Solar urticaria involves rapid mast cell STAT3 activation and neutrophil recruitment, with FcεRI as an upstream regulator.

BACKGROUND: Solar urticaria is a rare photodermatosis characterized by rapid-onset sunlight-induced urticaria, but its pathophysiology is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: We sought to define cutaneous cellular and molecular events in the evolution of solar urticaria following its initiation by solar-simulated UV radiation (SSR) and compare with healthy controls (HC). METHODS: Cutaneous biopsy specimens were taken from unexposed skin and skin exposed to a single low (physiologic) dose of SSR at 30 minutes, 3 hours, and 24 hours after exposure in 6 patients with solar urticaria and 6 HC. Biopsy specimens were assessed by immunohistochemistry and bulk RNA-sequencing analysis. RESULTS: In solar urticaria specimens, there was enrichment of several innate immune pathways, with striking early involvement of neutrophils, which was not observed in HC. Multiple proinflammatory cytokine and chemokine genes were upregulated (including IL20, IL6, and CXCL8) or identified as upstream regulators (including TNF, IL-1ß, and IFN-γ). IgE and FcεRI were identified as upstream regulators, and phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 expression in mast cells was increased in solar urticaria at 30 minutes and 3 hours after SSR exposure, suggesting a mechanism of mast cell activation. Clinical resolution of solar urticaria by 24 hours mirrored resolution of inflammatory gene signature profiles. Comparison with available datasets of chronic spontaneous urticaria showed transcriptomic similarities relating to immune activation, but several transcripts were identified solely in solar urticaria, including CXCL8 and CSF2/3. CONCLUSIONS: Solar urticaria is characterized by rapid signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 activation in mast cells and involvement of multiple chemotactic and innate inflammatory pathways, with FcεRI engagement indicated as an early event.

Understanding the impact of distance and disadvantage on lung cancer care and outcomes: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the third most common cancer in the UK and the leading cause of cancer mortality globally. NHS England guidance for optimum lung cancer care recommends management and treatment by a specialist team, with experts concentrated in one place, providing access to specialised diagnostic and treatment facilities. However, the complex and rapidly evolving diagnostic and treatment pathways for lung cancer, together with workforce limitations, make achieving this challenging. This place-based, behavioural science-informed qualitative study aims to explore how person-related characteristics interact with a person's location relative to specialist services to impact their engagement with the optimal lung pathway, and to compare and contrast experiences in rural, coastal, and urban communities. This study also aims to generate translatable evidence to inform the evidence-based design of a patient engagement intervention to improve lung cancer patients' and informal carers' participation in and experience of the lung cancer care pathway. METHODS: A qualitative cross-sectional interview study with people diagnosed with lung cancer < 6 months before recruitment (in receipt of surgery, radical radiotherapy, or living with advanced disease) and their informal carers. Participants will be recruited purposively from Barts Health NHS Trust and United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trusts to ensure a diverse sample across urban and rural settings. Semi-structured interviews will explore factors affecting individuals' capability, opportunity, and motivation to engage with their recommended diagnostic and treatment pathway. A framework approach, informed by the COM-B model, will be used to thematically analyse facilitators and barriers to patient engagement. DISCUSSION: The study aligns with the current policy priority to ensure that people with cancer, no matter where they live, can access the best quality treatments and care. The evidence generated will be used to ensure that lung cancer services are developed to meet the needs of rural, coastal, and urban communities. The findings will inform the development of an intervention to support patient engagement with their recommended lung cancer pathway. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The study received NHS Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 23/SC/0255) and NHS Health Research Authority (IRAS ID 328531) approval on 04/08/2023. The study was prospectively registered on Open Science Framework (16/10/2023; https://osf.io/njq48 ).

A systematic review on the qualitative experiences of people living with lung cancer in rural areas.

PURPOSE: To synthesize the qualitative literature exploring the experiences of people living with lung cancer in rural areas. METHODS: Searches were performed in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Articles were screened independently by two reviewers against pre-determined eligibility criteria. Data were synthesized using Thomas and Harden's framework for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research. The CASP qualitative checklist was used for quality assessment and the review was reported in accordance with the ENTREQ and PRISMA checklists. RESULTS: Nine articles were included, from which five themes were identified: (1) diagnosis and treatment pathways, (2) travel and financial burden, (3) communication and information, (4) experiences of interacting with healthcare professionals, (5) symptoms and health-seeking behaviors. Lung cancer diagnosis was unexpected for some with several reporting treatment delays and long wait times regarding diagnosis and treatment. Accessing treatment was perceived as challenging and time-consuming due to distance and financial stress. Inadequate communication of information from healthcare professionals was a common concern expressed by rural people living with lung cancer who also conveyed dissatisfaction with their healthcare professionals. Some were reluctant to seek help due to geographical distance and sociocultural factors whilst others found it challenging to identify symptoms due to comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by people with lung cancer in rural settings, through which future researchers can begin to develop tailored support to address the existing disparities that affect this population.

