Prevalence of BRCA-1 associated protein 1 germline mutation in sporadic malignant pleural mesothelioma cases

OBJECTIVE: 23% of mesothelioma tumor specimens have a mutation in the BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) gene and germline BAP1 mutations predispose to malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Our aim was to investigate germline BAP1 mutations in sporadic MPM patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Exonic DNA from peripheral blood leucocytes of 78 MPM patients was screened for germline BAP1 mutation. RESULTS: One out of 78 patients showed a germline synonymous mutation in exon 11. In all other patients wild-type sequence without any single-nucleotide polymorphisms was detected. CONCLUSIONS: Taking into account previous similar screenings, the prevalence of germline BAP1 mutations in sporadic MPM patients can be estimated around 1-2%, suggesting a minor role of germline BAP1 mutation in the pathogenesis of sporadic MPM

Influenza season influence on outcome of new nodules in the NELSON study

We evaluated the impact of the influenza season on outcome of new lung nodules in a LDCT lung cancer screening trial population. NELSON-trial participants with ≥ 1 new nodule detected in screening rounds two and three were included. Outcome (resolution or persistence) of new nodules detected per season was calculated and compared. Winter (influenza season) was defined as 1st October to 31st March, and compared to the summer (hay-fever season), 1st April to 30th September. Overall, 820 new nodules were reported in 529 participants. Of the total new nodules, 482 (59%) were reported during winter. When considering the outcome of all new nodules, there was no statistically significant association between summer and resolving nodules (OR 1.07 [CI 1.00-1.15], p = 0.066), also when looking at the largest nodule per participant (OR 1.37 [CI 0.95-1.98], p = 0.094). Similarly, there was no statistically significant association between season and screen detected cancers (OR 0.47 [CI 0.18-1.23], p = 0.123). To conclude, in this lung cancer screening population, there was no statistically significant association between influenza season and outcome of new lung nodules. Hence, we recommend new nodule management strategy is not influenced by the season in which the nodule is detected.</p

Quantification of growth patterns of screen-detected lung cancers:The NELSON study

Objectives: Although exponential growth is assumed for lung cancer, this has never been quantified in vivo. Aim of this study was to evaluate and quantify growth patterns of lung cancers detected in the Dutch-Belgian low-dose computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening trial (NELSON), in order to elucidate the development and progression of early lung cancer.Materials and methods: Solid lung nodules found at &gt;= 3 CT examinations before lung cancer diagnosis were included. Lung cancer volume (V) growth curves were fitted with a single exponential, expressed as V = V-1 exp(t/tau), with t time from baseline (days), V-1 estimated baseline volume (mm(3)), and tau estimated time constant. The R-2 coefficient of determination was used to evaluate goodness of fit. Overall volume-doubling time for the individual lung cancer is given by tau*log(2).Results: Forty-seven lung cancers in 46 participants were included. Forty participants were male (87.0%); mean age was 61.7 years (standard deviation, 6.2 years). Median nodule size at baseline was 99.5 mm(3) (IQR: 46.8-261.8 mm(3)). Nodules were followed for a median of 770 days (inter-quartile range: 383-1102 days) before lung cancer diagnosis. One cancer (2.1%) was diagnosed after six CT examinations, six cancers (12.8%) were diagnosed after five CTs, 14 (29.8%) after four CTs, and 26 cancers (55.3%) after three CTs. Lung cancer growth could be described by an exponential function with excellent goodness of fit (R-2 0.98). Median overall volume-doubling time was 348 days (inter-quartile range: 222-492 days).Conclusion: This study based on CT lung cancer screening provides in vivo evidence that growth of cancerous small-to-intermediate sized lung nodules detected at low-dose CT lung cancer screening can be described by an exponential function such as volume-doubling time. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</p

