Airflow limitation and mortality during cancer screening in the National Lung Screening Trial: why quantifying airflow limitation matters.

IMPORTANCE: Current eligibility criteria for lung cancer (LC) screening are derived from randomised controlled trials and primarily based on age and smoking history. However, the individual benefits of screening are highly variable and potentially attenuated by co-morbidities such as advanced airflow limitation (AL). OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between the presence and severity of AL and screening outcomes. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of 18 463 high-risk smokers, a substudy from the National Lung Screening Trial, who underwent pre-bronchodilator spirometry at baseline and median follow-up of 6.1 years. We used descriptive statistics and a competing risk proportional hazards model to examine differences in screening outcomes by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severity group. RESULTS: The risk of developing LC increased with worsening AL (effect size=0.34, p<0.0001), as did the risk of dying of LC (effect size=0.35, p<0.0001). While those with severe AL (Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease, GOLD grade 3-4) had the highest risk of LC and the highest LC mortality, they also had fewer adenocarcinomas (effect size=-0.20, p=0.008) and a lower surgery rate (effect size=-0.16, p=0.014) despite comparable staging, and greater non-LC mortality relative to LC mortality (effect size=0.30, p<0.0001). In participants with no AL, screening with CT was associated with a significant reduction in LC deaths relative to chest X-ray (30.3%, 95% CI 4.5% to 49.2%, p<0.05). The clinically relevant but attenuated reduction in those with AL (18.5%, 95% CI -8.4% to 38.7%, p>0.05) could be attributed to GOLD 3-4, where no appreciable mortality reduction was observed. CONCLUSION: Despite a greater risk of LC, severe AL was not associated with any apparent reduction in LC mortality following screening.

Should we be screening for COPD? - looking through the lens of lung cancer screening.

INTRODUCTION: In May 2022, the US Preventive Services Task Force published their recommendation against screening for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in asymptomatic adults. However, we argue the routine use of spirometry in both asymptomatic and symptomatic high-risk smokers has utility. AREAS COVERED: We provide published and unpublished observations from a secondary analyses of the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN), arm of the National Lung Screening Trial, including 18,463 high-risk current or former smokers who underwent pre-bronchodilator spirometry at baseline. According to history alone, 20% reported a prior diagnosis of 'COPD,' although only 11% (about one half), actually had airflow limitation (Diagnosed COPD) and 9% had Global Initiative for Obstructive Pulmonary Disease GOLD 0 Pre-COPD. Of the remaining 80% of 'asymptomatic' screening participants, 23% had airflow limitation (Screen-detected COPD) and 13% had preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm). This means 45% of this high-risk cohort were reclassified by spirometry, and together with comorbid disease, identified subgroups where lung cancer screening efficacy could be optimized by between 2-6 fold. EXPERT OPINION: Our preliminary findings suggest lung cancer screening outcomes vary according to 'new' COPD-related spirometric-defined subgroups and that screening spirometry, together with comorbid disease, identifies those for whom lung cancer screening is mostly beneficial or potentially harmful.

Dispositional optimism and optimistic bias: Associations with cessation motivation, confidence, and attitudes.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether 2 conceptually overlapping constructs, dispositional optimism (generalized positive expectations) and optimistic bias (inaccurately low risk perceptions), may have different implications for smoking treatment engagement. METHOD: Predominantly Black, low-income Southern Community Cohort study smokers (n = 880) self-reported dispositional optimism and pessimism (Life Orientation Test-Revised subscales: 0 = neutral, 12 = high optimism/pessimism), comparative lung cancer risk (Low/Average/High), and information to calculate objective lung cancer risk (Low/Med/High). Perceived risk was categorized as accurate (perceived = objective), optimistically-biased (perceived < objective), or pessimistically-biased (perceived > objective). One-way ANOVAs tested associations between dispositional optimism/pessimism and perceived risk accuracy. Multivariable logistic regressions tested independent associations of optimism/pessimism and perceived risk accuracy with cessation motivation (Low/High), confidence (Low/High), and precision treatment attitudes (Favorable/Unfavorable), controlling for sociodemographics and nicotine dependence. RESULTS: Mean dispositional optimism/pessimism scores were 8.41 (SD = 2.59) and 5.65 (SD = 3.02), respectively. Perceived lung cancer risk was 38% accurate, 27% optimistically-biased, and 35% pessimistically-biased. Accuracy was unrelated to dispositional optimism (F(2, 641) = 1.23, p = .29), though optimistically-biased (vs. pessimistically-biased) smokers had higher dispositional pessimism (F(2, 628) = 3.17, p = .043). Dispositional optimism was associated with higher confidence (Adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.71, 95% CI [1.42, 2.06], p < .001) and favorable precision treatment attitudes (AOR = 1.66, 95% CI [1.37, 2.01], p < .001). Optimistically-biased (vs. accurate) risk perception was associated with lower motivation (AOR = .64, 95% CI [.42, .98], p = .041) and less favorable precision treatment attitudes (AOR = .59, 95% CI [.38, .94], p = .029). CONCLUSIONS: Dispositional optimism and lung cancer risk perception accuracy were unrelated. Dispositional optimism was associated with favorable engagement-related outcomes and optimistically-biased risk perception with unfavorable outcomes, reinforcing the distinctiveness of these constructs and their implications for smoking treatment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

