Racial and Ethnic Differences in Lung Cancer Surgical Stage: An STS Database Study

A decade of surgical outcomes in a structured lung cancer screening program

OBJECTIVE

Lung cancer screening can decrease mortality. The majority of screen-detected cancers are early stage and undergo surgical resection. However, there are little data regarding the outcomes of surgical treatment outside of clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of curative resection for screen-detected lung cancers with nonscreened, incidentally detected cancers at an institution with a structured screening program.

METHODS

Patients undergoing lung cancer curative resection from January 2012 to June 2021 were identified from a prospective database. Baseline patient characteristics, tumor characteristics, and outcomes were compared between cancer detected from screening and cancer detected incidentally.

RESULTS

There were 199 patients in the incidental group and 82 patients in the screened group. Mean follow-up was 33.3 ± 25 months. The screened group had more African Americans (P = .04), a higher incidence of emphysema (P = .02), less prior cancers (P < .01), and more pack-years smoked (P < .01). The screened group had a smaller size (1.74 vs 2.31 cm, P < .01); however, pathologic stage was similar, with the majority being stage I. Postoperative morbidity, 30-day mortality, and overall and recurrence-free survival were similar between groups. Only 48.7% of the incidental group met current US Preventative Services Task Force screening criteria (age 50-80 years, ≥20 pack-year smoking history).

CONCLUSIONS

Screen-detected lung cancers have excellent postoperative and long-term outcomes with curative resection, similar to incidentally detected cancers. A large portion of incidentally detected lung cancers do not meet current screening guidelines, which is an opportunity for further refinement of eligibility.

Factors associated with diagnosis of stages I and II lung cancer: a multivariate analysis

OBJECTIVE

To present the overall survival rate for lung cancer and identify the factors associated with early diagnosis of stage I and II lung cancer.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study including individuals diagnosed with lung cancer, from January 2009 to December 2017, according to the cancer registry at UMass Memorial Medical Center. Five-year overall survival and its associated factors were identified by Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox's proportional hazards model. Factors associated with diagnosing clinical stage I and II lung cancer were identified by bivariate and multivariate backward stepwise logistic regression (Log-likelihood ratio (LR)) at 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

The study was conducted with data on 2730 individuals aged 67.9 years on average, 51.5% of whom female, 92.3% white, and 6.6% never smoked. Five-year overall survival was 21%. Individuals diagnosed with early-stage disease had a 43% five-year survival rate compared to 8% for those diagnosed at late stages. Stage at diagnosis was the main factor associated with overall survival [HR = 4.08 (95%CI: 3.62-4.59)]. Factors associated with early diagnosis included patients older than 68 years [OR = 1.23 (95%CI: 1.04-1.45)], of the female gender [OR = 1.47 (95%CI: 1.24-1.73)], white [OR = 1.63 (95%CI: 1.16-2.30)], and never-smokers [OR = 1.37 (95%CI: 1.01-1.86)]; as well as tumors affecting the upper lobe [OR = 1.46 (95%CI: 1.24-1.73)]; adenocarcinoma [OR = 1.43 (95%CI: 1.21-1.69)]; and diagnosis after 2014 [OR = 1.61 (95%CI: 1.37-1.90)].

CONCLUSIONS

Stage at diagnosis was the most decisive predictor for survival. Non-white and male individuals were more likely to be diagnosed at a late stage. Thus, promoting lung cancer early diagnosis by improving access to health care is vital to enhance overall survival for individuals with lung cancer.

Social Disparities in Thoracic Surgery Database Research: Implications and Impact

A complex relationship exists between health care disparities and large databases among the thoracic surgical patient population. Using the example of thoracic malignancies, the ability of investigations leveraging large databases and novel analytical approaches to highlight disparate access to care and discordant outcomes following treatment is illustrated. Large, widely used databases may not be representative of the thoracic surgical patient population as a whole, and caution must be used when interpreting and generalizing results gleaned from such database analyses. Ensuring appropriate representation of all relevant patient subgroups in research databases will improve external generalizability and scientific validity of future investigations.

The Incidence of Node-Positive Non-small-Cell Lung Cancer Undergoing Sublobar Resection and the Role of Radiation in Its Management

Purpose: To identify the incidence, preoperative risk factors, and prognosis associated with pathologically positive lymph node (pN+) in patients undergoing a sub-lobar resection (SLR). Methods: This is a retrospective study using the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2014 analyzing SLR excluding those with any preoperative chemotherapy and/or radiation, follow-up <3 months, stage IV disease, or >1 tumor nodule. Multivariable modeling (MVA) was used to determine factors associated with overall survival (OS). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to determine preoperative risk factors for pN+ in patients having at least one node examined to assess radiation's effect on OS in those patients with pN+ and to determine whether SLR was associated with inferior OS as compared to lobectomy for each nodal stage. Results: A total of 40,202 patients underwent SLR, but only 58.3% had one lymph node examined. Then, 2,615 individuals had pN+ which decreased progressively from 15.1% in 2004 to 8.9% in 2014 (N1, from 6.3 to 3.0%, and N2, from 8.4 to 5.9%). A lower risk of pN+ was noted for squamous cell carcinomas, bronchioloalveolar adenocarcinoma (BAC), adenocarcinomas, and right upper lobe locations. In the pN+ group, OS was worse without chemotherapy or radiation. Radiation was associated with a strong trend for OS in the entire pN+ group (p = 0.0647) which was largely due to the effects on those having N2 disease (p = 0.009) or R1 resections (p = 0.03), but not N1 involvement (p = 0.87). PSM noted that SLR was associated with an inferior OS as compared to lobectomy by nodal stage in the overall patient population and even for those with tumors <2 cm. Conclusion: pN+ incidence in SLRs has decreased over time. SLR was associated with inferior OS as compared to lobectomy by nodal stage. Radiation appears to improve the OS in patients undergoing SLR with pN+, especially in those with N2 nodal involvement and/or positive margins.

