Search

BackgroundMany persons with a history of smoking tobacco have clinically significant respiratory symptoms despite an absence of airflow obstruction as assessed by spirometry. They are often treated with medications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but supporting evidence for this treatment is lacking.MethodsWe randomly assigned persons who had a tobacco-smoking history of at least 10 pack-years, respiratory symptoms as defined by a COPD Assessment Test score of at least 10 (scores range from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms), and preserved lung function on spirometry (ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] to forced vital capacity [FVC] ≥0.70 and FVC ≥70% of the predicted value after bronchodilator use) to receive either indacaterol (27.5 μg) plus glycopyrrolate (15.6 μg) or placebo twice daily for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was at least a 4-point decrease (i.e., improvement) in the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating worse health status) after 12 weeks without treatment failure (defined as an increase in lower respiratory symptoms treated with a long-acting inhaled bronchodilator, glucocorticoid, or antibiotic agent).ResultsA total of 535 participants underwent randomization. In the modified intention-to-treat population (471 participants), 128 of 227 participants (56.4%) in the treatment group and 144 of 244 (59.0%) in the placebo group had at least a 4-point decrease in the SGRQ score (difference, -2.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -11.6 to 6.3; adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.37; P = 0.65). The mean change in the percent of predicted FEV1 was 2.48 percentage points (95% CI, 1.49 to 3.47) in the treatment group and -0.09 percentage points (95% CI, -1.06 to 0.89) in the placebo group, and the mean change in the inspiratory capacity was 0.12 liters (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.18) in the treatment group and 0.02 liters (95% CI, -0.03 to 0.08) in the placebo group. Four serious adverse events occurred in the treatment group, and 11 occurred in the placebo group; none were deemed potentially related to the treatment or placebo.ConclusionsInhaled dual bronchodilator therapy did not decrease respiratory symptoms in symptomatic, tobacco-exposed persons with preserved lung function as assessed by spirometry. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; RETHINC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02867761.).

Rationale: Characteristics and outcomes of lung cancer in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) in the United States remain understudied.Objectives: To determine the tumor characteristics and survival of patients with IPF with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using U.S. population-based data.Methods: We selected Medicare beneficiaries from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry with histologically confirmed NSCLC diagnosed between 2007 and 2011. IPF was identified using two validated claims-based algorithms. We compared tumor characteristics and used logistic and Cox regression to compare rates of stage-appropriate therapy and of overall and lung cancer-specific survival in those with IPF and without IPF.Results: A total of 54,453 patients with NSCLC were included. Those with IPF were more likely to be diagnosed at an earlier stage (P < 0.01) and to have squamous histology (46% vs. 35%; P < 0.01) and lower-lobe tumors (38% vs. 28%; P < 0.01) than those without IPF. Patients with IPF and stages I-II disease had odds of receiving stage-appropriate therapy similar to patients without IPF who had stages I-II disease (odds ratio [OR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.43); however, those with advanced disease were less likely to be treated (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99). Overall and lung cancer-specific survival were worse in patients with IPF (respectively, hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% CI, 1.26-1.45; and HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.10-1.32).Conclusions: NSCLC has a unique presentation in patients with IPF and is associated with poorer prognosis. Further research is needed to identify optimal treatment strategies in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Lung cancer risk models optimise screening by identifying subjects at highest risk, but none of them consider emphysema, a risk factor identifiable on baseline screen. Subjects with a negative baseline low-dose CT (LDCT) screen are at lower risk for subsequent diagnosis and may benefit from risk stratification prior to additional screening, thus we investigated the role of radiographic emphysema as an additional predictor of lung cancer diagnosis in participants with negative baseline LDCT screens of the National Lung Screening Trial.Methods: Our cohorts consist of participants with a negative baseline (T0) LDCT screen (n=16 624) and participants who subsequently had a negative 1-year follow-up (T1) screen (n=14 530). Lung cancer risk scores were calculated using the Bach, PLCOm2012 and Liverpool Lung Project models. Risk of incident lung cancer diagnosis at the end of the study and number screened per incident lung cancer were compared between participants with and without radiographic emphysema.Results: Radiographic emphysema was independently associated with nearly double the hazard of lung cancer diagnosis at both the second (T1) and third (T2) annual LDCT in all three risk models (HR range 1.9-2.0, p<0.001 for all comparisons). The number screened per incident lung cancer was considerably lower in participants with radiographic emphysema (62 vs 28 at T1 and 91 vs 40 at T2).Conclusion: Radiographic emphysema is an independent predictor of lung cancer diagnosis and may help guide decisions surrounding further screening for eligible patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]