Validation of the psychosocial consequences of screening in lung cancer questionnaire in the international lung screen trial Australian cohort.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of psychosocial consequences of lung cancer screening with LDCT in high-risk populations has generally been performed using generic psychometric instruments. Such generic instruments have low coverage and low power to detect screening impacts. This study aims to validate an established lung cancer screening-specific questionnaire, Consequences Of Screening Lung Cancer (COS-LC), in Australian-English and describe early results from the baseline LDCT round of the International Lung Screen Trial (ILST). METHODS: The Danish-version COS-LC was translated to Australian-English using the double panel method and field tested in Australian-ILST participants to examine content validity. A random sample of 200 participants were used to assess construct validity using Rasch item response theory models. Reliability was assessed using classical test theory. The COS-LC was administered to ILST participants at prespecified timepoints including at enrolment, dependent of screening results. RESULTS: Minor linguistic alterations were made after initial translation of COS-LC to English. The COS-LC demonstrated good content validity and adequate construct validity using psychometric analysis. The four core scales fit the Rasch model, with only minor issues in five non-core scales which resolved with modification. 1129 Australian-ILST participants were included in the analysis, with minimal psychosocial impact observed shortly after baseline LDCT results. CONCLUSION: COS-LC is the first lung cancer screening-specific questionnaire to be validated in Australia and has demonstrated excellent psychometric properties. Early results did not demonstrate significant psychosocial impacts of screening. Longer-term follow-up is awaited and will be particularly pertinent given the announcement of an Australian National Lung Cancer Screening Program. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02871856.

Lung cancer (internet-based) Delphi (LUCiD): A modified eDelphi consensus process to establish Australasian clinical quality indicators for thoracic cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Approximately 16,000 new cases of lung cancer are diagnosed each year in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, and it is the leading cause of cancer death in the region. Unwarranted variation in lung cancer care and outcomes has been described for many years, although clinical quality indicators to facilitate benchmarking across Australasia have not been established. The purpose of this study was to establish clinical quality indicators applicable to lung and other thoracic cancers across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. METHODS: Following a literature review, a modified three round eDelphi consensus process was completed between October 2022 and June 2023. Participants included clinicians from all relevant disciplines, patient advocates, researchers and other stakeholders, with representatives from all Australian states and territories and Aotearoa New Zealand. Consensus was set at a threshold of 70%, with the first two rounds conducted as online surveys, and the final round held as a hybrid in person and virtual consensus meeting. RESULTS: The literature review identified 422 international thoracic oncology indicators, and a total of 71 indicators were evaluated over the course of the Delphi consensus. Ultimately, 27 clinical quality indicators reached consensus, covering the continuum of thoracic oncologic care from diagnosis to first line treatment. Indicators benchmarking supportive care were poorly represented. Attendant numeric quality standards were developed to facilitate benchmarking. CONCLUSION: Twenty-seven clinical quality indicators relevant to thoracic oncology care in Australasia were developed. Real world implementation will now be explored utilizing a prospective dataset collected across Australia.

Updated cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening for Australia, capturing differences in the health economic impact of NELSON and NLST outcomes.

BACKGROUND: A national, lung cancer screening programme is under consideration in Australia, and we assessed cost-effectiveness using updated data and assumptions. METHODS: We estimated the cost-effectiveness of lung screening by applying screening parameters and outcomes from either the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) or the NEderlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (NELSON) to Australian data on lung cancer risk, mortality, health-system costs, and smoking trends using a deterministic, multi-cohort model. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for a lifetime horizon. RESULTS: The ICER for lung screening compared to usual care in the NELSON-based scenario was AU$39,250 (95% CI $18,150-108,300) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY); lower than the NLST-based estimate (ICER = $76,300, 95% CI $41,750-236,500). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, lung screening was cost-effective in 15%/60% of NELSON-like simulations, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,000/$50,000 per QALY, respectively, compared to 0.5%/6.7% for the NLST. ICERs were most sensitive to assumptions regarding the screening-related lung cancer mortality benefit and duration of benefit over time. The cost of screening had a larger impact on ICERs than the cost of treatment, even after quadrupling the 2006-2016 healthcare costs of stage IV lung cancer. DISCUSSION: Lung screening could be cost-effective in Australia, contingent on translating trial-like lung cancer mortality benefits to the clinic.