Association between time-to-treatment and outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: National targets for timely diagnosis and management of a potential cancer are driven in part by the perceived risk of disease progression during avoidable delays. However, it is unclear to what extent time-to-treatment impacts prognosis for patients with non-small cell lung cancer, with previous reviews reporting mixed or apparently paradoxical associations. This systematic review focuses on potential confounders in order to identify particular patient groups which may benefit most from timely delivery of care. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for publications between January 2012 and October 2020, correlating timeliness in secondary care pathways to patient outcomes. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; ID 99239). Prespecified factors (demographics, performance status, histology, stage and treatment) are examined through narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Thirty-seven articles were included. All but two were observational. Timely care was generally associated with a worse prognosis in those with advanced stage disease (6/8 studies) but with better outcomes for patients with early-stage disease treated surgically (9/12 studies). In one study, patients with squamous cell carcinoma referred for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy benefited more from timely care, compared with patients with adenocarcinoma. One randomised controlled trial supported timeliness as being advantageous in those with stage I-IIIA disease. CONCLUSION: There are limitations to the available evidence, but observed trends suggest timeliness to be of particular importance in surgical candidates. In more advanced disease, survival trends are likely outweighed by symptom burden, performance status or clinical urgency dictating timeliness of treatment.

Impact on survival of modelling increased surgical resection rates in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and cardiovascular comorbidities: a VICORI study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of cardiovascular disease (CVD) comorbidity on resection rates and survival for patients with early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unclear. We explored if CVD comorbidity explained surgical resection rate variation and the impact on survival if resection rates increased. METHODS: Cancer registry data consisted of English patients diagnosed with NSCLC from 2012 to 2016. Linked hospital records identified CVD comorbidities. We investigated resection rate variation by geographical region using funnel plots; resection and death rates using time-to-event analysis. We modelled an increased propensity for resection in regions with the lowest resection rates and estimated survival change. RESULTS: Among 57,373 patients with Stage 1-3A NSCLC, resection rates varied considerably between regions. Patients with CVD comorbidity had lower resection rates and higher mortality rates. CVD comorbidity explained only 1.9% of the variation in resection rates. For every 100 CVD comorbid patients, increasing resection in regions with the lowest rates from 24 to 44% would result in 16 more patients resected and alive after 1 year and two fewer deaths overall. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in regional resection rate is not explained by CVD comorbidities. Increasing resection in patients with CVD comorbidity to the levels of the highest resecting region would increase 1-year survival.

Incidence of second and higher order smoking-related primary cancers following lung cancer: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer 5-year survival has doubled over 15 years. Although the risk of second primary cancer is recognised, quantification over time is lacking. We describe the incidence of second and higher order smoking-related primary cancers in lung cancer survivors, identifying high-incidence groups and how incidence changes over time from first diagnosis. METHODS: Data on smoking-related primary cancers (lung, laryngeal, head and neck, oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma and bladder) diagnosed in England between 2000 and 2014 were obtained from Public Health England National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service. We calculated absolute incidence rates and standardised incidence rate ratios, both overall and for various subgroups of second primary cancer for up to 10 years from the initial diagnosis of lung cancer, using Poisson regression. RESULTS: Elevated incidence of smoking-related second primary cancer persists for at least 10 years from first lung cancer diagnosis with those aged 50 and 79 at first diagnosis at particularly high risk. The most frequent type of second malignancy was lung cancer although the highest standardised incidence rate ratios were for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (2.4) and laryngeal cancers (2.8) and consistently higher in women than in men. Over the last decade, the incidence of second primary lung cancer has doubled. CONCLUSION: Lung cancer survivors have increased the incidence of subsequent lung, laryngeal, head and neck and oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma for at least a decade from the first diagnosis. Consideration should be given to increasing routine follow-up from 5 years to 10 years for those at highest risk, alongside surveillance for other smoking-related cancers.

