Accuracy and consequences of same-day, invasive lung cancer workup - a retrospective study in patients treated with surgical resection

Suspected Lung Cancer with Suspicious Liver Lesions: Diagnostic Yield and Safety of Same-Day Bronchoscopy and Liver Biopsy in the Hands of a Pulmonologist

BACKGROUND

Bronchoscopy and endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) are standard procedures for the diagnosis and staging of patients suspected of lung cancer. If the patient simultaneously presents with suspicious liver lesions, it is tradition to refer the patient to a radiologist for ultrasound-guided percutaneous liver biopsy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the results and complications when the pulmonologist performs all three procedures in the same setting.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients who during 2018-2020 underwent invasive workup of suspected lung cancer and liver metastases with percutaneous liver lesion biopsy with or without same-day endoscopy (bronchoscopy and EBUS). We compared diagnostic yield and safety of liver lesion biopsy stratified by same-day endoscopy or not.

RESULTS

In total, 89 patients were included, of whom 28 patients (31%) underwent same-day endoscopy. All liver lesion biopsies were fine-needle aspiration biopsies performed by experienced pulmonologists. No complications were reported, and overall diagnostic yield was 88%. The diagnostic yield was significantly lower in the same-day endoscopy group (71% vs. 95%), and undergoing endoscopy was significantly associated with having fewer liver lesions, higher prevalence of lung cancer, and lower overall prevalence of a malignant diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Liver biopsy in the same session as endoscopy during lung cancer workup was feasible and safe. Confounding by indication was present in our study.

Is it okay to choose to receive bad news by telephone? An observational study on psychosocial consequences of diagnostic workup for lung cancer suspicion

BACKGROUND

In-person meeting is considered the gold standard in current communication protocols regarding sensitive information, yet one size may not fit all, and patients increasingly demand or are offered disclosure of bad news by, e.g., telephone. It is unknown how patients' active preference for communication modality affect psychosocial consequences of receiving potentially bad news.

AIM

To explore psychosocial consequences in patients, who themselves chose to have results of lung cancer workup delivered either in-person or by telephone compared with patients randomly assigned to either delivery in a recently published randomised controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

An observational study prospectively including patients referred for invasive workup for suspected lung cancer stratified in those declining (Patient's Own Choice, POC group) and those participating in the RCT. On the day of invasive workup and five weeks later, patients completed a validated, nine-dimension, condition-specific questionnaire, Consequences of Screening in Lung Cancer (COS-LC). Primary outcome: difference in change in COS-LC dimensions between POC and RCT groups.

RESULTS

In total, 151 patients were included in the POC group versus 255 in the RCT. Most (70%) in the POC group chose to have results by telephone. Baseline characteristics and diagnostic outcomes were comparable between POC and RCT groups, and in telephone and in-person subgroups too. We observed no statistically significant between-groups differences in any COS-LC score between POC and RCT groups, or between telephone and in-person subgroups in the POC group.

CONCLUSION

Continually informed patients' choice between in-person or telephone disclosure of results of lung cancer workup is not associated with differences in psychosocial outcomes. The present article supports further use of a simple model for how to prepare the patient for potential bad news.

Breaking potentially bad news of cancer workup to well-informed patients by telephone versus in-person: A randomised controlled trial on psychosocial consequences

BACKGROUND

The use of telephone in delivering cancer care increases, but not in cancer workup. Current protocols for breaking bad news assume a single in-person meeting. Cancer workup involves multiple opportunities for patient information. We investigated the psychosocial consequences in gradually informed patients of receiving lung cancer workup results by telephone versus in-person.

METHODS

A randomised, controlled, open-label, assessor-blinded, single-centre trial including patients referred for invasive workup for suspected malignancy (clinical trials no. NCT04315207). Patients were informed on probable cancer at referral, after imaging, and on the day of invasive workup (Baseline visit). Primary endpoint: change (Δ) from baseline to follow-up (4 weeks after receiving workup results) in scores of a validated, sensitive, condition-specific questionnaire (COS-LC) assessing consequences on anxiety, behaviour, dejection and sleep.

RESULTS

Of 492 eligible patients, we randomised 255 patients (mean age: 68 years; female: 38%; malignancy diagnosed: 68%) to the telephone (n = 129) or in-person (n = 126) group. Groups were comparable at baseline and follow-up, and no between-groups difference in ΔCOS-LC was observed in the intention-to-treat population, or in subgroups diagnosed with or without malignancy.

