Ten-year results of the Multicentric Italian Lung Detection trial demonstrate the safety and efficacy of biennial lung cancer screening

Adherence to Annual Lung Cancer Screening and Rates of Cancer Diagnosis

Importance

Adherence to annual lung cancer screening (LCS) is a proposed quality metric for LCS programs, but data linking annual adherence to lung cancer outcomes are lacking.

Objective

To investigate annual LCS adherence rates across 2 subsequent LCS rounds among adults undergoing baseline LCS and examine the association of adherence with lung cancer diagnosis rates.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included adults aged 55 to 75 years who formerly or currently smoked and underwent baseline LCS between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, across 5 US health care systems in the Population-Based Research to Optimize the Screening Process-Lung Consortium. Participants with missing Lung Computed Tomography Screening Reporting & Data System scores or a lung cancer diagnosis prior to LCS initiation were excluded. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to October 2024.

Exposures

For negative baseline screening results, T1 and T2 screening adherence was defined as chest computed tomography (CT) between 10 and 18 months and 22 and 30 months after baseline, respectively. For positive baseline screening results, T1 and T2 adherence was defined as chest CT between 11 and 21 months and 28 and 36 months after baseline, respectively.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were annual T1 and T2 LCS adherence rates and associations between T1 and T2 screening adherence; annual incident lung cancer diagnoses in rounds T0 (0-12 months after baseline), T1 (>12 to 24 months after baseline), and T2 (>24 to 36 months after baseline); and cancer stage distribution.

Results

A total of 10 170 individuals received baseline LCS (median age, 65 years [IQR, 60-69 years]; 5415 [53.2%] male). During round T1, 6141 of 10 033 eligible patients (61.2% [95% CI, 60.2%-62.2%]) were adherent, and during round T2, 5028 of 9966 eligible patients (50.5% [95% CI, 49.5%-51.4%]) were adherent. T1 adherence was significantly associated with T2 adherence (adjusted relative risk, 2.40; 95% CI, 2.06-2.79). Across 36 months of follow-up, 279 patients (2.7%; 95% CI, 2.4%-3.1%) were diagnosed with lung cancer. Incident lung cancer diagnosis rates were 1.3% (95% CI, 1.1%-1.6%), 0.7% (95% CI, 0.5%-0.8%), and 0.8% (95% CI, 0.6%-0.9%) during rounds T0, T1, and T2, respectively. Lung cancer diagnosis rates were higher among individuals who were LCS adherent vs nonadherent during both rounds T1 (59 of 6141 [1.0%; 95% CI, 0.7%-1.2%] vs 8 of 3892 [0.2%; 95% CI, 0.1%-0.4%]; P < .001) and T2 (63 of 5028 [1.3%; 95% CI, 1.0%-1.6%] vs 12 of 4938 [0.2%; 95% CI, 0.1%-0.4%]; P < .001). A greater proportion of early-stage lung cancers were diagnosed among individuals adherent to screening at T2 compared with those who were not (46 of 63 [73.0%] vs 3 of 12 [25.0%]; P = .006).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this multicenter cohort study of adults undergoing LCS, screening adherence was associated with increased overall and early-stage lung cancer detection rates; however, adherence decreased annually after baseline screening, suggesting that it is an important LCS quality metric.

Low Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening in Tuberculosis Endemic Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer screening (LCS) using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces mortality. Nevertheless, in high tuberculosis-burden countries (HTBC), there are concerns about high false-positive rates due to persistent lung lesions from prior tuberculosis (TB) infections. This study aims to evaluate the screen-positive rate (SPR) of LDCT screening in HTBC.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify studies utilizing LDCT for LCS in HTBC and reported SPR from inception to December 6, 2023. The primary outcome was the SPR, and the secondary outcome was the lung cancer detection rate (LCDR). The summary data was pooled using a random-effects model, and factors influencing the SPR were analyzed using multivariable meta-regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 44 studies with 477,424 individuals (59.3% men) were included in the systematic review. Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) (31%, 14 studies) and National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) criteria (non-calcified nodule ≥ 4 mm; 10 studies) were the most common criteria used for assessing SPR. The pooled SPR and LCDR were 18.36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.6-22.1) and 0.94% (95% confidence interval: 0.75-1.15), respectively. Although SPR was significantly higher with NLST criteria than Lung-RADS criteria (25.6% versus 10.4%, p < 0.0001), the LCDR remained similar (0.91% versus 0.95%, p = 0.92). Studies using NLST criteria had a higher SPR in multivariable meta-regression analysis. Nevertheless, the analysis is limited by significant statistical heterogeneity and publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Lung cancer screening by LDCT in HTBC demonstrates comparable SPR and LCDR to regions with lower TB incidence rates. Lung-RADS criteria are preferable to NLST criteria for LCS in HTBC to mitigate false-positive rates.

Coronary calcium score and emphysema extent on different CT radiation dose protocols in lung cancer screening

OBJECTIVES

To assess the consistency of automated measurements of coronary artery calcification (CAC) burden and emphysema extent on computed tomography (CT) images acquired with different radiation dose protocols in a lung cancer screening (LCS) population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The patient cohort comprised 361 consecutive screenees who underwent a low-dose CT (LDCT) scan and an ultra-low-dose CT (ULDCT) scan at an incident screening round. Exclusion criteria for CAC measurements were software failure and previous history of CVD, including coronary stenting, whereas for emphysema assessment, software failure only. CT images were retrospectively analyzed by a fully automated AI software for CAC scoring, using three predefined Agatston score categories (0-99, 100-399, and ≥ 400), and emphysema quantification, using the percentage of low attenuation areas (%LAA). Demographic and clinical data were obtained from the written questionnaire completed by each participant at the first visit. Agreement for CAC and %LAA categories was measured by the k-Cohen Index with Fleiss-Cohen weights (Kw) and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI).

RESULTS

An overlap of CAC strata was observed in 275/327 (84%) volunteers, with an almost perfect agreement (Kw = 0.86, 95% CI 0.82-0.90; ICC = 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.90), while an overlap of %LAA strata was found in 204/356 (57%) volunteers, with a moderate agreement (Kw = 0.57, 95% CI 0.51-0.63; ICC = 0.57, 95% CI 0.21-0.75).

CONCLUSION

Automated CAC quantification on ULDCT seems feasible, showing similar results to those obtained on LDCT, while the quantification of emphysema tended to be overestimated on ULDCT images.

KEY POINTS

Question Evidence demonstrating that coronary artery calcification and emphysema can be automatedly quantified on ultra-low-dose chest CT is still awaited. Findings Coronary artery calcification and emphysema measurements were similar among different CT radiation dose protocols; their automated quantification is feasible on ultra-low-dose CT. Clinical relevance Ultra-low-dose CT-based LCS might offer an opportunity to improve the secondary prevention of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases through automated quantification of both CAC burden and emphysema extent.

Advancements in lung cancer: a comprehensive perspective on diagnosis, staging, therapy and follow-up from the SAKK Working Group on Imaging in Diagnosis and Therapy Monitoring

In 2015, around 4400 individuals received a diagnosis of lung cancer, and Switzerland recorded approximately 3200 deaths related to lung cancer. Advances in detection, such as lung cancer screening and improved treatments, have led to increased identification of early-stage lung cancer and higher chances of long-term survival. This progress has introduced new considerations in imaging, emphasising non-invasive diagnosis and characterisation techniques like radiomics. Treatment aspects, such as preoperative assessment and the implementation of immune response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (iRECIST), have also seen advancements. For those undergoing curative treatment for lung cancer, guidelines propose follow-up with computed tomography (CT) scans within a specific timeframe. However, discrepancies exist in published guidelines, and there is a lack of universally accepted recommendations for follow-up procedures. This white paper aims to provide a certain standard regarding the use of imaging on the diagnosis, staging, treatment and follow-up of patients with lung cancer.

Medical mistrust and receptivity to lung cancer screening among African American and white American smokers

Although medical mistrust is associated with lower cancer screening uptake among racial minorities, such as African Americans, potential impacts on cancer screening among White Americans are generally understudied. In this study, we examined links from medical mistrust to lung cancer screening among African American (N = 203) and White American (N = 201) smokers. Participants completed the Group-Based Medical Mistrust Scale and viewed a brief online educational module about lung cancer risks, etiology, and screening. Thereafter, participants reported their receptivity to lung cancer screening using a Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) measurement framework (attitudes, normative beliefs, perceived control, and intentions). Medical mistrust predicted lower screening receptivity across all TPB measures for both racial groups. Although medical mistrust was higher among African Americans, there were no race differences in screening receptivity. However, there was some evidence that race moderates the relationship between medical mistrust and screening attitudes. While greater mistrust predicted more negative attitudes among both races, this effect was stronger among White Americans than African Americans. Findings suggest that group-based medical mistrust is a barrier to lung cancer screening for both African Americans and White Americans and illustrates the need to address medical mistrust as a barrier to screening for both racial minority and nonminority populations.

