Search

Pulmonary nodules are managed on the basis of their size and morphologic characteristics. Radiologists are familiar with assessing nodule size by measuring diameter using manually deployed electronic calipers. Size may also be assessed with 3D volumetric measurements (referred to as volumetry) obtained with software. Nodule size and growth are more accurately assessed with volumetry than on the basis of diameter, and the evidence supporting clinical use of volumetry has expanded, driven by its use in lung cancer screening nodule management algorithms in Europe. The application of volumetry has the potential to reduce recommendations for imaging follow-up of indeterminate solid nodules without impacting cancer detection. Although changes in scanning conditions and volumetry software packages can lead to variation in volumetry results, ongoing technical advances have improved the reliability of calculated volumes. Volumetry is now the primary method for determining size of solid nodules in the European lung cancer screening position statement and British Thoracic Society recommendations. The purposes of this article are to review technical aspects, advantages, and limitations of volumetry and, by considering specific scenarios, to contextualize the use of volumetry with respect to its importance in morphologic evaluation, its role in predicting malignancy in risk models, and its practical impact on nodule management. Implementation challenges and areas requiring further evidence are also highlighted.

Low-Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer can result in several potential outcomes of varying significance. Communication methods used in Lung Cancer Screening (LCS) programmes must, therefore, ensure that participants are prepared for the range of possible results and follow-up. Here, we assess perceptions of a written preparatory information booklet provided to participants in a large LCS cohort designed to convey this information.All participants in the SUMMIT Study (NCT03934866) were provided with a results preparation information booklet, entitled 'The SUMMIT Study: Next Steps' at their baseline appointment which outlined potential results, their significance, and timelines for follow up. Results from the LDCT scan and Lung Health Check were subsequently sent by letter. Perceptions of this booklet were assessed among participants with indeterminate pulmonary findings when they attended a face-to-face appointment immediately before their three-month interval scan. Specifically, questions assessed the perceived usefulness of the booklet and the amount of information contained in it.70.1% (n = 1,412/2,014) participants remembered receiving the booklet at their appointment. Of these participants, 72.0% (n = 1,017/1,412) found it quite or very useful and 68.0% (n = 960/1,412) reported that it contained the right amount of information. Older participants, those from the least deprived socioeconomic quintile and those of Black ethnicity were less likely to report finding the booklet either quite or very useful, or that it contained the right amount of information. Participants who remembered receiving the booklet were more likely to be satisfied with the process of results communication by letter.Providing written information that prepares participants for possible LDCT results and their significance appears to be a useful resource and a helpful adjunct to a written method of results communication for large scale LCS programmes.

Lung cancer screening (LCS) eligibility is largely determined by tobacco consumption. Primary care smoking data could guide LCS invitation and eligibility assessment. We present observational data from the SUMMIT Study, where individual self-reported smoking status was concordant with primary care records in 75.3%. However, 10.3% demonstrated inconsistencies between historic and most recent smoking status documentation. Quantified tobacco consumption was frequently missing, precluding direct LCS eligibility assessment. Primary care recorded "ever-smoker" status, encompassing both recent and historic documentation, can be used to target LCS invitation. Identifying those with missing or erroneous "never-smoker" smoking status is crucial for equitable invitation to LCS.

BackgroundIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) with co-existent emphysema, termed combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) may be associated with reduced FVC decline compared to non-CPFE IPF patients. We examined associations between mortality and functional measures of disease progression in two IPF cohorts.MethodsVisual emphysema extent (CPFE:non-CPFE: derivation cohort=317:183; replication cohort=358:152), scored on computed tomography imaging subgrouped CPFE patients using either a) 10%, or b) 15% visual emphysema threshold, or c) an unsupervised machine learning model considering emphysema and ILD extents. Baseline characteristics, 1-year forced vital capacity (FVC) and diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLco) decline (linear mixed effects models), and their associations with mortality (multivariable Cox regression models) were compared across CPFE and non-CPFE subgroups.ResultsIn both IPF cohorts, CPFE patients with >10% emphysema had a greater smoking history and lower baseline DLco compared to CPFE patients with 10% emphysema, 1-year DLco decline was a better indicator of mortality than 1-year FVC decline. Results were maintained in patients suitable for therapeutic IPF trials.Results were replicated in the >15% emphysema population and using unsupervised machine learning. Importantly, the unsupervised machine learning approach identified CPFE patients in whom FVC decline did not associate strongly with mortality. In non-CPFE IPF patients, 1-year FVC declines >5% and >10% showed comparable mortality associations.ConclusionWhen assessing disease progression in IPF, DLco decline should be considered in patients with >10% emphysema and a >5% 1-year FVC decline threshold considered in non-CPFE IPF patients.

