Search

Worldwide, lung cancer is the most common killer among cancers, advanced disease has worse outcomes, earlier stage detection leads to better outcomes, and high-quality screening has a favorable net benefit. With the mortality reduction recognized from annual low-radiation dose computed tomography by screening those at high risk, there has been consideration that this benefit could translate to those who have never smoked. There have been several large-scale, single-arm, observational trials in Asia in persons with light to no smoking histories, with or without a family history of lung cancer, which have revealed high or higher lung cancer detection rates than previously reported in high-risk persons who currently or formerly smoked. The Early Detection Program for Lung Cancer in Taiwan, of nearly 50,000 persons, revealed that the cancer detection rate for those screened with low-radiation dose computed tomography was more than twofold higher in light- or never-smokers with a family history of lung cancer compared with high-risk persons with more than 30 or more pack-years exposure and meeting U.S. Preventative Services Task Force criteria for screening. In addition, more than 90% of the cancers detected in those with a family history were in early stage. On the basis of those findings, the researchers concluded that screening first-degree relatives of those with a family history of lung cancer, irrespective of smoking history, would lead to a decrease in lung cancer mortality. We believe that the findings in this cohort and others like it represent substantial overdiagnosis and that the harms associated with screening a population that has a low likelihood of developing lethal cancers have not been thoroughly considered. Here, we provide our perspective and consider the potential benefits and harms of screening populations outside those currently eligible using the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force criteria.

Guided bronchoscopy is increasingly used to diagnose peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs). A meta-analysis published in 2012 demonstrated a pooled diagnostic yield of 70%; however, recent publications have documented yields as low as 40% and as high as 90%.

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality resulting from lung cancer screening (LCS) with an additive reduction from smoking abstinence. However, successful smoking cessation within LCS is variable.

ImportanceCurrent 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).ObjectiveTo examine the relationship between the presence and severity of AL and screening outcomes.MethodsThis 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionDespite a greater risk of LC, severe AL was not associated with any apparent reduction in LC mortality following screening.

Low-dose chest CT screening for lung cancer has become a standard of care in the United States, in large part because of the results of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). Additional evidence supporting the net benefit of low-dose chest CT screening for lung cancer, and increased experience in minimizing the potential harms, has accumulated since the prior iteration of these guidelines. Here, we update the evidence base for the benefit, harms, and implementation of low-dose chest CT screening. We use the updated evidence base to provide recommendations where the evidence allows, and statements based on experience and expert consensus where it does not.

Low-dose chest CT screening for lung cancer has become a standard of care in the United States, in large part because of the results of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). Additional evidence supporting the net benefit of low-dose chest CT screening for lung cancer, and increased experience in minimizing the potential harms, has accumulated since the prior iteration of these guidelines. Here, we update the evidence base for the benefit, harms, and implementation of low-dose chest CT screening. We use the updated evidence base to provide recommendations where the evidence allows, and statements based on experience and expert consensus where it does not.

The initial management of patients with lung cancer is growing more complex in the context of an expanding number of precision medicine treatments. These challenges are accompanied by opportunities to deliver more efficacious and less toxic treatments to patients. Indications for these treatments are also expanding, and patients with lung cancer across multiple stages now require biomarker testing. Given their role in the initial management of patients being diagnosed with lung cancer, pulmonologists must have fundamental knowledge regarding the importance, indications, and implications of biomarker testing across the spectrum of histology and stage. The purpose of this review is to provide fundamental knowledge regarding biomarker testing, its incorporation into the initial diagnostic and staging evaluation, and guidance for working within a multidisciplinary team to achieve timely and comprehensive biomarker testing to direct the use of precision medicine treatments.

Despite advances in precision medicine for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), biomarker testing for these therapies remain frequently underutilized, delayed, and inequitable. Pulmonologists often play a critical role in the initial diagnostic steps for patients with lung cancer and previous data show variability in their knowledge and practices regarding biomarker testing. The purpose of this study is to better understand how pulmonologists’ view their role in lung cancer care.

The diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPL) continues to present clinical challenges. Despite extensive experience with guided bronchoscopy, the diagnostic yield has not improved significantly. Robotic-assisted bronchoscopic platforms have been developed potentially to improve the diagnostic yield for PPL. Presently, limited data exist that evaluate the performance of robotic systems in live human subjects.

Over decades, there have been several alterations to cigarettes, including the addition of filters and flavoring. However, lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States.

Adherence to annual low-dose CT was 95% in the National Lung Screening Trial and must be replicated to achieve mortality benefit from screening.

The risks from potential exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and resource reallocation that has occurred to combat the pandemic, have altered the balance of benefits and harms that informed current (pre-COVID-19) guideline recommendations for lung cancer screening and lung nodule evaluation. Consensus statements were developed to guide clinicians managing lung cancer screening programs and patients with lung nodules during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Bronchoscopy is commonly used to evaluate suspicious lung lesions. The yield is likely dependent on patient, radiographic, and bronchoscopic factors. Few studies have assessed these factors simultaneously while also including the preprocedure physician-assessed probability of cancer (pCA) when assessing yield.

Shared decision-making is an essential element of low-dose CT (LDCT) screening for lung cancer. Understanding patient-level outcomes from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) is critical to effectively communicate risks and benefits of screening to patients.

Screening with low-dose CT scan has been shown to reduce mortality from lung cancer in those at risk based on age and smoking history. While lung cancer screening (LCS) is recommended by the United States Preventative Services Task Force and many professional societies, it has been recognized that the decision to be screened is complex due to a close balance of risk and benefit; therefore, shared decision-making is considered an essential component of effective LCS. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services provides coverage for LCS following a mandated shared-decision making (SDM) visit. Here we review the concept of SDM, facilitators and barriers, evidence and knowledge gaps, and novel considerations for SDM within LCS.