Lung cancer screening by low-dose CT scan in France: final results of the DEP KP80 study after three rounds

BACKGROUND

In prior randomised controlled trials, lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality and overall mortality. Despite these results, organised screening in France remains a challenge. This study assessed the feasibility and efficacy of lung cancer screening within a real-life context in a French administrative territory.

METHODS

DEP KP80 was a single-arm prospective study. Participants aged between 55 and 74 years, smokers or former smokers of ≥30 pack-years, were recruited. An annual LDCT scan was scheduled and three rounds were performed. Subjects were selected by general practitioners or pulmonologists, who checked the inclusion criteria and prescribed the CT scan.

FINDINGS

Between March 2016 and February 2020, 1254 participants were enrolled. Overall, 945 (75.4%) participants underwent baseline LDCT (T0), 376 (42.8%) completed the first round (T1) and 270 (31%) the second (T2) one. Forty-two lung cancers were diagnosed, 30 cancers (71.4%) were stage I or II and 34 cancers (80.9%) were treated surgically. In this study, the overall positive predictive value for a positive screening was 48% (95% CI 37-59) and the negative predictive value 100% (95% CI 100-100).

INTERPRETATION

This study demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of lung cancer screening in a real-life context with most lung cancers diagnosed at an early stage and surgically removed. Our results also highlighted the importance of participation in each round, underlining the fact that optimising organisation is a major goal.

FUNDING

Agence Régionale de Santé de Picardie, La Ligue contre le cancer, le Conseil Départemental de la Somme, and AstraZeneca.

Virtual Lung Screening Trial (VLST): An In Silico Replica of the National Lung Screening Trial for Lung Cancer Detection

Importance

Clinical imaging trials are crucial for evaluation of medical innovations, but the process is inefficient, expensive, and ethically-constrained. Virtual imaging trial (VIT) approach addresses these limitations by emulating the components of a clinical trial. An in silico rendition of the National Lung Screening Trial (NCLS) via Virtual Lung Screening Trial (VLST) demonstrates the promise of VITs to expedite clinical trials, reduce risks to subjects, and facilitate the optimal use of imaging technologies in clinical settings.

Objectives

To demonstrate that a virtual imaging trial platform can accurately emulate a major clinical trial, specifically the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) that compared computed tomography (CT) and chest radiography (CXR) imaging for lung cancer screening.

Design Setting and Participants

A virtual patient population of 294 subjects was created from human models (XCAT) emulating the NLST, with two types of simulated cancerous lung nodules. Each virtual patient in the cohort was assessed using simulated CT and CXR systems to generate images reflecting the NLST imaging technologies. Deep learning models trained for lesion detection, AI CT-Reader, and AI CXR-Reader served as virtual readers.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the difference in the Receiver Operating Characteristic Area Under the Curve (AUC) for CT and CXR modalities.

Results

The study analyzed paired CT and CXR simulated images from 294 virtual patients. The AI CT-Reader outperformed the AI CXR-Reader across all levels of analysis. At the patient level, CT demonstrated superior diagnostic performance with an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90-0.95), compared to CXR's AUC of 0.72 (0.67-0.77). Subgroup analyses of lesion types revealed CT had significantly better detection of homogeneous lesions (AUC 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95-0.98) compared to heterogeneous lesions (0.89; 0.86-0.93). Furthermore, when the specificity of the AI CT-Reader was adjusted to match the NLST sensitivity of 94% for CT, the VLST results closely mirrored the NLST findings, further highlighting the alignment between the two studies.

Conclusion and Relevance

The VIT results closely replicated those of the earlier NLST, underscoring its potential to replicate real clinical imaging trials. Integration of virtual trials may aid in the evaluation and improvement of imaging-based diagnosis.

Primary care outreach and decision counseling for lung cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer screening rates are very low despite a level B recommendation from the United States Preventive Services Task Force since 2013 and clear evidence that lung cancer screening reduces mortality. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services requires shared decision-making (SDM) for lung cancer screening reimbursement. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of an SDM intervention on lung cancer screening in primary care.

METHODS

The study design was a single-arm clinical trial design. The intervention included phone contact outside of a primary care visit and the use of the Decision Counseling Program ®, an online interactive decision aid focused on determining the factors which influence patients to screen or not screen, prioritizing those factors, and determining a decision preference score. The primary outcome was the completion of low-dose computed tomography scan (LDCT) 1 year after the SDM session compared in participants versus nonparticipants.

RESULTS

From six practices, there were 1359 potentially eligible patients in electronic medical record data, and 336 were reached to assess eligibility criteria. A total of 80 patients consented to be in the study, 64 completed a decision counseling session and 16 did not complete a session. Among the 64 people who agreed to have decision counseling, 45% had LDCT, higher than typically seen in routine clinical practice. Although not a comparable group, among the 16 people who declined decision counseling, none had LDCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision counseling is a promising intervention that might support SDM in the context of improving uptake of lung cancer screening in primary care. However, further, larger studies are needed.

Deaths averted: An unbiased alternative to rate ratios for measuring the performance of cancer screening programs

INTRODUCTION

Screening trials and meta-analyses emphasize the ratio of cancer death rates in screening and control arms. However, this measure is diluted by the inclusion of deaths from cancers that only became detectable after the end of active screening.

METHODS

We review traditional analysis of cancer screening trials and show that ratio estimates are inevitably biased to the null, because follow-up (FU) must continue beyond the end of the screening period and thus includes cases only becoming detectable after screening ends. But because such cases are expected to occur in equal numbers in the two arms, calculation of the difference between the number of cancer deaths in the screening and control arms avoids this dilutional bias. This difference can be set against the number of invitations to screening; we illustrate by reanalyzing data from all trials of tomography screening of lung cancer (LC) using this measure.

RESULTS

In nine trials of LC screening from 2000 to 2013, a total of 94,441 high-risk patients were invited to be in screening or control groups, with high participation rates (average 95%). In the older trials comparing computed tomography to chest X-ray, 88,285 invitations averted 83 deaths (1068 per death averted (DA)). In the six more recent trials with no screening in the control group, 69,976 invitations averted 121 deaths (577 invitations per DA).

DISCUSSION

Screens per DA is an undiluted measure of screening's effect and it is unperturbed by the arbitrary duration of FU. This estimate can be useful for program planning and informed consent.

Assessing the transportability of radiomic models for lung cancer diagnosis: commercial vs. open-source feature extractors

Background

Radiomics has shown promise in improving malignancy risk stratification of indeterminate pulmonary nodules (IPNs) with many platforms available, but with no head-to-head comparisons. This study aimed to evaluate transportability of radiomic models across platforms by comparing performances of a commercial radiomic feature extractor (HealthMyne) with an open-source extractor (PyRadiomics) on diagnosis of lung cancer in IPNs.

Methods

A commercial radiomic feature extractor was used to segment IPNs from computed tomography (CT) scans, and a previously validated radiomic model based on commercial features was used as baseline (ComRad). Using same segmentation masks, PyRadiomics, an open-source feature extractor was used to build three open-source radiomic models (OpenRad) using different methods: de novo open-source model derived using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) for feature selection, selecting open-source features matched to ComRad features based upon Imaging Biomarker Standardization Initiative (IBSI) nomenclature, and selecting open-source features most highly correlated to ComRad features. Radiomic models were trained on an internal cohort (n=161) and externally validated on 3 cohorts (n=278). We added Mayo clinical risk score to OpenRad and ComRad models, creating integrated clinical radiomic (ClinRad) models. All models were compared using area under the curve (AUC) and evaluated for clinical improvement using bias-corrected clinical net reclassification indices (cNRIs).

Results

ComRad AUC was 0.76 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-0.82], and OpenRad AUC was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.69-0.81) for LASSO model, 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.79) for Spearman's correlation, and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65-0.77) for IBSI. Mayo scores were added to OpenRad LASSO model, which performed best, forming open-source ClinRad model with AUC of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74-0.86), identical to commercial ClinRad's AUC. Both ClinRad models showed clinical improvement compared to Mayo alone, with commercial ClinRad achieving cNRI of 0.09 (95% CI: 0.02-0.15) for benign and 0.07 (95% CI: 0.00-0.13) for malignant, and open-source ClinRad achieving cNRI of 0.09 (95% CI: 0.02-0.15) for benign and 0.06 (95% CI: 0.00-0.12) for malignant.