Association between age, deprivation and specific comorbid conditions and the receipt of major surgery in patients with non-small cell lung cancer in England: A population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated socioeconomic disparities and the role of the main prognostic factors in receiving major surgical treatment in patients with lung cancer in England. METHODS: Our study comprised 31 351 patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer in England in 2012. Data from the national population-based cancer registry were linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and National Lung Cancer Audit data to obtain information on stage, performance status and comorbidities, and to identify patients receiving major surgical treatment. To describe the association between prognostic factors and surgery, we performed two different analyses: one using multivariable logistic regression and one estimating cause-specific hazards for death and surgery. In both analyses, we used multiple imputation to deal with missing data. RESULTS: We showed strong evidence that the comorbidities 'congestive heart failure', 'cerebrovascular disease' and 'chronic obstructive pulmonary disease' reduced the receipt of surgery in early stage patients. We also observed gender differences and substantial age differences in the receipt of surgery. Despite accounting for sex, age at diagnosis, comorbidities, stage at diagnosis, performance status and indication of having had a PET-CT scan, the socioeconomic differences persisted in both analyses: more deprived people had lower odds and lower rates of receiving surgery in early stage lung cancer. DISCUSSION: Comorbidities play an important role in whether patients undergo surgery, but do not completely explain the socioeconomic difference observed in early stage patients. Future work investigating access to and distance from specialist hospitals, as well as patient perceptions and patient choice in receiving surgery, could help disentangle these persistent socioeconomic inequalities.

Sequential screening for lung cancer in a high-risk group: randomised controlled trial: LungSEARCH: a randomised controlled trial of Surveillance using sputum and imaging for the EARly detection of lung Cancer in a High-risk group.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening detects early-stage lung cancer and reduces mortality. We proposed a sequential approach targeted to a high-risk group as a potentially efficient screening strategy. METHODS: LungSEARCH was a national multicentre randomised trial. Current/ex-smokers with mild/moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were allocated (1:1) to have 5 years surveillance or not. Screened participants provided annual sputum samples for cytology and cytometry, and if abnormal were offered annual LDCT and autofluorescence bronchoscopy (AFB). Those with normal sputum provided annual samples. The primary end-point was the percentage of lung cancers diagnosed at stage I/II (nonsmall cell) or limited disease (small cell). RESULTS: 1568 participants were randomised during 2007-2011 from 10 UK centres. 85.2% of those screened provided an adequate baseline sputum sample. There were 42 lung cancers among 785 screened individuals and 36 lung cancers among 783 controls. 54.8% (23 out of 42) of screened individuals versus 45.2% (14 out of 31) of controls with known staging were diagnosed with early-stage disease (one-sided p=0.24). Relative risk was 1.21 (95% CI 0.75-1.95) or 0.82 (95% CI 0.52-1.31) for early-stage or advanced cancers, respectively. Overall sensitivity for sputum (in those randomised to surveillance) was low (40.5%) with a cumulative false-positive rate (FPR) of 32.8%. 55% of cancers had normal sputum results throughout. Among sputum-positive individuals who had AFB, sensitivity was 45.5% and cumulative FPR was 39.5%; the corresponding measures for those who had LDCT were 100% and 16.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our sequential strategy, using sputum cytology/cytometry to select high-risk individuals for AFB and LDCT, did not lead to a clear stage shift and did not improve the efficiency of lung cancer screening.

Associations between general practice characteristics with use of urgent referrals for suspected cancer and endoscopies: a cross-sectional ecological study.

BACKGROUND: Large variation in measures of diagnostic activity has been described previously between English general practices, but related predictors remain understudied. OBJECTIVE: To examine associations between general practice population and characteristics, with the use of urgent referrals for suspected cancer, and use of endoscopy. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study of English general practices. We examined practice-level use (/1000 patients/year) of urgent referrals for suspected cancer, gastroscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. We used mixed-effects Poisson regression to examine associations with the sociodemographic profile of practice populations and other practice attributes, including the average age, sex and country of qualification of practice doctors. RESULTS: The sociodemographic characteristics of registered patients explained much of the between-practice variance in use of urgent referrals (32%) and endoscopic investigations (18-25%), all being higher in practices with older and more socioeconomically deprived patients. Practice-level attributes explained a substantial amount of between-practice variance in urgent referral (19%) but little of the variance in endoscopy (3%-4%). Adjusted urgent referral rates were higher in training practices and those with younger GPs. Practices with mean doctor ages of 41 and 57 years (at the 10th/90th centiles of the national distribution) would have urgent referral rates of 24.1 and 19.1/1000 registered patients, P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: Most between-practice variation in use of urgent referrals and endoscopies seems to reflect health need. Some practice characteristics, such as the mean age of GPs, are associated with appreciable variation in use of urgent referrals, though these associations do not seem strong enough to justify targeted interventions.

