David Manners

Identifying high risk individuals for targeted lung cancer screening: Independent validation of the PLCOm2012 risk prediction tool

Lung cancer screening with computerised tomography holds promise, but optimising the balance of benefits and harms via selection of a high risk population is critical. PLCOm2012 is a logistic regression model based on U.S. data, incorporating sociodemographic and health factors, which predicts 6‐year lung cancer risk among ever‐smokers, and thus may better predict those who might benefit from screening than criteria based solely on age and smoking history. We aimed to validate the performance of PLCOm2012 in predicting lung cancer outcomes in a cohort of Australian smokers. Predicted risk of lung cancer was calculated using PLCOm2012 applied to baseline data from 95,882 ever‐smokers aged ≥45 years in the 45 and Up Study (2006–2009). Predictions were compared to lung cancer outcomes captured to June 2014 via linkage to population‐wide health databases; a total of 1,035 subsequent lung cancer diagnoses were identified. PLCOm2012 had good discrimination (area under the receiver‐operating‐characteristic‐curve; AUC 0.80, 95%CI 0.78–0.81) and excellent calibration (mean and 90th percentiles of absolute risk difference between observed and predicted outcomes: 0.006 and 0.016, respectively). Sensitivity (69.4%, 95%CI, 65.6–73.0%) of the PLCOm2012 criteria in the 55–74 year age group for predicting lung cancers was greater than that using criteria based on ≥30 pack‐years smoking and ≤15 years quit (57.3%, 53.3‐61.3%; p < 0.0001), but specificity was lower (72.0%, 71.7–72.4% versus 75.2%, 74.8–75.6%, respectively; p < 0.0001). Targeting high risk people for lung cancer screening using PLCOm2012 might improve the balance of benefits versus harms, and cost‐effectiveness of lung cancer screening.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: an update on diagnosis and treatment options:

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) represents a significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenge and is almost always a fatal disease. Imaging abnormalities are common, but have a limited role in distinguishing mesothelioma from metastatic pleural disease. Similarly, minimally invasive biomarkers have shown promise but also have limitations in the diagnosis of mesothelioma. In experienced centers, cytology and immunohistochemistry are now sufficient to diagnose the epithelioid subtype of mesothelioma, which can reduce the need for more invasive diagnostic investigations. Prognosis of MPM is modestly impacted by oncological treatments. Chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed is considered the standard of care, though the addition of bevacizumab to the platinum doublet may be the new standard of care. New targeted therapies have demonstrated some promise and are being addressed in clinical trials. This review focuses on the current data on the diagnostic and therapeutic issues of MPM.

Estimating eligibility for lung cancer screening in an Australian cohort, including the effect of spirometry

Objectives: To estimate the proportion of ever‐smokers who are eligible for lung cancer screening in an Australian cohort, and to evaluate the effect of spirometry in defining chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) when assessing screening eligibility.

Lung cancer screening - practical challenges of confining participation to those who might benefit.

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 205

Current lung cancer screening practice amongst general practitioners in Western Australia: a cross-sectional study

Lung cancer screening with low dose computed tomography (LDCT) is recommended in the USA and Canada for high‐risk smokers but not in Australia. We administered a cross‐sectional survey to Western Australian general practitioners (GP). The majority (64/93, 69%) reported requesting a screening chest X‐ray (42/93, 45%) and/or LDCT (38/93, 41%) in the past year. LDCT screening was more common if the GP had received education from radiology practices (odds ratio (OR) 2.81, P = 0.03) or if they believed screening is funded by the Medical Benefits Scheme (OR 3.57, P = 0.02). Lung cancer screening with LDCT is occurring outside a coordinated programme, contrary to Australian guidelines.

Low rates of eligibility for lung cancer screening in patients undergoing computed tomography coronary angiography: Brief Communications

Incidental findings, including pulmonary nodules, on computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) are common. Previous authors have suggested CTCA could allow opportunistic screening for lung cancer, though the lung cancer risk profile of this patient group has not previously been established. Smoking histories of 229 patients undergoing CTCA at two tertiary hospitals were reviewed and only 25% were current or former smokers aged 55–80 years old. Less than half of this group were eligible for screening based on the PLCOm2012 risk model. We conclude that routine screening in the form of full thoracic field imaging, of individuals undergoing CTCA is not appropriate as it would likely result in net harm.