Conclusions

Transportability of radiomic models across platforms directly does not conserve performance, but radiomic platforms can provide equivalent results when building de novo models allowing for flexibility in feature selection to maximize prediction accuracy.

A pragmatic randomized clinical trial of multilevel interventions to improve adherence to lung cancer screening (The Larch Study): Study protocol

BACKGROUND

In real-world settings, low adherence to lung cancer screening (LCS) diminishes population-level benefits of reducing lung cancer mortality. We describe the Larch Study protocol, which tests the effectiveness of two patient-centered interventions (Patient Voices Video and Stepped Reminders) designed to address barriers and improve annual LCS adherence.

METHODS

The Larch Study is a pragmatic randomized clinical trial conducted within Kaiser Permanente Washington. Eligible patients (target n = 1606) are aged 50-78 years with an index low-dose CT (LDCT) of the chest with negative or benign findings. With a 2 × 2 factorial-design, patients are individually randomized to 1 of 4 arms: video only, reminders only, both video and reminders, or usual care. The Patient Voices video addresses patient education needs by normalizing LCS, reminding patients when LCS is due, and encouraging social support. Stepped Reminders prompts primary care physicians to order patient's repeat screening LDCT and patients to schedule their scan. Intervention delivery is embedded within routine healthcare, facilitated by shared electronic health record components. Primary outcome is adherence to national LCS clinical guidelines, defined as repeat LDCT within 9-15 months. Patient-reported outcomes are measured via survey (knowledge of LCS, perception of stigma) approximately 8 weeks after index LDCT. Our mixed-methods formative evaluation includes process data, collected during the trial, and interviews with trial participants and stakeholders.

DISCUSSION

Results will fill an important scientific gap on multilevel interventions to increase annual LCS adherence and provide opportunities for spread and scale to other healthcare settings.

REGISTRATION

Trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT05747443).

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.

Cardiac troponin I as predictor for cardiac and other mortality in the German randomized lung cancer screening trial (LUSI)

Cardiac Troponin I (cTnI) could be used to identify individuals at elevated risk of cardiac death in lung cancer (LC) screening settings. In a population-based, randomized LC screening trial in Germany ("LUSI" study) serum cTnI was measured by high-sensitivity assay in blood samples collected at baseline, and categorized into unquantifiable/low (< 6 ng/L), intermediate (≥ 6-15 ng/L), and elevated (≥ 16 ng/L). Cox proportional-hazard models were used to estimate risk of all-cause and cardiac mortality with cTnI levels. After exclusion criteria, 3653 participants were included for our analyses, of which 82.4% had low, 12.8% intermediate and 4.8% elevated cTnI, respectively. Over a median follow up of 11.87 years a total of 439 deaths occurred, including 67 caused by cardiac events. Within the first 5 years after cTnI measurement, intermediate or elevated cTnI levels showed approximately 1.7 (HR = 1.69 [95% CI 0.57-5.02) and 4.7-fold (HR = 4.66 [1.73-12.50]) increases in risk of cardiac death relative to individuals with unquantifiable/low cTnI, independently of age, sex, smoking and other risk factors. Within this time interval, a risk model based on age, sex, BMI, smoking history and cTnI showed a combined area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 73.6 (58.1-87.3), as compared to 70.4 (53.3-83.5) for a model without cTnI. Over the time interval of > 5-10 years after blood donation, the relative risk associations with cTnI and were weaker. cTnI showed no association with mortality from any other (non-cardiac) cause. Our findings show that cTnI may be of use for identifying individuals at elevated risk specifically of short-term cardiac mortality in the context of LC screening.

Study rationale and design of the PEOPLHE trial

PURPOSE

Lung cancer screening (LCS) by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) demonstrated a 20-40% reduction in lung cancer mortality. National stakeholders and international scientific societies are increasingly endorsing LCS programs, but translating their benefits into practice is rather challenging. The "Model for Optimized Implementation of Early Lung Cancer Detection: Prospective Evaluation Of Preventive Lung HEalth" (PEOPLHE) is an Italian multicentric LCS program aiming at testing LCS feasibility and implementation within the national healthcare system. PEOPLHE is intended to assess (i) strategies to optimize LCS workflow, (ii) radiological quality assurance, and (iii) the need for dedicated resources, including smoking cessation facilities.

METHODS

PEOPLHE aims to recruit 1.500 high-risk individuals across three tertiary general hospitals in three different Italian regions that provide comprehensive services to large populations to explore geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic diversities. Screening by LDCT will target current or former (quitting < 10 years) smokers (> 15 cigarettes/day for > 25 years, or > 10 cigarettes/day for > 30 years) aged 50-75 years. Lung nodules will be volumetric measured and classified by a modified PEOPLHE Lung-RADS 1.1 system. Current smokers will be offered smoking cessation support.

CONCLUSION

The PEOPLHE program will provide information on strategies for screening enrollment and smoking cessation interventions; administrative, organizational, and radiological needs for performing a state-of-the-art LCS; collateral and incidental findings (both pulmonary and extrapulmonary), contributing to the LCS implementation within national healthcare systems.

Increased expression of individual genes in whole blood is associated with late-stage lung cancer at and close to diagnosis

Lung cancer (LC) mortality rates are still increasing globally. As survival is linked to stage, there is a need to identify markers for earlier LC diagnosis and individualized treatment. The whole blood transcriptome of LC patients represents a source of potential LC biomarkers. We compared expression of > 60,000 genes in whole blood specimens taken from LC cases at diagnosis (n = 128) and controls (n = 62) using genome-wide RNA sequencing, and identified 14 candidate genes associated with LC. High expression of ANXA3, ARG1 and HP was strongly associated with lower survival in late-stage LC cases (hazard ratios (HRs) = 2.81, 2.16 and 2.54, respectively). We validated these markers in two independent population-based studies with pre-diagnostic whole blood specimens taken up to eight years prior to LC diagnosis (n = 163 cases, 184 matched controls). ANXA3 and ARG1 expression was strongly associated with LC in these specimens, especially with late-stage LC within two years of diagnosis (odds ratios (ORs) = 3.47 and 5.00, respectively). Additionally, blood CD4 T cells, NK cells and neutrophils were associated with LC at diagnosis and improved LC discriminative ability beyond candidate genes. Our results indicate that in whole blood, increased expression levels of ANXA3, ARG1 and HP are diagnostic and prognostic markers of late-stage LC.

Long-term outcomes of lung cancer screening in males and females

BACKGROUND

This study explored female and male overall mortality and lung cancer (LC) survival in two LC screening (LCS) populations, focusing on the predictive value of coronary artery calcification (CAC) at baseline low-dose computed tomography (LDCT).

METHODS

This retrospective study analysed data of 6495 heavy smokers enrolled in the MILD and BioMILD LCS trials between 2005 and 2016. The primary objective of the study was to assess sex differences in all-cause mortality and LC survival. CAC scores were automatically calculated on LDCT images by a validated artificial intelligence (AI) software. Sex differences in 12-year cause-specific mortality rates were stratified by age, pack-years and CAC score.

RESULTS

The study included 2368 females and 4127 males. The 12-year all-cause mortality rates were 4.1 % in females and 7.7 % in males (p < 0.0001), and median CAC score was 8.7 vs. 41 respectively (p < 0.0001). All-cause mortality increased with rising CAC scores (log-rank test, p < 0.0001) for both sexes. Although LC incidence was not different between the two sexes, females had lower rates of 12-year LC mortality (1.0 % vs. 1.9 %, p = 0.0052), and better LC survival from diagnosis (72.3 % vs. 51.7 %; p = 0.0005), with a similar proportion of stage I (58.1 % vs. 51.2 %, p = 0.2782).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that female LCS participants had lower rates of all-cause mortality at 12 years and better LC survival than their male counterparts, with similar LC incidence rates and stage at diagnosis. The lower CAC burden observed in women at all ages might contribute to explain their lower rates of all-cause mortality and better LC survival.