USPSTF2013 versus PLCOm2012 lung cancer screening eligibility criteria (International Lung Screening Trial): interim analysis of a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is a major health problem. CT lung screening can reduce lung cancer mortality through early diagnosis by at least 20%. Screening high-risk individuals is most effective. Retrospective analyses suggest that identifying individuals for screening by accurate prediction models is more efficient than using categorical age-smoking criteria, such as the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria. This study prospectively compared the effectiveness of the USPSTF2013 and PLCOm2012 model eligibility criteria. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, participants from the International Lung Screening Trial (ILST), aged 55-80 years, who were current or former smokers (ie, had ≥30 pack-years smoking history or ≤15 quit-years since last permanently quitting), and who met USPSTF2013 criteria or a PLCOm2012 risk threshold of at least 1·51% within 6 years of screening, were recruited from nine screening sites in Canada, Australia, Hong Kong, and the UK. After enrolment, patients were assessed with the USPSTF2013 criteria and the PLCOm2012 risk model with a threshold of at least 1·70% at 6 years. Data were collected locally and centralised. Main outcomes were the comparison of lung cancer detection rates and cumulative life expectancies in patients with lung cancer between USPSTF2013 criteria and the PLCOm2012 model. In this Article, we present data from an interim analysis. To estimate the incidence of lung cancers in individuals who were USPSTF2013-negative and had PLCOm2012 of less than 1·51% at 6 years, ever-smokers in the Prostate Lung Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO) who met these criteria and their lung cancer incidence were applied to the ILST sample size for the mean follow-up occurring in the ILST. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02871856. Study enrolment is almost complete. FINDINGS: Between June 17, 2015, and Dec 29, 2020, 5819 participants from the International Lung Screening Trial (ILST) were enrolled on the basis of meeting USPSTF2013 criteria or the PLCOm2012 risk threshold of at least 1·51% at 6 years. The same number of individuals was selected for the PLCOm2012 model as for the USPSTF2013 criteria (4540 [78%] of 5819). After a mean follow-up of 2·3 years (SD 1·0), 135 lung cancers occurred in 4540 USPSTF2013-positive participants and 162 in 4540 participants included in the PLCOm2012 of at least 1·70% at 6 years group (cancer sensitivity difference 15·8%, 95% CI 10·7-22·1%; absolute odds ratio 4·00, 95% CI 1·89-9·44; p<0·0001). Compared to USPSTF2013-positive individuals, PLCOm2012-selected participants were older (mean age 65·7 years [SD 5·9] vs 63·3 years [5·7]; p<0·0001), had more comorbidities (median 2 [IQR 1-3] vs 1 [1-2]; p<0·0001), and shorter life expectancy (13·9 years [95% CI 12·8-14·9] vs 14·8 [13·6-16·0] years). Model-based difference in cumulative life expectancies for those diagnosed with lung cancer were higher in those who had PLCOm2012 risk of at least 1·70% at 6 years than individuals who were USPSTF2013-positive (2248·6 years [95% CI 2089·6-2425·9] vs 2000·7 years [1841·2-2160·3]; difference 247·9 years, p=0·015). INTERPRETATION: PLCOm2012 appears to be more efficient than the USPSTF2013 criteria for selecting individuals to enrol into lung cancer screening programmes and should be used for identifying high-risk individuals who benefit from the inclusion in these programmes. FUNDING: Terry Fox Research Institute, The UBC-VGH Hospital Foundation and the BC Cancer Foundation, the Alberta Cancer Foundation, the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK and a consortium of funders, and the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation for the UK Lung Screen Uptake Trial.

An International Consensus on Actions to Improve Lung Cancer Survival: A Modified Delphi Method Among Clinical Experts in the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership.

