Search

Case Presentation A 62-year-old nonsmoking woman with no medical history initially presented with a 3-month history of rash. A painful, erythematous exanthem had progressed from her forehead, cheeks, and upper chest to her eyes (heliotrope rash) and hands, primarily involving the extensor surface finger joints with prominent digital ulceration.

Lung cancer screening is slowly but steadily entering the realm of preventive health maintenance. Standardization of reporting of positive findings identified on screening low-dose CT (LDCT) scans, specifically lung nodules, is a key element of high-quality lung cancer screening. The American College of Radiology developed the Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) system for this purpose. In addition to detailed categorization of lung nodules, Lung-RADS identifies category S for other incidental findings identified on screening LDCT scans. In contrast to the highly structured reporting for nodules, category S findings are reported at the discretion of individual readers, with the potential for high variability of reporting. Incidental findings on lung cancer screening studies are common, may trigger unwarranted evaluation with potential harm and cost, and may precipitate patient distress. In response to these concerns, our multidisciplinary lung cancer screening program developed a structured system for standardized reporting of category S findings based on recommendations of the American College of Radiology and relevant specialty societies.

In 2013, the United States Preventive Services Taskforce instituted recommendations for annual lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose chest CT imaging for high-risk individuals. LCS reduces lung cancer mortality, with greater reduction observed in Black participants in clinical trials. Although racial disparities in lung cancer mortality have been well documented, less is known about disparities in LCS participation and adherence to follow-up in clinical practice.What is the association between race and adherence to LCS follow-up?A systematic review was conducted through a search of published studies in MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Database from database inception through October 2020. We included studies that examined rates of adherence to LCS follow-up and compared rates by race. Studies were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.We screened 18,300 titles and abstracts, and 229 studies were selected for full-text review. Nine studies met inclusion criteria; seven were included in the meta-analysis. Median adherent follow-up rate was 37% (range, 16%-82%). Notable differences among the studies included the proportion of the Black population (range, 4%-47%) and the structure of the LCS programs. The meta-analyses showed lower adherence to LCS follow-up in the Black population (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.55-0.80). This disparity persisted across all malignancy risk levels determined by initial screening results.Lower adherence to LCS follow-up in Black compared with White patients occurs despite the higher potential lung cancer mortality benefit. Literature specifically addressing race-related barriers to LCS adherence remains limited. To ensure equity in LCS benefits, greater outreach to eligible Black patients should be implemented through increased physician education and use of screening program coordinators to focus on this patient population.PROSPERO; No.: CRD42020214213; URL: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO.

The new lung cancer stage classification system is the culmination of 10 years of work and an unprecedented analysis and validation process. This article reviews details of the rules governing how to implement the system and discusses areas in which ambiguities and difficulties exist.

Correctly staging lung cancer is extremely important because the treatment options and the prognosis differ significantly by stage. Several noninvasive imaging studies are available to aid in identifying disease both within and outside of the chest. Chest CT scanning is useful in providing anatomic detail that better identifies the location of the tumor, its proximity to local structures, and whether or not lymph nodes in the mediastinum are enlarged. Unfortunately, the accuracy of chest CT scanning in differentiating benign from malignant lymph nodes in the mediastinum is unacceptably low. Whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) scanning provides functional information on tissue activity and has much better sensitivity and specificity than chest CT scanning for staging lung cancer in the mediastinum. In addition, metastatic disease can be detected by PET scan. Still, positive findings of PET scans can occur from nonmalignant etiologies (eg, infections), so that tissue sampling to confirm the suspected malignancy must be performed. The clinical evaluation tool, which is composed of a thorough history and physical examination, remains the best predictor of metastatic disease. If the findings from the clinical evaluation are negative, then imaging studies such as a CT scan of the head, a bone scan, or an abdominal CT scan are unnecessary, and the search for metastatic disease is complete. If signs, symptoms, or findings from the physical examination suggest the presence of malignancy, then sequential imaging, starting with the most appropriate study based on the clues obtained by the clinical evaluation, should be performed. Abnormalities detected by all of the aforementioned imaging studies are not always cancer. Unless overwhelming evidence of metastatic disease is present on an imaging study, in situations in which it will make a difference in treatment, all abnormal scan findings require tissue confirmation of malignancy so that patients are not precluded from having potentially curative surgery.