Asian Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in Japan and worldwide. Early detection of lung cancer is an important strategy for decreasing mortality. Advances in diagnostic imaging have made it possible to detect lung cancer at an early stage in medical practice. Conversely, screening of asymptomatic healthy populations is recommended only when the evidence shows the benefits of regular intervention. Due to a variety of evidence and racial differences, screening methods vary from country to country. This article focused on the perspective of lung cancer screening in Japan.

Ten reasons to screen women at risk of lung cancer

This opinion piece reviews major reasons for promoting lung cancer screening in at-risk women who are smokers or ex-smokers, from the age of 50. The epidemiology of lung cancer in European women is extremely worrying, with lung cancer mortality expected to surpass breast cancer mortality in most European countries. There are conflicting data as to whether women are at increased risk of developing lung cancer compared to men who have a similar tobacco exposure. The sharp increase in the incidence of lung cancer in women exceeds the increase in their smoking exposure which is in favor of greater susceptibility. Lung and breast cancer screening could be carried out simultaneously, as the screening ages largely coincide. In addition, lung cancer screening could be carried out every 2 years, as is the case for breast cancer screening, if the baseline CT scan is negative.As well as detecting early curable lung cancer, screening can also detect coronary heart disease and osteoporosis induced by smoking. This enables preventive measures to be taken in addition to smoking cessation assistance, to reduce morbidity and mortality in the female population. Key points • The epidemiology of lung cancer in European women is very worrying.• Lung cancer is becoming the leading cause of cancer mortality in European women.• Women benefit greatly from screening in terms of reduced risk of death from lung cancer.

Artificial Intelligence in Lung Cancer Screening: The Future Is Now

Lung cancer has one of the worst morbidity and fatality rates of any malignant tumour. Most lung cancers are discovered in the middle and late stages of the disease, when treatment choices are limited, and patients' survival rate is low. The aim of lung cancer screening is the identification of lung malignancies in the early stage of the disease, when more options for effective treatments are available, to improve the patients' outcomes. The desire to improve the efficacy and efficiency of clinical care continues to drive multiple innovations into practice for better patient management, and in this context, artificial intelligence (AI) plays a key role. AI may have a role in each process of the lung cancer screening workflow. First, in the acquisition of low-dose computed tomography for screening programs, AI-based reconstruction allows a further dose reduction, while still maintaining an optimal image quality. AI can help the personalization of screening programs through risk stratification based on the collection and analysis of a huge amount of imaging and clinical data. A computer-aided detection (CAD) system provides automatic detection of potential lung nodules with high sensitivity, working as a concurrent or second reader and reducing the time needed for image interpretation. Once a nodule has been detected, it should be characterized as benign or malignant. Two AI-based approaches are available to perform this task: the first one is represented by automatic segmentation with a consequent assessment of the lesion size, volume, and densitometric features; the second consists of segmentation first, followed by radiomic features extraction to characterize the whole abnormalities providing the so-called "virtual biopsy". This narrative review aims to provide an overview of all possible AI applications in lung cancer screening.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Lung Cancer Screening: 2022 Update

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality for men and women in the United States. Screening for lung cancer with annual low-dose CT is saving lives, and the continued implementation of lung screening can save many more. In 2015, the CMS began covering annual lung screening for those who qualified based on the original United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lung screening criteria, which included patients 55 to 77 year of age with a 30 pack-year history of smoking, who were either currently using tobacco or who had smoked within the previous 15 years. In 2021, the USPSTF issued new screening guidelines, decreasing the age of eligibility to 80 years of age and pack-years to 20. Lung screening remains controversial for those who do not meet the updated USPSTF criteria, but who have additional risk factors for the development of lung cancer. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Ultra-low dose computed tomography protocols using spectral shaping for lung cancer screening: Comparison with low-dose for volumetric LungRADS classification

PURPOSE

To compare Low-Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) with four different Ultra-Low-Dose Computed Tomography (ULDCT) protocols for PN classification according to the Lung Reporting and Data System (LungRADS).

METHODS

Three hundred sixty-one participants of an ongoing lung cancer screening (LCS) underwent single-breath-hold double chest Computed Tomography (CT), including LDCT (120kVp, 25mAs; CTDIvol 1,62 mGy) and one ULDCT among: fully automated exposure control ("ULDCT₁"); fixed tube-voltage and current according to patient size ("ULDCT₂"); hybrid approach with fixed tube-voltage ("ULDCT₃") and tube current automated exposure control ("ULDCT₄"). Two radiologists (R1, R2) assessed LungRADS 2022 categories on LDCT, and then after 2 weeks on ULDCT using two different kernels (R1: Qr49_{ADMIRE 4}; R2: Br49_{ADMIRE 3}). Intra-subject agreement for LungRADS categories between LDCT and ULDCT was measured by the k-Cohen Index with Fleiss-Cohen weights.

RESULTS

LDCT-dominant PNs were detected in ULDCT in 87 % of cases on Qr49_{ADMIRE 4} and 88 % on Br49_{ADMIRE 3}. The intra-subject agreement was: κULDCT₁ = 0.89 [95 %CI 0.82-0.96]; κULDCT₂ = 0.90 [0.81-0.98]; κULDCT₃ = 0.91 [0.84-0.99]; κULDCT₄ = 0.88 [0.78-0.97] on Qr49_{ADMIRE 4}, and κULDCT₁ = 0.88 [0.80-0.95]; κULDCT₂ = 0.91 [0.86-0.96]; κULDCT₃ = 0.87 [0.78-0.95]; and κULDCT₄ = 0.88 [0.82-0.94] on Br49_{ADMIRE 3}. LDCT classified as LungRADS 4B were correctly identified as LungRADS 4B at ULDCT₃, with the lowest radiation exposure among the tested protocols (median effective doses were 0.31, 0.36, 0.27 and 0.37 mSv for ULDCT₁, ULDCT₂, ULDCT₃, and ULDCT₄, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

ULDCT by spectral shaping allows the detection and characterization of PNs with an excellent agreement with LDCT and can be proposed as a feasible approach in LCS.

Clinical Utility and Application of Liquid Biopsy Genotyping in Lung Cancer: A Comprehensive Review

Precision medicine has revolutionized the therapeutic management of cancer patients with a major impact on non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly lung adenocarcinoma, where advances have been remarkable. Tissue biopsy, required for tumor molecular testing, has significant limitations due to the difficulty of the biopsy site or the inadequacy of the histological specimen. In this context, liquid biopsy, consisting of the analysis of tumor-released materials circulating in body fluids, such as blood, is increasingly emerging as a valuable and non-invasive biomarker for detecting circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) carrying molecular tumor signatures. In advanced/metastatic NSCLC, liquid biopsy drives target therapy by monitoring response to treatment and identifying eventual genomic mechanisms of resistance. In addition, recent data have shown a significant ability to detect minimal residual disease in early-stage lung cancer, underlying the potential application of liquid biopsy in the adjuvant setting, in early detection of recurrence, and also in the screening field. In this article, we present a review of the currently available data about the utility and application of liquid biopsy in lung cancer, with a particular focus on the approach to different techniques of analysis for liquid biopsy and a comparison with tissue samples as well as the potential practical uses in early and advanced/metastatic NSCLC.

Increased levels of microRNA-320 in blood serum and plasma is associated with imminent and advanced lung cancer

Lung cancer (LC) incidence is increasing globally and altered levels of microRNAs (miRNAs) in blood may contribute to identification of individuals with LC. We identified miRNAs differentially expressed in peripheral blood at LC diagnosis and evaluated, in pre-diagnostic blood specimens, how long before diagnosis expression changes in such candidate miRNAs could be detected. We identified upregulated candidate miRNAs in plasma specimens from a hospital-based study sample of 128 patients with confirmed LC and 62 individuals with suspected but confirmed negative LC (FalsePos). We then evaluated the expression of candidate miRNAs in pre-diagnostic plasma or serum specimens of 360 future LC cases and 375 matched controls. There were 1663 miRNAs detected in diagnostic specimens, nine of which met our criteria for candidate miRNAs. Higher expression of three candidates, miR-320b, 320c, and 320d, was associated with poor survival, independent of LC stage and subtype. Moreover, miR-320c and miR-320d expression was higher in pre-diagnostic specimens collected within 2 years of LC diagnosis. Our results indicated that elevated levels of miR-320c and miR-320d may be early indications of imminent and advanced LC.

Radiation Exposure to Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening: Should We Be Concerned?

