Tobacco smoking as a risk factor of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma of the lung: pooled analysis of seven case–control studies in the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO)

Background: The International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO) was established in 2004, based on the collaboration of research groups leading large molecular epidemiology studies of lung cancer that are ongoing or have been recently completed. This framework offered the opportunity to investigate the role of tobacco smoking in the development of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC), a rare form of lung cancer. Methods: Our pooled data comprised seven case–control studies from the United States, with detailed information on tobacco smoking and histology, which contributed 799 cases of BAC and 15,859 controls. We estimated the odds ratio of BAC for tobacco smoking, using never smokers as a referent category, after adjustment for age, sex, race, and study center. Results: The odds ratio of BAC for ever smoking was 2.47 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08, 2.93); the risk increased linearly with duration, amount, and cumulative cigarette smoking and persisted long after smoking cessation. The proportion of BAC cases attributable to smoking was 0.47 (95% CI 0.39, 0.54). Conclusions: This analysis provides a precise estimate of the risk of BAC for tobacco smoking

Omecamtiv mecarbil in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, GALACTIC‐HF: baseline characteristics and comparison with contemporary clinical trials

Aims: The safety and efficacy of the novel selective cardiac myosin activator, omecamtiv mecarbil, in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is tested in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC‐HF) trial. Here we describe the baseline characteristics of participants in GALACTIC‐HF and how these compare with other contemporary trials. Methods and Results: Adults with established HFrEF, New York Heart Association functional class (NYHA) ≥ II, EF ≤35%, elevated natriuretic peptides and either current hospitalization for HF or history of hospitalization/ emergency department visit for HF within a year were randomized to either placebo or omecamtiv mecarbil (pharmacokinetic‐guided dosing: 25, 37.5 or 50 mg bid). 8256 patients [male (79%), non‐white (22%), mean age 65 years] were enrolled with a mean EF 27%, ischemic etiology in 54%, NYHA II 53% and III/IV 47%, and median NT‐proBNP 1971 pg/mL. HF therapies at baseline were among the most effectively employed in contemporary HF trials. GALACTIC‐HF randomized patients representative of recent HF registries and trials with substantial numbers of patients also having characteristics understudied in previous trials including more from North America (n = 1386), enrolled as inpatients (n = 2084), systolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg (n = 1127), estimated glomerular filtration rate < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (n = 528), and treated with sacubitril‐valsartan at baseline (n = 1594). Conclusions: GALACTIC‐HF enrolled a well‐treated, high‐risk population from both inpatient and outpatient settings, which will provide a definitive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of this novel therapy, as well as informing its potential future implementation

Trends in Subpopulations at High Risk for Lung Cancer

AbstractIntroductionTwo-thirds of patients in the United States with newly diagnosed lung cancer would not meet the current U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) screening criteria, which suggests a need for amendment of the definition of high risk. To provide evidence of additional high-risk subpopulations and estimated gains and losses from using different criteria for screening eligibility, we conducted a two-step study using three cohorts.MethodsThe two prospective cohorts comprised 5988 patients in whom primary lung cancer was diagnosed between 1997 and 2011 (the hospital cohort) and 850 defined-community residents (the community cohort); the retrospective cohort consisted of the population of Olmsted County, Minnesota, which was observed for 28 years (1984–2011). Subgroups of patients with lung cancer who might have been identified using additional determinates were estimated and compared between the community and hospital cohorts. The findings were supported by indirect comparative projections of two ratios: benefit to harm and cost to effectiveness.ResultsFormer cigarette smokers who had a smoking history of 30 or more pack-years and 15 to 30 quit-years and were 55 to 80 years old formed the largest subgroup not meeting the current screening criteria; they constituted 12% of the hospital cohort and 17% of community cohort. Using the expanded criteria suggested by our study may add 19% more CT examinations for detecting 16% more cases when compared with the USPSTF criteria. Meanwhile, the increases in false-positive results, overdiagnosis, and radiation-related lung cancer deaths are 0.6%, 0.1%, and 4.0%, respectively.ConclusionsCurrent USPSTF screening criteria exclude many patients who are at high risk for development of lung cancer. Including individuals who are younger than 81 years, have a smoking history of 30 or more pack-years, and have quit for 15 to 30 years may significantly increase the number of cases of non-overdiagnosed screen-detected lung cancer, does not significantly add to the number of false-positive cases, and saves more lives with an acceptable amount of elevated exposure to radiation and cost

Tobacco smoking as a risk factor of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma of the lung: pooled analysis of seven case-control studies in the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO).

BackgroundThe International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO) was established in 2004, based on the collaboration of research groups leading large molecular epidemiology studies of lung cancer that are ongoing or have been recently completed. This framework offered the opportunity to investigate the role of tobacco smoking in the development of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC), a rare form of lung cancer.MethodsOur pooled data comprised seven case-control studies from the United States, with detailed information on tobacco smoking and histology, which contributed 799 cases of BAC and 15,859 controls. We estimated the odds ratio of BAC for tobacco smoking, using never smokers as a referent category, after adjustment for age, sex, race, and study center.ResultsThe odds ratio of BAC for ever smoking was 2.47 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08, 2.93); the risk increased linearly with duration, amount, and cumulative cigarette smoking and persisted long after smoking cessation. The proportion of BAC cases attributable to smoking was 0.47 (95% CI 0.39, 0.54).ConclusionsThis analysis provides a precise estimate of the risk of BAC for tobacco smoking

Worse Disease-Free Survival in Never-Smokers with ALK+ Lung Adenocarcinoma

IntroductionThe EML4–anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocation is a recognized oncogenic driver in non-small cell lung cancer. We investigated immunohistochemistry (IHC) screening with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) confirmation for ALK detection and estimated the prevalence of ALK positivity in our patient cohort of never-smokers, together with differences in clinical outcomes and prognostic factors for patients with ALK-positive and ALK-negative tumors.MethodsWe designed a three-phase study (training, validation, and testing) in 300 never-smokers with lung adenocarcinoma from the observational Mayo Clinic Lung Cancer Cohort. Tumor samples were tested using IHC and FISH, and concordance between the methods was assessed. Clinical outcomes were assessed via 5-year progression- or recurrence-free survival from diagnosis. Prognostic factors for ALK-positive tumors and metastases were also investigated.ResultsALK-positive patients were significantly (p < 0.05) younger and had higher grade tumors than ALK-negative patients. ALK positivity was 12.2% by IHC and confirmed at 8.2% of tumors by FISH, with complete concordance between IHC 3+/0 and FISH+/− assessments, respectively. Five-year risk of progression or recurrence was doubled for patients with ALK-positive compared with ALK-negative tumors; ALK-positive tumors also appeared to be associated with a higher risk of brain and liver metastases.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that ALK positivity is associated with a significantly poor outcome in nonsmoking-related adenocarcinoma and that ALK-positive tumors may be associated with an increased risk of brain and liver metastases compared with ALK-negative disease. Consequently, an unmet medical need exists in ALK-positive lung cancer patients, and effective ALK-specific therapies are needed