Relationship between the number of new nodules and lung cancer probability in incidence screening rounds of CT lung cancer screening:The NELSON study

textabstractBackground: New nodules are regularly found after the baseline round of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening. The relationship between a participant's number of new nodules and lung cancer probability is unknown. Methods: Participants of the ongoing Dutch-Belgian Randomized Lung Cancer Screening (NELSON) Trial with (sub)solid nodules detected after baseline and registered as new by the NELSON radiologists were included. The correlation between a participant's new nodule count and the largest new nodule size was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation. To evaluate the new nodule count as predictor for new nodule lung cancer together with largest new nodule size, a multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. Results: In total, 705 participants with 964 new nodules were included. In 48% (336/705) of participants no nodule had been found previously during baseline screening and in 22% (154/705) of participants >1 new nodule was detected (range 1–12 new nodules). Eventually, 9% (65/705) of the participants had lung cancer in a new nodule. In 100% (65/65) of participants with new nodule lung cancer, the lung cancer was the largest or only new nodule at initial detection. The new nodule lung cancer probability did not differ significantly between participants with 1 (10% [56/551], 95%CI 8–13%) or >1 new nodule (6% [9/154], 95%CI 3–11%, P =.116). An increased number of new nodules positively correlated with a participant's largest nodule size (P < 0.001, Spearman's rho 0.177). When adjusted for largest new nodule size, the new nodule count had a significant negative association with lung cancer (odds ratio 0.59, 0.37–0.95, P =.03). Conclusion: A participant's new nodule count alone only has limited association with lung cancer. However, a higher new nodule count correlates with an increased largest new nodule size, while the lung cancer probability remains equivalent, and may improve lung cancer risk prediction by size only

New Fissure-Attached Nodules in Lung Cancer Screening:A Brief Report From The NELSON Study

Introduction: In incidence lung cancer screening rounds, new pulmonary nodules are regular findings. They have a higher lung cancer probability than baseline nodules. Previous studies have shown that baseline perifissural nodules (PFNs) represent benign lesions. Whether this is also the case for incident PFNs is unknown. This study evaluated newly detected nodules in the Dutch-Belgian randomized-controlled NELSON study with respect to incidence of fissure-attached nodules, their classification, and lung cancer probability. Methods: Within the NELSON trial, 7557 participants underwent baseline screening between April 2004 and December 2006. Participants with new nodules detected after baseline were included. Nodules were classified based on location and attachment. Fissure-attached nodules were re-evaluated to be classified as typical, atypical, or non-PFN by two radiologists without knowledge of participant lung cancer status. Results: One thousand four hundred eighty-four new nodules were detected in 949 participants (77.4% male, median age 59 years [interquartile range: 55–63 years]) in the second, third, and final NELSON screening round. Based on 2-year follow-up or pathology, 1393 nodules (93.8%) were benign. In total, 97 (6.5%) were fissure-attached, including 10 malignant nodules. None of the new fissure-attached malignant nodules was classified as typical or atypical PFN. Conclusions: In the NELSON study, 6.5% of incident lung nodules were fissure-attached. None of the lung cancers that originated from a new fissure-attached nodule in the incidence lung cancer screening rounds was classified as a typical or atypical PFN. Our results suggest that also in the case of a new PFN, it is highly unlikely that these PFNs will be diagnosed as lung cancer

Impaired perception of facial motion in autism spectrum disorder

Copyright: © 2014 O’Brien et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Facial motion is a special type of biological motion that transmits cues for socio-emotional communication and enables the discrimination of properties such as gender and identity. We used animated average faces to examine the ability of adults with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) to perceive facial motion. Participants completed increasingly difficult tasks involving the discrimination of (1) sequences of facial motion, (2) the identity of individuals based on their facial motion and (3) the gender of individuals. Stimuli were presented in both upright and upside-down orientations to test for the difference in inversion effects often found when comparing ASD with controls in face perception. The ASD group’s performance was impaired relative to the control group in all three tasks and unlike the control group, the individuals with ASD failed to show an inversion effect. These results point to a deficit in facial biological motion processing in people with autism, which we suggest is linked to deficits in lower level motion processing we have previously reported

Patient Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatment: A Qualitative Study Protocol Among Advanced Lung Cancer Patients

