User login
Interventional Chest/Diagnostic Procedures
Complications and economic burden of diagnostic procedures for lung abnormalities in the community setting
The influential National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported a 20% reduction in lung cancer-related deaths using low dose CT scan when compared with plain chest radiography (Aberle et al. N Engl J Med. 2011;365[5]:395). Many medical societies responded by recommending screening individuals at high-risk for lung cancer, and community-based lung cancer screening programs were developed across the US. A concerning feature of the study was the rate (23.3%) of false-positive findings after three rounds of screening and the potential for complications secondary to diagnostic invasive procedures.
Using a 2008-2013 cohort of community inpatient and outpatient practice settings, Hou and colleagues searched administrative databases for procedure and diagnostic codes used in the NLST (Hou et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179[3]:324). The study team created an age-matched control cohort that did not have an invasive procedure and used the difference in complications rates as an indicator of a procedure-related complication. Additionally, they estimated 1-year medical costs associated with complications. More than 340,000 patients were included in the study, and the overall complication rate was far higher than what was reported in the NLST. This difference was more pronounced in the older group in the study cohort (23.8% vs 8.5%). The associated economic burden of complications was substantial, and cost more than the initial procedure itself.
Although this was not a lung cancer screening cohort and used an administrative database, some valuable lessons can be offered from this study. First, complication rates of procedures like those performed in the NLST are likely to be higher in low-volume centers. Second, in order to minimize procedures, associated complications, and costs, we should be cognizant of the diagnostic limitations of each type of intervention when evaluating patients with lung nodules, wisely choosing the correct procedure for the correct patient after multidisciplinary discussion. We should seek to minimize biopsies of lesions that are likely benign. Third, it is evident that more research is needed regarding this topic. The ideal study would need to include both academic and community-based lung cancer screening programs, and, prospectively, analyze the diagnostic yield and complication rates, as well as downstream costs. Finally, the results of this study call all of us to properly follow the lung cancer screening guidelines and reconcile them with our common sense when evaluating a patient with a screen-detected nodule. Injudicious testing invites unnecessary complications, increases the cost of care, and diverts resources from those more likely to benefit from appropriate interventions.
Jose Cardenas-Garcia, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member
Douglas Arenberg, MD, FCCP
NetWork Member
Pediatric Chest Medicine
microRNAs: A New Biomarker
Biomarkers are essential tools in a clinician’s armamentarium. Biomarkers have multiple uses being indicators of a pathologic or physiologic process. One promising biomarker, now studied across multiple disorders, is microRNA (miRNA).
miRNAs are short (18–22 nucleotide) regulatory RNAs that bind mRNAs and decrease protein translation. miRNAs are generally co-transcribed with neighboring genes or co-transcribed within a cluster of miRNAs (a polycistronic cluster). Over 2,000 miRNAs are listed on miRBase (http://www.mirbase.org/), considered the central repository.
Function and biomarker utility of miRNAs are specific to the cells in which they are expressed. miRNAs isolated from circulating plasma exosomes have been shown to be stable over time, which is key in establishing their utility (Sanz-Rubio, et al. Sci Rep. 2018;8[1]:10306).
miRNAs have been credited with the function of micromanaging the circadian clock and sleep homeostasis in virtually all living organisms (Goodwin, et al. Cell Rep. 2018;23[13]:3776; Mehta, et al. J Mol Biol. 2013;425[19]:3609).
Preliminary work has identified dysregulated miRNAs in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (Li, et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96[34]:e7917). Exosomal miRNA has been shown to predict and protect against severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia (Lal, et al. JCI Insight. 2018;3[5]. pii: 93994).
Circadian miRNAs in salivary samples were found to have “altered” expression in autistic children with disordered sleep relative to peers with typical sleep (Hicks, et al. PLoS One. 2018;13[7]:e0198288). Collection from salivary samples facilitates multiple timed collection feasible at home and has multiple benefits.
