Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States and worldwide. Early detection of lung cancer is an important opportunity for decreasing mortality. Data support using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) of the chest to screen select patients who are at high risk for lung cancer. Lung screening is covered under the Affordable Care Act for individuals with high-risk factors. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) covers annual screening LDCT for appropriate Medicare beneficiaries at high risk for lung cancer if they also receive counseling and participate in shared decision-making before screening. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening provides recommendations for initial and subsequent LDCT screening and provides more detail about LDCT screening. This manuscript focuses on identifying patients at high risk for lung cancer who are candidates for LDCT of the chest and on evaluating initial screening findings.
IMPORTANCE Surgical treatment comparisons in rare diseases are difficult secondary to the geographic distribution of patients. Fortunately, emerging technologies offer promise to reduce these barriers for research. OBJECTIVE To prospectively compare the outcomes of the 3 most common surgical approaches for idiopathic subglottic stenosis (iSGS), a rare airway disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this international, prospective, 3-year multicenter cohort study, 810 patients with untreated, newly diagnosed, or previously treated iSGS were enrolled after undergoing a surgical procedure (endoscopic dilation [ED], endoscopic resection with adjuvant medical therapy [ERMT], or cricotracheal resection [CTR]). Patients were recruited from clinician practices in the North American Airway Collaborative and an online iSGS community on Facebook. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was days from initial surgical procedure to recurrent surgical procedure. Secondary end points included quality of life using the Clinical COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) Questionnaire (CCQ), Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10), Eating Assessment Test-10 (EAT-10), the 12-Item Short-Form Version 2 (SF-12v2), and postoperative complications. RESULTS Of 810 patients in this cohort, 798 (98.5%) were female and 787 (97.2%) were white, with a median age of 50 years (interquartile range, 43-58 years). Index surgical procedures were ED (n = 603; 74.4%), ERMT (n = 121; 14.9%), and CTR (n = 86; 10.6%). Overall, 185 patients (22.8%) had a recurrent surgical procedure during the 3-year study, but recurrence differed by modality (CTR, 1 patient [1.2%]; ERMT, 15 [12.4%]; and ED, 169 [28.0%]). Weighted, propensity score-matched, Cox proportional hazards regression models showed ED was inferior to ERMT (hazard ratio [HR], 3.16; 95% CI, 1.8-5.5). Among successfully treated patients without recurrence, those treated with CTR had the best CCQ (0.75 points) and SF-12v2 (54 points) scores and worst VHI-10 score (13 points) 360 days after enrollment as well as the greatest perioperative risk. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study of 810 patients with iSGS, endoscopic dilation, the most popular surgical approach for iSGS, was associated with a higher recurrence rate compared with other procedures. Cricotracheal resection offered the most durable results but showed the greatest perioperative risk and the worst long-term voice outcomes. Endoscopic resection with medical therapy was associated with better disease control compared with ED and had minimal association with vocal function. These results may be used to inform individual patient treatment decision-making.
Rationale: Less invasive, nonsurgical approaches are needed to treat severe emphysema.Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the Spiration Valve System (SVS) versus optimal medical management.Methods: In this multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial, subjects aged 40 years or older with severe, heterogeneous emphysema were randomized 2:1 to SVS with medical management (treatment) or medical management alone (control).Measurements and Main Results: The primary efficacy outcome was the difference in mean FEV1 from baseline to 6 months. Secondary effectiveness outcomes included: difference in FEV1 responder rates, target lobe volume reduction, hyperinflation, health status, dyspnea, and exercise capacity. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of composite thoracic serious adverse events. All analyses were conducted by determining the 95% Bayesian credible intervals (BCIs) for the difference between treatment and control arms. Between October 2013 and May 2017, 172 participants (53.5% male; mean age, 67.4 yr) were randomized to treatment (n = 113) or control (n = 59). Mean FEV1 showed statistically significant improvements between the treatment and control groups—between-group difference at 6 and 12 months, respectively, of 0.101 L (95% BCI, 0.060–0.141) and 0.099 L (95% BCI, 0.048–0.151). At 6 months, the treatment group had statistically significant improvements in all secondary endpoints except 6-minute-walk distance. Composite thoracic serious adverse event incidence through 6 months was greater in the treatment group (31.0% vs. 11.9%), primarily due to a 12.4% incidence of serious pneumothorax.Conclusions: In patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema, the SVS shows significant improvement in multiple efficacy outcomes, with an acceptable safety profile.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01812447).
Background Lung cancer treatment has become increasingly dependent upon invasive biopsies to profile tumors for personalized therapy. Recently, tumor expression of PD-L1 has gained interest as a potential predictor of response to immunotherapy. Circulating biomarkers present an opportunity for tumor profiling without the risks of invasive procedures. We characterized PD-L1 expression within populations of nucleated cells in the peripheral blood of lung cancer patients in hopes of expanding the role of liquid biopsy in this setting. Methods Peripheral blood samples from a multi-institutional prospective study of patients with clinical diagnosis of lung cancer were subjected to cytomorphometric and immunohistochemical evaluation using single-cell, automated slide-based, digital pathology. PD-L1 expression was determined by immunofluorescence. Results PD-L1 expression was detected within peripheral circulating cells associated with malignancy (CCAM) in 26/112(23%) non-small cell lung cancer patients. Two distinct populations of nucleated, non-hematolymphoid, PD-L1 expressing cells were identified; cytokeratin positive (CK+, PD-L1+, CD45−) and cytokeratin negative (CK−, PD-L1+, CD45−) cells, both with cytomorphometric features (size, nuclear to cytoplasm ratio) consistent with tumor cells. Patients with >1.1 PD-L1(+) cell/mL (n=14/112) experienced worse overall survival than patients with ≤1.1 PD-L1(+) cell/ml (2-yearOS:31.2% vs 78.8%, p=0.00159). In a Cox model adjusting for stage, high PD-L1(+) cell burden remained a significant predictor of mortality (HR=3.85, 95%CI:1.64–9.09, p=0.002). Conclusions PD-L1 expression is detectable in two distinct cell populations in the peripheral blood of lung cancer patients and is associated with worse survival.
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Lung Cancer Screening provide recommendations for selecting individuals for lung cancer screening, and for evaluation and follow-up of nodules found during screening, and are intended to assist with clinical and shared decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the major updates to the 2015 NCCN Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening, which include a revision to the recommendation from category 2B to 2A for one of the high-risk groups eligible for lung cancer screening. For low-dose CT of the lung, the recommended slice width was revised in the table on "Low-Dose Computed Tomography Acquisition, Storage, Interpretation, and Nodule Reporting."
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.