Sociodemographic variation in the use of chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with stage IV lung, oesophageal, stomach and pancreatic cancer: evidence from population-based data in England during 2013-2014.

BACKGROUND: Sociodemographic inequalities in cancer treatment have been generally described, but there is little evidence regarding patients with advanced cancer. Understanding variation in the management of these patients may provide insights into likely mechanisms leading to inequalities in survival. METHODS: We identified 50,232 patients with stage IV lung, oesophageal, pancreatic and stomach cancer from the English national cancer registry. A generalised linear model with a Poisson error structure was used to explore variation in radiotherapy and chemotherapy within 6 months from diagnosis by age, sex, deprivation, ethnicity, cancer site, comorbidity and, additionally, performance status. RESULTS: There was substantial variation by cancer site, large gradients by age, and non-trivial associations with comorbidity and deprivation. After full adjustment, more deprived patients were consistently least likely to be treated with chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy and radiotherapy combined compared with less deprived patients with equally advanced disease stage (treatment rate ratio: 0.82 95% CI (0.78, 0.87) for CT, 0.78 95% CI (0.71, 0.85) for CTRT p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There was marked variation in the management of patients with stage IV cancer. Routinely collected data could be used for surveillance across all cancers to help reduce treatment variation and optimise outcomes among patients with advanced cancer.

Geographical variations in the use of cancer treatments are associated with survival of lung cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer outcomes in England are inferior to comparable countries. Patient or disease characteristics, healthcare-seeking behaviour, diagnostic pathways, and oncology service provision may contribute. We aimed to quantify associations between geographic variations in treatment and survival of patients in England. METHODS: We retrieved detailed cancer registration data to analyse the variation in survival of 176,225 lung cancer patients, diagnosed 2010-2014. We used Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression to investigate survival in the two-year period following diagnosis. RESULTS: Survival improved over the period studied. The use of active treatment varied between geographical areas, with inter-quintile ranges of 9%-17% for surgical resection, 4%-13% for radical radiotherapy, and 22%-35% for chemotherapy. At 2 years, there were 188 potentially avoidable deaths annually for surgical resection, and 373 for radical radiotherapy, if all treated proportions were the same as in the highest quintiles. At the 6 month time-point, 318 deaths per year could be postponed if chemotherapy use for all patients was as in the highest quintile. The results were robust to statistical adjustments for age, sex, socio-economic status, performance status and co-morbidity. CONCLUSION: The extent of use of different treatment modalities varies between geographical areas in England. These variations are not attributable to measurable patient and tumour characteristics, and more likely reflect differences in clinical management between local multi-disciplinary teams. The data suggest improvement over time, but there is potential for further survival gains if the use of active treatments in all areas could be increased towards the highest current regional rates.

Investigation of the international comparability of population-based routine hospital data set derived comorbidity scores for patients with lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) identified significant international differences in lung cancer survival. Differing levels of comorbid disease across ICBP countries has been suggested as a potential explanation of this variation but, to date, no studies have quantified its impact. This study investigated whether comparable, robust comorbidity scores can be derived from the different routine population-based cancer data sets available in the ICBP jurisdictions and, if so, use them to quantify international variation in comorbidity and determine its influence on outcome. METHODS: Linked population-based lung cancer registry and hospital discharge data sets were acquired from nine ICBP jurisdictions in Australia, Canada, Norway and the UK providing a study population of 233 981 individuals. For each person in this cohort Charlson, Elixhauser and inpatient bed day Comorbidity Scores were derived relating to the 4-36 months prior to their lung cancer diagnosis. The scores were then compared to assess their validity and feasibility of use in international survival comparisons. RESULTS: It was feasible to generate the three comorbidity scores for each jurisdiction, which were found to have good content, face and concurrent validity. Predictive validity was limited and there was evidence that the reliability was questionable. CONCLUSION: The results presented here indicate that interjurisdictional comparability of recorded comorbidity was limited due to probable differences in coding and hospital admission practices in each area. Before the contribution of comorbidity on international differences in cancer survival can be investigated an internationally harmonised comorbidity index is required.