Lung cancer screening (LCS) programs through low-dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) are being implemented in several countries worldwide. Radiation exposure of healthy individuals due to prolonged CT screening rounds and, eventually, the additional examinations required in case of suspicious findings may represent a concern, thus eventually reducing the participation in an LCS program. Therefore, the present review aims to assess the potential radiation risk from LDCT in this setting, providing estimates of cumulative dose and radiation-related risk in LCS in order to improve awareness for an informed and complete attendance to the program. After summarizing the results of the international trials on LCS to introduce the benefits coming from the implementation of a dedicated program, the screening-related and participant-related factors determining the radiation risk will be introduced and their burden assessed. Finally, future directions for a personalized screening program as well as technical improvements to reduce the delivered dose will be presented.

[China National Lung Cancer Screening Guideline with Low-dose Computed Tomography (2023 Version)]

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in China. The effectiveness of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening has been further validated in recent years, and significant progress has been made in research on identifying high-risk individuals, personalizing screening interval, and management of screen-detected findings. The aim of this study is to revise China national lung cancer screening guideline with LDCT (2018 version). The China Lung Cancer Early Detection and Treatment Expert Group (CLCEDTEG) designated by the China's National Health Commission, and China Lung Oncolgy Group experts, jointly participated in the revision of Chinese lung cancer screening guideline (2023 version). This revision is based on the recent advances in LDCT lung cancer screening at home and abroad, and the epidemiology of lung cancer in China. The following aspects of the guideline were revised: (1) lung cancer risk factors besides smoking were considered for the identification of high risk population; (2) LDCT scan parameters were further classified; (3) longer screening interval is recommended for individuals who had negative LDCT screening results for two consecutive rounds; (4) the follow-up interval for positive nodules was extended from 3 months to 6 months; (5) the role of multi-disciplinary treatment (MDT) in the management of positive nodules, diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer were emphasized. This revision clarifies the screening, intervention and treatment pathways, making the LDCT screening guideline more appropriate for China. Future researches based on emerging technologies, including biomarkers and artificial intelligence, are needed to optimize LDCT screening in China in the future.
.

Fully automated calcium scoring predicts all-cause mortality at 12 years in the MILD lung cancer screening trial

Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is a known risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) events and mortality but is not yet routinely evaluated in low-dose computed tomography (LDCT)-based lung cancer screening (LCS). The present analysis explored the capacity of a fully automated CAC scoring to predict 12-year mortality in the Multicentric Italian Lung Detection (MILD) LCS trial. The study included 2239 volunteers of the MILD trial who underwent a baseline LDCT from September 2005 to January 2011, with a median follow-up of 190 months. The CAC score was measured by a commercially available fully automated artificial intelligence (AI) software and stratified into five strata: 0, 1-10, 11-100, 101-400, and > 400. Twelve-year all-cause mortality was 8.5% (191/2239) overall, 3.2% with CAC = 0, 4.9% with CAC = 1-10, 8.0% with CAC = 11-100, 11.5% with CAC = 101-400, and 17% with CAC > 400. In Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, CAC > 400 was associated with a higher 12-year all-cause mortality both in a univariate model (hazard ratio, HR, 5.75 [95% confidence interval, CI, 2.08-15.92] compared to CAC = 0) and after adjustment for baseline confounders (HR, 3.80 [95%CI, 1.35-10.74] compared to CAC = 0). All-cause mortality significantly increased with increasing CAC (7% in CAC ≤ 400 vs. 17% in CAC > 400, Log-Rank p-value <0.001). Non-cancer at 12 years mortality was 3% (67/2239) overall, 0.8% with CAC = 0, 1.0% with CAC = 1-10, 2.9% with CAC = 11-100, 3.6% with CAC = 101-400, and 8.2% with CAC > 400 (Grey's test p < 0.001). In Fine and Gray's competing risk model, CAC > 400 predicted 12-year non-cancer mortality in a univariate model (sub-distribution hazard ratio, SHR, 10.62 [95% confidence interval, CI, 1.43-78.98] compared to CAC = 0), but the association was no longer significant after adjustment for baseline confounders. In conclusion, fully automated CAC scoring was effective in predicting all-cause mortality at 12 years in a LCS setting.

Single CT Appointment for Double Lung and Colorectal Cancer Screening: Is the Time Ripe?

Annual screening of lung cancer (LC) with chest low-dose computed tomography (CT) and screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) with CT colonography every 5 years are recommended by the United States Prevention Service Task Force. We review epidemiological and pathological data on LC and CRC, and the features of screening chest low-dose CT and CT colonography comprising execution, reading, radiation exposure and harm, and the cost effectiveness of the two CT screening interventions. The possibility of combining chest low-dose CT and CT colonography examinations for double LC and CRC screening in a single CT appointment is then addressed. We demonstrate how this approach appears feasible and is already reasonable as an opportunistic screening intervention in 50–75-year-old subjects with smoking history and average CRC risk. In addition to the crucial role Computer Assisted Diagnosis systems play in decreasing the test reading times and the need to educate radiologists in screening chest LDCT and CT colonography, in view of a single CT appointment for double screening, the following uncertainties need to be solved: (1) the schedule of the screening CT; (2) the effectiveness of iterative reconstruction and deep learning algorithms affording an ultra-low-dose CT acquisition technique and (3) management of incidental findings. Resolving these issues will imply new cost-effectiveness analyses for LC screening with chest low dose CT and for CRC screening with CT colonography and, especially, for the double LC and CRC screening with a single-appointment CT.

The 50-Year Journey of Lung Cancer Screening: A Narrative Review

Early diagnosis and treatment are associated with better outcomes in oncology. We reviewed the existing literature using the search terms “low dose computed tomography” and “lung cancer screening” for systematic reviews, metanalyses, and randomized as well as non-randomized clinical trials in PubMed from January 1, 1963 to April 30, 2022. The studies were heterogeneous and included people with different age groups, smoking histories, and other specific risk scores for lung cancer screening. Based on the available evidence, almost all the guidelines recommend screening for lung cancer by annual low dose CT (LDCT) in populations over 50 to 55 years of age, who are either current smokers or have left smoking less than 15 years back with more than 20 to 30 pack-years of smoking. “LDCT screening” can reduce lung cancer mortality if carried out judiciously in countries with adequate resources and infrastructure.

Impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer-related mortality

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related death in the world, however lung cancer screening has not been implemented in most countries at a population level. A previous Cochrane Review found limited evidence for the effectiveness of lung cancer screening with chest radiography (CXR) or sputum cytology in reducing lung cancer-related mortality, however there has been increasing evidence supporting screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT).  OBJECTIVES: To determine whether screening for lung cancer using LDCT of the chest reduces lung cancer-related mortality and to evaluate the possible harms of LDCT screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed the search in collaboration with the Information Specialist of the Cochrane Lung Cancer Group and included the Cochrane Lung Cancer Group Trial Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library, current issue), MEDLINE (accessed via PubMed) and Embase in our search. We also searched the clinical trial registries to identify unpublished and ongoing trials. We did not impose any restriction on language of publication. The search was performed up to 31 July 2021.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of lung cancer screening using LDCT and reporting mortality or harm outcomes.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors were involved in independently assessing trials for eligibility, extraction of trial data and characteristics, and assessing risk of bias of the included trials using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Primary outcomes were lung cancer-related mortality and harms of screening. We performed a meta-analysis, where appropriate, for all outcomes using a random-effects model. We only included trials in the analysis of mortality outcomes if they had at least 5 years of follow-up. We reported risk ratios (RRs) and hazard ratios (HRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and used the I2 statistic to investigate heterogeneity.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 trials in this review with a total of 94,445 participants. Trials were conducted in Europe and the USA in people aged 40 years or older, with most trials having an entry requirement of ≥ 20 pack-year smoking history (e.g. 1 pack of cigarettes/day for 20 years or 2 packs/day for 10 years etc.). One trial included male participants only. Eight trials were phase three RCTs, with two feasibility RCTs and one pilot RCT. Seven of the included trials had no screening as a comparison, and four trials had CXR screening as a comparator. Screening frequency included annual, biennial and incrementing intervals. The duration of screening ranged from 1 year to 10 years. Mortality follow-up was from 5 years to approximately 12 years.  None of the included trials were at low risk of bias across all domains. The certainty of evidence was moderate to low across different outcomes, as assessed by GRADE. In the meta-analysis of trials assessing lung cancer-related mortality, we included eight trials (91,122 participants), and there was a reduction in mortality of 21% with LDCT screening compared to control groups of no screening or CXR screening (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87; 8 trials, 91,122 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were probably no differences in subgroups for analyses by control type, sex, geographical region, and nodule management algorithm. Females appeared to have a larger lung cancer-related mortality benefit compared to males with LDCT screening. There was also a reduction in all-cause mortality (including lung cancer-related) of 5% (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.99; 8 trials, 91,107 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Invasive tests occurred more frequently in the LDCT group (RR 2.60, 95% CI 2.41 to 2.80; 3 trials, 60,003 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, analysis of 60-day postoperative mortality was not significant between groups (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.94; 2 trials, 409 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  False-positive results and recall rates were higher with LDCT screening compared to screening with CXR, however there was low-certainty evidence in the meta-analyses due to heterogeneity and risk of bias concerns. Estimated overdiagnosis with LDCT screening was 18%, however the 95% CI was 0 to 36% (risk difference (RD) 0.18, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.36; 5 trials, 28,656 participants; low-certainty evidence). Four trials compared different aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using various measures. Anxiety was pooled from three trials, with participants in LDCT screening reporting lower anxiety scores than in the control group (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.43, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.27; 3 trials, 8153 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were insufficient data to comment on the impact of LDCT screening on smoking behaviour.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence supports a reduction in lung cancer-related mortality with the use of LDCT for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations (those over the age of 40 with a significant smoking exposure). However, there are limited data on harms and further trials are required to determine participant selection and optimal frequency and duration of screening, with potential for significant overdiagnosis of lung cancer. Trials are ongoing for lung cancer screening in non-smokers.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Lung Cancer: A Review for Clinicians

