Search

Objective: The main adjuvant therapies for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer include ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and chemotherapy. We aimed to compare differences in the incidence of thromboembolism (TE) among different treatment options., Design: Using a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA)., Data Sources: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and Web of Science databases before 10 June 2023., Eligibility Criteria: We included published randomised controlled trials (RCT) involving comparisons of treatments between chemotherapy and ALK-TKI drugs., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Assessed risk bias with Cochrane tool. Conducted NMA with GEMTC in R, we evaluate the model fit using the deviation information criteria. Estimated posterior distribution using Markov Chain Monte Carlo, 4 chains, 10 fine-tuned iterations, 10 000 iterations per chain, total 50 000 iterations. Monitored potential scale reduction factor for convergence. And checked convergence with Gelman-Rubin statistics and trace plot. Provided surface under the cumulative ranking, lower values indicate less TE event probability., Results: Analysis of eight RCTs showed that, compared with that for crizotinib, there was a lower risk of total TE with chemotherapy (OR, 0.28; 95% credible intervals (CrI) 0.11 to 0.63), brigatinib (OR 0.31; 95% CrI 0.11 to 0.79) and ceritinib (OR 0.13; 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.45). In addition, analysis of venous TE (VTE) showed similar results, with a lower occurrence for chemotherapy (OR 0.27; 95% CrI 0.1 to 0.62), brigatinib (OR 0.18; 95% CrI 0.04 to 0.6) and ceritinib (OR 0.1; 95% CrI 0.02 to 0.43) compared with that for crizotinib. There were no significant differences in the occurrence of arterial TE among the different treatment options., Conclusion: Compared with chemotherapy, alectinib, lorlatinib, brigatinib and ceritinib, crizotinib significantly increased the risk of TE and VTE., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42023373307., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Diagnosing and treating lung cancer in early stages is essential for survival outcomes. The chest X-ray (CXR) remains the primary screening tool to identify lung cancers in the UK; however, there is a shortfall of radiologists, while demand continues to increase. Image analysis by machine-learning software has the potential to support radiology workflows with a focus on immediate triage of suspicious X-rays. The RADICAL study will evaluate Qure.ai's 'qXR' software in reducing reporting time for suspicious X-rays in NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde., Methods and Analysis: This is a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised study consisting of a retrospective technical evaluation and prospective clinical effectiveness study alongside the assessment of acceptability via qualitative work and evaluation of cost-effectiveness via a cost utility analysis. The primary objective is to assess the clinical effectiveness of qXR to prioritise patients suspected with lung cancer on CXR for follow-up CT. Secondary objectives will look at the utility, safety, technical performance, health economics and acceptability of the intervention. The study period is 24 months, consisting of an initial 12 month data collection period and a 12 month follow-up period. All the standard care CXRs from outpatient and primary care requests will be securely transmitted to Qure.ai software 'qXR' for interpretation. Images with features of cancer will be flagged as 'Urgent Suspicion of Cancer' and be prioritised for radiologist review within the existing reporting workflow., Ethics and Dissemination: The study will follow the principles of Good Clinical Practice. The protocol was granted REC approval in August 2023 from North West-Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (REC 23/NW/0211). This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT06044454). An interim report will be produced for use by the Scottish Government. The results from this study will be presented at artificial intelligence, radiology and respiratory meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration Number: NCT06044454., Competing Interests: Competing interests: We note that we have received funding from Qure.ai to support the service implementation; however, the Scottish Government has funded the evaluation by the University of Glasgow. Qure.ai employees are also listed as authors in this study., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: This study evaluates the safety/efficacy of sabatolimab plus spartalizumab in patients with melanoma or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Design, Setting and Participants: This is a phase 1-1b/2, open-label, multinational, multicentre study of patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma or NSCLC with ≥1 measurable lesion., Interventions: Patients were given sabatolimab 800 mg every 4 weeks plus spartalizumab 400 mg every 4 weeks until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression and/or treatment discontinuation., Outcome Measures: The phase 2 primary outcome measure was overall response rate and secondary objectives included evaluation of the safety, tolerability, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of sabatolimab in combination with spartalizumab., Results: 33 patients (melanoma n=16, NSCLC n=17) received sabatolimab plus spartalizumab. 31 (94%) experienced ≥1 adverse event (AE); 15 (46%) experienced grade 3/4 events. The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs for NSCLC were anaemia, dyspnoea and pneumonia (each n=2, 12%); for patients with melanoma, the most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were physical health deterioration, hypokalaemia, hypophosphataemia, pathological fracture and tumour invasion (each n=1; 6%). One (3%) patient discontinued treatment due to AE. Stable disease was seen in three patients with melanoma (19%) and six patients with NSCLC (35%). Median progression-free survival was 1.8 (90% CI 1.7 to 1.9) and 1.7 (90% CI 1.1 to 3.4) months for patients with melanoma and NSCLC, respectively. Patients with stable disease had higher expression levels of CD8, LAG3, programmed death-ligand 1 and anti-T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin-domain containing-3 at baseline. The pharmacokinetics profile of sabatolimab was consistent with the phase 1 study., Conclusions: Sabatolimab plus spartalizumab was well tolerated in patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma or NSCLC who had progressed following antiprogrammed death-1/antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 treatment. Limited antitumour activity was observed. The tolerability of sabatolimab administration supports the potential to explore treatment with sabatolimab in various combination regimens and across a spectrum of tumour types., Trial Registration Number: NCT02608268., Competing Interests: Competing interests: NM is the founder of and owns shares in MaxiVAX SA and is the CSO at MaxiVAX. C-CL reports an advisory role for AbbVie, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis and PharmaEngine; honoraria from Lilly, Novartis and Roche; and travel support from BeiGene, Daiichi Sankyo and Lilly. GC reports research funding from Merck and fees for advisory board from BMS, Merck, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Exact Science, Daiichi Sankyo, GSK, Sanofi and Seagen. AS reports serving on an advisory board for BMS, Servier, Gilead, Pfizer, Eisai, Bayer and MSD (Merck Sharp & Dohme); consultancy for Arqule, Sanofi and Incyte; and participating in speaker’s bureaus for Takeda, BMS, Roche, AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Servier, Gilead, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Arqule, Lilly, Sandoz, Eisai, Novartis, Bayer and MSD. D-WK reports research funding to his institution from Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Hanmi, Janssen, Merus, Mirati Therapeutics, MSD, Novartis, ONO Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, TP Therapeutics, Xcovery, Yuhan, Chong Keun Dang, Bridge BioTherapeutics, and GSK; and travel and accommodation support for advisory board meeting attendance from Amgen and Daiichi-Sankyo. DT reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker’s bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Ipsen, Eisai and BMS; and consulting fees from Novartis, BMS and MSD. FSH reports receiving personal fees for serving on an advisory board for Surface, Compass Therapeutics, Apricity, Pionyr, 7 Hills Pharma, Torque, Bicara, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Bioentre, Iovance, Trillium, Amgen and Rheos; consultancy for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, EMD Serono, Novartis, Sanofi, Pieris, Genentech/Roche, Catalym, Immunocore, Kairos, Eisai and Zumutor; serving as an advisor consultant for Aduro; and receiving other personal fees from Gossamer. FSH reports receiving grant support to institution from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Novartis; and having equity in Apricity, Pionyr, Torque, Bicara and Checkpoint Therapeutics. FSH holds issued patents #7250291, #9402905, #10279021 and #10106611 and pending patents #20100111973 (with royalties), #20170248603, #20160340407, #20160046716, #20140004112, #20170022275, #20170008962 and #20170343552, as well as a pending patent for Methods of Using Pembrolizumab and Trebananib. SW reports serving on an advisory board for Eisai, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pierre Fabre (paid to institution). TD reports receiving grant support to institution from Lilly, MSD, Daiichi-Sankyo, Sumitomo Dainippon, Taiho, Novartis, Merck Biopharma, Janssen Pharma, Pfizer, BMS, AbbVie, Eisai, IQVIA, Chugai Pharma; consulting fees from Sumitomo Dainippon, Taiho, Takeda, Chugai