Work on miRNAs, though preliminary, appears promising in providing a much-needed new perspective on pathophysiology and treatment in many disease processes.
Harish Rao, MD
Steering Committee Member
Pulmonary Physiology, Function, and Rehabilitation
Using impulse oscillometry in clinical practice
Impulse oscillometry (iOS) is an effort-independent test that requires minimal cooperation from the patient. It provides measures of respiratory mechanics during normal tidal breathing, including resistance (R), reactance (X), and impedance (Z) (Oostveen E, et al. Eur Respir J. 2003;22[6]:1026).
Airway R is largely, but not entirely, determined by cross-sectional area (Poiseuille’s Law). X is a surrogate for lung elastance, which is the inverse of compliance. Z is the combination of R and X and isn’t used clinically.
There are several benefits to using iOS, as opposed to or in conjunction with standard spirometry. First, iOS yields respiratory function measurements for patients, like the elderly and young children, who cannot provide acceptable and reproducible spirometry (Pezzoli L, et al. Age Ageing. 2003;32[1]:43). Second, it provides a real-world assessment of lung function because R and X values are obtained during tidal breathing. Humans don’t use the forced maneuvers needed for spirometry during normal daily activities, which weakens the correlation of FEV1 with respiratory symptoms. Forced maneuvers also create artifacts from gas compression and cause small airway closure, which limits inferences made from standard spirometry (Brusasco V, et al. Eur Respir J. 2005;26[5]:948). Lastly, R and X provide information not available from spirometry, and iOS is particularly sensitive for detecting small airway dysfunction (Berger K, et al. Chest. 2015;148[5]:1131).
Clinical and disease-specific indications for iOS are still being established. As discussed above, iOS is appropriate for any patient unable to perform spirometry. As new inhalers designed to deliver medication to the distal airways become available, subtle abnormalities detected via iOS will provide a target for specific therapies (Lipworth B. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2013;110[4]:233). iOS shows significant promise as a noninvasive assessment for supraglottic diseases, like vocal cord dysfunction, and can quantify changes over time following invasive intervention to relieve upper airway obstruction (Bikov A, et al. Chest. 2015;148[3]:731; Horan T, et al. Chest. 2001:120[1]:69). As their comfort level with interpretation improves, pulmonologists will find iOS is an important tool for disease diagnosis and treatment.
Aaron Holley, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member
Pulmonary Vascular Disease
Hemodynamic definition of pulmonary hypertension changed
Many patients worldwide went to bed February 26, 2018, with normal pulmonary pressures and woke up the next morning with pulmonary hypertension (PH). That day, experts met at the World Symposium on PH in Nice, France, and changed the definition of resting PH from a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) of greater than or equal to 25 mm Hg to a mPAP greater 20 mm Hg (Simmoneau, et al. Eur Respir J. 2019;53:1801913). The First World Health Organization symposium on PH in 1973 established the 25 mm Hg cutoff to distinguish primary PH from what was then considered less severe forms of PH. This definition, acknowledged as arbitrary and conservative at the time, has persisted due to a paucity of data establishing a definitively abnormal mPAP threshold.
Two contemporary findings provide justification for the definition change: (1)Normal mPAP is 14 ± 3.3 mm Hg in healthy subjects (Kovacs, et al. Eur Respir J. 2009;34[4]:888). (2) Patients with mPAP greater than 20 mm Hg suffer worse outcomes compared with control subjects (Maron, et al. Circulation. 2016;133[13]:1240).
Preserving the other hemodynamic criteria for group 1 PH, pulmonary artery wedge pressure less than or equal to 15 mm Hg and pulmonary vascular resistance greater than or equal to 3 Wood units, experts also recommend applying the new definition to all pre-capillary PH, including groups 3, 4, and applicable group 5 diagnoses.
