Screening for lung cancer and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: killing two birds with one stone

Lung cancer screening: who pays? Who receives? The European perspectives

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and its early detection is critical to achieving a curative treatment and to reducing mortality. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is a highly sensitive technique for detecting noninvasive small lung tumors in high-risk populations. We here analyze the current status of lung cancer screening (LCS) from a European point of view. With economic burden of health care in most European countries resting on the state, it is important to reduce costs of screening and improve its effectiveness. Current cost-effectiveness analyses on LCS have indicated a favorable economic profile. The most recently published analysis reported an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €3,297 per 1 life-year gained adjusted for the quality of life (QALY) and €2,944 per life-year gained, demonstrating a 90% probability of ICER being below €15,000 and a 98.1% probability of being below €25,000. Different risk models have been used to identify the target population; among these, the PLCOM2012 in particular allows for the selection of the population to be screened with high sensitivity. Risk models should also be employed to define screening intervals, which can reduce the general number of LDCT scans after the baseline round. Future perspectives of screening in a European scenario are related to the will of the policy makers to implement policy on a large scale and to improve the effectiveness of a broad screening of smoking-related disease, including cardiovascular prevention, by measuring coronary calcium score on LDCT. The employment of artificial intelligence (AI) in imaging interpretation, the use of liquid biopsies for the characterization of CT-detected undetermined nodules, and less invasive, personalized surgical treatments, will improve the effectiveness of LCS.

Analysis of pulmonary sounds for the diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases secondary to rheumatoid arthritis

The diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases in patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis is fundamental to improving their survival rate. In particular, the average survival time of patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis with pulmonary implications is approximately 3 years. The gold standard for confirming the diagnosis of this disease is computer tomography. However, it is very difficult to raise diagnosis suspicion because the symptoms of the disease are extremely common in elderly people. The detection of the so-called velcro crackle in lung sounds can effectively raise the suspicion of an interstitial disease and speed up diagnosis. However, this task largely relies on the experience of physicians and has not yet been standardized in clinical practice. The diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases based on thorax auscultation still represents an underexplored field in the study of rheumatoid arthritis. In this study, we investigate the problem of the automatic detection of velcro crackle in lung sounds. In practice, the patient is auscultated using a digital stethoscope and the lung sounds are saved to a file. The acquired digital data are then analysed using a suitably developed algorithm. In particular, the proposed solution relies on the empirical observation that the audio bandwidth associated with velcro crackle is larger than that associated with healthy breath sounds. Experimental results from a database of 70 patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis demonstrate that the developed tool can outperform specialized physicians in terms of diagnosing pulmonary disorders. The overall accuracy of the proposed solution is 90.0%, with negative and positive predictive values of 95.0% and 83.3%, respectively, whereas the reliability of physician diagnosis is in the range of 60-70%. The devised algorithm represents an enabling technology for a novel approach to the diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases in patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis.

Smoking-related idiopathic interstitial pneumonia: A review

For many years, cigarette smoking has been considered as the leading cause of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer. Recently, however, it has also been associated with the development of diffuse interstitial lung diseases. In the latest classification of the major idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIP), the term smoking-related IIP has been introduced, including two entities, namely desquamative interstitial pneumonia (DIP) and respiratory bronchiolitis-interstitial lung disease (RB-ILD). Other entities in which smoking has a definite or suggested role include pulmonary Langerhan's cell histiocytosis, smoking-related interstitial fibrosis, combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema syndrome and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. In this review, we will focus on the mechanisms of smoking-related lung damage and on the clinical aspects of these disorders with the exception of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, which will be reviewed elsewhere in this review series.

Is generalization of exhaled CO assessment in primary care helpful for early diagnosis of COPD?

Background

COPD is largely under-diagnosed and once diagnosed usually at a late stage. Early diagnosis is thoroughly recommended but most attempts failed as the disease is marginally known and screening marginally accepted. It is a rare cause of concern in primary care and spirometry is not very common. Exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) is a 5-seconds easy-to-use device dedicated to monitor cigarette smoke consumption. We aimed to assess whether systematic eCO measurement in primary care is a useful tool to improve acceptance for early COPD diagnosis.

Methods

This was a two-center randomized controlled trial enrolling 410 patients between March and May, 2013. Whatever was the reason of attendance to the clinic, all adults were proposed to measure eCO during randomly chosen days and outcomes were compared between the two different groups of patients (performing and not performing eCO). Primary outcome was the rates of acceptance for COPD screening.

Results

Rate of acceptance for COPD screening was 28% in the eCO group and 26% in the other (P = 0.575). These rates increased to 48 and 51% in smokers (current and former). eCO significantly increased the rate of clinics during which a debate on smoking was initiated (42 vs. 24%, P = 0.001). eCO at 2.5 ppm was the discriminative concentration for identifying active smokers (ROC curve AUC: 0.935). Smoking was the only independent risk factor associated with acceptance for early COPD screening (OR = 364.6 (82.5-901.5) and OR = 78.5 (18.7-330.0) in current and former smokers, respectively) while eCO measurement was not.

Conclusions

Early COPD diagnosis is a minor cause of concern in primary care. Systematic eCO assessment failed to improve acceptance for early COPD screening.