages of decision making.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

It is crucial to develop targeted and systematic interventions based on the characteristics of each stage of LCS to maximize intervention effectiveness and reduce the burden of lung cancer.

Bone mineral density in lower thoracic vertebra for osteoporosis diagnosis in older adults during CT lung cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Quantitative computed tomography (QCT)-based lumbar bone mineral density (LBMD) has been used to diagnose osteoporosis. This study explored the value of lower thoracic BMD (TBMD) in diagnosing osteoporosis in older adults during CT lung cancer screening.

METHODS

This study included 751 subjects who underwent QCT scans with both LBMD and TBMD. 141 of them was selected for a validation. Osteoporosis was diagnosed based on LBMD using the ACR criteria (gold standard). TBMD thresholds were obtained using receiver operating characteristic curve. TBMD was also translated into LBMD (TTBMD) and osteoporosis was defined based on TTBMD using ACR criteria. The performance of TBMD and TTBMD in identifying osteoporosis was determined by Kappa test. The associations between TBMD- and TTBMD-based osteoporosis and fracture were tested in 227 subjects with followed up status of spine fracture.

RESULTS

The performance of TBMD in identifying osteoporosis was low (kappa = 0.66) if using the ACR criteria. Two thresholds of TBMD for identifying osteopenia (128 mg/cm3) and osteoporosis (91 mg/cm3) were obtained with areas under the curve of 0.97 and 0.99, respectively. The performance of the identification of osteoporosis/osteopenia using the two thresholds or TTBMD both had good agreement with the gold standard (kappa = 0.78, 0.86). Similar results were observed in validation population. Osteoporosis identified using the thresholds (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 18.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 5.13-68.36) or TTBMD (adjusted HR = 10.28, 95% CI: 4.22-25.08) were also associated with fractures.

CONCLUSION

Calculating the threshold of TBMD or normalizing TBMD to LBMD are both useful in identifying osteoporosis in older adults during CT lung cancer screening.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Lung Cancer Screening Processes in a Northeast Tertiary Health Care Network

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted health care systems, including implementation of lung cancer screening programs. The impact and recovery from this disruption on screening processes is not well appreciated. Herein, the radiology database of a Northeast tertiary health care network was reviewed before and during the pandemic (2013-2022). In the 3 months before the pandemic, an average of 77.3 lung cancer screening with computed tomography scans (LCS-CT) were performed per month. The average dropped to 23.3 between April and June of 2020, whereas COVID-19 hospitalizations peaked at 1604. By July, average hospitalizations dropped to 50, and LCS-CTs rose to >110 per month for the remaining year. LCS-CTs did not decline during COVID-19 surges in December of 2021 and 2022. The LCS-CT performance grew by 4.5% in 2020, 69.6% in 2021, and 27.0% in 2022, exceeding projected growth by 722 examinations. This resiliency indicates a potentially smaller impact of COVID-19 on lung cancer diagnoses than initially feared.

A Highly Sensitive and Specific Non-Invasive Test through Genome-Wide 5-Hydroxymethylation Mapping for Early Detection of Lung Cancer

Low-dose computed tomography screening can increase the detection for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To improve the diagnostic accuracy of early-stage NSCLC detection, ultrasensitive methods are used to detect cell-free DNA (cfDNA) 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) in plasma. Genome-wide 5hmC is profiled in 1990 cfDNA samples collected from patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, n = 727), healthy controls (HEA, n = 1,092), as well as patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC, n = 41), followed by sample randomization, differential analysis, feature selection, and modeling using a machine learning approach. Differentially modified features reflecting tissue origin. A weighted diagnostic model comprised of 105 features is developed to compute a detection score for each individual, which showed an area under the curve (AUC) range of 86.4%-93.1% in the internal and external validation sets for distinguishing lung cancer from HEA controls, significantly outperforming serum biomarkers (p < 0.001). The 5hmC-based model detected high-risk pulmonary nodules (AUC: 82%)and lung cancer of different subtypes with high accuracy as well. A highly sensitive and specific blood-based test is developed for detecting lung cancer. The 5hmC biomarkers in cfDNA offer a promising blood-based test for lung cancer.