CONCLUSION

Breaking final result of cancer workup by telephone is not associated with adverse psychosocial consequences compared to in-person conversation in well-informed patients.

Re-biopsy after first line treatment in advanced NSCLC can reveal changes in PD-L1 expression

OBJECTIVES

Re-biopsy in progressive advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) after first line treatment may reveal information about evolving tumor biology during treatment. Our study aims to investigate the feasibility, risk of complications, and clinical relevance of performing re-biopsy systematically.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

NSCLC patients with advanced, non-targetable disease, receiving first line systemic treatment, were included in a prospective single-centre study (NCT03512847). A diagnostic biopsy was performed at baseline and repeated at time of progression, preferentially from the progressive lesions as determined by CT or PET/CT. The primary endpoint was feasibility, including complication rate to re-biopsy. Secondary endpoints were clinical relevance, defined as a potential of changing treatment or follow-up, due to new histological evidence, specifically a change in PD-L1 Tumor Proportion Score (TPS).

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients with progressive advanced NSCLC had re-biopsy performed. Median time from patients' acceptance to biopsy was seven days (range: 0-31). Complication rate was 6% (n = 3) represented by pneumothorax, hydro-pneumothorax and pneumonia, respectively. No severe or chronic complications occurred. Sufficient material for PD-L1 analyses was obtained in 46 of 51 patients: the remaining five cases had insufficient tissue for analyses, no malignant cells/only suspected malignant cells, questioning whether progression was real. PD-L1 TPS change was observed in 33% of patients (n = 15) and 17% (n = 8) had potentially clinically relevant changes. A significantly higher chance of PD-L1 TPS change was observed in chemotherapy-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that re-biopsy is feasible, with low risk of complications, and can be clinically relevant in patients with suspected progression in advanced NSCLC.

Fluoroscopy guided percutaneous biopsy in combination with bronchoscopy and endobronchial ultrasound in the diagnosis of suspicious lung lesions - the triple approach

Flexible bronchoscopy and endobronchial ultrasound guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) are the pulmonologists´ basic procedures for the biopsy of suspicious lung lesions. If inconclusive, other guiding-modalities for tissue sampling are needed, computed tomography performed by a radiologist, or – if available – radial EBUS or electromagnetic navigation biopsy.

We wanted to investigate if same-day X-ray fluoroscopy-guided transthoracic fine-needle aspiration biopsy (F-TTNAB) performed by the pulmonologist immediately after bronchoscopy and EBUS is a feasible alternative.

We retrospectively identified consecutive patients in whom F-TTNAB followed a bronchoscopy and EBUS in the same séance. Patients in whom the suspicion of malignancy was invalidated after complete work up were followed for six months to identify false-negative cases.

In total 125 patients underwent triple approach (bronchoscopy, EBUS and F-TTNAB) during the same séance. Malignancy was diagnosed in 86 (69%), and 77 of these (90%) were primary lung cancers. The diagnostic yield of F-TTNAB for malignancy was 77%, and sensitivity was 90%. Pneumothorax occurred in 35 (28%) patients, and was administered with pleural drainage in 22 (18% of all patients). No cases of prolonged haemoptysis were observed. The risk of pneumothorax differed insignificantly with lesion size ≤2.0 cm (27%) versus >2.0 cm (29%).

We conclude that it is feasible for pulmonologist to perform F-TTNAB immediately after endoscopy as a combined triple approach in a fast-track workup of suspected lung cancer.

Transthoracic ultrasound-guided biopsy in the hands of chest physicians - a stepwise approach

Background: The evaluation of patients with lung lesions is challenging. The nature of the lesion can be determined by pathological evaluation of biopsies. The pulmonologists will be met by increasing demands with regard to biopsy techniques including ultrasound-guided transthoracic needle biopsy (US-TTNB).Objective: The aim of this paper is to present the pulmonologist to a systematic step-by-step guide for performing US-TTNB and to assess the evidence for this approach. Method/results: Indications, contraindications and a step-by-step guide for the techniques used when performing US-TTNB are presented, and major complications and handling of these are described. Conclusion: US-TTNB performed by pulmonologists is a safe and feasible procedure.