RationalePersistent pulmonary sequelae are evident in many survivors of acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but the molecular mechanisms responsible are incompletely understood. Post-COVID radiological lung abnormalities comprise two broad categories, organising pneumonia and reticulation, interpreted as indicative of subacute inflammation and fibrosis, respectively. Whether these two patterns represent distinct pathologies, likely to require different treatment strategies is not known.ObjectivesWe sought to identify differences at molecular and cellular level, in the local immunopathology of post-COVID inflammation and fibrosis.MethodsWe compared single-cell transcriptomic profiles and T cell receptor (TCR) repertoires of bronchoalveolar cells obtained from convalescent individuals with each radiological pattern of post-COVID lung disease (PCLD).Measurements and Main ResultsInflammatory and fibrotic PCLD single-cell transcriptomes closely resembled each other across all cell types. However, CD4 central memory T cells (TCM) and CD8 effector memory T cells (TEM) were significantly more abundant in inflammatory PCLD. A greater proportion of CD4 TCM also exhibited clonal expansion in inflammatory PCLD. High levels of clustering of similar TCRs from multiple donors was a striking feature of both PCLD phenotypes, consistent with tissue localised antigen-specific immune responses, but there was no enrichment for known SARS-CoV-2 reactive TCRs.ConclusionsThere is no evidence that radiographic organising pneumonia and reticulation in PCLD are associated with differential immmunopathological pathways. Inflammatory radiology is characterised by greater bronchoalveolar T cell accumulation. Both groups show evidence of shared antigen-specific T cell responses, but the antigenic target for these T cells remains to be identified.Scientific knowledge on the subjectThe immune pathogenesis of persistent pulmonary radiological abnormalities following COVID-19 is poorly understood. Whether post-COVID radiological inflammation and fibrosis represent distinct disease entities with different molecular mechanisms of tissue injury is not known.What this study adds to the fieldSingle-cell bronchoalveolar transcriptomes of inflammatory and fibrotic post-COVID lung disease closely resemble each other across all cell types, but CD4 central memory and CD8 effector memory T cells are more abundant in the inflammatory group. Marked T cell receptor clustering, suggestive of antigen-specific responses is evident in both phenotypes. These two radiological patterns likely represent different manifestations of the same disease process, which may benefit from therapies which target T cells.

Objectives Successful lung cancer screening delivery requires sensitive, timely reporting of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scans, placing a demand on radiology resources. Trained non-radiologist readers and computer-assisted detection (CADe) software may offer strategies to optimise the use of radiology resources without loss of sensitivity. This report examines the accuracy of trained reporting radiographers using CADe support to report LDCT scans performed as part of the Lung Screen Uptake Trial (LSUT). Methods In this observational cohort study, two radiographers independently read all LDCT performed within LSUT and reported on the presence of clinically significant nodules and common incidental findings (IFs), including recommendations for management. Reports were compared against a ‘reference standard’ (RS) derived from nodules identified by study radiologists without CADe, plus consensus radiologist review of any additional nodules identified by the radiographers. Results A total of 716 scans were included, 158 of which had one or more clinically significant pulmonary nodules as per our RS. Radiographer sensitivity against the RS was 68–73.7%, with specificity of 92.1–92.7%. Sensitivity for detection of proven cancers diagnosed from the baseline scan was 83.3–100%. The spectrum of IFs exceeded what could reasonably be covered in radiographer training. Conclusion Our findings highlight the complexity of LDCT reporting requirements, including the limitations of CADe and the breadth of IFs. We are unable to recommend CADe-supported radiographers as a sole reader of LDCT scans, but propose potential avenues for further research including initial triage of abnormal LDCT or reporting of follow-up surveillance scans. Key Points • Successful roll-out of mass screening programmes for lung cancer depends on timely, accurate CT scan reporting, placing a demand on existing radiology resources. • This observational cohort study examines the accuracy of trained radiographers using computer-assisted detection (CADe) software to report lung cancer screening CT scans, as a potential means of supporting reporting workflows in LCS programmes. • CADe-supported radiographers were less sensitive than radiologists at identifying clinically significant pulmonary nodules, but had a low false-positive rate and good sensitivity for detection of confirmed cancers.