"It Can't Hurt!": Why Many Patients With Limited Life Expectancy Decide to Accept Lung Cancer Screening

PURPOSE

Lung cancer screening (LCS) has less benefit and greater potential for iatrogenic harm among people with multiple comorbidities and limited life expectancy. Yet, such individuals are more likely to undergo screening than healthier LCS-eligible people. We sought to understand how patients with marginal LCS benefit conceptualize their health and make decisions regarding LCS.

METHODS

We interviewed 40 people with multimorbidity and limited life expectancy, as determined by high Care Assessment Need scores, which predict 1-year risk of hospitalization or death. Patients were recruited from 6 Veterans Health Administration facilities after discussing LCS with their clinician. We conducted a thematic analysis using constant comparison to explore factors that influence LCS decision making.

RESULTS

Patients commonly held positive beliefs about screening and perceived LCS to be noninvasive. When posed with hypothetical scenarios of limited benefit, patients emphasized the nonlongevity benefits of LCS (eg, peace of mind, planning for the future) and generally did not consider their health status or life expectancy when making decisions regarding LCS. Most patients were unaware of possible additional evaluations or treatment of screen-detected findings, but when probed further, many expressed concerns about the potential need for multiple evaluations, referrals, or invasive procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in this study with multimorbidity and limited life expectancy were unaware of their greater risk of potential harm when accepting LCS. Given patient trust in clinician recommendations, it is important that clinicians engage patients with marginal LCS benefit in shared decision making, ensuring that their values of desiring more information about their health are weighed against potential harms from further evaluations.

Deep Learning-Based Kernel Adaptation Enhances Quantification of Emphysema on Low-Dose Chest CT for Predicting Long-Term Mortality

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to ascertain the predictive value of quantifying emphysema using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) post deep learning-based kernel adaptation on long-term mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study investigated LDCTs obtained from asymptomatic individuals aged 60 years or older during health checkups between February 2009 and December 2016. These LDCTs were reconstructed using a 1- or 1.25-mm slice thickness alongside high-frequency kernels. A deep learning algorithm, capable of generating CT images that resemble standard-dose and low-frequency kernel images, was applied to these LDCTs. To quantify emphysema, the lung volume percentage with an attenuation value less than or equal to -950 Hounsfield units (LAA-950) was gauged before and after kernel adaptation. Low-dose chest CTs with LAA-950 exceeding 6% were deemed emphysema-positive according to the Fleischner Society statement. Survival data were sourced from the National Registry Database at the close of 2021. The risk of nonaccidental death, excluding causes such as injury or poisoning, was explored according to the emphysema quantification results using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The study comprised 5178 participants (mean age ± SD, 66 ± 3 years; 3110 males). The median LAA-950 (18.2% vs 2.6%) and the proportion of LDCTs with LAA-950 exceeding 6% (96.3% vs 39.3%) saw a significant decline after kernel adaptation. There was no association between emphysema quantification before kernel adaptation and the risk of nonaccidental death. Nevertheless, after kernel adaptation, higher LAA-950 (hazards ratio for 1% increase, 1.01; P = 0.045) and LAA-950 exceeding 6% (hazards ratio, 1.36; P = 0.008) emerged as independent predictors of nonaccidental death, upon adjusting for age, sex, and smoking status.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of deep learning for kernel adaptation proves instrumental in quantifying pulmonary emphysema on LDCTs, establishing itself as a potential predictive tool for long-term nonaccidental mortality in asymptomatic individuals.

Challenges Addressing Lung Cancer Screening for Patients With Multimorbidity in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

Many individuals who are eligible for lung cancer screening have comorbid conditions complicating their shared decision-making conversations with physicians. The goal of our study was to better understand how primary care physicians (PCPs) factor comorbidities into their evaluation of the risks and benefits of lung cancer screening and into their shared decision-making conversations with patients.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews by videoconference with 15 PCPs to assess the extent of shared decision-making practices and explore their understanding of the intersection of comorbidities and lung cancer screening, and how that understanding informed their clinical approach to this population.

