12 research outputs found

    Directing Therapy in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Using a Target 6 Min Walk Distance

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: The most effective approaches to escalating advanced therapies in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) are controversial

    Cystic Primary Lung Cancer: Evolution of Computed Tomography Imaging Morphology over Time

    No full text
    Purpose: Primary lung cancers associated with cystic airspaces are increasingly being recognized; however, there is a paucity of data on their natural history. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence, pathologic, and imaging characteristics of cystic lung cancer in a regional thoracic surgery center with a focus on the evolution of computed tomography morphology over time. Materials and Methods: Consecutive patients referred for potential surgical management of primary lung cancer between January 2016 and December 2018 were included. Clinical, imaging, and pathologic data were collected at the time of diagnosis and at the time of the oldest computed tomography showing the target lesion. Descriptive analysis was carried out. Results: A total of 441 cancers in 431 patients (185 males, 246 females), median age 69.6 years (interquartile range: 62.6 to 75.3 y), were assessed. Overall, 41/441 (9.3%) primary lung cancers were cystic at the time of diagnosis. The remaining showed solid (67%), part-solid (22%), and ground-glass (2%) morphologies. Histopathology of the cystic lung cancers at diagnosis included 31/41 (76%) adenocarcinomas, 8/41 (20%) squamous cell carcinomas, 1/41 (2%) adenosquamous carcinoma, and 1/41 (2%) unspecified non-small cell lung carcinoma. Overall, 8/34 (24%) cystic cancers at the time of diagnosis developed from different morphologic subtype precursor lesions, while 8/34 (24%) cystic precursor lesions also transitioned into part-solid or solid cancers at the time of diagnosis. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that cystic airspaces within lung cancers are not uncommon, and may be seen transiently as cancers evolve. Increased awareness of the spectrum of cystic lung cancer morphology is important to improve diagnostic accuracy and lung cancer management

    Protocol and rationale for the international lung screening trial

    No full text
    : The NLST (National Lung Screening Trial) reported a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomography screening; however, important questions on how to optimize screening remain, including which selection criteria are most accurate at detecting lung cancers and what nodule management protocol is most efficient. The PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian) Cancer Screening Trial 6-year and PanCan (Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer) nodule malignancy risk models are two of the better validated risk prediction models for screenee selection and nodule management, respectively. Combined use of these models for participant selection and nodule management could significantly improve screening efficiency.: The ILST (International Lung Screening Trial) is a prospective cohort study with two primary aims: ) Compare the accuracy of the PLCO model against U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for detecting lung cancers and ) evaluate nodule management efficiency using the PanCan nodule probability calculator-based protocol versus Lung-RADS.: ILST will recruit 4,500 participants who meet USPSTF and/or PLCO risk ≥1.51%/6-year selection criteria. Participants will undergo baseline and 2-year low-dose computed tomography screening. Baseline nodules are managed according to PanCan probability score. Participants will be followed up for a minimum of 5 years. Primary outcomes for aim 1 are the proportion of individuals selected for screening, proportion of lung cancers detected, and positive predictive values of either selection criteria, and outcomes for aim 2 include comparing distributions of individuals and the proportion of lung cancers in each of three management groups: next surveillance scan, early recall scan, or diagnostic evaluation recommended. Statistical powers to detect differences in the four components of primary study aims were ≥82%.: ILST will prospectively evaluate the comparative accuracy and effectiveness of two promising multivariable risk models for screenee selection and nodule management in lung cancer screening.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02871856)