BACKGROUND: Research from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) demonstrates that international variation in lung cancer survival persists, particularly within early stage disease. There is a lack of international consensus on the critical contributing components to variation in lung cancer outcomes and the steps needed to optimise lung cancer services. These are needed to improve the quality of options for and equitable access to treatment, and ultimately improve survival. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 9 key informants from ICBP countries. An international clinical network representing 6 ICBP countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, Ireland, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Scotland & Wales) was established to share local clinical insights and examples of best practice. Using a modified Delphi consensus model, network members suggested and rated recommendations to optimise the management of lung cancer. Calls to Action were developed via Delphi voting as the most crucial recommendations, with Good Practice Points included to support their implementation. RESULTS: Five Calls to Action and thirteen Good Practice Points applicable to high income, comparable countries were developed and achieved 100% consensus. Calls to Action include (1) Implement cost-effective, clinically efficacious, and equitable lung cancer screening initiatives; (2) Ensure diagnosis of lung cancer within 30 days of referral; (3) Develop Thoracic Centres of Excellence; (4) Undertake an international audit of lung cancer care; and (5) Recognise improvements in lung cancer care and outcomes as a priority in cancer policy. CONCLUSION: The recommendations presented are the voice of an expert international lung cancer clinical network, and signpost key considerations for policymakers in countries within the ICBP but also in other comparable high-income countries. These define a roadmap to help align and focus efforts in improving outcomes and management of lung cancer patients globally.

Lung cancer screening implementation: Complexities and priorities.

Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer death worldwide. The benefits of lung cancer screening to reduce mortality and detect early-stage disease are no longer in any doubt based on the results of two landmark trials using LDCT. Lung cancer screening has been implemented in the US and South Korea and is under consideration by other communities. Successful translation of demonstrated research outcomes into the routine clinical setting requires careful implementation and co-ordinated input from multiple stakeholders. Implementation aspects may be specific to different healthcare settings. Important knowledge gaps remain, which must be addressed in order to optimize screening benefits and minimize screening harms. Lung cancer screening differs from all other cancer screening programmes as lung cancer risk is driven by smoking, a highly stigmatized behaviour. Stigma, along with other factors, can impact smokers' engagement with screening, meaning that smokers are generally 'hard to reach'. This review considers critical points along the patient journey. The first steps include selecting a risk threshold at which to screen, successfully engaging the target population and maximizing screening uptake. We review barriers to smoker engagement in lung and other cancer screening programmes. Recruitment strategies used in trials and real-world (clinical) programmes and associated screening uptake are reviewed. To aid cross-study comparisons, we propose a standardized nomenclature for recording and calculating recruitment outcomes. Once participants have engaged with the screening programme, we discuss programme components that are critical to maximize net benefit. A whole-of-programme approach is required including a standardized and multidisciplinary approach to pulmonary nodule management, incorporating probabilistic nodule risk assessment and longitudinal volumetric analysis, to reduce unnecessary downstream investigations and surgery; the integration of smoking cessation; and identification and intervention for other tobacco related diseases, such as coronary artery calcification and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. National support, integrated with tobacco control programmes, and with appropriate funding, accreditation, data collection, quality assurance and reporting mechanisms will enhance lung cancer screening programme success and reduce the risks associated with opportunistic, ad hoc screening. Finally, implementation research must play a greater role in informing policy change about targeted LDCT screening programmes.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease prevalence and prediction in a high-risk lung cancer screening population.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an underdiagnosed condition sharing risk factors with lung cancer. Lung cancer screening may provide an opportunity to improve COPD diagnosis. Using Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer (PanCan) study data, the present study sought to determine the following: 1) What is the prevalence of COPD in a lung cancer screening population? 2) Can a model based on clinical and screening low-dose CT scan data predict the likelihood of COPD? METHODS: The single arm PanCan study recruited current or former smokers age 50-75 who had a calculated risk of lung cancer of at least 2% over 6 years. A baseline health questionnaire, spirometry, and low-dose CT scan were performed. CT scans were assessed by a radiologist for extent and distribution of emphysema. With spirometry as the gold standard, logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with COPD. RESULTS: Among 2514 recruited subjects, 1136 (45.2%) met spirometry criteria for COPD, including 833 of 1987 (41.9%) of those with no prior diagnosis, 53.8% of whom had moderate or worse disease. In a multivariate model, age, current smoking status, number of pack-years, presence of dyspnea, wheeze, participation in a high-risk occupation, and emphysema extent on LDCT were all statistically associated with COPD, while the overall model had poor discrimination (c-statistic = 0.627 (95% CI of 0.607 to 0.650). The lowest and the highest risk decile in the model predicted COPD risk of 27.4 and 65.3%. CONCLUSIONS: COPD had a high prevalence in a lung cancer screening population. While a risk model had poor discrimination, all deciles of risk had a high prevalence of COPD, and spirometry could be considered as an additional test in lung cancer screening programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: (Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00751660 , registered September 12, 2008).