Pharma, AbbVie, Bayer, Rakuten Medical, Otsuka Pharma, KAKEN Pharma, KYOWA KIRIN, SHIONOGI, PRA Health Science; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from BMS, Rakuten Medical, Ono Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for MSD, Daiichi-Sankyo, Amgen, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Pharma, AbbVie, Bayer, Astellas Pharma. CS-P was an employee of Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research and holds patents on TIM-3 through Harvard/BWH and CoStim/Novartis. CS-P is employed by and has options in Larkspur Biosciences. SS is an employee of Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research. SC is an NIBR employee and holds NVS stocks. AX has nothing to disclose. SG is an employee of Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research. AP is an employee of Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to explore the evidence regarding shared decision-making (SDM) in the management of pulmonary nodules., Design: Systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies., Data Source: Studies published in English or Chinese up to April 2022 were extracted from nine databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and SinoMed Data., Eligibility Criteria: Studies were eligible if patients or healthcare providers are faced with pulmonary nodule management options or the interventions or experiences were focused on the patient-healthcare provider relationship or health education to make, increase or support shared decisions. All types of studies were included, including quantitative and qualitative studies. Grey literature and literature that had not been peer reviewed were excluded. Poster abstracts and non-empirical publications such as editorials, letters, opinion papers and review articles were excluded., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts, assessed quality using Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tools, and extracted data from included studies. Thematic syntheses were used to identify prominent themes emerging from the data., Results: A total of 12 studies met the inclusion criteria, 11 of which were conducted in USA. These included six qualitative studies and six quantitative studies (including both survey and quasi-experimental designs). Three major themes with specific subthemes emerged: (1) Opportunity (uncertainty in the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary nodules, willingness to participate in decision-making); (2) Ability (patient's lack of knowledge, physician's experience); and (3) Different worldview (misconception, distress among patients, preference for diagnosis and treatment)., Conclusions: Uncertainty in the management of pulmonary nodules is the opportunity to implement SDM. Patients' lack of knowledge, distress, and misunderstandings between healthcare providers and patients are both the main obstacles and the causes of the application of SDM., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death globally. In 2022 the UK National Screening Committee recommended the implementation of a national targeted lung cancer screening programme, aiming to improve early diagnosis and survival rates. Research studies and services internationally consistently observe socioeconomic and smoking-related inequalities in screening uptake. Pathway navigation (PN) is a process through which a trained pathway navigator guides people to overcome barriers to accessing healthcare services, including screening. This nested randomised controlled trial aims to determine whether a PN intervention results in more individuals participating in lung cancer screening compared with the usual written invitation within a previous non-responder population as part of the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST)., Methods and Analysis: A two-arm randomised controlled trial and process evaluation nested within the YLST. Participants aged 55-80 (inclusive) who have not responded to previous postal invitations to screening will be randomised by household to receive PN or usual care (a further postal invitation to contact the screening service for a lung health check) between March 2023 and October 2024. The PN intervention includes a postal appointment notification and prearranged telephone appointment, during which a pathway navigator telephones the participant, following a four-step protocol to introduce the offer and conduct an initial risk assessment. If eligible, participants are invited to book a low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening scan. All pathway navigators receive training from behavioural psychologists on motivational interviewing and communication techniques to elicit barriers to screening attendance and offer solutions., Coprimary Outcomes: The number undergoing initial telephone assessment of lung cancer risk. The number undergoing an LDCT screening scan.Secondary outcomes include demographic, clinical and risk parameters of people undergoing telephone risk assessment; the number of people eligible for screening following telephone risk assessment; the number of screen-detected cancers diagnosed; costs and a mixed-methods process evaluation.Descriptive analyses will be used to present numbers, proportions and quantitative components of the process evaluation. Primary comparisons of differences between groups will be made using logistic regression. Applied thematic analysis will be used to interpret qualitative data within a conceptual framework based on the COM-B framework. A health economic analysis of the PN intervention will also be conducted., Ethics and Dissemination: The study is approved by the Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (18-NW-0012) and the Health Research Authority following the Confidentiality Advisory Group review. Results will be shared through peer-reviewed scientific journals, conference presentations and on the YLST website., Trial Registration Numbers: ISRCTN42704678 and NCT03750110., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PAJC has received consultation fees and shares options from Everest Detection. PAJC is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) gene are a heterogeneous population who often develop brain metastases (BM). The optimal management of patients with asymptomatic brain metastases is unclear given the activity of newer-generation targeted therapies in the central nervous system. We present a protocol for an individual patient data (IPD) prospective meta-analysis to evaluate whether the addition of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) before osimertinib treatment will lead to better control of intracranial metastatic disease. This is a clinically relevant question that will inform practice., Methods: Randomised controlled trials will be eligible if they include participants with BM arising from EGFR- mutant NSCLC and suitable to receive osimertinib both in the first-line and second-line settings (P); comparisons of SRS followed by osimertinib versus osimertinib alone (I, C) and intracranial disease control included as an endpoint (O). Systematic searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL (EBSCO), PsychInfo, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform's Search Portal will be undertaken. An IPD meta-analysis will be performed using methodologies recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. The primary outcome is intracranial progression-free survival, as determined by response assessment in neuro-oncology-BM criteria. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, time to whole brain radiotherapy, quality of life, and adverse events of special interest. Effect differences will be explored among prespecified subgroups., Ethics and Dissemination: Approved by each trial's ethics committee. Results will be relevant to clinicians, researchers, policymakers and patients, and will be disseminated via publications, presentations and media releases., Prospero Registration: CRD42022330532., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SL: research funding and honoraria from AstraZeneca. YYS: honoraria from AstraZeneca and Janssen. AGS: research grants (institution) from Elekta AB, Varian, Seagen and BrainLAB; consulting fees from Varian, Elekta (Gamma Knife Icon), BrainLAB, Merck, Abbvie and Roche; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Elekta AB, Varian, BrainLAB, Accuray and Seagen. MBP: speaker fees from AZ, BMS, MSD and Roche. AN: research grants from Varian Medical Systems. RAS: advisory board with Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lily, Merck, Merck Serono, Novartis, Pfizer, Puma Biotechnology, Roche, Taiho, Takeda, Thermo Fisher and Yuhan Corporation; research grant from Astra-Zeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim. FHJ: clinical trial funding, received honoraria and participated in advisory boards for Astra Zeneca; received payments and honoraria from BeiGene and MSD for lectures and presentations; supported by the Peter Mac Foundation and the Victorian Cancer Agency. BJS: advisory board/honoraria from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, Merck, Bristol Mysers Squibb, Janssen, Amgen and Eli Lilly. IWKT: honorarium from Elekta and MSD. CH: advisory boards with Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, EMD Serono, Janssen, Jazz, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and Takeda; research grants from AstraZeneca, EMD Serono and Roche. CKL: advisory board with Amgen, Astra Zeneca, GSK, Merck KGA, Norvatis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Boehringer-Ingelheim and Yuhan; research funding (institution) from Astra Zeneca, Roche, Merck KGA and Amgen. KPR, AP, MD, DBS, AGS, JT, CNL, WYK, YH, YLEA, JL, CY, MCL and APT have no competing interests. CH, SL, FHJ, CKL, YYS, RAS and IWKT are study chairs on the included trials., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Despite many technological advances, the diagnostic yield of bronchoscopic peripheral lung nodule analysis remains limited due to frequent mispositioning. Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) enables real-time microscopic feedback on needle positioning, potentially improving the sampling location and diagnostic yield. Previous studies have defined and validated nCLE criteria for malignancy, airway and lung parenchyma. Larger studies demonstrating the effect of nCLE on diagnostic yield are lacking. We aim to investigate if nCLE-imaging integrated with conventional bronchoscopy results in a higher diagnostic yield compared with conventional bronchoscopy without nCLE., Methods and Analysis: This is a parallel-group randomised controlled trial. Recruitment is performed at pulmonology outpatient clinics in universities and general hospitals in six different European countries and one hospital in the USA. Consecutive patients with a for malignancy suspected peripheral lung nodule (10-30 mm) with an indication for diagnostic bronchoscopy will be screened, and 208 patients will be included. Web-based randomisation (1:1) between the two procedures will be performed. The primary outcome is diagnostic yield. Secondary outcomes include diagnostic sensitivity for malignancy, needle repositionings, procedure and fluoroscopy duration, and complications. Pathologists will be blinded to procedure type; patients and endoscopists will not., Ethics and Dissemination: Primary approval by the Ethics Committee of the Amsterdam University Medical Center. Dissemination involves publication in a peer-reviewed journal., Support: Financial and material support from Mauna Kea Technologies., Trial Registration Number: NCT06079970., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JTA declares material and financial support to the sponsor’s institution from Mauna Kea Technologies for this study. All Cellvizio equipment needed for the conduct of the study is provided in-kind to participating centers. All other authors declare no other conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has a poor prognosis. Transvascular intervention is an important approach for treating NSCLC. Drug-eluting bead bronchial artery chemoembolisation (DEB-BACE) is a technique of using DEBs loaded with chemotherapeutic drugs for BACE. This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis to comprehensively assess the effectiveness and safety of DEB-BACE in treating NSCLC and investigate a novel therapeutic strategy for NSCLC., Methods and Analysis: Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, Scopus and Embase databases will be searched in November 2024. A meta-analysis will be conducted to assess the effectiveness and safety of DEB-BACE in the treatment of NSCLC. The following keywords will be applied: "Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung", "Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer", "Drug-Eluting Bead Bronchial Arterial Chemoembolization" and "drug-eluting beads". Reports in Chinese or English comparing the efficacy of DEB-BACE with other NSCLC treatment options will be included. Case reports, single-arm studies, conference papers, abstracts without full text and reports published in languages other than English and Chinese will not be considered. The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions will be used to independently assess the risk of bias for each included study. In case of significant heterogeneity between studies, possible sources of heterogeneity will be explored through subgroup and sensitivity analysis. For the statistical analysis of the data, RevMan V.5.3 will be used., Ethics and Dissemination: This meta-analysis will seek publication in a peer-reviewed journal on completion. Ethical approval is not required for this study as it is a database-based study., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42023411392., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Mesothelioma is an aggressive cancer predominantly affecting the lung and abdominal linings. It can have a unique impact on mental health and well-being (MHWB) due to its incurability, poor prognosis and asbestos-exposure causation. This review's aims were to identify/synthesise international evidence on mesothelioma's MHWB impacts; explore MHWB interventions used by patients and carers; and identify evidence of their effectiveness., Design: Systematic review., Data Sources: Databases, searched March 2022 and March 2024, were MEDLINE; CINAHL; PsycINFO; Cochrane Library; ASSIA., Eligibility Criteria: We included study designs focusing on psychological impacts of living with mesothelioma and MHWB interventions used by patients and informal carers, published in English since January 2002., Data Extraction and Synthesis: A team of reviewers screened included studies using standardised methods. Quality was assessed using validated tools: Mixed-Methods Appraisal tool for primary research and Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews., Results: Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria: 20 qualitative, 16 quantitative, nine reviews, two mixed-methods, one combined systematic review/qualitative study. UK studies predominated. Many MHWB impacts were reported, including traumatic stress, depression, anxiety and guilt. These were influenced by mesothelioma's causation, communication issues and carer-patient relational interactions. Participants used wide-ranging MHWB interventions, including religious/spiritual practice; talking to mental-health professionals; meaning-making. Some strategies were presented as unhelpful, for example, denial. Participants reported lack of access to support., Conclusions: Most qualitative studies were rated high quality. The quality of the quantitative studies and reviews varied. The sparse literature regarding MHWB in mesothelioma means more research is needed into impacts on patients and carers, including trauma. To enable access to evidence-based support, research is recommended concerning MHWB interventions' effectiveness in mesothelioma., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42022302187., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The CAPSTONE-1 trial demonstrated that adebrelimab-based immunotherapy yielded a favourable survival benefit compared with chemotherapy for patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this immunotherapy in the treatment of ES-SCLC from a healthcare system perspective in China., Design: The TreeAge Pro software was used to establish a three-state partitioned survival model. Survival data came from the CAPSTONE-1 trial (NCT03711305), and only direct medical costs were included. Utility values were obtained from the published literature. Sensitivity analysis was performed to explore the robustness of the model. The cost-effectiveness of immunotherapy was investigated through scenario and exploratory analyses in various settings., Outcome Measures: Total costs, incremental costs, life years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental QALYs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)., Results: The basic analysis revealed that the adebrelimab group achieved a total of 1.1 QALYs at a cost of US$65 385, while the placebo group attained 0.78 QALYs at a cost of US$12 741. ICER was US$163 893/QALY. Sensitivity analysis confirmed that the model was robust. Results from scenario and exploratory analyses indicated that the combination of adebrelimab and chemotherapy did not demonstrate cost-effectiveness in any scenario., Conclusions: From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, adebrelimab in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of ES-SCLC was not economical compared with chemotherapy., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Lung cancer continues to be the most common cause of cancer-related death and the leading cause of morbidity and burden of disease across Australia. There is an ongoing need to identify and reduce unwarranted clinical variation that may contribute to these poor outcomes for patients with lung cancer. An Australian national strategy acknowledges clinical quality outcome data as a critical component of a continuously improving healthcare system but there is a need to ensure clinical quality indicators adequately measure evidence-based contemporary care, including novel and emerging treatments. This study aimed to develop a suite of lung cancer-specific, evidence-based, clinically acceptable quality indicators to measure quality of care and outcomes, and an associated comparative feedback dashboard to provide performance data to clinicians and hospital administrators., Design: A multistage modified Delphi process was undertaken with a Clinical Advisory Group of multidisciplinary lung cancer specialists, with patient representation, to update and prioritise potential indicators of lung cancer care derived from a targeted review of published literature and reports from national and international lung cancer quality registries. Quality indicators were piloted and evaluated with multidisciplinary teams in a retrospective observational cohort study using clinical audit data from the Embedding Research (and Evidence) in Cancer Healthcare Program, a prospective clinical cohort of over 2000 patients with lung cancer diagnosed from May 2016 to October 2021., Setting and Participants: Six tertiary specialist cancer centres in metropolitan and regional New South Wales, Australia., Results: From an initial 37 potential quality indicators, a final set of 10 indicators spanning diagnostic, treatment, quality of life and survival domains was agreed., Conclusions: These indicators build on and update previously available measures of lung cancer care and outcomes in use by national and international lung cancer clinical quality registries which, to our knowledge, have not been recently updated to reflect the changing lung cancer treatment paradigm., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Lung cancer (LC) is the most common cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Its early detection can be achieved with a CT scan. Two large randomised trials proved the efficacy of low-dose CT (LDCT)-based lung cancer screening (LCS) in high-risk populations. The decrease in specific mortality is 20%-25%.Nonetheless, implementing LCS on a large scale faces obstacles due to the low number of thoracic radiologists and CT scans available for the eligible population and the high frequency of false-positive screening results and the long period of indeterminacy of nodules that can reach up to 24 months, which is a source of prolonged anxiety and multiple costly examinations with possible side effects.Deep learning, an artificial intelligence solution has shown promising results in retrospective trials detecting lung nodules and characterising them. However, until now no prospective studies have demonstrated their importance in a real-life setting., Methods and Analysis: This open-label randomised controlled study focuses on LCS for patients aged 50-80 years, who smoked more than 20 pack-years, whether active or quit smoking less than 15 years ago. Its objective is to determine whether assisting a multidisciplinary team (MDT) with a 3D convolutional network-based analysis of screening chest CT scans accelerates the definitive classification of nodules into malignant or benign. 