Quitting smoking improves two-year survival after a diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Smoking at diagnosis is associated with worse survival in lung cancer but the effects of quitting smoking on survival remain unclear. METHODS: In a UK multi-centre study (NCT01192256) we followed all 2751 patients with newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for up to 2 years or until death as part of the observational trial. Patients were offered smoking cessation advice and treatments according to national guidelines and local services. Smoking status was verified by exhaled carbon monoxide levels. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox Proportional Hazards Modelling examined the effects of quitting smoking on survival at 2 years. FINDINGS: 646 were current smokers at the time of diagnosis. The unadjusted two-year Kaplan-Meier survivor functions for quitters (0.45, 95 %CI 0.37 to 0.53) and continuers (0.32, 0.28 to 0.36) were significantly different (log-rank test p < 0.01). Median survival times were 659 days for quitters and 348 days for continuers. After adjusting for age, sex, stage, performance status, curative intent surgery, radical radiotherapy and comorbidity, the hazard ratio for quitting at diagnosis (0.75, 95 % CI 0.58 to 0.98) indicated a statistically significant reduction in the risk of death across the two-year study period. INTERPRETATION: Quitting smoking is independently and significantly associated with improved survival regardless of stage in NSCLC. We recommend that smoking cessation advice and treatments should be offered to smokers with lung cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01192256. FUNDING: This work was supported by a 2010 Global Research Award for Nicotine Dependence (GRAND), Pfizer.

The Economic Potential of Smoking Cessation Interventions at the Point of Diagnosis of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Stopping smoking has proven benefits in nearly all illnesses but the impact and health economic benefits of stopping smoking after a diagnosis of lung cancer are less well defined. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation (SC) services for patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer against current usual care, where patients are unlikely to receive SC service referral. METHODS: A health economic model was constructed in Excel. The modelled population comprised of patients with a new diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Data from the LungCast data set (Clinical Trials Identifier NCT01192256) were used to estimate model inputs. A structured search of published literature identified inputs not represented in LungCast, including healthcare resource use and costs. Costs were estimated from a 2020/2021 UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. The model estimated the incremental quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained in patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC receiving targeted SC intervention than those receiving no intervention. Extensive one-way sensitivity analyses explored input and data set uncertainty. RESULTS: In the 5-year base case, the model estimated an incremental cost of £14 904 per QALY gained through SC intervention. Sensitivity analysis estimated an outcome range of between £9935 and £32 246 per QALY gained. The model was most sensitive to the estimates of relative quit rates and expected healthcare resource use. CONCLUSION: This exploratory analysis indicates that SC intervention for smokers with patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC should be a cost-effective use of UK National Health Service resources. Additional research with focused costing is needed to confirm this positioning.

Feasibility and acceptability of a community pharmacy referral service for suspected lung cancer symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer survival rates in the UK are among the lowest in Europe, principally due to late-stage diagnosis. Alternative routes to earlier diagnosis of lung cancer are needed in socioeconomically deprived communities that are disproportionately affected by poor lung cancer outcomes. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a community-based pharmacy referral service to encourage earlier symptomatic referral for chest X-rays. METHODS: Seventeen community pharmacies located in a deprived area of Wales participated between March 2019 and March 2020. Stakeholder interviews were conducted with four patients, seven pharmacy professionals and one general practitioner. Four focus groups were conducted, including one with healthcare professionals (n=6) and three with members of the public who were current and former smokers (n=13). Quantitative data regarding patient characteristics and clinical outcomes were collected from hospital records and patient referral questionnaires completed by pharmacists and analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data sets were analysed thematically and triangulated. RESULTS: Twelve patients used the pharmacy referral service, all of whom were male. Average length of the pharmacy consultation was 13 min, with a mean 3 days to accessing chest X-rays in secondary care. Patients experienced a mean 46-day wait for results, with no lung cancer detected. Participants found the service to be acceptable and considered the pharmacy element to be broadly feasible. Perceived barriers included low awareness of the service and concerns about the role and capacity of pharmacists to deliver the service. Facilitators included perceived approachability and accessibility of pharmacists. A well-publicised, multifaceted awareness campaign was recommended. CONCLUSIONS: A community pharmacy referral service for lung symptoms was considered an acceptable alternative pathway to symptomatic diagnosis of lung cancer in deprived communities. Wider implementation of the service would require workforce capacity and training to be addressed to ensure optimum utilisation and promotion of the service.

Reflexive thematic analysis exploring stakeholder experiences of virtual pulmonary rehabilitation (VIPAR).