Importantly, new guidelines do not recommend treating PH patients with mPAP 21-24 mm Hg: “A change in the hemodynamic definition of PH due to [pulmonary vascular diseases] does not imply treating these additional patients, but highlights the importance of close monitoring in this population.”
John Kingrey, MD
Steering Committee Member
Thoracic Oncology
Lung Cancer and Women
While the overall incidence of lung cancer (LC) has decreased among both men and women, the decline among men has been steeper compared with women. Further, in women born in the 1950s to 1960s, the incidence has actually increased and cannot be fully explained by sex differences in smoking behavior (Jemal, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1999). Data suggest that women may be more susceptible to the harmful effects of tobacco and that the biology of LC may be different in women. In addition, LC in nonsmokers is more likely to occur in women.
LC is the leading cause of cancer death in both women and men worldwide, but the dramatic rise in the mortality rate from LC in women was qualified as a “full blown epidemic” in the Surgeon General’s 2001 Women and Smoking report.
The benefits of lung cancer screening (LCS) in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) were higher in women than in men and significantly greater in the subset of women (16%) that entered the Nelson trial – reduction in 10-year LC mortality of 61% vs. 26% in men (De Koning, et al. J Thorac Oncol. 2018;13[10]: suppl S185. Abstract PL02.05). A retrospective review of patients diagnosed with LC between 2005 and 2011 showed that only 37% of women vs. 50% of men met LCS criteria (Wang, et al. JAMA 2015;313[8]:853).
Lung cancer needs to be recognized as an important women’s health issue, and there is need for continued attention to sex differences in LC risk, LCS criteria, and outcomes.
Anne Gonzalez, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member
Interventional Chest/Diagnostic Procedures
Complications and economic burden of diagnostic procedures for lung abnormalities in the community setting
The influential National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported a 20% reduction in lung cancer-related deaths using low dose CT scan when compared with plain chest radiography (Aberle et al. N Engl J Med. 2011;365[5]:395). Many medical societies responded by recommending screening individuals at high-risk for lung cancer, and community-based lung cancer screening programs were developed across the US. A concerning feature of the study was the rate (23.3%) of false-positive findings after three rounds of screening and the potential for complications secondary to diagnostic invasive procedures.
Using a 2008-2013 cohort of community inpatient and outpatient practice settings, Hou and colleagues searched administrative databases for procedure and diagnostic codes used in the NLST (Hou et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179[3]:324). The study team created an age-matched control cohort that did not have an invasive procedure and used the difference in complications rates as an indicator of a procedure-related complication. Additionally, they estimated 1-year medical costs associated with complications. More than 340,000 patients were included in the study, and the overall complication rate was far higher than what was reported in the NLST. This difference was more pronounced in the older group in the study cohort (23.8% vs 8.5%). The associated economic burden of complications was substantial, and cost more than the initial procedure itself.
Although this was not a lung cancer screening cohort and used an administrative database, some valuable lessons can be offered from this study. First, complication rates of procedures like those performed in the NLST are likely to be higher in low-volume centers. Second, in order to minimize procedures, associated complications, and costs, we should be cognizant of the diagnostic limitations of each type of intervention when evaluating patients with lung nodules, wisely choosing the correct procedure for the correct patient after multidisciplinary discussion. We should seek to minimize biopsies of lesions that are likely benign. Third, it is evident that more research is needed regarding this topic. The ideal study would need to include both academic and community-based lung cancer screening programs, and, prospectively, analyze the diagnostic yield and complication rates, as well as downstream costs. Finally, the results of this study call all of us to properly follow the lung cancer screening guidelines and reconcile them with our common sense when evaluating a patient with a screen-detected nodule. Injudicious testing invites unnecessary complications, increases the cost of care, and diverts resources from those more likely to benefit from appropriate interventions.