Current lung cancer screening practice amongst general practitioners in Western Australia: a cross-sectional study.

Lung cancer screening with low dose computed tomography (LDCT) is recommended in the USA and Canada for high-risk smokers but not in Australia. We administered a cross-sectional survey to Western Australian general practitioners (GP). The majority (64/93, 69%) reported requesting a screening chest X-ray (42/93, 45%) and/or LDCT (38/93, 41%) in the past year. LDCT screening was more common if the GP had received education from radiology practices (odds ratio (OR) 2.81, P = 0.03) or if they believed screening is funded by the Medical Benefits Scheme (OR 3.57, P = 0.02). Lung cancer screening with LDCT is occurring outside a coordinated programme, contrary to Australian guidelines.

Participant selection for lung cancer screening by risk modelling (the Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer [PanCan] study): a single-arm, prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Results from retrospective studies indicate that selecting individuals for low-dose CT lung cancer screening on the basis of a highly predictive risk model is superior to using criteria similar to those used in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST; age, pack-year, and smoking quit-time). We designed the Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer (PanCan) study to assess the efficacy of a risk prediction model to select candidates for lung cancer screening, with the aim of determining whether this approach could better detect patients with early, potentially curable, lung cancer. METHODS: We did this single-arm, prospective study in eight centres across Canada. We recruited participants aged 50-75 years, who had smoked at some point in their life (ever-smokers), and who did not have a self-reported history of lung cancer. Participants had at least a 2% 6-year risk of lung cancer as estimated by the PanCan model, a precursor to the validated PLCOm2012 model. Risk variables in the model were age, smoking duration, pack-years, family history of lung cancer, education level, body-mass index, chest x-ray in the past 3 years, and history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Individuals were screened with low-dose CT at baseline (T0), and at 1 (T1) and 4 (T4) years post-baseline. The primary outcome of the study was incidence of lung cancer. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00751660. FINDINGS: 7059 queries came into the study coordinating centre and were screened for PanCan risk. 15 were duplicates, so 7044 participants were considered for enrolment. Between Sept 24, 2008, and Dec 17, 2010, we recruited and enrolled 2537 eligible ever-smokers. After a median follow-up of 5·5 years (IQR 3·2-6·1), 172 lung cancers were diagnosed in 164 individuals (cumulative incidence 0·065 [95% CI 0·055-0·075], incidence rate 138·1 per 10 000 person-years [117·8-160·9]). There were ten interval lung cancers (6% of lung cancers and 6% of individuals with cancer): one diagnosed between T0 and T1, and nine between T1 and T4. Cumulative incidence was significantly higher than that observed in NLST (4·0%; p<0·0001). Compared with 593 (57%) of 1040 lung cancers observed in NLST, 133 (77%) of 172 lung cancers in the PanCan Study were early stage (I or II; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: The PanCan model was effective in identifying individuals who were subsequently diagnosed with early, potentially curable, lung cancer. The incidence of cancers detected and the proportion of early stage cancers in the screened population was higher than observed in previous studies. This approach should be considered for adoption in lung cancer screening programmes. FUNDING: Terry Fox Research Institute and Canadian Partnership Against Cancer.

Identifying high risk individuals for targeted lung cancer screening: Independent validation of the PLCOm2012 risk prediction tool.

Lung cancer screening with computerised tomography holds promise, but optimising the balance of benefits and harms via selection of a high risk population is critical. PLCOm2012 is a logistic regression model based on U.S. data, incorporating sociodemographic and health factors, which predicts 6-year lung cancer risk among ever-smokers, and thus may better predict those who might benefit from screening than criteria based solely on age and smoking history. We aimed to validate the performance of PLCOm2012 in predicting lung cancer outcomes in a cohort of Australian smokers. Predicted risk of lung cancer was calculated using PLCOm2012 applied to baseline data from 95,882 ever-smokers aged ≥45 years in the 45 and Up Study (2006-2009). Predictions were compared to lung cancer outcomes captured to June 2014 via linkage to population-wide health databases; a total of 1,035 subsequent lung cancer diagnoses were identified. PLCOm2012 had good discrimination (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic-curve; AUC 0.80, 95%CI 0.78-0.81) and excellent calibration (mean and 90th percentiles of absolute risk difference between observed and predicted outcomes: 0.006 and 0.016, respectively). Sensitivity (69.4%, 95%CI, 65.6-73.0%) of the PLCOm2012 criteria in the 55-74 year age group for predicting lung cancers was greater than that using criteria based on ≥30 pack-years smoking and ≤15 years quit (57.3%, 53.3-61.3%; p < 0.0001), but specificity was lower (72.0%, 71.7-72.4% versus 75.2%, 74.8-75.6%, respectively; p < 0.0001). Targeting high risk people for lung cancer screening using PLCOm2012 might improve the balance of benefits versus harms, and cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening.

