Search

Background: Precision medicine focuses on the identification of therapeutic strategies that are effective for a group of patients based on similar unifying characteristics. The recent success of precision medicine in non–critical care settings has resulted from the confluence of large clinical and biospecimen repositories, innovative bioinformatics, and novel trial designs. Similar advances for precision medicine in sepsis and in the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are possible but will require further investigation and significant investment in infrastructure. Methods: This project was funded by the American Thoracic Society Board of Directors. A multidisciplinary and diverse working group reviewed the available literature, established a conceptual framework, and iteratively developed recommendations for the Precision Medicine Research Agenda for Sepsis and ARDS. Results: The following six priority recommendations were developed by the working group: 1) the creation of large richly phenotyped and harmonized knowledge networks of clinical, imaging, and multianalyte molecular data for sepsis and ARDS; 2) the implementation of novel trial designs, including adaptive designs, and embedding trial procedures in the electronic health record; 3) continued innovation in the data science and engineering methods required to identify heterogeneity of treatment effect; 4) further development of the tools necessary for the real-time application of precision medicine approaches; 5) work to ensure that precision medicine strategies are applicable and available to a broad range of patients varying across differing racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and demographic groups; and 6) the securement and maintenance of adequate and sustainable funding for precision medicine efforts. Conclusions: Precision medicine approaches that incorporate variability in genomic, biologic, and environmental factors may provide a path forward for better individualizing the delivery of therapies and improving care for patients with sepsis and ARDS.

Background: In the past two decades, many advances have been made to our understanding of interstitial lung disease (ILD) and the way we approach its treatment. Despite this, many questions remain unanswered, particularly those related to how the disease and its therapies impact outcomes that are most important to patients. There is currently a lack of guidance on how to best define and incorporate these patient-centered outcomes in ILD research. Objectives: To summarize the current state of patient-centered outcomes research in ILD, identify gaps in knowledge and research, and highlight opportunities and methods for future patient-centered research agendas in ILD. Methods: An international interdisciplinary group of experts was assembled. The group identified top patient-centered outcomes in ILD, reviewed available literature for each outcome, highlighted important discoveries and knowledge gaps, and formulated research recommendations. Results: The committee identified seven themes around patient-centered outcomes as the focus of the statement. After a review of the literature and expert committee discussion, we developed 28 research recommendations. Conclusions: Patient-centered outcomes are key to ascertaining whether and how ILD and interventions used to treat it affect the way patients feel and function in their daily lives. Ample opportunities exist to conduct additional work dedicated to elevating and incorporating patient-centered outcomes in ILD research.

Background: Central sleep apnea (CSA) is common among patients with heart failure and has been strongly linked to adverse outcomes. However, progress toward improving outcomes for such patients has been limited. The purpose of this official statement from the American Thoracic Society is to identify key areas to prioritize for future research regarding CSA in heart failure. Methods: An international multidisciplinary group with expertise in sleep medicine, pulmonary medicine, heart failure, clinical research, and health outcomes was convened. The group met at the American Thoracic Society 2019 International Conference to determine research priority areas. A statement summarizing the findings of the group was subsequently authored using input from all members. Results: The workgroup identified 11 specific research priorities in several key areas: 1) control of breathing and pathophysiology leading to CSA, 2) variability across individuals and over time, 3) techniques to examine CSA pathogenesis and outcomes, 4) impact of device and pharmacological treatment, and 5) implementing CSA treatment for all individuals Conclusions: Advancing care for patients with CSA in the context of heart failure will require progress in the arenas of translational (basic through clinical), epidemiological, and patient-centered outcome research. Given the increasing prevalence of heart failure and its associated substantial burden to individuals, society, and the healthcare system, targeted research to improve knowledge of CSA pathogenesis and treatment is a priority.

