Studying the immune landscape in lung cancer models: choosing the right experimental tools

Oral hygiene is defined as the practice of keeping the mouth clean and healthy, by brushing and flossing to prevent the occurrence of any gum diseases like periodontitis or gingivitis. The main aim of oral health hygiene is to prevent the buildup of plaque, which is defined as a sticky film of bacteria and food formed on the teeth. The coastal guard is an official who is employed to watch the sea near a coast for ships that are in danger or involved with illegal activities. Coastal guards have high possibilities of being affected by mesothelioma or lung cancer due to asbestos exposure. So, a questionnaire consisting of 20 questions was created and circulated among a hundred participants who were coastal guards, through Google forms. The responses were recorded and tabulated in the form of bar graphs. Out of a hundred participants, 52.4% were not aware of the fact that coastal guards have high chances of developing lung cancer and Mesothelioma. 53.7% were aware of the other oral manifestations of lung cancer other than bleeding gums. Majority of the coastal guards feel that they are given enough information about dental hygiene protocols. Hence, to conclude, oral hygiene habits have to be elaborated using various tools in the right manner to ensure better health of teeth and gums.

Download Full-text

Patients with Metastatic Lung Cancer and Oncologists’ Views on Achievement of Treatment Goals and Making the Right Treatment Decision: A Prospective Multicenter Study

Medical Decision Making ◽

10.1177/0272989x21998951 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 0272989X2199895

Author(s):

Adinda Mieras ◽

Annemarie Becker-Commissaris ◽

Hanna T. Klop ◽

H. Roeline W. Pasman ◽

Denise de Jong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Multicenter Study ◽

Systemic Treatment ◽

Treatment Decision ◽

Treatment Goals ◽

Metastatic Lung Cancer ◽

Prospective Multicenter Study ◽

Cancer Data ◽

Metastatic Lung ◽

The Right

Background Previous studies have investigated patients’ treatment goals before starting a treatment for metastatic lung cancer. Data on the evaluation of treatment goals are lacking. Aim To determine if patients with metastatic lung cancer and their oncologists perceive the treatment goals they defined at the start of systemic treatment as achieved after treatment and if in hindsight they believe it was the right decision to start systemic therapy. Design and Participants A prospective multicenter study in 6 hospitals across the Netherlands between 2016 and 2018. Following systemic treatment, 146 patients with metastatic lung cancer and 23 oncologists completed a questionnaire on the achievement of their treatment goals and whether they made the right treatment decision. Additional interviews with 15 patients and 5 oncologists were conducted. Results According to patients and oncologists, treatment goals were achieved in 30% and 37% for ‘quality of life,’ 49% and 41% for ‘life prolongation,’ 26% and 44% for ‘decrease in tumor size,’ and 44% for ‘cure’, respectively. Most patients and oncologists, in hindsight, felt they had made the right decision to start treatment and also if they had not achieved their goals (72% and 93%). This was related to the feeling that they had to do ‘something.’ Conclusions Before deciding on treatment, the treatment options, including their benefits and side effects, and the goals patients have should be discussed. It is key that these discussions include not only systemic treatment but also palliative care as effective options for doing ‘something.’

Download Full-text

Prediction of 10-year and lifetime risk of cancer in individual patients with established cardiovascular disease, results from UCC-SMART and CANTOS

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2815 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

C.C Van 't Klooster ◽

P.M Ridker ◽

N.R Cook ◽

J.G.J.V Aerts ◽

J Westerink ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Risk Factors ◽

Lung Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Prediction Models ◽

Funding Source ◽

Cancer Models ◽

Total Cancer ◽

The Cantos ◽

Risk Of Cancer

Abstract Background As treatment for cardiovascular disease (CVD) has improved substantially over the last decades, more patients survive acute CVD manifestations and are at risk for developing cancer as well as recurrent CVD. Due to similar risk factors, including smoking and obesity, patients with established CVD are at higher risk for cancer. Objectives The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate prediction models for the estimation of 10-year and lifetime risk for total, colorectal, and lung cancer in patients with established CVD. Methods Data from patients with established CVD from the UCC-SMART prospective cohort study (N=7,280) were used for model development, and data from the CANTOS trial (N=9,322) were used for model validation. Predictors were selected based on previously published cancer risk prediction models or cancer risk factors, easy clinical availability, and availability in the derivation dataset (UCC-SMART cohort). A Fine and Gray competing risk-adjusted lifetime model was developed for total, colorectal, and lung cancer. Results Selected predictors were age, sex, smoking status, weight, height, alcohol use, antiplatelet use, diabetes mellitus, and C-reactive protein. External calibration for 4-year risks of the total cancer, colorectal cancer, and lung cancer models was good (Figure 1), and C-statistics were 0.63–0.74 in the CANTOS trial population. Median predicted lifetime risks in CANTOS were 26% (range 1%-52%) for total cancer, 4% (range 0%-13%) for colorectal cancer, and 5% (range 0%-37%) for lung cancer. Conclusions Lifetime and 10-year risk of cancer can be estimated with easy to measure variables in patients with established CVD, showing a wide distribution of predicted lifetime risks for total cancer and lung cancer. Using these lifetime models in clinical practice could increase understanding of cancer risk and aid in emphasizing healthy lifestyle changes. Figure 1. Calibration plots of cancer models Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public hospital(s). Main funding source(s): University Medical Center; Additional funding: CANTOS trial was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Download Full-text