Probability of cancer in pulmonary nodules detected on first screening CT.

BACKGROUND: Major issues in the implementation of screening for lung cancer by means of low-dose computed tomography (CT) are the definition of a positive result and the management of lung nodules detected on the scans. We conducted a population-based prospective study to determine factors predicting the probability that lung nodules detected on the first screening low-dose CT scans are malignant or will be found to be malignant on follow-up. METHODS: We analyzed data from two cohorts of participants undergoing low-dose CT screening. The development data set included participants in the Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer Study (PanCan). The validation data set included participants involved in chemoprevention trials at the British Columbia Cancer Agency (BCCA), sponsored by the U.S. National Cancer Institute. The final outcomes of all nodules of any size that were detected on baseline low-dose CT scans were tracked. Parsimonious and fuller multivariable logistic-regression models were prepared to estimate the probability of lung cancer. RESULTS: In the PanCan data set, 1871 persons had 7008 nodules, of which 102 were malignant, and in the BCCA data set, 1090 persons had 5021 nodules, of which 42 were malignant. Among persons with nodules, the rates of cancer in the two data sets were 5.5% and 3.7%, respectively. Predictors of cancer in the model included older age, female sex, family history of lung cancer, emphysema, larger nodule size, location of the nodule in the upper lobe, part-solid nodule type, lower nodule count, and spiculation. Our final parsimonious and full models showed excellent discrimination and calibration, with areas under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve of more than 0.90, even for nodules that were 10 mm or smaller in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: Predictive tools based on patient and nodule characteristics can be used to accurately estimate the probability that lung nodules detected on baseline screening low-dose CT scans are malignant. (Funded by the Terry Fox Research Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00751660.).

Estimating eligibility for lung cancer screening in an Australian cohort, including the effect of spirometry.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the proportion of ever-smokers who are eligible for lung cancer screening in an Australian cohort, and to evaluate the effect of spirometry in defining chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) when assessing screening eligibility. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of 3586 individuals aged 50-68 years who live in the Busselton Shire of Western Australia. OUTCOMES: Proportion of ever-smokers eligible for lung cancer screening based on United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria, and PLCOm2012 lung cancer risk > 1.5%. The effect of using self-reported COPD, symptoms consistent with COPD, or spirometry to define COPD for screening eligibility according to the PLCOm2012 criteria. RESULTS: Of ever-smokers aged 55-68 years, 254 (20.1%) would be eligible for screening according to USPSTF criteria; fewer would be eligible according to PLCOm2012 criteria (225, 17.9%; P = 0.004). This is equivalent to 8.9-10.0% of the total population aged 55-68 years, which suggests about 450 000 individuals in Australia may be eligible for lung cancer screening. The proportions of eligible participants were not significantly different whether spirometry results or symptoms consistent with COPD were used to determine PLCOm2012 risk. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of ever-smokers in this population who were eligible for lung cancer screening was 17.9-20.1%. Using symptoms to define COPD is an appropriate surrogate measure for spirometry when determining the presence of COPD in this population. There are significant challenges for policy makers on how to identify and recruit these eligible individuals from the wider population.

DNA methylation is globally disrupted and associated with expression changes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease small airways.