Background: Severe alcohol withdrawal syndrome (SAWS) is highly morbid, costly, and common among hospitalized patients, yet minimal evidence exists to guide inpatient management. Research needs in this field are broad, spanning the translational science spectrum. Goals: This research statement aims to describe what is known about SAWS, identify knowledge gaps, and offer recommendations for research in each domain of the Institute of Medicine T0-T4 continuum to advance the care of hospitalized patients who experience SAWS. Methods: Clinicians and researchers with unique and complementary expertise in basic, clinical, and implementation research related to unhealthy alcohol consumption and alcohol withdrawal were invited to participate in a workshop at the American Thoracic Society 2019 International Conference. The committee was subdivided into four groups on the basis of interest and expertise: T0-T1 (basic science research with translation to humans), T2 (research translating to patients), T3 (research translating to clinical practice), and T4 (research translating to communities). A medical librarian conducted a pragmatic literature search to facilitate this work, and committee members reviewed and supplemented the resulting evidence, identifying key knowledge gaps. Results: The committee identified several investigative opportunities to advance the care of patients with SAWS in each domain of the translational science spectrum. Major themes included 1) the need to investigate non-γ-aminobutyric acid pathways for alcohol withdrawal syndrome treatment; 2) harnessing retrospective and electronic health record data to identify risk factors and create objective severity scoring systems, particularly for acutely ill patients with SAWS; 3) the need for more robust comparative-effectiveness data to identify optimal SAWS treatment strategies; and 4) recommendations to accelerate implementation of effective treatments into practice. Conclusions: The dearth of evidence supporting management decisions for hospitalized patients with SAWS, many of whom require critical care, represents both a call to action and an opportunity for the American Thoracic Society and larger scientific communities to improve care for a vulnerable patient population. This report highlights basic, clinical, and implementation research that diverse experts agree will have the greatest impact on improving care for hospitalized patients with SAWS.

Background: Well-designed clinical research needs to obtain information that is applicable to the general population. However, most current studies fail to include substantial cohorts of racial/ethnic minority populations. Such underrepresentation may lead to delayed diagnosis or misdiagnosis of disease, wide application of approved interventions without appropriate knowledge of their usefulness in certain populations, and development of recommendations that are not broadly applicable. Goals: To develop best practices for recruitment and retention of racial/ethnic minorities for clinical research in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Methods: The American Thoracic Society convened a workshop in May of 2019. This included an international interprofessional group from academia, industry, the NIH, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, with expertise ranging from clinical and biomedical research to community-based participatory research methods and patient advocacy. Workshop participants addressed historical and current mistrust of scientific research, systemic bias, and social and structural barriers to minority participation in clinical research. A literature search of PubMed and Google Scholar was performed to support conclusions. The search was not a systematic review of the literature. Results: Barriers at the individual, interpersonal, institutional, and federal/policy levels were identified as limiting to minority participation in clinical research. Through the use of a multilevel framework, workshop participants proposed evidence-based solutions to the identified barriers. Conclusions: To date, minority participation in clinical research is not representative of the U.S. and global populations. This American Thoracic Society research statement identifies potential evidence-based solutions by applying a multilevel framework that is anchored in community engagement methods and patient advocacy.

Background: Thousands of biomarker tests are either available or under development for lung diseases. In many cases, adoption of these tests into clinical practice is outpacing the generation and evaluation of sufficient data to determine clinical utility and ability to improve health outcomes. There is a need for a systematically organized report that provides guidance on how to understand and evaluate use of biomarker tests for lung diseases. Methods: We assembled a diverse group of clinicians and researchers from the American Thoracic Society and leaders from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute with expertise in various aspects of precision medicine to review the current status of biomarker tests in lung diseases. Experts summarized existing biomarker tests that are available for lung cancer, pulmonary arterial hypertension, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cystic fibrosis, and other rare lung diseases. The group identified knowledge gaps that future research studies can address to efficiently translate biomarker tests into clinical practice, assess their cost-effectiveness, and ensure they apply to diverse, real-life populations. Results: We found that the status of biomarker tests in lung diseases is highly variable depending on the disease. Nevertheless, biomarker tests in lung diseases show great promise in improving clinical care. To efficiently translate biomarkers into tests used widely in clinical practice, researchers need to address specific clinical unmet needs, secure support for biomarker discovery efforts, conduct analytical and clinical validation studies, ensure tests have clinical utility, and facilitate appropriate adoption into routine clinical practice. Conclusions: Although progress has been made toward implementation of precision medicine for lung diseases in clinical practice in certain settings, additional studies focused on addressing specific unmet clinical needs are required to evaluate the clinical utility of biomarkers; ensure their generalizability to diverse, real-life populations; and determine their cost-effectiveness.