ERS statement on harmonised standards for lung cancer registration and lung cancer services in Europe.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS) task force for harmonised standards for lung cancer registration and lung cancer services in Europe recognised the need to create a single dataset for use in pan-European data collection and a manual of standards for European lung cancer services.The multidisciplinary task force considered evidence from two different sources, reviewing existing national and international datasets alongside the results of a survey of clinical data collection on lung cancer in 35 European countries. A similar process was followed for the manual of lung cancer services, with the task force using existing guidelines and national or international recommendations for lung cancer services to develop a manual of standards for services in Europe.The task force developed essential and minimum datasets for lung cancer registration to enable all countries to collect the same essential data and some to collect data with greater detail. The task force also developed a manual specifying standards for lung cancer services in Europe.Despite the wide variation in the sociopolitical landscape across Europe, the ERS is determined to encourage the delivery of high-quality lung cancer care. Both the manual of lung cancer services and the minimum dataset for lung cancer registration will support this aspiration.

30-day mortality after systemic anticancer treatment for breast and lung cancer in England: a population-based, observational study.

BACKGROUND: 30-day mortality might be a useful indicator of avoidable harm to patients from systemic anticancer treatments, but data for this indicator are limited. The Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy (SACT) dataset collated by Public Health England allows the assessment of factors affecting 30-day mortality in a national patient population. The aim of this first study based on the SACT dataset was to establish national 30-day mortality benchmarks for breast and lung cancer patients receiving SACT in England, and to start to identify where patient care could be improved. METHODS: In this population-based study, we included all women with breast cancer and all men and women with lung cancer residing in England, who were 24 years or older and who started a cycle of SACT in 2014 irrespective of the number of previous treatment cycles or programmes, and irrespective of their position within the disease trajectory. We calculated 30-day mortality after the most recent cycle of SACT for those patients. We did logistic regression analyses, adjusting for relevant factors, to examine whether patient, tumour, or treatment-related factors were associated with the risk of 30-day mortality. For each cancer type and intent, we calculated 30-day mortality rates and patient volume at the hospital trust level, and contrasted these in a funnel plot. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, and Dec, 31, 2014, we included 23 228 patients with breast cancer and 9634 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in our regression and trust-level analyses. 30-day mortality increased with age for both patients with breast cancer and patients with NSCLC treated with curative intent, and decreased with age for patients receiving palliative SACT (breast curative: odds ratio [OR] 1·085, 99% CI 1·040-1·132; p<0·0001; NSCLC curative: 1·045, 1·013-1·079; p=0·00033; breast palliative: 0·987, 0·977-0·996; p=0·00034; NSCLC palliative: 0·987, 0·976-0·998; p=0·0015). 30-day mortality was also significantly higher for patients receiving their first reported curative or palliative SACT versus those who received SACT previously (breast palliative: OR 2·326 99% CI 1·634-3·312; p<0·0001; NSCLC curative: 3·371, 1·554-7·316; p<0·0001; NSCLC palliative: 2·667, 2·109-3·373; p<0·0001), and for patients with worse general wellbeing (performance status 2-4) versus those who were generally well (breast curative: 6·057, 1·333-27·513; p=0·0021; breast palliative: 6·241, 4·180-9·319; p<0·0001; NSCLC palliative: 3·384, 2·276-5·032; p<0·0001). We identified trusts with mortality rates in excess of the 95% control limits; this included seven for curative breast cancer, four for palliative breast cancer, five for curative NSCLC, and seven for palliative NSCLC. INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that several factors affect the risk of early mortality of breast and lung cancer patients in England and that some groups are at a substantially increased risk of 30-day mortality. The identification of hospitals with significantly higher 30-day mortality rates should promote review of clinical decision making in these hospitals. Furthermore, our results highlight the importance of collecting routine data beyond clinical trials to better understand the factors placing patients at higher risk of 30-day mortality, and ultimately improve clinical decision making. Our insights into the factors affecting risk of 30-day mortality will help treating clinicians and their patients predict the balance of harms and benefits associated with SACT. FUNDING: Public Health England.

The LungPath study: variation in the diagnostic and staging pathway for patients with lung cancer in England.

The LungPath project investigated differences in lung cancer diagnostic practice by following the diagnostic pathways of 1507 patients from 19 representative English lung cancer centres. We found large variation in the proportion of patients receiving positron emission tomography-CT scan (range 13%-64%) and endobronchial ultrasound (range 2%-31%). There was also wide variation in the proportion of patients with good performance status who had their tumours histologically confirmed (range 61%-100%). The variation is discussed with reference to current national guidelines and implications for patient care.