Correctly staging lung cancer is important because the treatment options and prognosis differ significantly by stage. Several noninvasive imaging studies and invasive tests are available. Understanding the accuracy, advantages, and disadvantages of the available methods for staging non-small cell lung cancer is critical to decision-making.Test accuracies for the available staging studies were updated from the second iteration of the American College of Chest Physicians Lung Cancer Guidelines. Systematic searches of the MEDLINE database were performed up to June 2012 with the inclusion of selected meta-analyses, practice guidelines, and reviews. Study designs and results are summarized in evidence tables.The sensitivity and specificity of CT scanning for identifying mediastinal lymph node metastasis were approximately 55% and 81%, respectively, confirming that CT scanning has limited ability either to rule in or exclude mediastinal metastasis. For PET scanning, estimates of sensitivity and specificity for identifying mediastinal metastasis were approximately 77% and 86%, respectively. These findings demonstrate that PET scanning is more accurate than CT scanning, but tissue biopsy is still required to confirm PET scan findings. The needle techniques endobronchial ultrasound-needle aspiration, endoscopic ultrasound-needle aspiration, and combined endobronchial ultrasound/endoscopic ultrasound-needle aspiration have sensitivities of approximately 89%, 89%, and 91%, respectively. In direct comparison with surgical staging, needle techniques have emerged as the best first diagnostic tools to obtain tissue. Based on randomized controlled trials, PET or PET-CT scanning is recommended for staging and to detect unsuspected metastatic disease and avoid noncurative resections.Since the last iteration of the staging guidelines, PET scanning has assumed a more prominent role both in its use prior to surgery and when evaluating for metastatic disease. Minimally invasive needle techniques to stage the mediastinum have become increasingly accepted and are the tests of first choice to confirm mediastinal disease in accessible lymph node stations. If negative, these needle techniques should be followed by surgical biopsy. All abnormal scans should be confirmed by tissue biopsy (by whatever method is available) to ensure accurate staging. Evidence suggests that more complete staging improves patient outcomes.

The current Lung Cancer Stage Classification system is the seventh edition, which took effect in January 2010. This article reviews the definitions for the TNM descriptors and the stage grouping in this system.

The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) has conducted an extensive initiative to inform the revision of the lung cancer staging system. This involved development of an international database along with extensive analysis of a large population of patients and their prognoses. This article reviews the recommendations of the IASLC International Staging Committee for the definitions for the TNM descriptors and the stage grouping in the new non-small cell lung cancer staging system.

Examining case studies from patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) is important in order to evaluate current diagnosis and treatment options. Two cases will be discussed; the first case examines a patient with usual interstitial pneumonia, and the second case examines a patient with subacute ILD and elements to suggest a forme fruste presentation of an unclassifiable connective tissue disease. Each case highlights components of the differential diagnosis, as well as reviews the treatments and prognoses of these patients. The cases provide clinical pearls that are designed to enhance the reader's understanding of ILDs.

Correctly staging lung cancer is extremely important because the treatment options and the prognosis differ significantly by stage. Several noninvasive imaging studies are available to aid in identifying disease both within and outside of the chest. Chest CT scanning is useful in providing anatomic detail that better identifies the location of the tumor, its proximity to local structures, and whether or not lymph nodes in the mediastinum are enlarged. Unfortunately, the accuracy of chest CT scanning in differentiating benign from malignant lymph nodes in the mediastinum is unacceptably low. Whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) scanning provides functional information on tissue activity and has much better sensitivity and specificity than chest CT scanning for staging lung cancer in the mediastinum. In addition, metastatic disease can be detected by PET scan. Still, positive findings of PET scans can occur from nonmalignant etiologies (eg, infections), so that tissue sampling to confirm the suspected malignancy must be performed. The clinical evaluation tool, which is composed of a thorough history and physical examination, remains the best predictor of metastatic disease. If the findings from the clinical evaluation are negative, then imaging studies such as a CT scan of the head, a bone scan, or an abdominal CT scan are unnecessary, and the search for metastatic disease is complete. If signs, symptoms, or findings from the physical examination suggest the presence of malignancy, then sequential imaging, starting with the most appropriate study based on the clues obtained by the clinical evaluation, should be performed. Abnormalities detected by all of the aforementioned imaging studies are not always cancer. Unless overwhelming evidence of metastatic disease is present on an imaging study, in situations in which it will make a difference in treatment, all abnormal scan findings require tissue confirmation of malignancy so that patients are not precluded from having potentially curative surgery.