While the complexity of flexible bronchoscopy has increased, standard options for moderate sedation medications have not changed in three decades. There is a need to improve moderate sedation while maintaining safety. Remimazolam was developed to address shortcomings of current sedation strategies.

New technology has resulted in bronchoscopy being increasingly used for diagnosing pulmonary lesions. Reported yield from these procedures varies widely with few randomized clinical trials. This study compares the diagnostic yield of a thin bronchoscope and radial endobronchial ultrasound (R-EBUS) with standard bronchoscopy and fluoroscopy (SB-F) in lung lesions.

Lung nodules are a diagnostic challenge, with an estimated yearly incidence of 1.6 million in the United States. This study evaluated the accuracy of an integrated proteomic classifier in identifying benign nodules in patients with a pretest probability of cancer (pCA) ≤ 50%.

Incorporating tobacco treatment within lung cancer screening programs has the potential to influence cessation in high-risk smokers. We aimed to better understand the characteristics of smokers within a screening cohort, correlate those variables with downstream outcomes, and identify predictors of continued smoking.

Low-dose chest CT screening for lung cancer has become a standard of care in the United States in the past few years, in large part due to the results of the National Lung Screening Trial. The benefit and harms of low-dose chest CT screening differ in both frequency and magnitude. The translation of a favorable balance of benefit and harms into practice can be difficult. Here, we update the evidence base for the benefit, harms, and implementation of low radiation dose chest CT screening. We use the updated evidence base to provide recommendations where the evidence allows, and statements based on experience and expert consensus where it does not.

Lung cancer screening with annual low-dose computed tomography (CT) decreases lung cancer mortality in high-risk patients, as defined by smoking history (> 30 pack-years) and age (55-74 years). Risks to screening include overdiagnosis, anxiety about indeterminate nodules, and radiation exposure. To be effective, lung cancer screening must combine individualized risk assessment, shared decision-making, smoking cessation, structured reporting, high quality and multi-specialty cancer care, and reliable follow-up; a multidisciplinary approach is crucial. Specialty organizations have outlined both the components of high quality lung cancer screening programs and the proposed metrics that programs should track. Long-term outcomes of lung cancer screening in the general population, further refinement of who to screen, and use of biomarkers for early cancer detection are ongoing research questions.

Electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy (ENB) is guided bronchoscopy to pulmonary nodules (PN) that relies on a preprocedural chest CT to create a three-dimensional (3D) virtual airway map. The CT is traditionally done at a full inspiratory breath hold (INSP), but the procedure is performed while the patient tidal breaths, when lung volumes are closer to functional residual capacity. Movement of a PN from INSP to expiration (EXP) has been shown to average 17.6 mm. Therefore, the hypothesis of this study is that preprocedural virtual maps built off a CT closer to physiological lung volumes during bronchoscopy may better represent the actual 3D location of a PN.

Black patients with lung cancer diagnosed at early stages—for which surgical resection offers a potential cure—experience worse overall survival than do their white counterparts. We undertook a population-based study to estimate the racial and ethnic disparity in death from competing causes and assessed its contribution to the gap in overall survival among patients with early-stage lung cancer.

The annual incidence of pulmonary nodules is estimated at 1.57 million. Guidelines recommend using an initial assessment of nodule probability of malignancy (pCA). A previous study found that despite this recommendation, physicians did not follow guidelines.

Interventional pulmonology (IP) is a rapidly evolving subspecialty of pulmonary medicine. In the last 10 years, formal IP fellowships have increased substantially in number from five to now > 30. The vast majority of IP fellowship trainees are selected through the National Resident Matching Program, and validated in-service and certification examinations for IP exist. Practice standards and training guidelines for IP fellowship programs have been published; however, considerable variability in the environment, curriculum, and experience offered by the various fellowship programs remains, and there is currently no formal accreditation process in place to standardize IP fellowship training. Recognizing the need for more uniform training across the various fellowship programs, a multisociety accreditation committee was formed with the intent to establish common accreditation standards for all IP fellowship programs in the United States. This article provides a summary of those standards and can serve as an accreditation template for training programs and their offices of graduate medical education as they move through the accreditation process.

Palliative care (PC) focuses on improving the quality of life and minimizing suffering in patients with chronic, symptomatic, and life-threatening disease. Because of severe and progressive symptoms, coexisting lung disease, anxiety, and depression, lung cancer (LC) patients derive robust benefit from PC. Multiple studies have shown that PC in LC improves quality of life, survival, mental health outcomes, and caregiver satisfaction. Despite proven benefit, PC is very often viewed as a therapy of last resort, and opportunities to reduce suffering are missed. To be most effective, PC should be provided by generalists and specialists, implemented early, involve multidisciplinary teams, and be malleable to the needs of patients and caregivers. This paper reviews the literature to improve the understanding and dissemination of best palliative practices in LC care.

Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT (LDCT) imaging was recommended in 2013, making approximately 8 million Americans eligible for LCS. The demographic characteristics and outcomes of individuals screened in the United States have not been reported at the population level.

Bronchoscopy is often the initial diagnostic procedure performed in patients with pulmonary lesions suggestive of lung cancer. A bronchial genomic classifier was previously validated to identify patients at low risk for lung cancer after an inconclusive bronchoscopy. In this study, we evaluated the potential of the classifier to reduce invasive procedure utilization in patients with suspected lung cancer.