Utilizing Lung Cancer Risk Prediction Models to Promote Smoking Cessation: Two Randomized Controlled Trials

Purpose: The current project sought to examine whether delivery of lung cancer risk projections (calculated using the Liverpool Lung Project [LLP] risk model) predicted follow-up smoking status. Design: Two single-blinded randomized controlled trials. Setting: Stop Smoking Services in Liverpool (United Kingdom). Participants: Baseline current smokers (N = 297) and baseline recent former smokers (N = 216) were recruited. Intervention: Participants allocated to intervention groups were provided with personalized lung cancer risk projections, calculated using the LLP risk model. Measures: Baseline and follow-up questionnaires explored sociodemographics, smoking behavior, and lung cancer risk perceptions. Analysis: Bivariate analyses identified significant differences between randomization groups, and logistic regression models were developed to investigate the intervention effect on the outcome variables. Results: Lung cancer risk projections were not found to predict follow-up smoking status in the trial of baseline current smokers; however, they did predict follow-up smoking status in the trial of baseline recent former smokers (odds ratio: 1.91; 95% confidence interval: 1.03-3.55). Conclusion: The current study suggests that lung cancer risk projections may help maintain abstinence among individuals who have quit smoking, but the results did not provide evidence to suggest that lung cancer risk projections motivate current smokers to quit.

Download Full-text

C-Reactive Protein and Risk of Lung Cancer

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2009.27.0454 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 28 (16) ◽

pp. 2719-2726 ◽

Cited By ~ 121

Author(s):

Anil K. Chaturvedi ◽

Neil E. Caporaso ◽

Hormuzd A. Katki ◽

Hui-Lee Wong ◽

Nilanjan Chatterjee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Lung Cancer Risk ◽

Smoking Status ◽

Lung Carcinogenesis ◽

C Reactive Protein ◽

Baseline Serum ◽

Reactive Protein ◽

Former Smokers

Purpose Chronic inflammation could play a role in lung carcinogenesis, underscoring the potential for lung cancer prevention and screening. We investigated the association of circulating high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP, an inflammation biomarker) and CRP single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with prospective lung cancer risk. Patients and Methods We conducted a nested case-control study of 592 lung cancer patients and 670 controls with available prediagnostic serum and 378 patients and 447 controls with DNA within the screening arm of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (N = 77,464). Controls were matched to patients on age, sex, entry year, follow-up time, and smoking. We measured CRP levels in baseline serum samples and genotyped five common CRP SNPs. Results Elevated CRP levels were associated with increased lung cancer risk (odds ratio [OR], 1.98; 95% CI, 1.35 to 2.89; P-trend < .001 for fourth quartile [Q4, ≥ 5.6 mg/L] v Q1 [< 1.0 mg/L]). The CRP association did not differ significantly by histology, follow-up time, or smoking status, but was most apparent for squamous cell carcinomas (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.30 to 6.54), 2 to 5 years before lung cancer diagnosis (OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.39), and among former smokers (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.53 to 4.03) and current smokers (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.06 to 3.41). Although CRP SNPs and haplotypes were associated with CRP levels, they were not associated with lung cancer risk. Ten-year standardized absolute risks of lung cancer were higher with elevated CRP levels among former smokers (Q4: 2.55%; 95% CI, 1.98% to 3.27% v Q1: 1.39%; 95% CI, 1.07% to 1.81%) and current smokers (Q4: 7.37%; 95% CI, 5.81% to 9.33% v Q1: 4.03%; 95% CI, 3.01% to 5.40%). Conclusion Elevated CRP levels are associated with subsequently increased lung cancer risk, suggesting an etiologic role for chronic pulmonary inflammation in lung carcinogenesis.

Download Full-text

The Associations of Fruit and Vegetable Intake with Lung Cancer Risk in Participants with Different Smoking Status: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies

Nutrients ◽

10.3390/nu11081791 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (8) ◽

pp. 1791 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Chong Wang ◽

Ting Yang ◽

Xiao-fei Guo ◽

Duo Li

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Dose Response ◽

Lung Cancer Risk ◽

Vegetable Intake ◽

Smoking Status ◽

Fruit And Vegetable Intake ◽

Response Analysis ◽

Prospective Cohort Studies ◽

Former Smokers

The results of epidemiological studies on the relationship between fruit and vegetable intake and lung cancer risk were inconsistent among participants with different smoking status. The purpose of this study was to investigate these relationships in participants with different smoking status with prospective cohort studies. A systematic literature retrieval was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases up to June 2019. The summary relative risks (RRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by random-effects model. The nonlinear dose-response analysis was carried out with restricted cubic spline regression model. Publication bias was estimated using Begg’s test. Nine independent prospective studies were included for data synthesis. Dietary consumption of fruit was negatively correlated with lung cancer risk among current smokers and former smokers, and the summery RRs were 0.86 (95% CI: 0.78, 0.94) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.99), respectively. Consumption of vegetable was significantly associated with reduced risk of lung cancer for current smokers (summary RR = 87%; 95% CI: 0.78, 0.94), but not for former smokers and never for smokers. Dose-response analysis suggested that risk of lung cancer was reduced by 5% (95% CI: 0.93, 0.97) in current smokers, and reduced by 4% (95% CI: 0.93, 0.98) in former smokers with an increase of 100 grams of fruit intake per day, respectively. Besides, dose-response analysis indicated a 3% reduction in lung cancer risk in current smokers for 100 gram per day increase of vegetable intake (95% CI: 0.96, 1.00). The findings of this study provide strong evidence that higher fruit consumption is negatively associated with the risk of lung cancer among current smokers and former smokers, while vegetable intake is significantly correlated with reducing the risk of lung cancer in current smokers. These findings might have considerable public health significance for the prevention of lung cancer through dietary interventions.

Download Full-text

Neighbourhood deprivation and lung cancer risk: a nested case–control study in the USA

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021059 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (9) ◽

pp. e021059 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Maureen Sanderson ◽

Melinda C Aldrich ◽

Robert S Levine ◽

Barbara Kilbourne ◽

Qiuyin Cai ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Case Control Study ◽

Lung Cancer Risk ◽

Smoking Status ◽

Case Control ◽

Neighbourhood Deprivation ◽

Former Smokers ◽

Nested Case Control ◽

Control Study

ObjectivesTo examine the association between neighbourhood deprivation and lung cancer risk.DesignNested case–control study.SettingSouthern Community Cohort Study of persons residing in 12 states in the southeastern USA.Participants1334 cases of lung cancer and 5315 controls.Primary outcome measureRisk of lung cancer.ResultsAfter adjustment for smoking status and other confounders, and additional adjustment for individual-level measures of socioeconomic status (SES), there was no monotonic increase in risk with worsening deprivation score overall or within sex and race groups. There was an increase among current and shorter term former smokers (p=0.04) but not among never and longer term former smokers. There was evidence of statistically significant interaction by sex among whites, but not blacks, in which the effect of worsening deprivation on lung cancer existed in males but not in females.ConclusionsArea-level measures of SES were associated with lung cancer risk in current and shorter term former smokers only in this population.

Download Full-text

Role of pemetrexed in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, with histology subgroup analysis

Current Oncology ◽

10.3747//co.19.891 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

Author(s):

K. Alsaleh ◽

C. Quinton ◽

P. M. Ellis

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Subgroup Analysis ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Small Cell ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Small Cell Lung ◽

Randomized Controlled

Download Full-text

The benefits and risks of CTLA4 inhibitor plus PD1/PDL1 inhibitor in stage IIIB/IV non‐small cell lung cancer: A systematic analysis and meta‐analysis based on randomized controlled trials

Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics ◽

10.1111/jcpt.13465 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Qiangyun Liu ◽

Zige Fang ◽

Miaowen Liu ◽

Ruoxin Xu ◽

Fengming Yi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Cell Lung Cancer ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Small Cell ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Small Cell Lung ◽

Systematic Analysis ◽

Randomized Controlled

Download Full-text

Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Journal of Intensive Care ◽

10.1186/s40560-021-00563-7 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Xiao-Li Chen ◽

Bei-Lei Zhang ◽

Chang Meng ◽

Hui-Bin Huang ◽

Bin Du

Keyword(s):

Sensitivity Analysis ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Critically Ill Patients ◽

Oxygen Therapy ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Icu Patients ◽

Randomized Controlled

Abstract Objective Conservative oxygen strategy is recommended in acute illness while its benefit in ICU patients remains controversial. Therefore, we sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine such oxygen strategies’ effect and safety in ICU patients. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception to Feb 15, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a conservative oxygen strategy to a conventional strategy in critically ill patients were included. Results were expressed as mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary outcome was the longest follow-up mortality. Heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were also investigated to test the robustness of the primary outcome. Results We included seven trials with a total of 5265 patients. In general, the conventional group had significantly higher SpO2 or PaO2 than that in the conservative group. No statistically significant differences were found in the longest follow-up mortality (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.97–1.10; I2=18%; P=0.34) between the two oxygen strategies when pooling studies enrolling subjects with various degrees of hypoxemia. Further sensitivity analysis showed that ICU patients with mild-to-moderate hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2 >100 mmHg) had significantly lower mortality (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05–1.46; I2=0%; P=0.01) when receiving conservative oxygen therapy. These findings were also confirmed in other study periods. Additional, secondary outcomes of the duration of mechanical ventilation, the length of stay in the ICU and hospital, change in sequential organ failure assessment score, and adverse events were comparable between the two strategies. Conclusions Our findings indicate that conservative oxygen therapy strategy did not improve the prognosis of the overall ICU patients. The subgroup of ICU patients with mild to moderate hypoxemia might obtain prognosis benefit from such a strategy without affecting other critical clinical results.

Download Full-text