PURPOSE: Feasibility assessments (FAs) are important to establish site capabilities to conduct clinical trials and their suitability for specific trials. However, current FA methods used by biotechnology and pharmaceutical (biotech-pharma) trial sponsors and contract research organizations (CROs) are costly, inefficient, unnecessarily burdensome, and resource intensive. These methods delay trial start-up, act as a barrier to site participation, and ultimately reduce timely patient access to clinical trials and novel treatments. METHODS: An ASCO Task Force was convened to assess the specific burdens and challenges with FAs and to develop recommendations to improve their efficiencies and effectiveness. Stakeholders (including trial sites, biotech-pharma sponsors, and CROs) provided insights into challenges and offered solutions through two surveys and an in-person meeting. The Task Force used the feedback to formulate consensus recommendations to improve FAs for oncology clinical trials. RESULTS: Three key recommendations were identified for application across all biotech-pharma sponsored trials: (1) implement a streamlined and uniform FA process across trials and sponsors; (2) minimize and standardize questions; and (3) leverage technology to centralize FAs, facilitate communications, and reduce redundancies. CONCLUSION: There is an urgency to improve the current FA process, which is costly, inconsistent, inefficient, labor intensive, and of uncertain effectiveness. All stakeholders stand to benefit from implementing these recommendations, which aim to minimize burdens and ensure that more trial sites and patients have timely access to oncology clinical trials. To have meaningful impact, adoption and consistent execution of these recommendations across all trials, sponsors, CROs, and sites are essential.

Lung cancer screening (LCS) has the potential to reduce the risk of lung cancer death in healthy individuals, but the impact of coexisting chronic illnesses on LCS outcomes has not been well defined. Consideration of the complex relationship between baseline risk of lung cancer, treatment-related harms, and risk of death from competing causes is crucial in determining the balance of benefits and harms of LCS.To summarize evidence, identify knowledge and research gaps, prioritize topics, and propose methods for future research on how best to incorporate comorbidities in making decisions regarding LCS.A multidisciplinary group of international clinicians and researchers reviewed available data on the effects of comorbidities on LCS outcomes, focusing on the juxtaposition of lung cancer risk and competing risks of death, consideration of benefits and risks in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, communication of risk, and treatment of screen-detected lung cancer.This statement identifies gaps in knowledge regarding how comorbidities and competing causes of death impact outcomes in LCS, and we have developed questions to help guide future research efforts to better inform patient selection, education, and implementation of LCS.There is an urgent need for further research that can help guide clinical decision-making with patients who may not benefit from LCS owing to coexisting chronic illness. This statement establishes a research framework to address essential questions regarding how to incorporate and communicate risks of comorbidities into patient selection and decisions regarding LCS.

Background UK Hospital Trusts are charged with increasing patients' research awareness and willingness to take part in research. This includes implementing strategies to encourage patient-initiated enquiries about participation. Objectives To evaluate the impact of a research statement inserted in outpatient letters in one clinical service, and to derive suggestions on potential steps towards increasing patient-initiated recruitment. Setting A medical outpatient clinic of a research-active hospital trust, serving an inner-city multi-ethnic population across two boroughs. Methods Pre-intervention and post-intervention questionnaires were administered face-to-face to new patients. Questionnaires included closed questions and one open comments section. Data were analysed for frequencies, with thematic coding of open-ended responses. Results The response rates were 87% for the pre-intervention survey and 92% for the post-intervention survey. In the post-intervention survey, 85% of patients did not notice the research statement in the letter. More than half found the statement "a little unclear," whilst one-third considered it "clear." Three-quarters of respondents perceived the statement to be "a little helpful." Only one person enquired about participating in clinical research having read the statement in the outpatient letter. Conclusion The analysis suggests that simple, single-solution approaches such as including research statements in outpatient letters are unlikely to be sufficient to significantly facilitate patient-initiated recruitment. Recruitment efforts need to take into consideration the diversity of patient constituencies including the reasons they seek health care, and how patients can meaningfully access information (research literacy).