In this ORION study subgroup analysis, the safety and effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) was evaluated in people from the South Asia region with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) before, during, and after Ramadan, in a real-world setting.The ORION study was a real-world, prospective, observational, non-comparative study conducted across 11 countries. The current subgroup analysis included participants from the South Asia region (India and Pakistan) who fasted during Ramadan. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants experiencing ≥ 1 event of severe and/or symptomatic documented hypoglycemia with self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) ≤ 70 mg/dL during Ramadan. Secondary endpoints analyzed were changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbAThis subgroup analysis included 106 participants from the South Asia region with mean (standard deviation) age of 51.3 (10.9) years and mean number of 29.8 (4.0) fasting days. The number of severe and/or symptomatic documented hypoglycemia events was low in the pre-Ramadan (SMPG ≤ 70 mg/dL: 1 event [0.9%]; SMPG 54 mg/dL: 1 event [0.9%]) and Ramadan periods (SMPG ≤ 70 mg/dL: 1 event [0.9%]; SMPG 54 mg/dL: 0 events), and none in the post-Ramadan period. One participant reported severe hypoglycemia (any time of the day: nocturnal or daytime) throughout the pre-Ramadan period. A reduction in HbAThe real-world data from the ORION study indicate that Gla-300 is effective, with low risk of hypoglycemia, for the management of T2DM during Ramadan in the South Asian population.CTRI/2019/02/017636.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide. The absence of symptoms in early-stage (I/II) disease, when curative treatment is possible, results in >70% of cases being diagnosed at late stage (III/IV), when treatment is rarely curative. This contributes greatly to the poor prognosis of lung cancer, which sees only 16.2% of individuals diagnosed with the disease alive at 5 years. Early detection is key to improving lung cancer survival outcomes. As a result, there has been longstanding interest in finding a reliable screening test. After little success with chest radiography and sputum cytology, in 2011 the United States National Lung Screening Trial demonstrated that annual low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening reduced lung cancer-specific mortality by 20%, when compared with annual chest radiography. In 2020, the NELSON study demonstrated an even greater reduction in lung cancer-specific mortality for LDCT screening at 0, 1, 3 and 5.5 years of 24% in men, when compared to no screening. Despite these impressive results, a call to arms in the 2017 European position statement on lung cancer screening (LCS) and the widespread introduction across the United States, there was, until recently, no population-based European national screening programme in place. We address the potential barriers and outstanding concerns including common screening foes, such as false-positive tests, overdiagnosis and the negative psychological impact of screening, as well as others more unique to LDCT LCS, including appropriate risk stratification of potential participants, radiation exposure and incidental findings. In doing this, we conclude that whilst the evidence generated from ongoing work can be used to refine the screening process, for those risks which remain, appropriate and acceptable mitigations are available, and none should serve as barriers to the implementation of national unified LCS programmes across Europe and beyond.

Non-nodular incidental lung findings can broadly be categorised as airway- or airspace-related abnormalities and diffuse parenchymal abnormalities. Airway-related abnormalities include bronchial dilatation and thickening, foci of low attenuation, emphysema, and congenital variants. Diffuse parenchymal abnormalities relate to the spectrum of diffuse parenchymal lung diseases cover a spectrum from interstitial lung abnormalities (ILAs) and pulmonary cysts to established diffuse parenchymal lung abnormalities such as the idiopathic interstitial pneumonias and cystic lung diseases. In this review, we discuss the main manifestations of these incidental findings, paying attention to their prevalence and importance, descriptors to use when reporting, the limits of what can be considered “normal”, and conclude each section with some pragmatic reporting recommendations. We also highlight technical and patient factors which can lead to spurious abnormalities.