DNA methylation is an epigenetic modification that is highly disrupted in response to cigarette smoke and involved in a wide spectrum of malignant and nonmalignant diseases, but surprisingly not previously assessed in small airways of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Small airways are the primary sites of airflow obstruction in COPD. We sought to determine whether DNA methylation patterns are disrupted in small airway epithelia of patients with COPD, and evaluate whether changes in gene expression are associated with these disruptions. Genome-wide methylation and gene expression analysis were performed on small airway epithelial DNA and RNA obtained from the same patient during bronchoscopy, using Illumina's Infinium HM27 and Affymetrix's Genechip Human Gene 1.0 ST arrays. To control for known effects of cigarette smoking on DNA methylation, methylation and gene expression profiles were compared between former smokers with and without COPD matched for age, pack-years, and years of smoking cessation. Our results indicate that aberrant DNA methylation is (1) a genome-wide phenomenon in small airways of patients with COPD, and (2) associated with altered expression of genes and pathways important to COPD, such as the NF-E2-related factor 2 oxidative response pathway. DNA methylation is likely an important mechanism contributing to modulation of genes important to COPD pathology. Because these methylation events may underlie disease-specific gene expression changes, their characterization is a critical first step toward the development of epigenetic markers and an opportunity for developing novel epigenetic therapeutic interventions for COPD.

Small-airway obstruction and emphysema in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: The major sites of obstruction in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are small airways (<2 mm in diameter). We wanted to determine whether there was a relationship between small-airway obstruction and emphysematous destruction in COPD. METHODS: We used multidetector computed tomography (CT) to compare the number of airways measuring 2.0 to 2.5 mm in 78 patients who had various stages of COPD, as judged by scoring on the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) scale, in isolated lungs removed from patients with COPD who underwent lung transplantation, and in donor (control) lungs. MicroCT was used to measure the extent of emphysema (mean linear intercept), the number of terminal bronchioles per milliliter of lung volume, and the minimum diameters and cross-sectional areas of terminal bronchioles. RESULTS: On multidetector CT, in samples from patients with COPD, as compared with control samples, the number of airways measuring 2.0 to 2.5 mm in diameter was reduced in patients with GOLD stage 1 disease (P=0.001), GOLD stage 2 disease (P=0.02), and GOLD stage 3 or 4 disease (P<0.001). MicroCT of isolated samples of lungs removed from patients with GOLD stage 4 disease showed a reduction of 81 to 99.7% in the total cross-sectional area of terminal bronchioles and a reduction of 72 to 89% in the number of terminal bronchioles (P<0.001). A comparison of the number of terminal bronchioles and dimensions at different levels of emphysematous destruction (i.e., an increasing value for the mean linear intercept) showed that the narrowing and loss of terminal bronchioles preceded emphysematous destruction in COPD (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These results show that narrowing and disappearance of small conducting airways before the onset of emphysematous destruction can explain the increased peripheral airway resistance reported in COPD. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others.).

A dynamic bronchial airway gene expression signature of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung function impairment.

RATIONALE: Molecular phenotyping of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been impeded in part by the difficulty in obtaining lung tissue samples from individuals with impaired lung function. OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether COPD-associated processes are reflected in gene expression profiles of bronchial airway epithelial cells obtained by bronchoscopy. METHODS: Gene expression profiling of bronchial brushings obtained from 238 current and former smokers with and without COPD was performed using Affymetrix Human Gene 1.0 ST Arrays. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 98 genes whose expression levels were associated with COPD status, FEV1% predicted, and FEV1/FVC. In silico analysis identified activating transcription factor 4 (ATF4) as a potential transcriptional regulator of genes with COPD-associated airway expression, and ATF4 overexpression in airway epithelial cells in vitro recapitulates COPD-associated gene expression changes. Genes with COPD-associated expression in the bronchial airway epithelium had similarly altered expression profiles in prior studies performed on small-airway epithelium and lung parenchyma, suggesting that transcriptomic alterations in the bronchial airway epithelium reflect molecular events found at more distal sites of disease activity. Many of the airway COPD-associated gene expression changes revert toward baseline after therapy with the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone in independent cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate a molecular field of injury throughout the bronchial airway of active and former smokers with COPD that may be driven in part by ATF4 and is modifiable with therapy. Bronchial airway epithelium may ultimately serve as a relatively accessible tissue in which to measure biomarkers of disease activity for guiding clinical management of COPD.

A Prospective Observational Study of Physical Activity Levels and Physical Fitness of People at High Risk for Lung Cancer.

