Electronic cigarette use in youths: a position statement of the Forum of International Respiratory Societies

Children and adolescents are highly susceptible to nicotine addiction, which affects their brain development, even in those who smoke infrequently. Young people who become addicted to nicotine are at greater risk of becoming lifelong tobacco consumers. The use of nicotine-delivering electronic cigarettes has risen dramatically among youths worldwide. In addition to physical dependence, adolescents are susceptible to social and environmental influences to use electronic cigarettes. The product design, flavours, marketing, and perception of safety and acceptability have increased the appeal of electronic cigarettes to young people, thus leading to new generations addicted to nicotine. Moreover, there is growing evidence that electronic cigarettes in children and adolescents serve as a gateway to cigarette smoking. There can be no argument for harm reduction in children. To protect this vulnerable population from electronic cigarettes and other nicotine delivery devices, we recommend that electronic cigarettes be regulated as tobacco products and included in smoke-free policies. Sale of electronic cigarettes should be barred to youths worldwide. Flavouring should be prohibited in electronic cigarettes, and advertising accessible by youths and young adults be banned. Finally, we recommend greater research on the health effects of electronic cigarettes and surveillance of use across different countries.

Mycobacterium lentiflavum in drinking water supplies, Australia

Humans may acquire infection from potable water.

Mycobacterium lentiflavum, a slow-growing nontuberculous mycobacterium, is a rare cause of human disease. It has been isolated from environmental samples worldwide. To assess the clinical significance of M. lentiflavum isolates reported to the Queensland Tuberculosis Control Centre, Australia, during 2001–2008, we explored the genotypic similarity and geographic relationship between isolates from humans and potable water in the Brisbane metropolitan area. A total of 47 isolates from 36 patients were reported; 4 patients had clinically significant disease. M. lentiflavum was cultured from 13 of 206 drinking water sites. These sites overlapped geographically with home addresses of the patients who had clinically significant disease. Automated repetitive sequence–based PCR genotyping showed a dominant environmental clone closely related to clinical strains. This finding suggests potable water as a possible source of M. lentiflavum infection in humans.

Brief Tailored Smoking Cessation Counseling in a Lung Cancer Screening Population is Feasible: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Maximizing smoking abstinence in lung cancer screening participants is important to reduce individual risk of disease and improve screening cost-effectiveness; however, the optimal strategy remains undefined. We hypothesized that a single session of tailored face-to-face counseling on the day of screening CT scan, coupled with audio and printed cessation information would be feasible to deliver in a CT screening trial.

METHODS

We randomized volunteer smokers in the Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study to intervention (counseling session, audio quit materials, printed quit materials, Quitline contact details) or control group (printed quit materials, Quitline contact details). Participants self-reported point prevalence quit rates at 1 year.

RESULTS

Fifty-five smokers were enrolled; 28 randomized to intervention and 27 controls. Median cigarette consumption was 25/day; 54/55 smoked at least 15 cigarettes per day. Median smoking duration was 46 years. Median Fagerström dependence score was 6. In total 58% did not report any quit attempt in the prior 12 months. Mean duration of counseling was 26.5 minutes. After 1 year, four participants (14.3%) in the intervention group and five participants (18.5%) in the control group had quit (P = .74). Combined annual point prevalence quit rate was 16.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although feasible to deliver a single session of tailored counseling on the day of screening this intervention had no discernible impact on cessation over and above printed materials and Quitline access. As participants exhibited hardcore smoking characteristics, more intensive strategies, in larger cohorts, should be explored.

IMPLICATIONS

The optimal smoking cessation strategy within a lung cancer screening program is not known. This study demonstrates that a single session of counseling can be feasibly delivered on the day of screening but may not have been intensive enough for long-term, hard-core smokers.

Utility of clinical parameters of tissue oxygenation in a quantitative model of irreversible hemorrhagic shock

The aim of this study was to assess the value of parameters of tissue oxygenation in monitoring the progression to irreversibility in a quantitative model of hemorrhagic shock. Rats were bled to a mean arterial pressure of 40 mmHg and were maintained at this level by further blood withdrawal until the compensation endpoint; this point was defined as the time at which the rat was no longer able to maintain its blood pressure at this level and shed blood was required for transfusion. The shock period was maintained until 0%, 20%, 40%, or 50% of the maximum shed blood volume (MBV) had been returned (n = 10 in each group, total n = 40). The animals were then resuscitated with remaining shed blood plus twice MBV as lactated Ringer's solution to MAP > 80 mmHg. Blood gas and serum lactate samples were measured at baseline, compensation endpoint, and at the time of resuscitation, and 24 h survival was recorded. Increasing the severity of shock progressively worsened the acidosis, with increased base deficit and lacticacidemia, and deterioration in central venous oxygen saturation (CvO2). Tissue oxygenation parameters, particularly CvO2, predicted subsequent mortality. Lactate levels only predicted irreversibility in late, severe shock. This quantitative model of hemorrhagic shock showed that tissue oxygenation parameters can be used to monitor the progression from the decompensated phase of hemorrhagic shock to irreversibility. Furthermore, this experimental study suggests that venous indices may be a valuable tool in reflecting the severity of hemorrhagic insult in a setting when arterial blood samples may not be easily available.