To further define the epilepsy phenotype in a cohort of children with 15q13.3 microdeletion syndrome.We retrospectively reviewed the phenotypic spectrum of all children aged18 years with epilepsy and 15q13.3 microdeletion syndrome.Thirteen children were included, 69% were female. The median age of children in the cohort was 12 years (age range: 3 years-15 years). Median age at seizure onset was 4 years. Eleven children (85%) had intellectual disability. Nine of 13 children (69%) had a history of typical absence seizures with median age of onset at 5 years (2 had absence status epilepticus). Thirty-one percent (4/13) had focal with impaired awareness non-motor onset seizures. ILAE recognized absence epilepsy syndromes were diagnosed in 6/13 (46%). The remainder were classified as having genetic generalized epilepsies with overlap clinical features, combined or focal epilepsies. Electroencephalogram in the cohort showed generalized (85%) and focal epileptiform discharges (62%) and posterior dominant rhythm slowing (33%). One child had electrical status epilepticus of sleep. Neuroimaging was performed in 5 children (38%) and revealed abnormal findings in 3. Seizures were drug resistant in a third of the cohort. Valproate resulted in seizure freedom in 5 (42%). Oxcarbazepine caused clinical worsening in one child with combined seizure types. Two children tried cannabidiol and one tried the ketogenic diet; neither was effective.The epilepsy phenotype in children with 15q13.3 microdeletion syndrome is defined by childhood onset absence seizures, and may have atypical features such as, early onset absences, persistence into adolescence, status epilepticus, intellectual disability and treatment resistance. Focal seizures and focal EEG findings may be observed and should be treated cautiously, given the possibility of combined seizure types. Valproate appeared effective, although other treatments must be explored further.

In patients with IPF, this study aimed (i) to examine the relationship between serial change in CT parameters of lung volume and lung function, (ii) to identify the prognostic value of serial change in CT parameters of lung volume, and (iii) to define a threshold for serial change in CT markers of lung volume that optimally captures disease progression. Serial CTs were analysed for progressive volume loss or fibrosis progression in 81 IPF patients (66 males, median age = 67 years) with concurrent forced vital capacity (FVC) (median follow-up 12 months, range 6–23 months). Serial CT measurements of volume loss comprised oblique fissure posterior retraction distance (OFPRD), aortosternal distance (ASD), lung height corrected for body habitus (LH), and automated CT-derived total lung volumes (ALV) (measured using commercially available software). Fibrosis progression was scored visually. Serial changes in CT markers and FVC were compared using regression analysis, and evaluated against mortality using Cox proportional hazards. There were 58 deaths (72%, median survival = 17 months). Annual % change in ALV was most significantly related to annual % change in FVC (R2 = 0.26, p

Objectives: To investigate the extent to which observer variability of computed tomography (CT) lung nodule assessment may affect clinical treatment stratification in Wilms tumour (WT) patients, according to the recent Société Internationale d'Oncologie Pédiatrique Renal Tumour Study Group (SIOP-RTSG) UMBRELLA protocol. Methods: I: CT thoraces of children with WT submitted for central review were used to estimate size distribution of lung metastases. II: Scans were selected for blinded review by five radiologists to determine intra- and inter-observer variability. They assessed identical scans on two occasions 6 months apart. III: Monte Carlo simulation (MCMC) was used to predict the clinical impact of observer variation when applying the UMBRELLA protocol size criteria. Results: Lung nodules were found in 84 out of 360 (23%) children with WT. For 21 identified lung nodules, inter-observer limits of agreement (LOA) for the five readers were ±2.4 and ±1.4 mm (AP diameter), ±1.9 and ±1.8 mm (TS diameter) and ±2.0 and ±2.4 mm (LS diameter) at assessments 1 and 2. Intra-observer LOA across the three dimensions were ±1.5, ±2.2, ±3.5, ±3.1 and ±2.6 mm (readers 1–5). MCMC demonstrated that 17% of the patients with a ‘true’ nodule size of ≥3 mm will be scored as