    Lung adenocarcinoma promotion by air pollutants

    Get PDF
    This research was conducted using the UK Biobank Resource under application number 82693. This work was supported by the Mark Foundation ASPIRE I Award (grant 21-029-ASP), the Lung Cancer Research Foundation Grant on Disparities in Lung Cancer, Advanced Grant (PROTEUS, grant agreement no. 835297), CRUK EDD (EDDPMA-Nov21\100034) and a Rosetrees Out-of-round Award (OoR2020\100009). W.H. is funded by an ERC Advanced Grant (PROTEUS, grant agreement no. 835297), CRUK EDD (EDDPMA-Nov21\100034), The Mark Foundation (grant 21-029-ASP) and has been supported by Rosetrees. E.L.L. receives funding from the NovoNordisk Foundation (ID 16584), The Mark Foundation (grant 21-029-ASP) and has been supported by Rosetrees. C.E.W. is supported by a RESPIRE4 fellowship from the European Respiratory Society and Marie-Sklodowska-Curie Actions. C.L. is supported by the Agency for Science, Technology & Research, Singapore and the Cancer Research UK City of London Centre and the City of London Centre Clinical Academic Training Programme. M.A. is supported by the City of London Centre Clinical Academic Training Programme (Year 3, SEBSTF-2021\100007). K.C. is supported by the Research Unit of Intelligence Diagnosis and Treatment in Early Non-small Cell Lung Cancer, the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (2021RU002), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 82072566) and Peking University People’s Hospital Research and Development Funds (RS2019-01). T.K. receives grant support from JSPS Overseas Research Fellowships Program (202060447). S.-H.L. is supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (no. 2020R1A2C3006535), the National Cancer Center Grant (NCC1911269-3) and a grant from the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number HR20C0025). L.H.S. receives grant support from the Berta Kamprad Foundation, the Swedish Cancer Society and the Swedish Research Council. R.M. and S.L. acknowledge funding from the Terry Fox Research Institute. N.M. is a Sir Henry Dale Fellow, jointly funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Royal Society (grant number 211179/Z/18/Z) and receives funding from Cancer Research UK, the Rosetrees and the NIHR BRC at University College London Hospitals and the CRUK University College London Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre. J. DeGregori, M.G., Y.E.M., D.T.M. and R.L.K. receive funding from the American Association for Cancer Research/Johnson&Johnson (18-90-52-DEGR), and J. DeGregori is supported by the Courtenay C. and Lucy Patten Davis Endowed Chair in Lung Cancer Research and a Merit Award from the Veteran’s Administration (1 I01 BX004495). M.G., Y.E.M., D.T.M. and R.L.K. were supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) RO1 CA219893. E.J.E.J. was supported by a NCI Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award T32-CA190216 and the Blumenthal Fellowship from the Linda Crnic Institute for Down Syndrome. C.I.T. acknowledges funding from UC Anschutz (LHNC T32CA174648). The work at the University of Colorado was also supported by NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30CA046934. K. Litchfield is funded by the UK Medical Research Council (MR/P014712/1 and MR/V033077/1), the Rosetrees Trust and the Cotswold Trust (A2437) and Cancer Research UK (C69256/A30194). M.J.-H. is a CRUK Career Establishment Awardee has received funding from Cancer Research UK, IASLC International Lung Cancer Foundation, the National Institute for Health Research, the Rosetrees Trust, UKI NETs and the NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. C.S. is a Royal Society Napier Research Professor (RSRP\R\210001). His work is supported by the Francis Crick Institute that receives its core funding from Cancer Research UK (CC2041), the UK Medical Research Council (CC2041), and the Wellcome Trust (CC2041). For the purpose of Open Access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission. C.S. is funded by Cancer Research UK (TRACERx (C11496/A17786), PEACE (C416/A21999) and CRUK Cancer Immunotherapy Catalyst Network); Cancer Research UK Lung Cancer Centre of Excellence (C11496/A30025); the Rosetrees Trust, Butterfield and Stoneygate Trusts; NovoNordisk Foundation (ID16584); Royal Society Professorship Enhancement Award (RP/EA/180007); National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre; the Cancer Research UK-University College London Centre; Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre; the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (US) (BCRF-22-157); Cancer Research UK Early Detection an Diagnosis Primer Award (grant EDDPMA-Nov21/100034); and The Mark Foundation for Cancer Research Aspire Award (grant 21-029-ASP). This work was supported by a Stand Up To Cancer‐LUNGevity-American Lung Association Lung Cancer Interception Dream Team Translational Research Grant (grant number: SU2C-AACR-DT23-17 to S.M. Dubinett and A.E. Spira). Stand Up To Cancer is a division of the Entertainment Industry Foundation. Research grants are administered by the American Association for Cancer Research, the Scientific Partner of SU2C. C.S. is in receipt of an ERC Advanced Grant (PROTEUS) from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no. 835297). We acknowledge the PEACE Consortium (PEACE Consortium members are named below) for their expertise and support in putting together the healthy tissue sample cohorts. We thank the clinical and administrative team of the PEACE study for their assistance in data curation (S. Shepherd, Z. Tippu, B. Shum, C. Lewis, M. O’Flaherty, A. Lucanas, E. Carlyle, L. Holt, F. Williams); nursing and biospecimen coordinators for their assistance in sample curation (K. Edmonds, L. Grostate, K. Lingard, D. Kelly, J. Korteweg, L. Terry, J. Biano, A. Murra, K. Kelly, K. Peat, N. Hunter); A. H. -K. Cheung for assistance in pathology review; J. Asklin and C. Forsberg for logistical and technical assistance; staff at the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital for providing Chang Gung Research Database (CGRD) data; staff who provided support at the Flow Cytometry Unit, the Experimental Histopathology Unit, the Advanced Light Microscopy Facility, the Advanced Sequencing Facility and the Biological Resources Unit, especially N. Chisholm and Jay O’Brien, at the Francis Crick Institute; A. Yuen, A. Azhar, K. Lau, C. Schwartz, A. Lee and C. Rider for their logistical support for the human exposure study; and staff at the Centre d’expertise et de services Génome Québec for their sequencing services and support. Data for this study are based on patient-level information collected by the NHS, as part of the care and support of cancer patients. The data are collated, maintained and quality assured by the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, which is part of NHS England (NHSE). We extend our thanks to the skilled Cancer Registration Officers (CROs) within the National Disease Registration Service, who abstracted and registered the English tumour and molecular testing data.Peer reviewedPostprin