2722 patients will be included with the aim to demonstrate a 3-month reduction in the delay between lung nodule detection and its definitive classification into benign or malignant., Ethics and Dissemination: The sponsor of this study is the University Hospital of Nice. The study was approved for France by the ethical committee CPP (Comités de Protection des Personnes) Sud-Ouest et outre-mer III (No. 2022-A01543-40) and the Agence Nationale du Medicament et des produits de Santé (Ministry of Health) in December 2023. The findings of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and national and international conference presentations., Trial Registration Number: NCT05704920., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: In a small percentage of patients, pulmonary nodules found on CT scans are early lung cancers. Lung cancer detected at an early stage has a much better prognosis. The British Thoracic Society guideline on managing pulmonary nodules recommends using multivariable malignancy risk prediction models to assist in management. While these guidelines seem to be effective in clinical practice, recent data suggest that artificial intelligence (AI)-based malignant-nodule prediction solutions might outperform existing models., Methods and Analysis: This study is a prospective, observational multicentre study to assess the clinical utility of an AI-assisted CT-based lung cancer prediction tool (LCP) for managing incidental solid and part solid pulmonary nodule patients vs standard care. Two thousand patients will be recruited from 12 different UK hospitals. The primary outcome is the difference between standard care and LCP-guided care in terms of the rate of benign nodules and patients with cancer discharged straight after the assessment of the baseline CT scan. Secondary outcomes investigate adherence to clinical guidelines, other measures of changes to clinical management, patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness., Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been reviewed and given a favourable opinion by the South Central-Oxford C Research Ethics Committee in UK (REC reference number: 22/SC/0142).Study results will be available publicly following peer-reviewed publication in open-access journals. A patient and public involvement group workshop is planned before the study results are available to discuss best methods to disseminate the results. Study results will also be fed back to participating organisations to inform training and procurement activities., Trial Registration Number: NCT05389774., Competing Interests: Competing interests: FG reports grant funding from NIHR and Innovate UK, consultancy fees from Polarean and has shares in Optellum; SJ has received grant funding from GRAIL, consultancy fees/ honoraria from AstraZeneca and Chiesi, stock options in Optellum Ltd and his spouse is employed by AstraZeneca; RL is funded by the Royal Marsden NIHR BRC, Royal Marsden Cancer charity and SBRI (including QURE.AI). RL’s institution receives compensation for time spent in a secondment role for the lung health check program and as a National Specialty Lead for the National Institute of Health and Care Research. He has received research funding from CRUK, Innovate UK (cofunded by GE Healthcare, Roche and Optellum), SBRI, RM Partners Cancer Alliance and NIHR (coapplicant in grants with Optellum). He has received honoraria from CRUK; WM has received honoraria from Amgen; AN declares grants from Department of Health’s NIHR Biomedical Research Centre's funding scheme and GRAIL, consulting fees from Aidence BV, Faculty Science LTD and MSD; Support for attending meetings from Takeda Limited; Advisory Board participation for Aidence BV and Faculty Science Ltd; JR has received support for travel and accommodation from BTOG, ERS, CRUK, EORTC, ESMO and NCRI; RT has received honoraria from Olympus Medical; DRB has grant from NHS Digital and had received honoraria from MSD and AstraZeneca; DC, FM, JW are Optellum employees and have share options in Optellum. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the perspective of the US payer., Methods: Based on the POSEIDON clinical trial, a partition survival model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for the first-line treatment of metastatic NSCLC. The model's primary outcomes were costs, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The analysis only considered direct medical costs, and health utility value was determined using published literature. The robustness of the model was tested by probabilistic sensitivity analyses., Results: The combination therapy of durvalumab and chemotherapy improved survival by 0.713 QALYs at an incremental cost of $64 104.638 compared with chemotherapy alone, resulting in an ICER of $89 908.328 per QALY gained from the US payer perspective. The combination therapy had a 92.3% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per QALY based on incremental net health benefits. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the model's consistency, and none of the parameters significantly influenced the findings., Conclusion: Durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy represents a more cost-effective strategy for first-line therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC in the USA compared with chemotherapy alone., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death worldwide and most patients present with extensive disease. One-year survival is improving but remains low (37%) despite novel systemic anti-cancer treatments forming the current standard of care. Although new therapies improve survival, most patients have residual disease after treatment, and little is known on how best to manage it. Therefore, residual disease management varies across the UK, with some patients receiving only maintenance systemic anti-cancer treatment while others receive local consolidative treatment (LCT), alongside maintenance systemic anti-cancer treatment. LCT can be a combination of surgery, radiotherapy and/or ablation to remove all remaining cancer within the lung and throughout the body. This is intensive, expensive and impacts quality of life, but we do not know if it results in better survival, nor the extent of impact on quality of life and what the cost might be for healthcare providers. The RAMON study (RAdical Management Of Advanced Non-small cell lung cancer) will evaluate the acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of LCT versus no LCT after first-line systemic treatment for advanced lung cancer., Methods and Analysis: RAMON is a pragmatic open multicentre, parallel group, superiority randomised controlled trial. We aim to recruit 244 patients aged 18 years and over with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer from 40 UK NHS hospitals. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive LCT alongside maintenance treatment, or maintenance treatment alone. LCT will be tailored to each patient's specific disease sites. Participants will be followed up for a minimum of 2 years. The primary outcome is overall survival from randomisation., Ethics and Dissemination: The West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (22/WS/0121) gave ethical approval in August 2022 and the Health Research Authority in September 2022. Participants will provide written informed consent before participating in the study. Findings will be presented at international meetings, in peer-reviewed publications, through patient organisations and notifications to patients., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN11613852., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors received support from the National Institute for Health and Care Research for the project associated with this manuscript, which was paid to their employing institution. EL reports personal fees from Abbott Molecular, AstraZeneca, Glaxo Smith Kline, Pfizer, Norvatis, Covidien, Roche, Lily Oncology, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medela, Ethicon, and AstraZeneca, and grants from ScreenCell, Clearbridge Biomedics, Illumina, and Guardant Health. PDS reports personal fees from Vitae Professionals. JR reports personal and travel fees from NCRI Lung Advanced disease subgroup, ELF lung cancer patient advisory group, BTOG, Clinical expert group lung cancer, WM Cancer Alliance lung cancer and mesothelioma EAG (as a patient representative). TND reports personal fees from AstraZenca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, MSD, Otsuka, Roche, Takeda, BMS, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, and