Introduction: Lung cancer is the deadliest and most prevalent cancer worldwide. Lung cancer treatments have different characteristics and are associated with a range of benefits and side effects for patients. Such differences may raise uncertainty among drug developers, regulators, payers, and clinicians regarding the value of these treatment effects to patients. The value of conducting patient preference studies (using qualitative and/or quantitative methods) for benefits and side effects of different treatment options has been recognized by healthcare stakeholders, such as drug developers, regulators, health technology assessment bodies, and clinicians. However, evidence-based guidelines on how and when to conduct and use these studies in drug decision-making are lacking. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, we developed a protocol for a qualitative study that aims to understand which treatment characteristics are most important to lung cancer patients and to develop attributes and levels for inclusion in a subsequent quantitative preference survey. Methods: The study protocol specifies a four-phased approach: (i) a scoping literature review of published literature, (ii) four focus group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, (iii) two nominal group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, and (iv) multi-stakeholder discussions involving clinicians and preference experts. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps as to how qualitative research can be applied to identify and develop attributes and levels for inclusion in patient preference studies aiming to inform decisions across the drug life cycle. The results of this study are intended to inform a subsequent quantitative preference survey that assesses patient trade-offs regarding lung cancer treatment options. This protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing qualitative studies to understand which treatment aspects are most valued by patients in drug development, regulation, and reimbursement

Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Volume CT Screening in a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND There are limited data from randomized trials regarding whether volume-based, low-dose computed tomographic (CT) screening can reduce lung-cancer mortality among male former and current smokers. METHODS A total of 13,195 men (primary analysis) and 2594 women (subgroup analyses) between the ages of 50 and 74 were randomly assigned to undergo CT screening at T0 (baseline), year 1, year 3, and year 5.5 or no screening. We obtained data on cancer diagnosis and the date and cause of death through linkages with national registries in the Netherlands and Belgium, and a review committee confirmed lung cancer as the cause of death when possible. A minimum follow-up of 10 years until December 31, 2015, was completed for all participants. RESULTS Among men, the average adherence to CT screening was 90.0%. On average, 9.2% of the screened participants underwent at least one additional CT scan (initially indeterminate). The overall referral rate for suspicious nodules was 2.1%. At 10 years of follow-up, the incidence of lung cancer was 5.58 cases per 1000 personyears in the screening group and 4.91 cases per 1000 person-years in the control group; lung-cancer mortality was 2.50 deaths per 1000 person-years and 3.30 deaths per 1000 person-years, respectively. The cumulative rate ratio for death from lung cancer at 10 years was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 0.94; P = 0.01) in the screening group as compared with the control group, similar to the values at years 8 and 9. Among women, the rate ratio was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.38 to 1.14) at 10 years of follow-up, with values of 0.41 to 0.52 in years 7 through 9. CONCLUSIONS In this trial involving high-risk persons, lung-cancer mortality was significantly lower among those who underwent volume CT screening than among those who underwent no screening. There were low rates of follow-up procedures for results suggestive of lung cancer. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization of Health Research and Development and others; NELSON Netherlands Trial Register number, NL580.)

Patient Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatments: A Study Protocol for a Preference Survey Using Discrete Choice Experiment and Swing Weighting

Background: Advanced treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of both. Decisions surrounding NSCLC can be considered as preference-sensitive because multiple treatments exist that vary in terms of mode of administration, treatment schedules, and benefit–risk profiles. As part of the IMI PREFER project, we developed a protocol for an online preference survey for NSCLC patients exploring differences in preferences according to patient characteristics (preference heterogeneity). Moreover, this study will evaluate and compare the use of two different preference elicitation methods, the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and the swing weighting (SW) task. Finally, the study explores how demographic (i.e., age, gender, and educational level) and clinical (i.e., cancer stage and line of treatment) information, health literacy, health locus of control, and quality of life may influence or explain patient preferences and the usefulness of a digital interactive tool in providing information on preference elicitation tasks according to patients. Methods: An online survey will be implemented with the aim to recruit 510 NSCLC patients in Belgium and Italy. Participants will be randomized 50:50 to first receive either the DCE or the SW. The survey will also collect information on participants' disease-related status, health locus of control, health literacy, quality of life, and perception of the educational tool. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps to quantitatively elicit and study patient preferences for NSCLC treatment alternatives. Results from this study will increase the understanding of which treatment aspects are most valued by NSCLC patients to inform decision-making in drug development, regulatory approval, and reimbursement. Methodologically, the comparison between the DCE and the SW task will be valuable to gain information on how these preference methods perform against each other in eliciting patient preferences. Overall, this protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing quantitative patient preferences into decision-making along the medical product life cycle