Defining a standard set of patient-centred outcomes for lung cancer.

In lung cancer, outcome measurement has been mostly limited to survival. Proper assessment of the value of lung cancer treatments, and the performance of institutions delivering care, requires more comprehensive measurement of standardised outcomes.The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement convened an international, multidisciplinary working group of patient representatives, medical oncologists, surgeons, radiation oncologists, pulmonologists, palliative care specialists, registry experts and specialist nurses to review existing data and practices. Using a modified Delphi method, the group developed a consensus recommendation ("the set") on the outcomes most essential to track for patients with lung cancer, along with baseline demographic, clinical and tumour characteristics (case-mix variables) for risk adjustment.The set applies to patients diagnosed with nonsmall cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer. Our working group recommends the collection of the following outcomes: survival, complications during or within 6 months of treatment and patient-reported domains of health-related quality of life including pain, fatigue, cough and dyspnoea. Case-mix variables were defined to improve interpretation of comparisons.We defined an international consensus recommendation of the most important outcomes for lung cancer patients, along with relevant case-mix variables, and are working to support adoption and reporting of these measures globally.

A primer for studying cell cycle dynamics of the human hair follicle.

The cell cycle is of major importance to human hair follicle (HF) biology. Not only is continuously active cell cycling required to facilitate healthy hair growth in anagen VI HFs, but perturbations in the cell cycle are likely to be of significance in HF pathology (i.e. in scarring, non-scarring, chemotherapy-induced and androgenic alopecias). However, cell cycle dynamics of the human hair follicle (HF) are poorly understood in contrast to what is known in mouse. The current Methods Review aims at helping to close this gap by presenting a primer that introduces immunohistological/immunofluorescent techniques to study the cell cycle in the human HF. Moreover, this primer encourages the exploitation of the human HF as a powerful and clinically relevant tool to investigate mammalian cell cycle biology in situ. To achieve this, we describe methods to study markers of general 'proliferation' (nuclei count, Ki-67 expression), apoptosis (terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick-end labelling, cleaved caspase 3), mitosis (phospho-histone H3, 'pS780'), DNA synthesis (5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridine) and cell cycle regulation (cyclins) in the human HF. In addition, we provide specific examples of dual immunolabelling for instructive cell cycle analyses and for investigating the cell cycle behaviour of specific HF keratinocyte subpopulations, such as keratin 15+ stem/progenitor cells.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control.

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise­from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists­has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care­its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families­are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

Morphological and genetic classification of lung cancer: variation in practice and implications for tailored treatment.

AIMS: Tailored therapy of lung cancer requires high-quality pathology. Tumours must be subtyped accurately and material preserved for genetic analysis upon which treatment is increasingly based. There is a presumption that pathologists have risen to this challenge, but the nature and degree of variation in practice and quality are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We collected detailed information on 1507 consecutive, newly diagnosed patients referred to 19 UK lung cancer units, ranging from district general hospitals to specialist cardiothoracic units. In only four centres were pathologists handling thoracic biopsies enrolled in the thoracic external quality assessment (EQA) scheme. Achievement of a positive diagnosis of malignancy ranged from 53 to 88%. Variation in tumour subtypes was wide, and the proportion of biopsies classified as merely 'non-small-cell lung cancer, not otherwise specified' varied from 3 to 20%, despite almost universal use of immunochemistry. The proportion of tumours tested for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene mutation ranged from 12 to 92%. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in practice among UK pathologists and arguably in the quality of pathology, raising questions about expertise, adherence to guidelines, rigour of EQA and, ultimately, the reliability of the pathology that underpins the management of lung cancer.

The effectiveness of lung cancer MDT and the role of respiratory physicians.

There is an increasing trend for the use of multi-disciplinary teams (MDT) in the management of complex medical conditions. The latter may include various cancers, including lung cancer. However, the use of MDT is not restricted to cancer management, but may include complex conditions like diabetes and other non-malignant disorders. There is an increasing trend to use MDT in the investigation and management of patients with suspected or proven lung cancer. This review examines the evidence that supports the efficacy, or otherwise, of lung cancer management in a MDT as opposed to individual care, who should be a member of a lung cancer MDT, and the specific role of the respiratory physician in a lung cancer MDT. Although it may seem to make common sense to manage lung cancer in a MDT setting, there is actually little in the way of high quality data to support this concept. The logistic and ethical difficulties in researching this issue are highlighted in this review.