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.

Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: a review of current status

Screening using low-dose computed tomography (CT) represents an exciting new development in the struggle to improve outcomes for people with lung cancer. Randomised controlled evidence demonstrating a 20% relative lung cancer mortality benefit has led to endorsement of screening by several expert bodies in the US and funding by healthcare providers. Despite this pivotal result, many questions remain regarding technical and logistical aspects of screening, cost-effectiveness and generalizability to other settings. This review discusses the rationale behind screening, the results of on-going trials, potential harms of screening and current knowledge gaps.

Electronic cigarettes: A position statement from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand

The TSANZ develops position statements where insufficient data exist to write formal clinical guidelines. In 2018, the TSANZ addressed the question of potential benefits and health impacts of electronic cigarettes (EC). The working party included groups focused on health impacts, smoking cessation, youth issues and priority populations. The 2018 report on the Public Health Consequences of E-Cigarettes from the United States NASEM was accepted as reflective of evidence to mid-2017. A search for papers subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals was conducted in August 2018. A small number of robust and important papers published until March 2019 were also identified and included. Groups identified studies that extended, modified or contradicted the NASEM report. A total of 3793 papers were identified and reviewed, with summaries and draft position statements developed and presented to TSANZ membership in April 2019. After feedback from members and external reviewers, a collection of position statements was finalized in December 2019. EC have adverse lung effects and harmful effects of long-term use are unknown. EC are unsuitable consumer products for recreational use, part-substitution for smoking or long-term exclusive use by former smokers. Smokers who require support to quit smoking should be directed towards approved medication in conjunction with behavioural support as having the strongest evidence for efficacy and safety. No specific EC product can be recommended as effective and safe for smoking cessation. Smoking cessation claims in relation to EC should be assessed by established regulators.

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.

Screen-detected subsolid pulmonary nodules: long-term follow-up and application of the PanCan lung cancer risk prediction model

OBJECTIVE

To report the long-term follow-up of subsolid nodules (SSNs) detected in participants of a prospective low-dose CT lung cancer screening cohort, and to investigate the utility of the PanCan model in stratifying risk in baseline SSNs.

METHODS

Participants underwent a baseline scan, two annual incidence scans and further follow-up scans for the detected nodules. All SSNs underwent a minimum of 2 years of follow-up (unless resolved or resected). Risk of malignancy was estimated using the PanCan model; discrimination [area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC)] and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test) were assessed. The Mann-Whitney U-Wilcoxon test was used to compare estimated risk between groups.

RESULTS

70 SSNs were detected in 41 (16.0%) out of 256 total participants. Median follow-up period was 25.5 months (range 2.0-74.0 months). 29 (41.4%) SSNs were transient. Five (7.1%) SSNs were resected, all found to be Stage I lung adenocarcinoma, including one SSN stable in size for 3.0 years before growth was detected. The PanCan model had good discrimination for the 52 baseline SSNs (AUC = 0.89; 95% confidence interval 0.76-1); the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was non-significant (p = 0.27). Estimated risk was significantly higher in the baseline SSNs found to be cancer vs those not found to be cancer after 2-6 years of follow-up (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support a long-term follow-up approach for screen-detected SSNs for 3 years or longer. The PanCan model appeared discriminatory and well calibrated in this cohort.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The PanCan model may have utility in identifying low-risk SSNs which could be followed with less frequent CT scans.

Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study: rationale, design and methods

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in Australia. Screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) can reduce lung cancer mortality. The feasibility of screening in Australia is unknown. This paper describes the rationale, design and methods of the Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study.

AIMS

The aim of the study is to describe the methodology for a feasibility study of lung cancer screening by LDCT in Australia.