Pulmonary nodules are managed based on their size and morphologic characteristics. Radiologists are familiar with assessing nodule size by diameter measured using manually deployed electronic calipers. Size may also be assessed by 3D volumetric measurements (referred to as volumetry) using software. Nodule size and growth are more accurately assessed by volumetry than by diameter, and the evidence supporting clinical use of volumetry has expanded, driven by its use in lung cancer screening (LCS) nodule management algorithms in Europe. The application of volumetry has the potential to reduce recommendations for imaging follow-up of indeterminate solid nodules without impacting cancer detection. Although changes in scanning conditions or volumetry software package may lead to variation in volumetry results, ongoing technical advances have improved the reliability of calculated volumes. Volumetry is now the primary method for determining size of solid nodules in the European LCS position statement and British Thoracic Society recommendations. In this article, we review technical aspects, advantages, and limitations of volumetry, and contextualize its use with respect to its importance relative to morphologic evaluation, role for predicting malignancy in risk models, and practical impact on nodule management, by considering specific scenarios. Implementation challenges and areas requiring further evidence are also highlighted.

Bispectral Index (BIS) is used to monitor anesthetic depth and is a useful instrument to keep a check on intraoperative awareness. But there are various situations in which it shows false readings. Our aim of the study was to observe the changes in BIS value with steep Trendelenburg position, which is usually done, in robotic pelvic surgeries.We included 100 patients in our study who underwent robotic prostatectomies and hysterectomies. After anesthetizing the patient, the patient's heart rate, systolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, end-tidal desflurane, end-tidal COWe found a significant increase in BIS values (p0.05) after the change of position from supine to steep Trendelenburg. Heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure were almost constant.Our study concluded that the BIS value increases when patients were shifted from the supine to Trendelenburg position, which might raise the concern of a decrease in anesthetic depth.

The optimal management of small but growing nodules remains unclear. The SUMMIT study nodule management algorithm uses a specific threshold volume of 200 mm

Glycemic change from baseline to 2-years was examined during the second year of LANDMARC, a 3-year prospective observational study (CTRI/2017/05/008452) , which included participants with T2D taking ≥2 antihyperglycemic medications (with/without glycemic control) . Out of 6234 evaluable participants (mean baseline values - age: 52.1 years, T2D duration: 8.59 years and A1C: 8.05%) , 5318 completed 2-year follow-up visit. All glycemic parameters improved significantly (p In conclusion, although there was a marked improvement in all the glycemic parameters from baseline, a large majority of the participants remained uncontrolled. This emphasizes the need for optimizing diabetes management in India. Disclosure S. Joshi: Advisory Panel; Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diabetes Care. Consultant; Biocon, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, USV Private Limited. A.K. Das: Advisory Panel; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. K. Kumar: None. A. Mithal: Advisory Panel; Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Consultant; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott Diabetes, AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. S. Kalra: Speaker's Bureau; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. A. Unnikrishnan: Advisory Panel; Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Sanofi. Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk, Serdia Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt. Ltd., Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. H. Thacker: None. B. Sethi: None. S. Chowdhury: None. A. Nair: None. S. Mohanasundaram: Employee; Sanofi. V. Salvi: Employee; Sanofi. D. Chodankar: Employee; Sanofi. C. Trivedi: None. S. Wangnoo: None. A.H. Zargar: Advisory Panel; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk, USV Private Limited. N. Rais: None. Funding Sanofi, India

Macrovascular and microvascular complications were evaluated during the first 2 years of LANDMARC, a 3-year prospective observational study (CTRI/2017/05/008452) that included participants with T2D on ≥2 antihyperglycemic medications. Out of 6234 evaluable participants (mean baseline values - age: 52.1 years, T2D duration: 8.59 years and A1C: 8.05%) , 5318 participants completed the 2-year follow-up. The mean A1C decreased by 0.58% (baseline: 8.05%) in 2 years. The microvascular complications were frequent in 17.6% participants (1096/6234) ; while the incidence of macrovascular complications was 1.1% participants (66/6234) . Neuropathy was the most commonly reported complication (baseline: 11.8% and 2-years: 14.4%) . Overall, complications were more common in participants with BMI ≥23 kg/m2, A1C ≥7% or having CV risk factors (Table) . A total of 41 deaths were reported; of which 30 deaths were attributed to CV causes (sudden death [n=19], myocardial infarction [n=9], stroke [n=1], and coronary artery procedure [n=1]) . The 2-year results indicate more complications among those who were overweight, or with suboptimal glycemic control or having CV risk factors. Neuropathy was the predominant T2D complication. These results offer insights into disease progression and suggest the need for controlling risk factors and timely treatment adjustment in participants with T2D. Disclosure N. Rais: None. A.K. Das: Advisory Panel; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. S. Joshi: Advisory Panel; Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diabetes Care. Consultant; Biocon, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, USV Private Limited. A. Mithal: Advisory Panel; Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Consultant; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott Diabetes, AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. S. Kalra: Speaker's Bureau; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. A. Unnikrishnan: Advisory Panel; Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Sanofi. Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk, Serdia Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt. Ltd., Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. H. Thacker: None. B. Sethi: None. S. Chowdhury: None. A. Nair: None. S. Mohanasundaram: Employee; Sanofi. V. Salvi: Employee; Sanofi. D. Chodankar: Employee; Sanofi. C. Trivedi: None. S. Wangnoo: None. A.H. Zargar: Advisory Panel; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk, USV Private Limited. K. Kumar: None. Funding Sanofi, India