Introduction: Physical activity (PA) is a potentially modifiable risk factor for lung cancer, with previous research revealing that people who engage in more PA have lower risk of developing lung cancer. PA levels of lung cancer screening participants have not previously been explored. Methods: Participants at a single Australian International Lung Screen Trial site were eligible for assessment of self-reported PA levels (International Physical Activity Questionnaire and Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly) and physical assessments (6-min walk distance, hand grip muscle strength, daily step count, and body composition) at a single time point during lung cancer screening. Statistics were predominantly descriptive, with parametric data presented as mean and SD and nonparametric data presented as median and interquartile range (IQR). Results: A total of 178 participants were enrolled in this study, with a median age of 61 years. Of the participants, 61% were men and 51% were people who currently smoke. The median total International Physical Activity Questionnaire score was 1756 MET/min/wk (IQR 689, 4049). Mean total Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly score was 160 (SD 72), higher than described in healthy sedentary adults. The median daily step count was 7237 steps (IQR 5353, 10,038) and mean 6-minute walk distance was 545 m (SD 92). Median grip strengths were within predicted normal range, with an elevated median percentage body fat and low skeletal muscle mass found on body composition. Conclusion: Almost a quarter of International Lung Screen Trial participants assessed reported low levels of PA and have a potentially modifiable risk factor to improve health outcomes. Larger studies are needed to characterize the burden of inactivity among high-risk lung cancer screening populations.

Current and Future Perspectives on Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: A Roadmap From 2023 to 2027 From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer substantially reduces mortality from lung cancer, as revealed in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses. This review is based on the ninth CT screening symposium of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, which focuses on the major themes pertinent to the successful global implementation of LDCT screening and develops a strategy to further the implementation of lung cancer screening globally. These recommendations provide a 5-year roadmap to advance the implementation of LDCT screening globally, including the following: (1) establish universal screening program quality indicators; (2) establish evidence-based criteria to identify individuals who have never smoked but are at high-risk of developing lung cancer; (3) develop recommendations for incidentally detected lung nodule tracking and management protocols to complement programmatic lung cancer screening; (4) Integrate artificial intelligence and biomarkers to increase the prediction of malignancy in suspicious CT screen-detected lesions; and (5) standardize high-quality performance artificial intelligence protocols that lead to substantial reductions in costs, resource utilization and radiologist reporting time; (6) personalize CT screening intervals on the basis of an individual's lung cancer risk; (7) develop evidence to support clinical management and cost-effectiveness of other identified abnormalities on a lung cancer screening CT; (8) develop publicly accessible, easy-to-use geospatial tools to plan and monitor equitable access to screening services; and (9) establish a global shared education resource for lung cancer screening CT to ensure high-quality reading and reporting.

The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Early Lung Imaging Confederation Open-Source Deep Learning and Quantitative Measurement Initiative.

INTRODUCTION: With global adoption of computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening, there is increasing interest to use artificial intelligence (AI) deep learning methods to improve the clinical management process. To enable AI research using an open-source, cloud-based, globally distributed, screening CT imaging data set and computational environment that are compliant with the most stringent international privacy regulations that also protect the intellectual properties of researchers, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer sponsored development of the Early Lung Imaging Confederation (ELIC) resource in 2018. The objective of this report is to describe the updated capabilities of ELIC and illustrate how this resource can be used for clinically relevant AI research. METHODS: In this second phase of the initiative, metadata and screening CT scans from two time points were collected from 100 screening participants in seven countries. An automated deep learning AI lung segmentation algorithm, automated quantitative emphysema metrics, and a quantitative lung nodule volume measurement algorithm were run on these scans. RESULTS: A total of 1394 CTs were collected from 697 participants. The LAV950 quantitative emphysema metric was found to be potentially useful in distinguishing lung cancer from benign cases using a combined slice thickness more than or equal to 2.5 mm. Lung nodule volume change measurements had better sensitivity and specificity for classifying malignant from benign lung nodules when applied to solid lung nodules from high-quality CT scans. CONCLUSIONS: These initial experiments revealed that ELIC can support deep learning AI and quantitative imaging analyses on diverse and globally distributed cloud-based data sets.

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

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 ($), 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 $355 of cost savings per 0.2 QALYs gained (INB=$4294 at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $20 000/QALY (95 %CI: $4205-$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), 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.