Pfizer., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Pembrolizumab is a programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor used to treat advanced patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) tumour proportion score (TPS) ≥50. Further sub-division of TPS-based stratification has not been evaluated in the UK, although smoking-induced tumour mutational burden and the immunogenic effects of prior radiotherapy are suggested to improve response., Aims: To investigate if PD-L1 TPS ≥80%, smoking status or radiotherapy before or within 2 months of treatment influenced progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with NSCLC treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy., Methods: PD-L1 TPS, smoking status and radiotherapy exposure were compared in patients with NSCLC in National Health Service (NHS) Tayside (n=100) treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy between 1 November 2017 and 18 February 2022. Survival estimates were compared using log-rank analysis, and Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to investigate the influence of potential confounding factors, including tumour stage and performance status., Results: PFS was not significantly different (log-rank HR=0.330, p=0.566) comparing patients with PD-L1 TPS 50-79% and PD-L1 TPS ≥80%. Smokers had significantly improved PFS (log-rank HR=4.867, p=0.027), while patients receiving radiotherapy had significantly decreased PFS (log-rank HR=6.649, p=0.012). A Cox regression model confirmed that both radiotherapy (p=0.022) and performance status (p=0.009) were independent negative predictors of PFS., Conclusions: More rigorous PD-L1 TPS stratification did not influence survival outcomes. Smoking history improved PFS, although it was not an independent response predictor, while radiotherapy and performance status independently influenced clinical response. We suggest that further stratification of PD-L1 TPS is not warranted, while performance status and radiotherapy treatment may be additional clinically useful biomarkers of response to pembrolizumab in patients with NSCLC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Lung nodules are one of the most prevalent diseases. Medical imaging methods have a high false positive rate for distinguishing malignant nodules from benign nodules. Therefore, developing new technologies with high accuracy for screening malignant nodules is of great importance for lung nodule surveillance. Use of flow cytometry to detect biomarkers in blood macrophages (epitop detect in macrophages/macrophages) has opened a new era for early and noninvasive diagnosis of cancer. This planned study aims to examine whether the peripheral blood macrophage factors Apo10 and TKTL1 accurately distinguish malignant nodules from benign nodules., Methods and Analyses: We plan to enrol in this study 3825 participants with lung nodules who will attend their annual physical examination at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center. Apo10 and TKTL1 levels in all patients will be tested at 60 min after their last meal every 6 months during their 3-year follow-up. Biopsy or surgical pathology results will be collected as the gold standard to assess the accuracy of Apo10 and TKTL1 in distinguishing malignant nodules from benign nodules. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and area under the receiving operating characteristic curve will also be evaluated., Ethics and Dissemination: The study is approved by the medical ethics committee of Sun Yat-sen University (SL-G2022-005-02). The results of this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and presentations at international scientific meetings and will also be disseminated to the participants., Trial Registration Number: ChiCTR2300073823; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Despite strong evidence for the efficacy of low-radiation dose CT (LDCT) in reducing lung cancer (LC) mortality, implementing LC screening (LCS) programmes remains a challenge. We aim to systematically review the evidence on the strategies used to recruit the adult population at risk of LC to LDCT within LCS programmes and to estimate the effectiveness of interventions identified, used to reach the potentially eligible population, increase participation and informed choice, and ensure equitable access., Methods and Analysis: This sequential systematic literature review will consist of three steps: (1) a scoping review of existing strategies and organisational models for LCS; (2) selecting papers reporting relevant outcomes (test coverage, screening participation and informed choice) and comparing results among different models; (3) a systematic review of interventions implemented to increase participation in LCS programmes. Each step will follow the methodological guidelines provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Data sources include electronic databases such as Medline (PubMed version), Embase, CINAHL (Ebsco version), Scopus and Cochrane CENTRAL. The search will be limited to studies published from January 2000 to March 2023 in English, Italian, French, Spanish, Serbian and Croatian language. Findings will be synthesised quantitatively and qualitatively as appropriate. Risk of bias assessment will be only applied to studies selected in the second and third steps. The quality of evidence will be summarised for each outcome using the Grading Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology., Ethics and Dissemination: Given that this is a review of existing literature, ethics approval is not required. The results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at relevant conferences. The findings of this review will help guide health authorities in organising LCS programmes and developing recommendations, policies, and actions at national and regional levels., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42023408357., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: This study has two objectives: first, to explore the diagnostic experiences of black/African American (BAA) patients with lung cancer to pinpoint pitfalls, suboptimal experiences and instances of discrimination leading to disparities in outcomes compared with patients of other ethnic backgrounds, especially white patients. The second objective is to identify the underlying causes contributing to health disparities in the diagnosis of lung cancer among BAA patients., Methods: We employed a phenomenological research approach, guiding in-depth interviews with patients self-identifying as BAA diagnosed with lung cancer, as well as caregivers, healthcare professionals and community advocates knowledgeable about BAA experiences with lung cancer. We performed thematic analysis to identify experiences at patient, primary care and specialist levels. Contributing factors were identified using the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) health disparity model., Results: From March to November 2021, we conducted individual interviews with 19 participants, including 9 patients/caregivers and 10 providers/advocates. Participants reported recurring and increased pain before seeking treatment, treatment for non-cancer illnesses, delays in diagnostic tests and referrals, poor communication and bias when dealing with specialists and primary care providers. Factors contributing to suboptimal experiences included reluctance by insurers to cover costs, provider unwillingness to conduct comprehensive testing, provider bias in recommending treatment, high healthcare costs, and lack of healthcare facilities and qualified staff to provide necessary support. However, some participants reported positive experiences due to their insurance, availability of services and having an empowered support structure., Conclusions: BAA patients and caregivers encountered suboptimal experiences during their care. The NIMHD model is a useful framework to organise factors contributing to these experiences that may be leading to health disparities. Additional research is needed to fully capture the extent of these experiences and identify ways to improve BAA patient experiences in the lung cancer diagnosis pathway., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To estimate the evolution of quality indicators (30-day mortality and failure-to-rescue) inpatients who underwent lung cancer surgery in France over the past 15 years and to study the potential influencing factors., Design: Retrospective cohort study using data from the French hospital database (PMSI)., Setting: Nationwide population-based study., Participants: All patients who underwent pulmonary resection for lung cancer in France (2005-2020) were included (N=1 57 566). Characteristics of patients (age, gender, comorbidities), surgery (surgical approach, type of resection, extent of resection) and hospital (type of hospital, hospital volume for pulmonary resections) were retrieved., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: We studied two outcome indicators: 30-day mortality and failure-to-rescue. We used regression-based techniques (including interrupted time-series) to assess the effects of patient and hospital characteristics on 30-day mortality and failure-to-rescue (number of deaths among patients with at least one major postoperative complication within the 30 days after surgery), adjusting for case mix., Results: The 30-day mortality rate increased from 3.8% in 2005 to 4.9% in 2010 and then decreased to 2.9% in 2020. The failure-to-rescue rate decreased from 12.2% in 2005 to 7.1% in 2020. The pneumonectomy rate decreased significantly over time (18.1% in 2005 to 4.8% in 2020) and had the greatest contribution on the reduction of mortality between two periods (2005-2010/2015-2020). The use of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery or robot-assisted surgery had a great influence on the reduction of mortality (16% of the observed difference in mortality) between the two periods, as did hospital volume., Conclusions: The change in surgical practices, particularly the reduction in pneumonectomies, could be one of the main reasons for reduction in postoperative mortality and failure-to-rescue in France since 2011. Hospital volume is another important factor in reducing postoperative mortality. Our study should encourage the use of technological or organisational innovation, such as changes in surgical practice and cancer surgery authorisations, to improve quality of care., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The ASTRUM-005 trial showed that serplulimab plus chemotherapy (SEP) significantly extended survival time compared with chemotherapy in the treatment of small cell lung cancer. But the survival benefits of SEP came at high costs, and its economy is not clear. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of SEP from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system., Design: A partition survival model was built to simulate the outcomes. The clinical data came from the ASTRUM-005 trial, and only direct medical costs were included in the model. The utility values referred to the published literature. Scenario analyses 1 and 2 explored outcomes in the presence of a patient assistance plan (PAP) and different simulation periods, respectively. Scenario analysis 3 compared the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy (AEP) with SEP by network meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the results., Outcome Measures: Total costs, incremental costs, life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental QALYs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)., Results: Compared with chemotherapy, SEP achieved an additional 0.34 QALYs at incremental costs of US$41 682.63, with an ICER of US$122 378.86/QALY. When PAP was available, ICER was US$58 316.46/QALY. In the simulation time of 5 years and 20 years, the ICER was US$132 637.97/QALY and US$118 054.59/QALY, respectively. When compared with AEP, SEP not only reduced the costs by US$47 244.87 but also gained 0.07 QALYs more. Sensitivity analyses showed that the price of serplulimab and the utility value of the progression-free survival stage were the main influencing parameters, and the results were stable., Conclusions: Compared with chemotherapy, SEP was not cost-effective from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. However, SEP was absolutely dominant in comparison with AEP., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Workers in the construction industry have been exposed to asbestos in various occupations. In Italy, a National Mesothelioma Registry has been implemented more than 20 years ago. Using cases selected from this registry and exploiting existing control data sets, we estimated relative risks for pleural mesothelioma (PM) among construction workers., Design: Case-control study., Setting: Cases from the National Mesothelioma Registry (2000-2018), controls from three previous case-control studies., Methods: We selected male PM incident cases diagnosed in 2000-2018. Population controls were taken from three studies performed in six Italian regions within two periods (2002-2004 and 2012-2016). Age-adjusted and period-adjusted unconditional logistic regression models were fitted to estimate odds ratios (OR) for occupations in the construction industry. We followed two approaches, one (primary) excluding and the other (secondary) including subjects employed in other non-construction blue collar occupations for >5 years. For both approaches, we performed an overall analysis including all cases and, given the incomplete temporal and geographic overlap of cases and controls, three time or/and space restricted sensitivity analyses., Results: The whole data set included 15 592 cases and 2210 controls. With the primary approach (4797 cases and 1085 controls), OR was 3.64 (2181 cases) for subjects ever employed in construction. We found elevated risks for blue-collar occupations (1993 cases, OR 4.52), including bricklayers (988 cases, OR 7.05), general construction workers (320 cases, OR 4.66), plumbers and pipe fitters (305 cases, OR 9.13), painters (104 cases, OR 2.17) and several others. Sensitivity analyses yielded very similar findings. Using the secondary approach, we observed similar patterns, but ORs were remarkably lower., Conclusions: We found markedly increased PM risks for most occupations in the construction industry. These findings are relevant for compensation of subjects affected with mesothelioma in the construction industry., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DCo, SMa and CM served as consultants in trials concerning asbestos-related diseases., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To assess key elements of the design for Meso-ORIGINS (Mesothelioma Observational study of RIsk prediction and Generation of paired benign-meso tissue samples, Including a Nested MRI Substudy), an ambitious, UK-wide, prospective study that will collect ≥63 matched benign-mesothelioma tissue pairs through longitudinal surveillance and repeat biopsy of patients with asbestos-associated pleural inflammation (AAPI)., Design: A multicentre, mixed-methods feasibility study, comprising a prospective observational element, evaluating recruitment feasibility, technical feasibility of repeat local anaesthetic thoracoscopy (LAT) and patient acceptability, and a retrospective cohort study focused on AAPI-mesothelioma evolution rate, informing sample size., Setting: 4 UK pleural disease centres (February 2019-January 2020)., Participants: Patients with AAPI (history or typical imaging plus appropriate pleural histology) were eligible for both elements. In August 2019, eligibility for the prospective element was broadened, including addition of radiological AAPI for technical feasibility and patient acceptability endpoints only. Retrospective cases required ≥2 years follow-up., Outcome Measures: A prospective recruitment target was set a priori at 27 histological AAPI cases (or 14 in any 6 months). Technical feasibility and patient acceptability were determined at 6-month follow-up by thoracic ultrasound surrogates and questionnaires, respectively. Retrospective malignant pleural mesothelioma evolution rate was defined by proportion (95% CI). Baseline predictors of evolution were identified using logistic regression., Results: 296 patients with AAPI (39 prospective, 257 retrospective) were recruited/selected. 21/39 prospective recruits were histologically diagnosed (target n=27). Repeat LAT was technically feasible and acceptable in 13/28 (46%) and 24/36 (67%) cases with complete follow-up data. Mesothelioma evolution was confirmed histologically in 36/257 retrospective cases (14% (95% CI 10.3% to 18.8%)) and associated with malignant CT features (OR 4.78 (95% CI 2.36 to 9.86)) and age (OR 1.06 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.12))., Conclusions: Our initial eligibility criteria were too narrow. Meso-ORIGINS will recruit a broader cohort, including prevalent cases, any biopsy type and patients with malignant CT features. A range of rebiopsy techniques will be allowed, accounting for technical and patient factors. The sample size has been reduced to 500., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN12840870., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: There is significant potential to improve outcomes for patients with lung cancer in terms of quality of life and survival. There is some evidence that prehabilitation can help, but, to date, this has only been tested in surgical populations, despite 70%-80% of patients with lung cancer in the UK receiving non-surgical treatment. The physiological and psychological benefits of prehabilitation seen in surgical patients could be extrapolated to those receiving non-surgical treatment, particularly in such a poor prognosis group. With patients and healthcare professionals, we have co-designed a personalised and evidence-based prehabilitation programme. This draws on a conceptual framework that aligns with patient values and needs as well as functional goals. We aim to investigate whether this programme is feasible to implement and evaluate in clinical practice., Methods and Analysis: An open-label, single-group feasibility study incorporating quantitative assessments, a qualitative free text questionnaire and reflective field notes. Thirty participants will be recruited over an eight-month period from a single London teaching hospital. All recruited participants will receive a personalised prehabilitation programme during their oncological treatment. This includes a one-hour face-to-face appointment prior to, at week three and at week six of their treatment regimen as well as a weekly telephone call. Interventions including nutrition, physical activity and psychological well-being are stratified according to a patient's priorities, level of readiness and expressed needs. The primary outcome will be feasibility of the personalised prehabilitation programme in clinical practice by investigating areas of uncertainty regarding patient recruitment, attrition, treatment fidelity, intervention adherence and acceptability of study outcome measures. Secondary outcomes will include quality of life, functional capacity and grip strength., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Health Research Authority (reference number 22/PR/0390). Results of this study will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed articles, presentations at scientific conferences and in collaboration with patient and public involvement representatives., Trial Registration Number: NCT05318807., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: In December 2018, China launched national volume-based procurement (NVBP) to negotiate drug prices with manufacturers. Gefitinib was one of the 25 pilot drugs, which is used for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Lung cancer is the most common type of cancer in China and targeted