METHODS

The Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study is an ongoing, prospective observational study of screening by LDCT at a single tertiary institution. Healthy volunteers at high risk of lung cancer (age 60-74 years; smoking history ≥30 pack years, current or quit within 15 years; forced expiratory volume in 1s ≥50% predicted) are recruited from the general public through newspaper advertisement and press release. Participants receive a LDCT scan of the chest at baseline, year 1 and year 2 using a multidetector helical computed tomography scanner and are followed up for a total of 5 years. Feasibility of screening will be assessed by cancer detection rates, lung nodule prevalence, optimal management strategies for lung nodules, economic costs, healthcare utilisation and participant quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Studying LDCT screening in the Australian setting will help us understand how differences in populations, background diseases and healthcare structures modulate screening effectiveness. This information, together with results from overseas randomised studies, will inform and facilitate local policymaking.

Interstitial lung abnormalities in the Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study: prevalence and progression over 2 years of surveillance

BACKGROUND

We report the prevalence and progression of incidentally detected interstitial lung abnormalities (ILA) in the Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study cohort.

METHODS

About 256 volunteers aged 60-74, with ≥30 pack years smoking history and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) ≥50% predicted underwent low-dose computed tomography (CT) chest screening. Electronic search of baseline (T0) and 2-year follow-up (T2) CT reports identified candidate cases using Fleischner Society interstitial terminology. Candidate CT were reviewed in a randomised order by two experienced radiologists and a senior respiratory medicine trainee blinded to the existing reports. Scans were evaluated for the presence and extent of ILA using an in-house score, and graded for progression.

RESULTS

ILA were detected in 20/256 baseline cases (7.8%) with no incident cases detected at T2 surveillance imaging. Of these 20 cases, 9 (45%) had reticulation, 18 (90%) had ground glass change, 1 had traction bronchiectasis and 1 had randomly distributed nodularity. Seven cases with ground glass changes also had areas of reticulation, and only two had reticulation alone. All ILA were graded as minor except for traction bronchiectasis, which was moderate. Only one case progressed on T2 imaging. ILA were associated with the presence of auscultatory crackles (50% vs 11.6%, P = 0.001) and a lesser degree of emphysema (mean % volumetric emphysema 6.7% vs 9.8%, P = 0.009). No relationship was observed between baseline and serial lung function parameters.

CONCLUSION

ILA are frequent incidental findings in lung cancer screening. In the majority of cases these abnormalities do not appear to change significantly over a 2-year period of surveillance.

Personalizing and targeting therapy for COPD: the role of molecular and clinical biomarkers

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous disease characterized by persistent airflow limitation. It is the third leading cause of death worldwide, and there are currently no curative strategies for this disease. Many factors contribute to COPD susceptibility, progression and exacerbations. These include cigarette smoking, environmental and occupational pollutants, respiratory infections and comorbidities. As the clinical phenotypes of COPD are so variable, it has been difficult to devise an individualized treatment plan for patients with this complex chronic disease. This review will highlight how potential clinical, inflammatory, genomic and epigenomic biomarkers for COPD could be used to personalize treatment, leading to improved disease management and prevention for our patients.

Hospital-based multidisciplinary lung cancer care in Australia: a survey of the landscape in 2021

Introduction

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in Australia and has the highest cancer burden. Numerous reports describe variations in lung cancer care and outcomes across Australia. There are no data assessing compliance with treatment guidelines and little is known about lung cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) infrastructure around Australia.

Methods

Clinicians from institutions treating lung cancer were invited to complete an online survey regarding the local infrastructure for lung cancer care and contemporary issues affecting lung cancer.

Results

Responses from 79 separate institutions were obtained representing 72% of all known institutions treating lung cancer in Australia. Most (93.6%) held a regular MDT meeting although recommended core membership was only achieved for 42/73 (57.5%) sites. There was no thoracic surgery representation in 17/73 (23.3%) of MDTs and surgery was less represented in regional and low case volume centres. Specialist nurses were present in just 37/79 (46.8%) of all sites. Access to diagnostic and treatment facilities was limited for some institutions. IT infrastructure was variable and most sites (69%) do not perform regular audits against guidelines. The COVID-19 pandemic has driven most sites to incorporate virtual MDT meetings, with variable impact around the country. Clinician support for a national data-driven approach to improving lung cancer care was unanimous.

Discussion

This survey demonstrates variations in infrastructure support, provision and membership of lung cancer MDTs, in particular thoracic surgery and specialist lung cancer nurses. This heterogeneity may contribute to some of the well-documented variations in lung cancer outcomes in Australia.

Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation

Introduction

Participation in lung cancer screening (LCS) trials and real-world programs is low, with many people at high-risk for lung cancer opting out of baseline screening after registering interest. We aimed to identify the potential drivers of participation in LCS in the Australian setting, to inform future implementation.