A Real-World Analysis of Treatment Patterns and Clinical Characteristics Among Patients with COPD Who Initiated Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in New Zealand.

Purpose: Real-world data on maintenance treatment and prescription patterns provide insights into healthcare management among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which benefits our understanding of current COPD treatment patterns in New Zealand. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed real-world data from the HealthStat general practice database to evaluate treatment patterns among patients with COPD in New Zealand who initiated multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT): inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) + long-acting muscarinic antagonist + long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA). Our main objective described treatment patterns (class, duration, modification, persistence, and adherence) and characteristics of patients with COPD initiating MITT between 1 May 2016 and 30 April 2017, with 12-months' follow-up. We also assessed the number of patients receiving MITT between 2015 and 2017, among a larger patient population receiving long-acting bronchodilator and ICS-containing therapies. Results: Of 6249 eligible patients, 421 (mean age 67.3 years; mean number exacerbations at baseline 1.8) initiated MITT: 59.1% received combination ICS/LABA therapy prior to MITT initiation, and median treatment duration prior to MITT initiation was 350 days. Overall, 33.5% of patients remained on index treatment for 12 months. Of the remaining patients who modified treatment (on average at 144.4 days), those who had a direct switch (24.9%) or retreatment (13.5%) remained on MITT, 19.7% of patients stepped down to mono/dual therapy, and 8.3% discontinued treatment. Mean (standard deviation) persistence to any MITT over 12 months was 47.3 (50.0), and 53.4% of patients were considered adherent to MITT. Total proportions of patients receiving long-acting bronchodilator therapy and MITT increased between 2015 and 2017. Conclusion: Most patients with COPD in New Zealand who initiated MITT had characteristics appropriate for triple therapy prescription, suggesting prescription behavior among general practitioners was largely consistent with treatment guidelines. Our findings may help optimize treatment decisions, with a focus on improving long-term triple therapy persistence and adherence.

Long-Acting Bronchodilator Use in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Primary Care in New Zealand: A Retrospective Study of Treatment Patterns and Evolution Using the HealthStat Database.

PURPOSE: Long-acting bronchodilator (LABD) use is the mainstay of pharmacologic treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Few studies describe evolving patterns of LABD use in the setting of changing inhaler availability and updated clinical guidelines. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study in New Zealand using the HealthStat general practice database (01/2014 to 04/2018). Eligible patients (aged ≥40 years) had COPD and ≥1 LABD prescription (long-acting muscarinic antagonist [LAMA] and/or long-acting ß2-agonist [LABA]) during the index period (05/2015 to 04/2016). Demographics and clinical characteristics of all LABD users (overall/by treatment) were described at baseline. Patients starting LABD treatment during the index period, termed "new" users, were also described, as was their treatment evolution over 24 months of follow-up. Yearly LABD initiation rates were assessed from 2015 to 2017, covering changes to Pharmaceutical Management Agency criteria and clinical guidelines. RESULTS: Across 2140 eligible patients, the most common index treatments were inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA (59.0%) and open triple therapy (LAMA+LABA+ICS; 26.7%). ICS/LABA therapy was highest in younger patients, with open triple therapy highest in older patients. Prior yearly exacerbation rates were lowest in those receiving monotherapy (LABA: 0.9/year; LAMA: 1.1/year) versus dual therapy (all 1.4/year) and open triple therapy (2.2/year). Of 312 new LABD users, ICS/LABA was the most common index treatment (69.6%), followed by LAMA monotherapy (16.0%). Continuous use with index treatment was 31.1% at 12 months and 13.5% at 24 months; mean time to treatment change was 175.5 and 244.1 days, respectively. Among patients modifying treatment at 24 months, 23.0% augmented, 7.0% switched, 45.6% re-started, and 24.4% discontinued/stepped down. Among patients initiating LABD each year from 2015 to 2017, LAMA prescription increased (17% to 46%) while ICS prescription remained stable (approximately 20%). CONCLUSION: Predominant use of ICS/LABA (05/2015 to 04/2016) reflects available LABDs and previous restrictions on LAMA use in New Zealand.