RESULTS

We identified 3 themes. The first theme was whether to discuss or not to discuss lung cancer screening. PCPs described taking additional steps for individuals with complex comorbidities to decide whether to initiate this discussion and used subjective clinical judgment to decide whether the conversation would be productive and beneficial. PCPs made mental assessments that factored in the patient's health, life expectancy, quality of life, and access to support systems. The second theme was that shared decision making is not a simple discussion. When PCPs did initiate discussions about lung cancer screening, although some believed they could provide objective information, others struggled with personal biases. The third theme was that ultimately, the decision to be screened was up to the patient. Patients had the final say, even if their decision was discordant with the PCP's advice.

CONCLUSIONS

Shared decision-making conversations about lung cancer screening differed substantially from the standard for patients with complex comorbidities. Future research should include efforts to characterize the risks and benefits of LCS in patients with comorbidities to inform guidelines and clinical application.

Machine-Learning-Based Classification Model to Address Diagnostic Challenges in Transbronchial Lung Biopsy

BACKGROUND

When obtaining specimens from pulmonary nodules in TBLB, distinguishing between benign samples and mis-sampling from a tumor presents a challenge. Our objective is to develop a machine-learning-based classifier for TBLB specimens.

METHODS

Three pathologists assessed six pathological findings, including interface bronchitis/bronchiolitis (IB/B), plasma cell infiltration (PLC), eosinophil infiltration (Eo), lymphoid aggregation (Ly), fibroelastosis (FE), and organizing pneumonia (OP), as potential histologic markers to distinguish between benign and malignant conditions. A total of 251 TBLB cases with defined benign and malignant outcomes based on clinical follow-up were collected and a gradient-boosted decision-tree-based machine learning model (XGBoost) was trained and tested on randomly split training and test sets.

RESULTS

Five pathological changes showed independent, mild-to-moderate associations (AUC ranging from 0.58 to 0.75) with benign conditions, with IB/B being the strongest predictor. On the other hand, FE emerged to be the sole indicator of malignant conditions with a mild association (AUC = 0.66). Our model was trained on 200 cases and tested on 51 cases, achieving an AUC of 0.78 for the binary classification of benign vs. malignant on the test set.

CONCLUSION

The machine-learning model developed has the potential to distinguish between benign and malignant conditions in TBLB samples excluding the presence or absence of tumor cells, thereby improving diagnostic accuracy and reducing the burden of repeated sampling procedures for patients.

What Goes into Patient Selection for Lung Cancer Screening? Factors Associated with Clinician Judgments of Suitability for Screening

Rationale: Achieving the net benefit of lung cancer screening (LCS) depends on optimizing patient selection. Objective: To identify factors associated with clinician assessments that a patient was unlikely to benefit from LCS ("LCS-inappropriate") because of comorbidities or limited life expectancy. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients assessed for LCS at 30 Veterans Health Administration facilities from January 1, 2015 to February 1, 2021. We conducted hierarchical mixed-effects logistic regression analyses to determine factors associated with clinicians' designations of LCS inappropriateness (primary outcome), accounting for 3-year predicted probability (i.e., competing risk) of non-lung cancer death. Measurements and Main Results: Among 38,487 LCS-eligible patients, 1,671 (4.3%) were deemed LCS-inappropriate by clinicians, whereas 4,383 (11.4%) had an estimated 3-year competing risk of non-lung cancer death greater than 20%. Patients with higher competing risks of non-lung cancer death were more likely to be deemed LCS-inappropriate (odds ratio [OR], 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.32-3.05). Older patients (ages 75-80; OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.18-1.78) and those with interstitial lung disease (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.51-2.59) were more likely to be deemed LCS-inappropriate than would be explained by competing risk of non-lung cancer death, whereas patients currently smoking (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.58-0.73) were less likely to be deemed LCS-inappropriate, suggesting that clinicians over- or underweighted these factors. The probability of being deemed LCS-inappropriate varied from 0.4% to 74%, depending on the clinician making the assessment (median OR, 3.07; 95% CI, 2.89-3.25). Conclusion: Concerningly, the likelihood that a patient is deemed LCS-inappropriate is more strongly associated with the clinician making the assessment than with patient characteristics. Patient selection may be optimized by providing decision support to help clinicians assess net LCS benefit.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography and a polygenic risk score