Therapy patterns were examined across various subgroups during the second year of LANDMARC, a 3-year prospective observational study (CTRI/2017/05/008452) that included participants with T2D on ≥2 antihyperglycemic medications. Of 6234 evaluable participants (mean baseline values - age: 52.1 years, T2D duration: 8.59 years and A1C: 8.05%) , 5318 completed 2-year follow-up visit. Therapeutic management was at the discretion of the treating physician. At the end of the second year, the proportion of participants taking insulin + OAD increased (baseline: 24.0%; 2-years: 33.3%) ; while those taking only OADs decreased (baseline: 74.4%; 2-years: 64.8%) . Among injectable glucose-lowering drugs, there was an increase in basal, prandial and premix insulin. Biguanides and sulfonylureas were the most commonly used OAD classes, the highest increase in OAD addition was seen for DPP4 inhibitors (baseline: 3049/6234, 48.9%; 2-years: 3526/5763, 61.2%) followed by SGLT2 inhibitors (baseline: 654/6234, 10.5%; 2-years: 1227/5763, 21.3%) . Overall, glycemic parameters improved in insulin vs. insulin naïve subgroup (p3 OAD subgroup. No difference in change of glycemic parameters was noted in those on basal vs. premix insulin (Table) . Overall, 2-year data indicate that timely initiation of insulin may play an important role in improving glycemic parameters. Disclosure H. Thacker: None. A.K. Das: Advisory Panel; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. S. Joshi: Advisory Panel; Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diabetes Care. Consultant; Biocon, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, USV Private Limited. A. Mithal: Advisory Panel; Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Consultant; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott Diabetes, AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. S. Kalra: Speaker's Bureau; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. A. Unnikrishnan: Advisory Panel; Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Sanofi. Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk, Serdia Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt. Ltd., Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. K. Kumar: None. B. Sethi: None. S. Chowdhury: None. A. Nair: None. S. Mohanasundaram: Employee; Sanofi. V. Salvi: Employee; Sanofi. D. Chodankar: Employee; Sanofi. C. Trivedi: None. S. Wangnoo: None. A.H. Zargar: Advisory Panel; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk, USV Private Limited. N. Rais: None. Funding Sanofi, India

There are few studies on type 2 diabetes complications from Indian metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities. Macrovascular and microvascular complications during the second year of LANDMARC, a 3-year nationwide prospective observational study (CTRI/2017/05/008452) , were evaluated in participants from metropolitan versus non-metropolitan cities. LANDMARC included participants with T2D who were on ≥2 antihyperglycemic medications. Of the total 6234 participants, 2376 and 3858 were from metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities, respectively. Age, T2D duration, and baseline A1C were similar across groups. Microvascular complications were significantly higher in participants from non-metropolitan than metropolitan cities (12.93% vs. 4.65%; p Disclosure S. Kalra: Speaker's Bureau; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. A.K. Das: Advisory Panel; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. S. Joshi: Advisory Panel; Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diabetes Care. Consultant; Biocon, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, USV Private Limited. A. Mithal: Advisory Panel; Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Consultant; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott Diabetes, AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. K. Kumar: None. A. Unnikrishnan: Advisory Panel; Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Sanofi. Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk, Serdia Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt. Ltd., Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. H. Thacker: None. B. Sethi: None. S. Chowdhury: None. A. Nair: None. S. Mohanasundaram: Employee; Sanofi. V. Salvi: Employee; Sanofi. D. Chodankar: Employee; Sanofi. C. Trivedi: None. S. Wangnoo: None. A.H. Zargar: Advisory Panel; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk, USV Private Limited. N. Rais: None. Funding Sanofi, India