INTRODUCTION: To enable greater availability of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), video-conferencing technology was employed to link a community site to a standard outpatient PR service to deliver the programme closer to those with chronic respiratory disease. The service was called virtual pulmonary rehabilitation (VIPAR). To understand the experiences of those involved in this service, this study aimed to answer the question: How do the different stakeholders that interact with VIPAR experience the programme? METHODS: Focus groups were conducted with people with chronic lung disease attending either the community or outpatient PR site, in addition to the staff involved in the running of the PR groups. A total of five focus groups were conducted. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcripts. RESULTS: Participants who received VIPAR were positive regarding the programme and described the benefits of the service. Additionally, participants discussed the trade-off between convenience and relatedness. Staff described barriers to the service and solutions that could be employed to mitigate these, including greater training, organisation and understanding of risk. DISCUSSION: Using technology to increase the availability of PR is acceptable to the stakeholders involved, providing problems and organisational issues are resolved with training.

Factors associated with work-related burnout in NHS staff during COVID-19: a cross-sectional mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVES: To measure work-related burnout in all groups of health service staff during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify factors associated with work-related burnout. DESIGN: Cross-sectional staff survey. SETTING: All staff grades and types across primary and secondary care in a single National Health Service organisation. PARTICIPANTS: 257 staff members completed the survey, 251 had a work-related burnout score and 239 records were used in the regression analysis. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Work-related burnout as measured by the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory; (2) factors associated with work-related burnout identified through a multiple linear regression model; and (3) factors associated with work-related burnout identified through thematic analysis of free text responses. RESULTS: After adjusting for other covariates (including age, sex, job, being able to take breaks and COVID-19 knowledge), we observed meaningful changes in work-related burnout associated with having different COVID-19 roles (p=0.03), differences in the ability to rest and recover during breaks (p<0.01) and having personal protective equipment concerns (p=0.04). Thematic analysis of the free text comments also linked burnout to changes in workload and responsibility and to a lack of control through redeployment and working patterns. Reduction in non-COVID-19 services has resulted in some members of staff feeling underutilised, with feelings of inequality in workload. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses support anecdotal reports of staff struggling with the additional pressures brought on by COVID-19. All three of the factors we found to be associated with work-related burnout are modifiable and hence their effects can be mitigated. When we next find ourselves in extraordinary times the ordinary considerations of rest and protection and monitoring of the impact of new roles will be more important than ever.

Using the Technology Acceptance Model to conceptualise experiences of the usability and acceptability of a self-management app (COPD.Pal®) for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a long-term progressive inflammatory lung disease causing chronic breathlessness and many hospital admissions. It affects up to 1.2 million people in the UK. To help people with COPD self-manage their condition we developed, in partnership with healthcare users, a digital mobile phone app called COPD.Pal®. We report the first user feedback of COPD.Pal®, applying the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) theoretical framework. 11 participants engaged with a click dummy version of COPD.Pal® before being asked questions relating to their experiences. A deductive, semantic, reflexive thematic analysis was conducted to analyse their individual and collective experiences. The study was registered at Clinical Trials.gov (NCT04142957). Two overarching themes resulted: Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness. Within the former, participants discussed how they wanted flexibility and choice in how they engaged with the app; including how often they used it. Additionally, they discussed how the app layout should make it straightforward to use, whilst unanimously agreeing that COPD.Pal® provided this. Within Perceived Usefulness, participants discussed how they wanted the information they entered into the app to be useful, in addition to the app providing resources regarding COPD. Lastly, there was disagreement regarding preferences for further app development. We found that COPD.Pal® was usable and acceptable by people with COPD and TAM provided a useful theoretical framework for both structuring discussions with users and analysing their comments.

Longitudinal study to assess impact of smoking at diagnosis and quitting on 1-year survival for people with non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To update the prevalence of smoking in people as they were diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to see whether smoking status at baseline and quitting are independently associated with 1-year survival. DESIGN: A real-world cohort study following patients from diagnosis for up to 1 year or until death. SETTING: UK multi-centre study (28 sites) based in secondary and primary care. PARTICIPANTS: 1124 patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC between 2010-2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Smoking status was validated at diagnosis and at every routine and emergency hospital visit. Cancer treatments were offered according to local multi-disciplinary team decisions following UK guidelines and smoking cessation treatments offered according to local practice /availability. Survival analysis and Cox Proportional Hazards Modelling examined the associations of a) smoking at baseline and b) quitting smoking, on survival at 1 year. RESULTS: 77% of never smokers, 60% of ex-smokers and 57% of current smokers, were alive at 1 year (p = 0.01). After adjusting for age, stage, EGOG, surgery and gender, ex smokers (adjusted HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.16-2.31) and current smokers (aHR 2.04, 1.19-3.48) were both more likely to die within one year. 23% of smokers with NSCLC quit within 3 months of diagnosis. At 1 year, 69% of those who quit were alive versus 53% of those who continued to smoke (p < 0.01). After adjusting the risk of dying was lower (aHR 0.75), in those who quit smoking, although this was not statistically significant (p = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest prospective study that validates smoking in NSCLC; it shows a third of people are smoking at the time of diagnosis. Smokers have lower 12-month survival than never and ex -smokers. Quitting smoking was associated with 25% reduction in mortality which may be clinically important although not statistically significant, after adjusting for other factors.