Genomic assessment distinguishes intrapulmonary metastases from synchronous primary lung cancers

Background

Multiple synchronous lung tumors (MSLT), particularly within a single lobe, represent a diagnostic and treatment challenge. While histologic assessment was once the only method to possibly distinguish multiple primary lung cancers, there is a growing interest in identifying unique genomic features or mutations to best characterize these processes.

Methods

In order to differentiate multiple primary lung malignancies from intrapulmonary metastases in patients with MSLT, we performed whole exome sequencing (WES) on 10 tumor samples from 4 patients with MSLT.

Results

Shared mutations between tumors from the same patient varied from 0-91%. Patient 3 shared no common mutations; however, in Patients 2 and 4, identical mutations were identified among all tumors from each patient, suggesting that the three tumors identified in Patient 3 represent separate primary lung cancers, while those of Patients 1, 2 and 4 signify hematogenous and lymphatic spread.

Conclusions

A high proportion of shared mutations between different lung tumors is likely indicative of intrapulmonary metastatic disease, while tumors with distinct genomic profiles likely represent multiple primary malignancies driven by distinct molecular events. Application of genomic profiling in the clinical setting may prove to be important to precise management of patients with MSLT.

Barriers to and Interest in Lung Cancer Screening Among Latino and Non-Latino Current and Former Smokers

Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer death in Latinos. In a telephone survey, we assessed perceptions about lung cancer and awareness of, interest in, and barriers to lung screening among older current and former smokers. We compared Latino and non-Latino responses adjusting for age, sex, education, and smoking status using logistic regression models. Of the 460 patients who completed the survey (51.5% response rate), 58.0% were women, 49.3% former smokers, 15.7% Latino, with mean age 63.6 years. More Latinos believed that lung cancer could be prevented compared to non-Latinos (74.6% vs. 48.2%, OR 3.07, CI 1.89-5.01), and less worried about developing lung cancer (34.8% vs. 50.3%, OR 0.44, CI 0.27-0.72). Most participants were not aware of lung screening (44.1% Latinos vs. 34.3% Non-Latinos, OR 1.24, CI 0.79-1.94), but when informed, more Latinos wanted to be screened (90.7% vs. 67%, OR 4.58, CI 2.31-9.05). Latinos reported fewer barriers to lung screening.

Patient navigation for lung cancer screening among current smokers in community health centers a randomized controlled trial

Annual chest computed tomography (CT) can decrease lung cancer mortality in high-risk individuals. Patient navigation improves cancer screening rates in underserved populations. Randomized controlled trial was conducted from February 2016 to January 2017 to evaluate the impact of a patient navigation program on lung cancer screening (LCS) among current smokers in five community health centers (CHCs) affiliated with an academic primary care network. We randomized 1200 smokers aged 55-77 years to intervention (n = 400) or usual care (n = 800). Navigators contacted patients to determine LCS eligibility, introduce shared decision making about screening, schedule appointments with primary care physicians (PCPs), and help overcome barriers to obtaining screening and follow-up. Control patients received usual care. The main outcome was the proportion of patients who had any chest CT. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients contacted, proportion receiving LCS CTs, screening results and number of lung cancers diagnosed. Of the 400 intervention patients, 335 were contacted and 76 refused participation. Of the 259 participants, 124 (48%) were ineligible for screening; 119 had smoked <30 pack-years, and five had competing comorbidities. Among the 135 eligible participants in the intervention group, 124 (92%) had any chest CT performed. In intention-to-treat analyses, 124 intervention patients (31%) had any chest CT versus 138 control patients (17.3%, P < 0.001). LCS CTs were performed in 94 intervention patients (23.5%) versus 69 controls (8.6%, P < 0.001). A total of 20% of screened patients required follow-up. Lung cancer was diagnosed in eight intervention (2%) and four control (0.5%) patients. A patient navigation program implemented in CHCs significantly increased LCS among high-risk current smokers.

Variability in Cancer Risk and Outcomes Within US Latinos by National Origin and Genetic Ancestry

Latinos have lower rates for most common cancer sites and higher rates of some less common cancers (gallbladder, liver, gastric, and cervical) than other ethnic/racial groups. Latinos are a highly heterogeneous population with diverse national origins, unique genetic admixture patterns, and wide spectrum of socio-demographic characteristics. Across the major cancers (breast, colorectal, prostate, lung, and liver) US-born Latinos have higher incidence and worse survival than foreign-born, and those with low-socioeconomic status have the lowest incidence. Puerto Rican and Cuban Latinos have higher incidence rates than Mexican Latinos. We have identified the following themes as understudied and critical to reduce the cancer burden among US Latinos: (1) etiological studies considering key sources of heterogeneity, (2) culturally sensitive cancer prevention strategies, (3) description of the molecular tumor landscape to guide treatments and improve outcomes, and (4) development of prediction models of disease risk and outcomes accounting for heterogeneity of Latinos.