Smoking cessation counseling in conjunction with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening is recommended in multiple clinical practice guidelines. The best approach for integrating effective smoking cessation interventions within this setting is unknown.To summarize evidence, identify research gaps, prioritize topics for future research, and propose standardized tools for use in conducting research on smoking cessation interventions within the LDCT lung cancer screening setting.The American Thoracic Society convened a multistakeholder committee with expertise in tobacco dependence treatment and/or LDCT screening. During an in-person meeting, evidence was reviewed, research gaps were identified, and key questions were generated for each of three research domains: (1) target population to study; (2) adaptation, development, and testing of interventions; and (3) implementation of interventions with demonstrated efficacy. We also identified standardized measures for use in conducting this research. A larger stakeholder panel then ranked research questions by perceived importance in an online survey. Final prioritization was generated hierarchically on the basis of average rank assigned.There was little consensus on which questions within the population domain were of highest priority. Within the intervention domain, research to evaluate the effectiveness in the lung cancer screening setting of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions shown to be effective in other contexts was ranked highest. In the implementation domain, stakeholders prioritized understanding strategies to identify and overcome barriers to integrating smoking cessation in lung cancer screening settings.This statement offers an agenda to stimulate research surrounding the integration and implementation of smoking cessation interventions with LDCT lung cancer screening.

Background: Health disparities have a major impact in the quality of life and clinical care received by minorities in the United States. Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a rare cardiopulmonary disorder that affects children and adults and that, if untreated, results in premature death. The impact of health disparities in the diagnosis, treatment, and clinical outcome of patients with PAH has not been systematically investigated. Objectives: The specific goals of this research statement were to conduct a critical review of the literature concerning health disparities in PAH, identify major research gaps and prioritize direction for future research. Methods: Literature searches from multiple reference databases were performed using medical subject headings and text words for pulmonary hypertension and health disparities. Members of the committee discussed the evidence and provided recommendations for future research. Results: Few studies were found discussing the impact of health disparities in PAH. Using recent research statements focused on health disparities, the group identified six major study topics that would help address the contribution of health disparities to PAH. Representative studies in each topic were discussed and specific recommendations were made by the group concerning the most urgent questions to address in future research studies. Conclusions: At present, there are few studies that address health disparities in PAH. Given the potential adverse impact of health disparities, we recommend that research efforts be undertaken to address the topics discussed in the document. Awareness of health disparities will likely improve advocacy efforts, public health policy and the quality of care of vulnerable populations with PAH.

BACKGROUND: Airway remodeling (AR) is a prominent feature of asthma and other obstructive lung diseases that is minimally affected by current treatments. The goals of this Official American Thoracic Society (ATS) Research Statement are to discuss the scientific, technological, economic, and regulatory issues that deter progress of AR research and development of therapeutics targeting AR and to propose approaches and solutions to these specific problems. This Statement is not intended to provide clinical practice recommendations on any disease in which AR is observed and/or plays a role.METHODS: An international multidisciplinary group from within academia, industry, and the National Institutes of Health, with expertise in multimodal approaches to the study of airway structure and function, pulmonary research and clinical practice in obstructive lung disease, and drug discovery platforms was invited to participate in one internet-based and one face-to-face meeting to address the above-stated goals. Although the majority of the analysis related to AR was in asthma, AR in other diseases was also discussed and considered in the recommendations. A literature search of PubMed was performed to support conclusions. The search was not a systematic review of the evidence.RESULTS: Multiple conceptual, logistical, economic, and regulatory deterrents were identified that limit the performance of AR research and impede accelerated, intensive development of AR-focused therapeutics. Complementary solutions that leverage expertise of academia and industry were proposed to address them.CONCLUSIONS: To date, numerous factors related to the intrinsic difficulty in performing AR research, and economic forces that are disincentives for the pursuit of AR treatments, have thwarted the ability to understand AR pathology and mechanisms and to address it clinically. This ATS Research Statement identifies potential solutions for each of these factors and emphasizes the importance of educating the global research community as to the extent of the problem as a critical first step in developing effective strategies for: (1) increasing the extent and impact of AR research and (2) developing, testing, and ultimately improving drugs targeting AR.