Methods

Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with individuals at high-risk of lung cancer who were eligible for screening and who had either participated (‘screeners’) or declined to participate (‘decliners’) in the International Lung Screening Trial from two Australian sites. Interview guide development was informed by the Precaution Adoption Process Model. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using the COM-B model of behaviour to explore capability, opportunity and motivation related to screening behaviour.

Results

Thirty-nine participants were interviewed (25 screeners; 14 decliners). Motivation to participate in screening was high in both groups driven by the lived experience of lung cancer and a belief that screening is valuable, however decliners unlike their screening counterparts reported low self-efficacy. Decliners in our study reported challenges in capability including ability to attend and in knowledge and understanding. Decliners also reported challenges related to physical and social opportunity, in particular location as a barrier and lack of family support to attend screening.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that motivation alone may not be sufficient to change behaviour related to screening participation, unless capability and opportunity are also considered. Focusing strategies on barriers related to capability and opportunity such as online/telephone support, mobile screening programs and financial assistance for screeners may better enhance screening participation. Providing funding for clinicians to support individuals in decision-making and belief in self-efficacy may foster motivation. Targeting interventions that connect eligible individuals with the LCS program will be crucial for successful implementation.

Cost of screening for lung cancer in Australia

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer screening can reduce lung cancer mortality. Australian cost estimates are important to inform policy but remain uncertain.

AIM

To describe the first direct medical costs associated with lung cancer screening in Australia.

METHODS

Single-centre prospective screening cohort. Healthy volunteers (age 60-74 years, current or former smokers quit <15 years prior to enrolment, ≥30 pack-years exposure) underwent baseline and two annual incidence computed tomography (CT) screening scans. Health status and healthcare usage data were collated for 5 years. The main outcome measures were: rates of lung cancer; individual healthcare resource use derived from multiple data sources adjusted to 2018 Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule values.

RESULTS

A total of 256, 239, 233 participants was screened at each round respectively; 12 participants were diagnosed with lung cancer during screening and 2 during follow-up: 9 underwent surgery, 4 received concurrent chemoradiation, 1 received palliative chemotherapy. One surgical case died from lymphoma 1407 days after diagnosis, all other surgical cases survived >5 years. Non-surgical median survival post-diagnosis was 654 days. Gross trial cost was Australian dollar (AU$) 965 665 (AU$397 396 CT scans; AU$29 303 false-positive scan work-up; AU$96 340 true-positive scan workup; AU$336 914 lung cancer treatment; AU$104 712 lung cancer follow-up post-treatment). Average total direct medical cost per participant was AU$3 768. Average direct cost of surgery was AU$22 659; average non-surgical cost was AU$47 395 (radiotherapy, chemotherapy, palliative care).

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced cancer cost more to treat and had worse survival than early cancer. Screening costs are similar to international studies and suggest that lung cancer early detection could limit treatment costs and improve outcomes.

Biomarkers of lung cancer for screening and in never-smokers-a narrative review

Background and Objective

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, partially attributed to late-stage diagnoses. In order to mitigate this, lung cancer screening (LCS) of high-risk patients is performed using low dose computed tomography (CT) scans, however this method is burdened by high false-positive rates and radiation exposure for patients. Further, screening programs focus on individuals with heavy smoking histories, and as such, never-smokers who may otherwise be at risk of lung cancer are often overlooked. To resolve these limitations, biomarkers have been posited as potential supplements or replacements to low-dose CT, and as such, a large body of research in this area has been produced. However, comparatively little information exists on their clinical efficacy and how this compares to current LCS strategies.

Methods

Here we conduct a search and narrative review of current literature surrounding biomarkers of lung cancer to supplement LCS, and biomarkers of lung cancer in never-smokers (LCINS).

Key Content and Findings

Many potential biomarkers of lung cancer have been identified with varying levels of sensitivity, specificity, clinical efficacy, and supporting evidence. Of the markers identified, multi-target panels of circulating microRNAs, lipids, and metabolites are likely the most clinically efficacious markers to aid current screening programs, as these provide the highest sensitivity and specificity for lung cancer detection. However, circulating lipid and metabolite levels are known to vary in numerous systemic pathologies, highlighting the need for further validation in large cohort randomised studies.

Conclusions

Lung cancer biomarkers is a fast-expanding area of research and numerous biomarkers with potential clinical applications have been identified. However, in all cases the level of evidence supporting clinical efficacy is not yet at a level at which it can be translated to clinical practice. The priority now should be to validate existing candidate markers in appropriate clinical contexts and work to integrating these into clinical practice.