Jose Cardenas-Garcia, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member
Douglas Arenberg, MD, FCCP
NetWork Member
Pediatric Chest Medicine
microRNAs: A New Biomarker
Biomarkers are essential tools in a clinician’s armamentarium. Biomarkers have multiple uses being indicators of a pathologic or physiologic process. One promising biomarker, now studied across multiple disorders, is microRNA (miRNA).
miRNAs are short (18–22 nucleotide) regulatory RNAs that bind mRNAs and decrease protein translation. miRNAs are generally co-transcribed with neighboring genes or co-transcribed within a cluster of miRNAs (a polycistronic cluster). Over 2,000 miRNAs are listed on miRBase (http://www.mirbase.org/), considered the central repository.
Function and biomarker utility of miRNAs are specific to the cells in which they are expressed. miRNAs isolated from circulating plasma exosomes have been shown to be stable over time, which is key in establishing their utility (Sanz-Rubio, et al. Sci Rep. 2018;8[1]:10306).
miRNAs have been credited with the function of micromanaging the circadian clock and sleep homeostasis in virtually all living organisms (Goodwin, et al. Cell Rep. 2018;23[13]:3776; Mehta, et al. J Mol Biol. 2013;425[19]:3609).
Preliminary work has identified dysregulated miRNAs in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (Li, et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96[34]:e7917). Exosomal miRNA has been shown to predict and protect against severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia (Lal, et al. JCI Insight. 2018;3[5]. pii: 93994).
Circadian miRNAs in salivary samples were found to have “altered” expression in autistic children with disordered sleep relative to peers with typical sleep (Hicks, et al. PLoS One. 2018;13[7]:e0198288). Collection from salivary samples facilitates multiple timed collection feasible at home and has multiple benefits.
Work on miRNAs, though preliminary, appears promising in providing a much-needed new perspective on pathophysiology and treatment in many disease processes.
Harish Rao, MD
Steering Committee Member
Pulmonary Physiology, Function, and Rehabilitation
Using impulse oscillometry in clinical practice
Impulse oscillometry (iOS) is an effort-independent test that requires minimal cooperation from the patient. It provides measures of respiratory mechanics during normal tidal breathing, including resistance (R), reactance (X), and impedance (Z) (Oostveen E, et al. Eur Respir J. 2003;22[6]:1026).
Airway R is largely, but not entirely, determined by cross-sectional area (Poiseuille’s Law). X is a surrogate for lung elastance, which is the inverse of compliance. Z is the combination of R and X and isn’t used clinically.
There are several benefits to using iOS, as opposed to or in conjunction with standard spirometry. First, iOS yields respiratory function measurements for patients, like the elderly and young children, who cannot provide acceptable and reproducible spirometry (Pezzoli L, et al. Age Ageing. 2003;32[1]:43). Second, it provides a real-world assessment of lung function because R and X values are obtained during tidal breathing. Humans don’t use the forced maneuvers needed for spirometry during normal daily activities, which weakens the correlation of FEV1 with respiratory symptoms. Forced maneuvers also create artifacts from gas compression and cause small airway closure, which limits inferences made from standard spirometry (Brusasco V, et al. Eur Respir J. 2005;26[5]:948). Lastly, R and X provide information not available from spirometry, and iOS is particularly sensitive for detecting small airway dysfunction (Berger K, et al. Chest. 2015;148[5]:1131).
Clinical and disease-specific indications for iOS are still being established. As discussed above, iOS is appropriate for any patient unable to perform spirometry. As new inhalers designed to deliver medication to the distal airways become available, subtle abnormalities detected via iOS will provide a target for specific therapies (Lipworth B. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2013;110[4]:233). iOS shows significant promise as a noninvasive assessment for supraglottic diseases, like vocal cord dysfunction, and can quantify changes over time following invasive intervention to relieve upper airway obstruction (Bikov A, et al. Chest. 2015;148[3]:731; Horan T, et al. Chest. 2001:120[1]:69). As their comfort level with interpretation improves, pulmonologists will find iOS is an important tool for disease diagnosis and treatment.