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have proved that Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) is a potential candidate for realizing precision screening. The effectiveness of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer has been proved to reduce lung cancer specific and overall mortality, but the cost-effectiveness of diverse screening strategies remained unclear.

METHODS

The comparative cost-effectiveness analysis used a Markov state-transition model to assess the potential effect and costs of the screening strategies incorporating PRS or not. A hypothetical cohort of 300,000 heavy smokers entered the study at age 50-74 years and were followed up until death or age 79 years. The model was run with a cycle length of 1 year. All the transition probabilities were validated and the performance value of PRS was extracted from published literature. A societal perspective was adopted and cost parameters were derived from databases of local medical insurance bureau. Sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The strategy incorporating PRS was estimated to obtain an ICER of CNY 156,691.93 to CNY 221,741.84 per QALY gained compared with non-screening with the initial start age range across 50-74 years. The strategy that screened using LDCT alone from 70-74 years annually could obtain an ICER of CNY 80,880.85 per QALY gained, which was the most cost-effective strategy. The introduction of PRS as an extra eligible criteria was associated with making strategies cost-saving but also lose the capability of gaining more LYs compared with LDCT screening alone.

CONCLUSION

The PRS-based conjunctive screening strategy for lung cancer screening in China was not cost-effective using the willingness-to-pay threshold of 1 time Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, and the optimal screening strategy for lung cancer still remains to be LDCT screening for now. Further optimization of the screening modality can be useful to consider adoption of PRS and prospective evaluation remains a research priority.

Predicting the Invasiveness of Pulmonary Adenocarcinomas in Pure Ground-Glass Nodules Using the Nodule Diameter: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Validation in an Independent Cohort

The nodule diameter was commonly used to predict the invasiveness of pulmonary adenocarcinomas in pure ground-glass nodules (pGGNs). However, the diagnostic performance and optimal cut-off values were inconsistent. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the nodule diameter for predicting the invasiveness of pulmonary adenocarcinomas in pGGNs and validated the cut-off value of the diameter in an independent cohort. Relevant studies were searched through PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, from inception until December 2022. The inclusion criteria comprised studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the nodule diameter to differentiate invasive adenocarcinomas (IAs) from non-invasive adenocarcinomas (non-IAs) in pGGNs. A bivariate mixed-effects regression model was used to obtain the diagnostic performance. Meta-regression analysis was performed to explore the heterogeneity. An independent sample of 220 pGGNs (82 IAs and 128 non-IAs) was enrolled as the validation cohort to evaluate the performance of the cut-off values. This meta-analysis finally included 16 studies and 2564 pGGNs (761 IAs and 1803 non-IAs). The pooled area under the curve, the sensitivity, and the specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.82-0.88), 0.82 (95% CI, 0.78-0.86), and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.67-0.78). The diagnostic performance was affected by the measure of the diameter, the reconstruction matrix, and patient selection bias. Using the prespecified cut-off value of 10.4 mm for the mean diameter and 13.2 mm for the maximal diameter, the mean diameter showed higher sensitivity than the maximal diameter in the validation cohort (0.85 vs. 0.72, p < 0.01), while there was no significant difference in specificity (0.83 vs. 0.86, p = 0.13). The nodule diameter had adequate diagnostic performance in differentiating IAs from non-IAs in pGGNs and could be replicated in a validation cohort. The mean diameter with a cut-off value of 10.4 mm was recommended.