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer are common global causes of morbidity and mortality. Because both diseases share several predisposing risks, the 2 diseases may occur concurrently in susceptible individuals. The diagnosis of COPD has important implications for the diagnostic approach and treatment options if lesions concerning for lung cancer are identified during screening. Importantly, the presence of COPD has significant implications on prognosis and management of patients with lung cancer. In this monograph, we review the mechanistic linkage between lung cancer and COPD, the impact of lung cancer screening on patients at risk, and the implications of the presence of COPD on the approach to the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. This manuscript succinctly reviews the epidemiology and common pathogenetic factors for the concurrence of COPD and lung cancer. Importantly for the clinician, it summarizes the indications, benefits, and complications of lung cancer screening in patients with COPD, and the assessment of risk factors for patients with COPD undergoing consideration of various treatment options for lung cancer.

New Implications of Patients’ Sex in Today’s Lung Cancer Management

Simple Summary

We aim to raise awareness that sex is an important factor to take into account in modern-day thoracic oncology practice. Summarized, women should be specifically targeted in smoking cessation campaigns and sex-specific barriers should be addressed. Women present more often with adenocarcinoma histology and EGFR/ALK alterations, as lung cancer in never-smokers is more common in women compared to men. Lung cancer in female patients may show a poorer response to immune checkpoint inhibition; therefore, the addition of chemotherapy should be considered. On the other hand, women experience more benefits from targeted therapy against EGFR. In general, prognosis for women is better compared to that in men. Lung cancer screening trials report that women derive more benefit from screening, although they have not been designed for women. Future trial designs should take this into account and encourage participation of women.

Abstract

This paper describes where and how sex matters in today’s management of lung cancer. We consecutively describe the differences between males and females in lung cancer demographics; sex-based differences in the immune system (including the poorer outcomes in women who are treated with immunotherapy but no chemotherapy); the presence of oncogenic drivers and the response to targeted therapies according to sex; the greater benefit women derive from lung cancer screening and why they get screened less; and finally, the barriers to smoking cessation that women experience. We conclude that sex is an important but often overlooked factor in modern-day thoracic oncology practice.

Outreach to primary care patients in lung cancer screening: A randomized controlled trial

Current guidelines recommend annual lung cancer screening (LCS), but rates are low. The current study evaluated strategies to increase LCS. This study was a randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the effects of patient outreach and shared decision making (SDM) about LCS among patients in four primary care practices. Patients 50 to 80 years of age and at high risk for lung cancer were randomized to Outreach Contact plus Decision Counseling (OC-DC, n = 314), Outreach Contact alone (OC, n = 314), or usual care (UC, n = 1748). LCS was significantly higher in the combined OC/OC-DC group versus UC controls (5.5% vs. 1.8%; hazard ratio, HR = 3.28; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.98 to 5.41; p = 0.001). LCS was higher in the OC-DC group than in the OC group, although not significantly so (7% vs. 4%, respectively; HR = 1.75; 95% CI: 0.86 to 3.55; p = 0.123). LCS referral/scheduling was also significantly higher in the OC/OC-DC group compared to controls (11% v. 5%; odds ratio, OR = 2.02; p = 0.001). We observed a similar trend for appointment keeping, but the effect was not statistically significant (86% v. 76%; OR = 1.93; p = 0.351). Outreach contacts significantly increased LCS among primary care patients. Research is needed to assess the additional value of SDM on screening uptake.

Low-dose CT for lung cancer screening: position paper from the Italian college of thoracic radiology

Smoking is the main risk factor for lung cancer (LC), which is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Independent randomized controlled trials, governmental and inter-governmental task forces, and meta-analyses established that LC screening (LCS) with chest low dose computed tomography (LDCT) decreases the mortality of LC in smokers and former smokers, compared to no-screening, especially in women. Accordingly, several Italian initiatives are offering LCS by LDCT and smoking cessation to about 10,000 high-risk subjects, supported by Private or Public Health Institutions, envisaging a possible population-based screening program. Because LDCT is the backbone of LCS, Italian radiologists with LCS expertise are presenting this position paper that encompasses recommendations for LDCT scan protocol and its reading. Moreover, fundamentals for classification of lung nodules and other findings at LDCT test are detailed along with international guidelines, from the European Society of Thoracic Imaging, the British Thoracic Society, and the American College of Radiology, for their reporting and management in LCS. The Italian College of Thoracic Radiologists produced this document to provide the basics for radiologists who plan to set up or to be involved in LCS, thus fostering homogenous evidence-based approach to the LDCT test over the Italian territory and warrant comparison and analyses throughout National and International practices.

European lung cancer screening: valuable trial evidence for optimal practice implementation

Lung cancer screening (LCS) by low-dose computed tomography is a strategy for secondary prevention of lung cancer. In the last two decades, LCS trials showed several options to practice secondary prevention in association with primary prevention, however, the translation from trial to practice is everything but simple. In 2020, the European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society published their joint statement paper on LCS. This commentary aims to provide the readership with detailed description about hurdles and potential solutions that could be encountered in the practice of LCS.

Cancer statistics for African American/Black People 2022

African American/Black individuals have a disproportionate cancer burden, including the highest mortality and the lowest survival of any racial/ethnic group for most cancers. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society estimates the number of new cancer cases and deaths for Black people in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence (herein through 2018), mortality (through 2019), survival, screening, and risk factors using population-based data from the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2022, there will be approximately 224,080 new cancer cases and 73,680 cancer deaths among Black people in the United States. During the most recent 5-year period, Black men had a 6% higher incidence rate but 19% higher mortality than White men overall, including an approximately 2-fold higher risk of death from myeloma, stomach cancer, and prostate cancer. The overall cancer mortality disparity is narrowing between Black and White men because of a steeper drop in Black men for lung and prostate cancers. However, the decline in prostate cancer mortality in Black men slowed from 5% annually during 2010 through 2014 to 1.3% during 2015 through 2019, likely reflecting the 5% annual increase in advanced-stage diagnoses since 2012. Black women have an 8% lower incidence rate than White women but a 12% higher mortality; further, mortality rates are 2-fold higher for endometrial cancer and 41% higher for breast cancer despite similar or lower incidence rates. The wide breast cancer disparity reflects both later stage diagnosis (57% localized stage vs 67% in White women) and lower 5-year survival overall (82% vs 92%, respectively) and for every stage of disease (eg, 20% vs 30%, respectively, for distant stage). Breast cancer surpassed lung cancer as the leading cause of cancer death among Black women in 2019. Targeted interventions are needed to reduce stark cancer inequalities in the Black community.

Prevalence, symptom burden and under-diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Polish lung cancer screening population: a cohort observational study

OBJECTIVES

Lung cancer screening using low-dose CT may be not effective without considering the presence of comorbidities related to chronic smoking. The aim of the study was to establish the prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in group of phighlight the potential benefits atients participating in the largest Polish lung cancer screening programme MOLTEST-BIS and attempt to confirm the necessity of combined lung cancer and COPD screening.

DESIGN

Cohort, prospective study.