    Economic impact of using risk models for eligibility selection to the International lung screening Trial

    No full text
    OBJECTIVES: Using risk models as eligibility criteria for lung screening can reduce race and sex-based disparities. We used data from the International Lung Screening Trial(ILST; NCT02871856) to compare the economic impact of using the PLCOm2012 risk model or the US Preventative Services' categorical age-smoking history-based criteria (USPSTF-2013). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of using PLCOm2012 versus USPSTF-2013 was evaluated with a decision analytic model based on the ILST and other screening trials. The primary outcomes were costs in 2020 International Dollars (),qualityadjustedlifeyears(QALY)andincrementalnetbenefit(INB,in), quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and incremental net benefit (INB, in per QALY). Secondary outcomes were selection characteristics and cancer detection rates (CDR). RESULTS: Compared with the USPSTF-2013 criteria, the PLCOm2012 risk model resulted in 355ofcostsavingsper0.2QALYsgained(INB=355 of cost savings per 0.2 QALYs gained (INB=4294 at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20000/QALY(95 20 000/QALY (95 %CI: 4205-4383).Usingtheriskmodelwasmorecosteffectiveinfemalesatbotha1.5 4383). Using the risk model was more cost-effective in females at both a 1.5 % and 1.7 % 6-year risk threshold (INB=6616 and 6112,respectively),comparedwithmales(6112, respectively), compared with males (5221 and $695). The PLCOm2012 model selected more females, more individuals with fewer years of formal education, and more people with other respiratory illnesses in the ILST. The CDR with the risk model was higher in females compared with the USPSTF-2013 criteria (Risk Ratio = 7.67, 95 % CI: 1.87-31.38). CONCLUSION: The PLCOm2012 model saved costs, increased QALYs and mitigated socioeconomic and sex-based disparities in access to screening
    corecore