In contrast to clinical biopsies, where tissue is collected to inform patient care, research biopsies are performed for scientific purposes to potentially enhance understanding of the biologic bases of cancer and drug action, thereby improving diagnosis and treatment, but they may offer no direct benefit to participants and have known risks. The widespread use of research biopsies that do not have the potential to directly benefit participants has come under scrutiny, with critics raising ethical concerns related to the adequacy of participant protections, informed consent, and participant understanding of the risks and benefits, as well as the scientific impact of research biopsies on drug development and treatment. This manuscript presents the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s (ASCO’s) ethical framework for incorporation of research biopsies in trials. The framework provides guidance on the circumstances to include optional and mandatory biopsies, as well as provides recommendations to stakeholders on necessary steps for improving the conduct of research biopsies overall.

Many advances in health care fail to reach patients. Implementation science is the study of novel approaches to mitigate this evidence-to-practice gap.The American Thoracic Society (ATS) created a multidisciplinary ad hoc committee to develop a research statement on implementation science in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. The committee used an iterative consensus process to define implementation science and review the use of conceptual frameworks to guide implementation science for the pulmonary, critical care, and sleep community and to explore how professional medical societies such as the ATS can promote implementation science.The committee defined implementation science as the study of the mechanisms by which effective health care interventions are either adopted or not adopted in clinical and community settings. The committee also distinguished implementation science from the act of implementation. Ideally, implementation science should include early and continuous stakeholder involvement and the use of conceptual frameworks (i.e., models to systematize the conduct of studies and standardize the communication of findings). Multiple conceptual frameworks are available, and we suggest the selection of one or more frameworks on the basis of the specific research question and setting. Professional medical societies such as the ATS can have an important role in promoting implementation science. Recommendations for professional societies to consider include: unifying implementation science activities through a single organizational structure, linking front-line clinicians with implementation scientists, seeking collaborations to prioritize and conduct implementation science studies, supporting implementation science projects through funding opportunities, working with research funding bodies to set the research agenda in the field, collaborating with external bodies responsible for health care delivery, disseminating results of implementation science through scientific journals and conferences, and teaching the next generation about implementation science through courses and other media.Implementation science plays an increasingly important role in health care. Through support of implementation science, the ATS and other professional medical societies can work with other stakeholders to lead this effort.

BACKGROUND: Right ventricular (RV) adaptation to acute and chronic pulmonary hypertensive syndromes is a significant determinant of short- and long-term outcomes. Although remarkable progress has been made in the understanding of RV function and failure since the meeting of the NIH Working Group on Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Right Heart Failure in 2005, significant gaps remain at many levels in the understanding of cellular and molecular mechanisms of RV responses to pressure and volume overload, in the validation of diagnostic modalities, and in the development of evidence-based therapies.METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group of 20 international experts from the American Thoracic Society Assemblies on Pulmonary Circulation and Critical Care, as well as external content experts, reviewed the literature, identified important knowledge gaps, and provided recommendations.RESULTS: This document reviews the knowledge in the field of RV failure, identifies and prioritizes the most pertinent research gaps, and provides a prioritized pathway for addressing these preclinical and clinical questions. The group identified knowledge gaps and research opportunities in three major topic areas: 1) optimizing the methodology to assess RV function in acute and chronic conditions in preclinical models, human studies, and clinical trials; 2) analyzing advanced RV hemodynamic parameters at rest and in response to exercise; and 3) deciphering the underlying molecular and pathogenic mechanisms of RV function and failure in diverse pulmonary hypertension syndromes.CONCLUSIONS: This statement provides a roadmap to further advance the state of knowledge, with the ultimate goal of developing RV-targeted therapies for patients with RV failure of any etiology.