SETTING

Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland PARTICIPANTS: The study included 754 participants in lung cancer screening trial from the Pomeranian region, aged 50-70 years old, current and former smokers with a smoking history ≥30 pack-years.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Questionnaire, physical examination, anthropometric measurements, spirometry test before and after inhaled bronchodilator (400 µg of salbutamol) RESULTS: Obstructive disorders were diagnosed in 186 cases (103 male and 83 female). In the case of 144 participants (19.73%), COPD was diagnosed. Only 13.3% of participants with COPD were known about the disease earlier. According to classification of airflow limitation 55.6% of diagnosed COPD were in Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 1 (mild), 38.9% in GOLD 2 (moderate), 4.9% in GOLD 3 (severe) and 0.7% in GOLD 4 (very severe) stage. Women with recognition of COPD were younger than men (63.7 vs 66.3 age) and they smoked less cigarettes (41.1 vs 51.9 pack-years).

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of COPD in Polish lung cancer screening cohort is significant. The COPD in this group is remarkably under-diagnosed. Most diagnosed COPD cases were in the initial stage of advancement. This early detection of airflow limitation highlights the potential benefits arising from combined oncological-pulmonary screening.NKBBN.

MiR-486-5p Targets CD133+ Lung Cancer Stem Cells through the p85/AKT Pathway

Despite improvements in therapies and screening strategies, lung cancer prognosis still remains dismal, especially for metastatic tumors. Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are endowed with properties such as chemoresistance, dissemination, and stem-like features, that make them one of the main causes of the poor survival rate of lung cancer patients. MicroRNAs (miRNAs), small molecules regulating gene expression, have a role in lung cancer development and progression. In particular, miR-486-5p is an onco-suppressor miRNA found to be down-modulated in the tumor tissue of lung cancer patients. In this study, we investigate the role of this miRNA in CD133+ lung CSCs and evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of coated cationic lipid-nanoparticles entrapping the miR-486-5p miRNA mimic (CCL-486) using lung cancer patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. In vitro, miR-486-5p overexpression impaired the PI3K/Akt pathway and decreased lung cancer cell viability. Moreover, miR-486-5p overexpression induced apoptosis also in CD133+ CSCs, thus affecting the in vivo tumor-initiating properties of these cells. Finally, we demonstrated that in vivo CCL-486 treatment decreased CD133+ percentage and inhibited tumor growth in PDX models. In conclusion, we provided insights on the efficacy of a novel miRNA-based compound to hit CD133+ lung CSCs, setting the basis for new combined therapeutic strategies.

Artificial intelligence for early diagnosis of lung cancer through incidental nodule detection in low- and middle-income countries-acceleration during the COVID-19 pandemic but here to stay

Although the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had profound pernicious effects, it revealed deficiencies in health systems, particularly among low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). With increasing uncertainty in healthcare, existing unmet needs such as poor outcomes of lung cancer (LC) patients in LMICs, mainly due to late stages at diagnosis, have been challenging-necessitating a shift in focus for judicious health resource utilization. Leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) for screening large volumes of pulmonary images performed for noncancerous reasons, such as health checks, immigration, tuberculosis screening, or other lung conditions, including but not limited to COVID-19, can facilitate easy and early identification of incidental pulmonary nodules (IPNs), which otherwise could have been missed. AI can review every chest X-ray or computed tomography scan through a trained pair of eyes, thus strengthening the infrastructure and enhancing capabilities of manpower for interpreting images in LMICs for streamlining accurate and early identification of IPNs. AI can be a catalyst for driving LC screening with enhanced efficiency, particularly in primary care settings, for timely referral and adequate management of coincidental IPN. AI can facilitate shift in the stage of LC diagnosis for improving survival, thus fostering optimal health-resource utilization and sustainable healthcare systems resilient to crisis. This article highlights the challenges for organized LC screening in LMICs and describes unique opportunities for leveraging AI. We present pilot initiatives from Asia, Latin America, and Russia illustrating AI-supported IPN identification from routine imaging to facilitate early diagnosis of LC at a potentially curable stage.

Molecular properties and survival of lung adenocarcinoma in young patients

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the molecular properties and factors of lung cancer in young patients aged 18-45 years, affecting survival in patients with pulmonary adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Patients aged between 18 and 45 years who were diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma in our hospital between January 2015 and December 2019 and their tumoural mutations were studied and included in this study and then reviewed retrospectively from the hospital records.

RESULTS

At the time of diagnosis, 71 (3.57%) of 1985 primary lung cancer patients were 45 years old, and 42 (59.2%) male and 29 (40.8%) female patients with a mean age of 39.9 were evaluated. Most of the patients were diagnosed with advanced-stage lung cancer, 55 (77.5%) of them were in stage IV. PET CT showed that the standard intake value (SUV) of 11.1 tended to be high. Multiple organ metastases were detected in 57 patients (80.3%). EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) mutation was positive in 13 patients (18.3%), ALK (anaplastic lymphoma kinase) mutation was positive in 13 patients (18.3%) and ROS (c-ros) mutation oncogene was positive in 2 (2.8%) patients. Surgical operation was performed in 21 (29.6%), radiotherapy was given to 29 (40.8%), chemotherapy to 48 (67.6%) and targeted therapy to 22 (31.0%) patients. The mean overall survival of the patients was 16 months. Within 1 year, 41 (57.7%) patients died.

CONCLUSION

In our study, significant efficacy of age, gender distribution, smoking, metastasis, ALK positivity, presence of chemotherapy, targeted therapy and surgical treatment was observed in young adenocarcinoma patients. The molecular properties of lung adenocarcinoma in young patients differ from those in the general population, and major driver genes are major factors influencing tumour differentiation and prognosis. In our study, we aimed to explain the molecular properties and results of pulmonary adenocarcinoma. In the future, we will provide constructive recommendations for the prevention and treatment of young patients.

Advances in Diagnostic Bronchoscopy

The increase in incidental discovery of pulmonary nodules has led to more urgent requirement of tissue diagnosis. The peripheral pulmonary nodules are especially challenging for clinicians. There are various modalities for diagnosis and tissue sampling of pulmonary lesions, but most of these modalities have their own limitations. This has led to the development of many advanced technical modalities, which have empowered pulmonologists to reach the periphery of the lung safely and effectively. These techniques include thin/ultrathin bronchoscopes, radial probe endobronchial ultrasound (RP-EBUS), and navigation bronchoscopy—including virtual navigation bronchoscopy (VNB) and electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB). Recently, newer technologies—including robotic-assisted bronchoscopy (RAB), cone-beam CT (CBCT), and augmented fluoroscopy (AF)—have been introduced to aid in the navigation to peripheral pulmonary nodules. Technological advances will also enable more precise tissue sampling of smaller peripheral lung nodules for local ablative and other therapies of peripheral lung cancers in the future. However, we still need to overcome the CT-to-body divergence, among other limitations. In this review, our aim is to summarize the recent advances in diagnostic bronchoscopy technology.

Overuse of follow-up chest computed tomography in patients with incidentally identified nodules suspicious for lung cancer

PURPOSE

Although professional societies agreed that CT screening inconsistent with recommendation leads to radiation-related cancer and unexpected cost, many patients still undergo unnecessary Chest CT before treatment. The goal of this study was to assess the overuse of Chest CT in different type of patients.

METHODS

Data on 1853 patients who underwent pulmonary resection from May 2019 to May 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Data collected include age, sex, follow-up period, density and size of nodules and frequency of undergoing Chest CT. Pearson χ² test and logistic regression were conducted to compare the receipt of CT screening.

RESULTS

Among 1853 patients in the study, 689 (37.2%) overused Chest CT during follow-up of the pulmonary nodules. This rate was 16.2% among patients with solid nodules, 57.5% among patients with pure ground glass opacity (pGGO), and 41.4% among patients with mixed ground glass opacity (mGGO) (P < 0.001). 50.7% in the "age ≤ 40" group, 39.8% in the "41 ≤ age ≤ 50" group, 38.7% in the "51 ≤ age ≤ 60" group, 32.3% in the "61 ≤ age ≤ 70" group, 27.8% in the " > 70" group underwent unnecessary CT (P < 0.001). Female got more unnecessary CT than male (40.6% vs 32.8%, P < 0.001). Factors associated with a greater likelihood of overusing Chest CT was the density of nodules [odds ratios (ORs) of 0.53 for mGGO; 0.15 for solid nodule, P < 0.0001, vs patients with pGGO].