drugs like gefitinib have been proven to provide clinical benefits to patients. This study aims to explore the impact of NVBP policy on the usage and expenditure of anticancer drugs., Methods: Gefitinib and alternative drugs (icotinib and erlotinib) were used as objects of study. Quarterly data from the China Hospital Pharmaceutical Audit database in 9454 hospitals in China were used for analysis. Descriptive analysis was conducted using purchase volume and expenditure as variables. Interrupted time-series (ITS) analysis was applied to further analyse the effect of NVBP policy on the medicines under study., Results: During the 12-month period before (2018Q2-2019Q1) and after (2019Q2-2020Q1) the NVBP policy, the total purchase volume of medicines rose from 4.48 million defined daily dose (DDD) to 7.02 million DDD, with an increase of 56.66%. Purchase volume of gefitinib and alternative drugs increased 100.61% and 14.88%, respectively. After the implementation of NVBP policy, procurement volume of alternative drugs decreased by 72 051 DDD (p value=0.044) and trend change decreased by 56 738 DDD (p value<0.01). The overall expenditure reduction was 14.7%, with the expenditure of gefitinib reducing by 38.47% and alternative drugs increasing by 10.70%. ITS analysis indicated statistically significant differences in level and trend changes for expenditure of total drugs and gefitinib., Conclusions: The evidence provided in this study indicated that the implementation of NVBP policy was related to the expenditure reduction of the first generation of anti-EGFR lung cancer drugs. The policy effectively controlled the increase in expenditures for corresponding drugs while ensuring the use of drugs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Lung cancer remains a highly fatal disease. Surgical resection has been proven to be the most effective treatment for early-stage lung cancer. The conventional hospital-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is shown to reduce symptoms, improve exercise capacity and impact the quality of life (QoL) for lung cancer patients. To date, scientific evidence on the effectiveness of home-based PR for patients with lung cancer following surgery is scarce. We aim to explore if home-based PR is non-inferior to outpatient PR for patients with lung cancer following surgical resection., Methods and Analysis: This study is a two-arm, parallel-group, assessor-blind, single-centre, randomised controlled trial. Participants will be recruited from West China Hospital, Sichuan University and randomly allocated to either an outpatient group or a home-based group at a ratio of 1:1. The PR programme involves self-management and exercises. The exercise includes warm-up (10 min), aerobic training (20 min), resistance training (15 min) and cool-down (10 min), lasting 4 weeks, with two sessions per week either at home or in the outpatient setting. The intensity will be adjusted according to the modified Borg rating of perceived exertion and heart rate before and after each exercise session. The primary outcome is QoL measured by EORTC QLQ-C30 & LC 13 after an intervention. Secondary outcomes include physical fitness measured by a 6 min walk test and stair-climbing test and symptom severity measured by patient-reported questionnaires and pulmonary function. The main hypothesis is that home-based PR is non-inferior to outpatient PR for patients with lung cancer following surgical resection., Ethics and Dissemination: The trial has been approved by the Ethical Committee of West China Hospital and is also registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. The results of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences., Trial Registration Number: ChiCTR2100053714., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

ObjectiveTo assess use of bone-targeting agents (BTA) in patients with confirmed bone metastases (BM) from breast cancer (BC), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or prostate cancer (PC)., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Regional hospital-based oncology database of approximately 2 million patients in England., Participants: Patients aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of BC, NSCLC or PC as well as BM between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2018, with follow-up to 30 June 2020 or death; BM diagnosis ascertained from recorded medical codes and unstructured data using natural language processing (NLP)., Main Outcomes Measures: Initiation or non-initiation of BTA following BM diagnosis, time from BM diagnosis to BTA initiation, time from first to last BTA, time from last BTA to death., Results: This study included 559 BC, 894 NSCLC and 1013 PC with BM; median age (Q1-Q3) was 65 (52-76), 69 (62-77) and 75 (62-77) years, respectively. NLP identified BM diagnosis from unstructured data for 92% patients with BC, 92% patients with NSCLC and 95% patients with PC. Among patients with BC, NSCLC and PC with BM, 47%, 87% and 88% did not receive a BTA, and 53%, 13% and 12% received at least one BTA, starting a median 65 (27-167), 60 (28-162) and 610 (295-980) days after BM, respectively. Median (Q1-Q3) duration of BTA treatment was 481 (188-816), 89 (49-195) and 115 (53-193) days for patients with BC, NSCLC and PC. For those with a death record, median time from last BTA to death was 54 (26-109) for BC, 38 (17-98) for NSCLC and 112 (44-218) days for PC., Conclusion: In this study identifying BM diagnosis from both structured and unstructured data, a high proportion of patients did not receive a BTA. Unstructured data provide new insights on the real-world use of BTA., Competing Interests: Competing interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests. AS was an employee and equity holder in Amgen during the conduct of the study. PE, BL and MT were employed with IQVIA during the conduct of the study. JW had no conflict of interest to declare. AA reported contract work with Amgen. MR was employed with IQVIA and had an honorary contract with Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust (LTHT) to access the data to produce analysis. PM worked for IQVIA during the initial development of the manuscript, and the analysis time period. SC’s part was funded by IQVIA., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Late presentation or diagnosis of cancer results in a poor clinical prognosis, negatively affects treatment and subsequently lowers one's chances of survival. This study aimed to identify the factors associated with late lung and colorectal cancer presentation and diagnosis in Jordan., Design: This correlational cross-sectional study was based on face-to-face interviews and medical chart reviews from a cancer registry database. A structured questionnaire based on a review of the literature was used., Setting and Participants: The study participants were a representative sample of adult patients with colorectal or lung cancer who visited the outpatient clinics at King Hussein Cancer Center in Amman, Jordan, between January 2019 and December 2020, to get their first medical consultation., Results: 382 study participants were surveyed, with a response rate of 82.3%. Of these, 162 (42.2%) reported a late presentation and 92 (24.1%) reported a late diagnosis of cancer. The results of backward multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that female gender and not seeking a medical advice when feeling ill combined was associated with an almost three times increased likelihood of reporting a late presentation with cancer (adjusted OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.19 to 7.43). Not having health insurance and not seeking medical advice combined was also associated with late presentation (2.5, 95% CI 1.02 to 6.12). For lung cancer, Jordanians living in rural areas were 9.29 (95% CI 2.46 to 35.1) times more likely to report late diagnosis. Jordanians who did not screen for cancer in the past were 7.02 (95% CI 1.69 to 29.18) times more likely to report late diagnosis. For colorectal cancer, those having no previous knowledge about cancers or screening programmes had increased odds of reporting late diagnosis (2.30, 95% CI 1.06 to 4.97)., Conclusions: This study highlights important factors associated with the late presentation and diagnosis of colorectal and lung cancers in Jordan. Investing in national screening and early detection programmes as well as public outreach and awareness campaigns will have a significant impact on early detection to improve treatment outcomes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related death in the USA. While most patients are diagnosed following symptomatic presentation, no studies have compared symptoms and physical examination signs at or prior to diagnosis from electronic health records (EHRs) in the USA. We aimed to identify symptoms and signs in patients prior to diagnosis in EHR data., Design: Case-control study., Setting: Ambulatory care clinics at a large tertiary care academic health centre in the USA., Participants, Outcomes: We studied 698 primary lung cancer cases in adults diagnosed between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2019, and 6841 controls matched by age, sex, smoking status and type of clinic. Coded and free-text data from the EHR were extracted from 2 years prior to diagnosis date for cases and index date for controls. Univariate and multivariable conditional logistic regression were used to identify symptoms and signs associated with lung cancer at time of diagnosis, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months before the diagnosis/index dates., Results: Eleven symptoms and signs recorded during the study period were associated with a significantly higher chance of being a lung cancer case in multivariable analyses. Of these, seven were significantly associated with lung cancer 6 months prior to diagnosis: haemoptysis (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.9 to 5.3), cough (OR 3.1, 95% CI 2.4 to 4.0), chest crackles or wheeze (OR 3.1, 95% CI 2.3 to 4.1), bone pain (OR 2.7, 95% CI 2.1 to 3.6), back pain (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.9 to 3.2), weight loss (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.8) and fatigue (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.1)., Conclusions: Patients diagnosed with lung cancer appear to have symptoms and signs recorded in the EHR that distinguish them from similar matched patients in ambulatory care, often 6 months or more before diagnosis. These findings suggest opportunities to improve the diagnostic process for lung cancer., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and risk factors of chronic respiratory symptoms among school teachers in Gondar city, north-western Ethiopia., Design: A school-based cross-sectional study was conducted from April to May 2019. A self-administered British Medical Research Council Questionnaire was used to assess chronic respiratory symptoms. Data were entered into Epi Info V.7 and Stata V.14 was used for analysis. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with chronic respiratory symptoms. The association was determined using adjusted OR (AOR) with a 95% CI at a value of p<0.05., Setting: The study was conducted in public and private schools in Gondar city., Participants: A total of 822 teachers participated in this study., Outcome Measures: The primary outcome is the prevalence of chronic respiratory symptoms., Results: The total response rate was 97.4%. The majority, 532 (64.7%) of the participants, were male. The mean age (±SD) of the respondents was 36.69 (±6.93) years. The total prevalence of chronic respiratory symptoms in the previous 12 months among teachers in Gondar city was found to be 31.14% (95% CI 27.99% to 34.43%). A family history of respiratory problems (AOR=1.90; 95% CI 1.07 to 3.37), an overweight body mass index (AOR=2.57; 95% CI 1.57 to 4.21), exposure to secondhand cigarette smoke at home (AOR=9.85; 95% CI 4.77 to 20.33), use of chalk (AOR=1.97; 95% CI 1.25 to 3.09), and failure to open windows during class (AOR=2.15; 95% CI 1.02 to 4.52) were risk factors for chronic respiratory symptoms., Conclusion: This study concluded that the prevalence of chronic respiratory symptoms was high among teachers. Making a smoking-free zone, avoiding smoking in public places, improving the ventilation conditions of the classrooms and controlling the chalk dust are all necessary actions to take to reduce chronic respiratory symptoms., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) occur after up to 60% of non-cardiac thoracic surgery (NCTS), especially for multimorbid elderly patients. Nevertheless, current risk prediction models for PPCs have major limitations regarding derivation and validation, and do not account for the specific risks of NCTS patients. Well-founded and externally validated models specific to elderly NCTS patients are warranted to inform consent and treatment decisions., Methods and Analysis: We will develop, internally and externally validate a multivariable risk model to predict 30-day PPCs in elderly NCTS patients. Our cohort will be generated in three study sites in southern China with a target population of approximately 1400 between October 2021 and December 2023. Candidate predictors have been selected based on published data, clinical expertise and epidemiological knowledge. Our model will be derived using the combination of multivariable logistic regression and bootstrapping technique to lessen predictors. The final model will be internally validated using bootstrapping validation technique and externally validated using data from different study sites. A parsimonious risk score will then be developed on the basis of beta estimates derived from the logistic model. Model performance will be evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, max-rescaled Brier score and calibration slope. In exploratory analysis, we will also assess the net benefit of Probability of PPCs Associated with THoracic surgery in elderly patients score in the complete cohort using decision curve analysis., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the Affiliated Cancer Hospital and Institute of Guangzhou Medical University, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine and the University of Hongkong-Shenzhen Hospital, respectively. The final risk prediction model will be published in an appropriate journal and further disseminated as an online calculator or nomogram for clinical application. Approved and anonymised data will be shared., Trial Registration Number: ChiCTR2100051170., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Describe characteristics, treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC)., Design: Retrospective chart review study defining several cohorts: (1) limited-stage disease (LD) SCLC initiating 1L therapy (1 L LD-SCLC), (2) extensive-stage disease (ED) SCLC initiating 1L therapy (1L ED-SCLC) and (3) patients initiating 2L therapy., Setting: 39 physicians (medical oncologists, thoracic oncologists and/or pulmonologists) from France, Italy and the UK., Participants: Patients >18 years of age with a confirmed diagnosis of LD-SCLC or ED-SCLC and a full oncology medical history. Patients included initiated a 1L (2013-2015) or 2L (2013-2016) treatment (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy-RT)., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: 231 patients in 1L LD-SCLC, 308 in 1L ED-SCLC and 225 with relapse/refractory SCLC initiating 2L treatment were included. The proportion of men was higher across all groups (56.8% to 68.5%) and mean age at time of diagnosis was 66.0 and 65.4 years in 1L LD-SCLC and 2L ED-SCLC cohorts. The majority of patients in LD-SCLC 1L group received chemotherapy with RT (76.2%). Patients initiating 2L therapy predominantly received chemotherapy alone (79.6%).Median OS in 1 L patients was 17.3 months in LD-SCLC and 8.8 months in ED-SCLC. Median PFS was 11.6 months in LD-SCLC and 6.1 months in ED-SCLC patients. Median OS in patients initiating 2L treatment was 6.6 months. OS from start of 2L treatment was lower in patients initially diagnosed with ED (5.1 months) than in patients initially diagnosed with LD (9.3 months) (p<0.0001). OS and PFS were assessed from the start of 1L or 2L therapy, depending on the cohort., Conclusions: Despite the availability of a high number of treatments and combinations, the prognosis of SCLC is still unsatisfactory, especially for those patients diagnosed with ED-SCLC, indicating high unmet need in this patient population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: FB reports personal fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Bayer, Cellgene, CellMedica, Ipsen, Mediation, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, and Takeda; grants from Amgen, Pfizer, and Novartis; and non-financial support from Amgen, and AstraZeneca; outside the submitted work. NG reports personal fees from Lilly, Pharmamar and BMS; and grants from Lilly, and BMS; during the conduct of the study. AL does not report personal fees, grants or non-financial support during the conduct of the study. LM and AJG report BMS employment. MR and NL report IQVIA employment., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Eligibility criteria definition for a lung cancer screening (LCS) is an unmet need. We hypothesised that patients with a history of atheromatous cardiovascular disease (ACVD) associated with tobacco consumption are at risk of lung cancer (LC). The main objective is to assess LC prevalence among patients with ACVD and history of tobacco consumption by using low-dose chest CT scan. Secondary objectives include the evaluation LCS in this population and the constitution of a biological biobank to stratify risk of LC., Methods and Analysis: We are performing a monocentric 'single-centre' prospective study among patients followed up in adult cardiovascular programmes of vascular surgery, cardiology and cardiac surgery recruited from 18 November 2019 to 18 May 2021. The inclusion criteria are (1) age 45-75 years old, (2) history of ACVD and (3) history of daily tobacco consumption for 10 years prior to onset of ACVD. Exclusion criteria are symptoms of LC, existing follow-up for pulmonary nodule, fibrosis, pulmonary hypertension, resting dyspnoea and active pulmonary infectious disease. We targeted the inclusion of 500 patients. After inclusion (V0), patients are scheduled for a low-dose chest CT and blood and faeces harvesting within 7 months (V1). Each patient is scheduled for a follow-up by telephonic visits at month 3 (V2), month 6 (V3) and month 12 (V4) after V1. Each patient is followed up until 1 year after V1 (14 February 2023). We measure LC prevalence and quantify the National Lung Screening Trial and Dutch-Belgian Randomized Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NELSON) trial eligibility criteria, radiation, positive screening, false positivity, rate of localised LC diagnosis, quality of life with the Short Form 12 (SF-12) and anxiety with the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory A and B (STAI-YA and STAI-YB, respectively), smoking cessation and onset of cardiovascular and oncological events within 1 year of follow-up. A case-control study nested in the cohort is performed to identify clinical or biological candidate biomarkers of LC., Ethics and Dissemination: The study was approved according the French Jardé law; the study is referenced at the French 'Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament et des Produits de Santé' (reference ID RCB: 2019-A00262-55) and registered on clinicaltrial.gov. The results of the study will be presented after the closure of the follow-up scheduled on 14 February 2023 and disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and national and international conferences., Trial Registration Number: NCT03976804., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)