Background: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are common conditions; the co-occurrence of these diseases, called the overlap syndrome (OVS), has been associated with poor health outcomes. Purpose: The purpose of this Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement is to describe pathophysiology, epidemiology, outcomes, diagnostic metrics, and treatment of OVS, as well as to identify important gaps in knowledge and make recommendations for future research. Methods: Clinicians and researchers with expertise in sleep medicine, pulmonary medicine, or both were invited to participate. Topics were divided among the participants according to their interest and expertise. A literature search was conducted; the search was not a formal systematic review. Evidence was considered and supplemented with the panelists’ nonsystematic clinical observations. Important knowledge gaps were identified. Results: Recommendations for research to fill existing knowledge gaps were made. The recommendations were formulated by discussion and consensus. Conclusions: Many important questions about OVS exist. This American Thoracic Society Research Statement highlights the types of research that leading clinicians and researchers believe will have the greatest impact on better understanding the spectrum of disease, improving diagnosis, and optimizing therapy.

Since the mid-20th century, the scientific community has substantially improved its understanding of the worldwide tobacco epidemic. Although significant progress has been made, the sheer enormity and scope of the global problem put it on track to take a billion lives this century. Curbing the epidemic will require maximizing the impact of proven tools as well as the development of new, breakthrough methods to help interrupt the spread of nicotine addiction and reduce the downstream morbidity.Members of the Tobacco Action Committee of the American Thoracic Society queried bibliographic databases, including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Collaborative, to identify primary sources and reviews relevant to the epidemic. Exploded search terms were used to identify evidence, including tobacco, addiction, smoking, cigarettes, nicotine, and smoking cessation. Evidence was consolidated into three thematic areas: (1) determinants of risk, (2) maternal-fetal exposure, and (3) current tobacco users. Expert panel consensus regarding current gaps in understanding and recommendations for future research priorities was generated through iterative discussion.Although much has been accomplished, significant gaps in understanding remain. Implementation often lags well behind insight. This report identifies a number of investigative opportunities for significantly reducing the toll of tobacco use, including: (1) the need for novel, nonlinear models of population-based disease control; (2) refinement of "real-world" models of clinical intervention in trial design; and (3) understanding of mechanisms by which intrauterine smoke exposure may lead to persistent, tobacco-related chronic disease.In the coming era of tobacco research, pooled talent from multiple disciplines will be required to further illuminate the complex social, environmental and biological codeterminants of tobacco dependence.

International audience; Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and resource use worldwide. The goal of this official American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) research statement is to describe evidence related to diagnosis, assessment and management; identify gaps in knowledge; and make recommendations for future research. It is not intended to provide clinical practice recommendations on COPD diagnosis and management. Clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates with expertise in COPD were invited to participate. A literature search of Medline was performed, and studies deemed relevant were selected. The search was not a systematic review of the evidence. Existing evidence was appraised and summarised, and then salient knowledge gaps were identified. Recommendations for research that addresses important gaps in the evidence in all areas of COPD were formulated via discussion and consensus. Great strides have been made in the diagnosis, assessment and management of COPD, as well as understanding its pathogenesis. Despite this, many important questions remain unanswered. This ATS/ ERS research statement highlights the types of research that leading clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates believe will have the greatest impact on patient-centred outcomes. @ERSpublications ATS/ERS statement: which types of research will have the greatest future impact on patient-centred outcomes in COPD? http://ow.ly/I54Hb

ASCO believes that high-quality observational studies can advance evidence-based practice for cancer care and are complementary to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Observational studies can generate hypotheses by evaluating novel exposures or biomarkers and by revealing patterns of care and relationships that might not otherwise be discovered. Researchers can then test these hypotheses in RCTs. Observational studies can also answer or inform questions that either have not been or cannot be answered by RCTs. In addition, observational studies can be used for postmarketing surveillance of new cancer treatments, particularly in vulnerable populations. The incorporation of observational research as part of clinical decision making is consistent with the position of many leading institutions. ASCO identified five overarching recommendations to enhance the role of observational research in clinical decision making: (1) improve the quality of electronic health data available for research, (2) improve interoperability and the exchange of electronic health information, (3) ensure the use of rigorous observational research methodologies, (4) promote transparent reporting of observational research studies, and (5) protect patient privacy.

