OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to explore the evidence regarding shared decision-making (SDM) in the management of pulmonary nodules.
METHODS: Systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.
METHODS: 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.
METHODS: 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 Grey literature and literature that had not been peer reviewed were excluded.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.
METHODS: 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.

BACKGROUND: 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: 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.
METHODS: 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.
BACKGROUND: 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.
BACKGROUND: ISRCTN42704678 and NCT03750110.

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.
BACKGROUND: 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.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42022330532.

BACKGROUND: 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: 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.
BACKGROUND: Primary approval by the Ethics Committee of the Amsterdam University Medical Center. Dissemination involves publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
BACKGROUND: Financial and material support from Mauna Kea Technologies.
BACKGROUND: NCT06079970.

OBJECTIVE: 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.
METHODS: Systematic review.
METHODS: Databases, searched March 2022 and March 2024, were MEDLINE; CINAHL; PsycINFO; Cochrane Library; ASSIA.
METHODS: 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.
METHODS: 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.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42022302187.

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: 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.
BACKGROUND: 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.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42023411392.

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.
METHODS: 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.
METHODS: 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.

OBJECTIVE: 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.
METHODS: 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.
METHODS: 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.

BACKGROUND: 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: 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.
BACKGROUND: 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.
BACKGROUND: NCT05704920.

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.
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.
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.
NCT05389774.