Glycemic trends of T2D from metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities of India have been less studied and hence, were evaluated during the second year of LANDMARC trial (a 3-year nationwide prospective observational study; CTRI/2017/05/008452) . A total of 5318 of 6234 evaluable participants with T2D taking ≥2 antihyperglycemic medications (with/without glycemic control) completed 2-year follow-up visit. The age, T2D duration, baseline A1C were comparable across participants from metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities. At 2-year, a decrease in all glycemic parameters was noted. There was a noticeable improvement in A1C levels from baseline in participants from metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities (mean [95% CI]: −0.5% [−0.6, −0.4] and −0.7% [−0.8, −0.6]; p=0.0450, respectively) . Almost, one-third of the participants in metropolitan (491/16[30.6%]) and non-metropolitan (806/2280 [35.4%]) cities achieved glycemic control (A1C Disclosure A. Unnikrishnan: Advisory Panel; Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Sanofi. Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk, Serdia Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt. Ltd., Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. A.K. Das: Advisory Panel; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. S. Joshi: Advisory Panel; Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diabetes Care. Consultant; Biocon, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, USV Private Limited. A. Mithal: Advisory Panel; Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Consultant; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., USV Private Limited. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott Diabetes, AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. S. Kalra: Speaker's Bureau; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. K. Kumar: None. H. Thacker: None. B. Sethi: None. S. Chowdhury: None. A. Nair: None. S. Mohanasundaram: Employee; Sanofi. V. Salvi: Employee; Sanofi. D. Chodankar: Employee; Sanofi. C. Trivedi: None. S. Wangnoo: None. A.H. Zargar: Advisory Panel; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; AstraZeneca, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk, USV Private Limited. N. Rais: None. Funding Sanofi, India

Delivering lung cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant and ongoing challenges. There is a lack of published COVID-19 and lung cancer evidence-based reviews, including for the whole patient pathway. We searched for COVID-19 and lung cancer publications and brought together a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to review and comment on the evidence and challenges. A rapid review of the literature was undertaken up to 28 October 2020, producing 144 papers, with 113 full texts screened. We focused on new primary data collection (qualitative or quantitative evidence) and excluded case reports, editorials and commentaries. Following exclusions, 15 published papers were included in the review and are summarised. They included one qualitative paper and 14 quantitative studies (surveys or cohort studies), with a total of 2295 lung cancer patients data included (mean study size 153 patients; range 7–803). Review of current evidence and commentary included awareness and help-seeking; lung cancer screening; primary care assessment and referral; diagnosis and treatment in secondary care, including oncology and surgery; patient experience and palliative care. Cross-cutting themes and challenges were identified using qualitative methods for patients, healthcare professionals and service delivery, with a clear need for continued studies to guide evidence-based decision-making.

Early detection and diagnosis of coronary artery disease could reduce the risk of developing a heart attack. The coronary arteries are optimally visualised using computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) imaging. These images are reviewed by specialist radiologists who evaluate the coronary arteries for potential narrowing. A lack of radiologists in the UK is a constraint to timely diagnosis of coronary artery disease, particularly in the acute accident and emergency department setting. The development of automated methods by which coronary artery narrowing can be identified rapidly and accurately are therefore timely. Such complex computer based tools also need to be sufficiently computationally efficient that they can run on servers typically found in hospital settings, where graphical processing units for example are unavailable. We propose a fully automatic two-dimensional Unet model to segment the aorta and coronary arteries on CTCA images. Two models are trained to segment two regions of interest, (1) the aorta and the coronary arteries or (2) the coronary arteries alone. Our method achieves 91.20% and 88.80% dice similarity coefficient accuracy on regions of interest 1 and 2 respectively. Compared with a semi-automatic segmentation method, our model performs better when segmenting the coronary arteries alone. The performance of the proposed method is comparable to existing published two-dimensional or three-dimensional deep learning models. Importantly, the algorithmic and graphical processing unit memory efficiencies are maintained such that the model can be deployed without requiring graphical processing units, and therefore can be used in a hospital setting.