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Smoking Cessation Smartphone App (My QuitBuddy) in Older Persons: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Although many smoking cessation smartphone apps exist, few have been independently evaluated, particularly in older populations. In 2017, of the 112 commercially available smoking cessation apps in Australia, only 6 were deemed to be of high quality, in that they partially adhered to Australian guidelines. Mobile health (mHealth) apps have the potential to modify smoking behavior at a relatively low cost; however, their acceptability in older smokers remains unknown. Rigorous scientific evaluation of apps is thus urgently needed to assist smokers and clinicians alike.

Objective

We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial to evaluate the feasibility of a large-scale trial to assess the use and acceptability of a high-quality smoking cessation app in older smokers.

Methods

Adult inpatient and outpatient smokers with computer and smartphone access were recruited face to face and via telephone interviews from Metropolitan Hospitals in Brisbane, Australia. Participants were randomized 1:1 to the intervention (requested to download the “My QuitBuddy” smoking cessation app on their smartphone) or the control group (provided access to a tailored smoking cessation support webpage [Quit HQ]). The My QuitBuddy app is freely available from app stores and provides personalized evidenced-based smoking cessation support. Quit HQ offers regular email support over 12 weeks. No training or instructions on the use of these e-resources were given to participants. Outcomes at 3 months included recruitment and retention rates, use and acceptability of e-resource (User Version of the Mobile App Rating Scale [uMARS]), changes in quitting motivation (10-point scale), and self-reported smoking abstinence.

Results

We randomized 64 of 231 potentially eligible individuals (27.7%). The mean age of participants was 62 (SD 8). Nicotine dependence was moderate (mean Heaviness of Smoking Index [HSI] 2.8 [SD 1.2]). At 3 months the retention rate was (58/64, 91%). A total of 15 of 31 participants in the intervention arm (48%) used the app at least once, compared with 10 of 33 (30%) in the control arm. uMARS scores for e-resource use and acceptability were statistically similar (P=.29). Motivation to quit was significantly higher in the intervention arm compared with the control arm (median 6 [IQR 4-8] versus 4 [IQR 4-5], respectively, P=.02). According to the intention-to-treat analysis, smoking abstinence was nonsignificantly higher in the intervention group (4/31 [13%], 95% CI 4%-30%, versus 2/33 [6%], 95% CI 1%-20%; P=.42). The estimated number needed to treat was 14.

Conclusions

Internet and mHealth smoking cessation resources appear acceptable to a minority of older smokers. Smokers who engaged with the allocated e-resources rated them equally, and there were trends toward greater uptake, increased motivation, and higher abstinence rates in the app group; however, only the change in motivation reached statistical significance (median score 6 versus 4, respectively, P=.02). This results of this pilot study suggest that apps may improve quit outcomes in older adults who are willing to use them. Further research into user–app interactions should be undertaken to facilitate improvements in app design and consumer engagement. These favorable trends should be explored in larger trials with sufficient statistical power.

Trial Registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619000159156; http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=376849&isReview=true

"What do I think about implementing lung cancer screening? It all depends on how." Acceptability and feasibility of lung cancer screening in Australia: The view of key stakeholders about health system factors

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer death worldwide. Although international trials demonstrate that targeted screening using low dose computed tomography (LDCT) significantly reduces lung cancer mortality, implementation of screening in the high-risk population presents complex health system challenges that need to be thoroughly understood to support policy change.

AIM

To elicit health care providers' and policymakers' views about the acceptability and feasibility of lung cancer screening (LCS) and barriers and enablers to implementation in the Australian setting.

METHODS

We conducted 24 focus groups and three interviews (22 focus groups and all interviews online) in 2021 with 84 health professionals, researchers, and current cancer screening program managers and policy makers across all Australian states and territories. Focus groups included a structured presentation about lung cancer and screening and lasted approximately one hour each. A qualitative approach to analysis was used to map topics to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Nearly all participants considered LCS to be acceptable and feasible but identified a wide range of implementation challenges. Topics (five specific to health systems and five cross-cutting with participant factors) identified were mapped to CFIR constructs, of which 'readiness for implementation', 'planning' and 'executing' were most salient. Health system factor topics included delivery of the LCS program, cost, workforce considerations, quality assurance and complexity of health systems. Participants strongly advocated for streamlined referral processes. Practical strategies to address equity and access, such as using mobile screening vans, were emphasised.

CONCLUSIONS

Key stakeholders readily identified the complex challenges associated with the acceptability and feasibility of LCS in Australia. The barriers and facilitators across health system and cross-cutting topics were clearly elicited. These findings are highly relevant to the scoping of a national LCS program by the Australian Government and a subsequent recommendation for implementation.