CONCLUSION

Roughly 37% patients with pulmonary nodules received Chest CT too frequently despite national recommendations against the practice. Closer adherence to clinical guidelines is likely to result in more cost-effective care.

Lung cancer screening implementation: Complexities and priorities

Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer death worldwide. The benefits of lung cancer screening to reduce mortality and detect early-stage disease are no longer in any doubt based on the results of two landmark trials using LDCT. Lung cancer screening has been implemented in the US and South Korea and is under consideration by other communities. Successful translation of demonstrated research outcomes into the routine clinical setting requires careful implementation and co-ordinated input from multiple stakeholders. Implementation aspects may be specific to different healthcare settings. Important knowledge gaps remain, which must be addressed in order to optimize screening benefits and minimize screening harms. Lung cancer screening differs from all other cancer screening programmes as lung cancer risk is driven by smoking, a highly stigmatized behaviour. Stigma, along with other factors, can impact smokers' engagement with screening, meaning that smokers are generally 'hard to reach'. This review considers critical points along the patient journey. The first steps include selecting a risk threshold at which to screen, successfully engaging the target population and maximizing screening uptake. We review barriers to smoker engagement in lung and other cancer screening programmes. Recruitment strategies used in trials and real-world (clinical) programmes and associated screening uptake are reviewed. To aid cross-study comparisons, we propose a standardized nomenclature for recording and calculating recruitment outcomes. Once participants have engaged with the screening programme, we discuss programme components that are critical to maximize net benefit. A whole-of-programme approach is required including a standardized and multidisciplinary approach to pulmonary nodule management, incorporating probabilistic nodule risk assessment and longitudinal volumetric analysis, to reduce unnecessary downstream investigations and surgery; the integration of smoking cessation; and identification and intervention for other tobacco related diseases, such as coronary artery calcification and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. National support, integrated with tobacco control programmes, and with appropriate funding, accreditation, data collection, quality assurance and reporting mechanisms will enhance lung cancer screening programme success and reduce the risks associated with opportunistic, ad hoc screening. Finally, implementation research must play a greater role in informing policy change about targeted LDCT screening programmes.

Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT in Smokers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lung cancer continues to be one of the main causes of cancer death in Europe. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has shown high potential for screening of lung cancer in smokers, most recently in two European trials. The aim of this review was to assess lung cancer screening of smokers by LDCT with respect to clinical effectiveness, radiological procedures, quality of life, and changes in smoking behavior. We searched electronic databases in April 2020 for publications of randomized controlled trials (RCT) reporting on lung cancer and overall mortality, lung cancer morbidity, and harms of LDCT screening. A meta-analysis was performed to estimate effects on mortality. Forty-three publications on 10 RCTs were included. The meta-analysis of eight studies showed a statistically significant relative reduction of lung cancer mortality of 12% in the screening group (risk ratio = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.79-0.97). Between 4% and 24% of screening-LDCT scans were classified as positive, and 84-96% of them turned out to be false positive. The risk of overdiagnosis was estimated between 19% and 69% of diagnosed lung cancers. Lung cancer screening can reduce disease-specific mortality in (former) smokers when stringent requirements and quality standards for performance are met.

[Lung cancer screening with low dose computed tomography : a systematic review]

INTRODUCTION

Bronchial cancer, often diagnosed at a late stage, is the leading cause of cancer death. As early detection could potentially lead to curative treatment, several studies have evaluated low-dose chest CT (LDCT) as a screening method. The main objective of this work is to determine the impact of LDCT screening on overall mortality of a smoking population.

METHODS

Systematic review of randomised controlled screening trials comparing LDCT with no screening or chest x-ray.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomised controlled trials were identified, seven of which reported mortality results. NSLT showed a significant reduction of 6.7% in overall mortality and 20% in lung cancer mortality after 6.5 years of follow-up. NELSON showed a significant reduction in lung cancer mortality of 24% at 10 years among men. LUSI and MILD showed a reduction in lung cancer mortality of 69% at 8 years among women and 39% at 10 years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Screening for bronchial cancer is a complex issue. Clarification is needed regarding the selection of individuals, the definition of a positive result and the attitude towards a suspicious nodule.

Personalising lung cancer screening: An overview of risk-stratification opportunities and challenges

Randomised clinical trials have shown the efficacy of computed tomography lung cancer screening, initiating discussions on whether and how to implement population‐based screening programs. Due to smoking behaviour being the primary risk‐factor for lung cancer and part of the criteria for determining screening eligibility, lung cancer screening is inherently risk‐based. In fact, the selection of high‐risk individuals has been shown to be essential in implementing lung cancer screening in a cost‐effective manner. Furthermore, studies have shown that further risk‐stratification may improve screening efficiency, allow personalisation of the screening interval and reduce health disparities. However, implementing risk‐based lung cancer screening programs also requires overcoming a number of challenges. There are indications that risk‐based approaches can negatively influence the trade‐off between individual benefits and harms if not applied thoughtfully. Large‐scale implementation of targeted, risk‐based screening programs has been limited thus far. Consequently, questions remain on how to efficiently identify and invite high‐risk individuals from the general population. Finally, while risk‐based approaches may increase screening program efficiency, efficiency should be balanced with the overall impact of the screening program. In this review, we will address the opportunities and challenges in applying risk‐stratification in different aspects of lung cancer screening programs, as well as the balance between screening program efficiency and impact.

Ongoing challenges in implementation of lung cancer screening

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in Europe and around the world. Although available therapies have undergone considerable development in the past decades, the five-year survival rate for lung cancer remains low. This sobering outlook results mainly from the advanced stages of cancer most patients are diagnosed with. As the population at risk is relatively well defined and early stage disease is potentially curable, lung cancer outcomes may be improved by screening. Several studies already show that lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality. However, for a successful implementation of LCS programmes, several challenges have to be overcome: selection of high-risk individuals, standardization of nodule classification and measurement, specific training of radiologists, optimization of screening intervals and screening duration, handling of ancillary findings are some of the major points which should be addressed. Last but not least, the psychological impact of screening on screened individuals and the impact of potential false positive findings should not be neglected. The aim of this review is to discuss the different challenges of implementing LCS programmes and to give some hints on how to overcome them. Finally, we will also discuss the psychological impact of screening on quality of life and the importance of smoking cessation.

The radiologist's role in lung cancer screening

Lung cancer is still the deadliest cancer in men and women worldwide. This high mortality is related to diagnosis in advanced stages, when curative treatment is no longer an option. Large randomized controlled trials have shown that lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (CT) can detect lung cancers at earlier stages and reduce lung cancer-specific mortality. The recent publication of the significant reduction of cancer-related mortality by 26% in the Dutch-Belgian NELSON LCS trial has increased the likelihood that implementation of LCS in Europe will move forward. Radiologists are important stakeholders in numerous aspects of the LCS pathway. Their role goes beyond nodule detection and nodule management. Being part of a multidisciplinary team, radiologists are key players in numerous aspects of implementation of a high quality LCS program. In this non-systematic review we discuss the multifaceted role of radiologists in LCS.

Screen-detected solid nodules: from detection of nodule to structured reporting

Lung cancer screening (LCS) is gaining some interest worldwide after positive results from International trials. Unlike other screening practices, LCS is performed by an extremely sensitive test, namely low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) that can detect the smallest nodules in lung parenchyma. Up-to-date detection approaches, such as computer aided detection systems, have been increasingly employed for lung nodule automatic identification and are largely used in most LCS programs as a complementary tool to visual reading. Solid nodules of any size are represented in the vast majority of subjects undergoing LDCT. However, less than 1% of solid nodules will be diagnosed lung cancer. This fact calls for specific characterization of nodules to avoid false positives, overinvestigation, and reduce the risks associated with nodule work up. Recent research has been exploring the potential of artificial intelligence, including deep learning techniques, to enhance the accuracy of both detection and characterisation of lung nodule. Computer aided detection and diagnosis algorithms based on artificial intelligence approaches have demonstrated the ability to accurately detect and characterize parenchymal nodules, reducing the number of false positives, and to outperform some of the currently used risk models for prediction of lung cancer risk, potentially reducing the proportion of surveillance CT scans. These forthcoming approaches will eventually integrate a new reasoning for development of future guidelines, which are expected to evolve into precision and personalized stratification of lung cancer risk stratification by continuous fashion, as opposed to the current format with a limited number of risk classes within fixed thresholds of nodule size. This review aims to detail the standard of reference for optimal management of solid nodules by low-dose computed and its projection into the fine selection of candidates for work up.