Background: Pulmonary fibrosis encompasses a group of lung-scarring disorders that occur owing to known or unknown insults and accounts for significant morbidity and mortality. Despite intense investigation spanning decades, much remains to be learned about the natural history, pathophysiology, and biologic mechanisms of disease. Purpose: To identify the most pressing research needs in the lung fibrosis community and to provide a roadmap of priorities to investigators, funding agencies, patient advocacy groups, and other interested stakeholders. Methods: An ad hoc international working group of the American Thoracic Society with experience in clinical, translational, and bench-based research in fibrotic lung diseases was convened. The group used an iterative consensus process to identify successes and challenges in pulmonary fibrosis research. Measurements and Main Results: The group identified five main priority areas in which substantial resources should be invested to advance our understanding and to develop novel therapies for patients with pulmonary fibrosis. These priorities include develop newer models of human lung fibrosis, engage current and new stakeholders to provide sustained funding for the initiatives, create a global infrastructure for storing patient-derived materials, establish collaborative preclinical and clinical research networks in fibrotic lung disease, and create a global lung fibrosis initiative that unites these multifaceted efforts into a single virtual umbrella structure. Conclusions: Despite recent advances in the treatment of some forms of lung fibrosis, many gaps in knowledge about natural history, pathophysiology, and treatment remain. Investment in the research priorities enumerated above will help address these shortcomings and enhance patient care worldwide. &nbsp

Pulmonary nodules are frequently detected during diagnostic chest imaging and as a result of lung cancer screening. Current guidelines for their evaluation are largely based on low-quality evidence, and patients and clinicians could benefit from more research in this area.In this research statement from the American Thoracic Society, a multidisciplinary group of clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates reviewed available evidence for pulmonary nodule evaluation, characterized six focus areas to direct future research efforts, and identified fundamental gaps in knowledge and strategies to address them. We did not use formal mechanisms to prioritize one research area over another or to achieve consensus.There was widespread agreement that novel tests (including novel imaging tests and biopsy techniques, biomarkers, and prognostic models) may improve diagnostic accuracy for identifying cancerous nodules. Before they are used in clinical practice, however, better evidence is needed to show that they improve more distal outcomes of importance to patients. In addition, the pace of research and the quality of clinical care would be improved by the development of registries that link demographic and nodule characteristics with patient-level outcomes. Methods to share data from registries are also necessary.This statement may help researchers to develop impactful and innovative research projects and enable funders to better judge research proposals. We hope that it will accelerate the pace and increase the efficiency of discovery to improve the quality of care for patients with pulmonary nodules.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and resource use worldwide. The goal of this Official American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) Research Statement is to describe evidence related to diagnosis, assessment, and management; identify gaps in knowledge; and make recommendations for future research. It is not intended to provide clinical practice recommendations on COPD diagnosis and management. METHODS: Clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates with expertise in COPD were invited to participate. A literature search of Medline was performed, and studies deemed relevant were selected. The search was not a systematic review of the evidence. Existing evidence was appraised and summarized, and then salient knowledge gaps were identified. RESULTS: Recommendations for research that addresses important gaps in the evidence in all areas of COPD were formulated via discussion and consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Great strides have been made in the diagnosis, assessment, and management of COPD as well as understanding its pathogenesis. Despite this, many important questions remain unanswered. This ATS/ERS Research Statement highlights the types of research that leading clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates believe will have the greatest impact on patient-centered outcomes.

In the Netherlands, as in many other nations, the government has proposed the use of a contact-tracing app as a means of helping to contain the spread of the corona virus. The discussion about the use of such an app has mostly been framed in terms of a tradeoff between privacy and public health. This research statement presents an analysis of the Dutch public debate on Corona-apps by using the framework of Orders of Worth by Boltanski and Thévenot (1991). It argues that this framework can help us to move beyond the dichotomy of privacy vs. public health by recognizing a plurality of conceptions of the common good in the debate about contact-tracing apps. This statement presents six orders of worth present in the Dutch debate:civic, domestic, vitality, market, industrialandproject,and argues that the identification of which common goods are at stake will contribute to discussions about the use of this technology from a standpoint with a richer ethical perspective.