Aaron Holley, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member
Pulmonary Vascular Disease
Hemodynamic definition of pulmonary hypertension changed
Many patients worldwide went to bed February 26, 2018, with normal pulmonary pressures and woke up the next morning with pulmonary hypertension (PH). That day, experts met at the World Symposium on PH in Nice, France, and changed the definition of resting PH from a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) of greater than or equal to 25 mm Hg to a mPAP greater 20 mm Hg (Simmoneau, et al. Eur Respir J. 2019;53:1801913). The First World Health Organization symposium on PH in 1973 established the 25 mm Hg cutoff to distinguish primary PH from what was then considered less severe forms of PH. This definition, acknowledged as arbitrary and conservative at the time, has persisted due to a paucity of data establishing a definitively abnormal mPAP threshold.
Two contemporary findings provide justification for the definition change: (1)Normal mPAP is 14 ± 3.3 mm Hg in healthy subjects (Kovacs, et al. Eur Respir J. 2009;34[4]:888). (2) Patients with mPAP greater than 20 mm Hg suffer worse outcomes compared with control subjects (Maron, et al. Circulation. 2016;133[13]:1240).
Preserving the other hemodynamic criteria for group 1 PH, pulmonary artery wedge pressure less than or equal to 15 mm Hg and pulmonary vascular resistance greater than or equal to 3 Wood units, experts also recommend applying the new definition to all pre-capillary PH, including groups 3, 4, and applicable group 5 diagnoses.
Importantly, new guidelines do not recommend treating PH patients with mPAP 21-24 mm Hg: “A change in the hemodynamic definition of PH due to [pulmonary vascular diseases] does not imply treating these additional patients, but highlights the importance of close monitoring in this population.”
John Kingrey, MD
Steering Committee Member
Thoracic Oncology
Lung Cancer and Women
While the overall incidence of lung cancer (LC) has decreased among both men and women, the decline among men has been steeper compared with women. Further, in women born in the 1950s to 1960s, the incidence has actually increased and cannot be fully explained by sex differences in smoking behavior (Jemal, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1999). Data suggest that women may be more susceptible to the harmful effects of tobacco and that the biology of LC may be different in women. In addition, LC in nonsmokers is more likely to occur in women.
LC is the leading cause of cancer death in both women and men worldwide, but the dramatic rise in the mortality rate from LC in women was qualified as a “full blown epidemic” in the Surgeon General’s 2001 Women and Smoking report.
The benefits of lung cancer screening (LCS) in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) were higher in women than in men and significantly greater in the subset of women (16%) that entered the Nelson trial – reduction in 10-year LC mortality of 61% vs. 26% in men (De Koning, et al. J Thorac Oncol. 2018;13[10]: suppl S185. Abstract PL02.05). A retrospective review of patients diagnosed with LC between 2005 and 2011 showed that only 37% of women vs. 50% of men met LCS criteria (Wang, et al. JAMA 2015;313[8]:853).
Lung cancer needs to be recognized as an important women’s health issue, and there is need for continued attention to sex differences in LC risk, LCS criteria, and outcomes.
Anne Gonzalez, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member
Interventional Chest/Diagnostic Procedures
Complications and economic burden of diagnostic procedures for lung abnormalities in the community setting
The influential National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported a 20% reduction in lung cancer-related deaths using low dose CT scan when compared with plain chest radiography (Aberle et al. N Engl J Med. 2011;365[5]:395). Many medical societies responded by recommending screening individuals at high-risk for lung cancer, and community-based lung cancer screening programs were developed across the US. A concerning feature of the study was the rate (23.3%) of false-positive findings after three rounds of screening and the potential for complications secondary to diagnostic invasive procedures.
Using a 2008-2013 cohort of community inpatient and outpatient practice settings, Hou and colleagues searched administrative databases for procedure and diagnostic codes used in the NLST (Hou et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179[3]:324). The study team created an age-matched control cohort that did not have an invasive procedure and used the difference in complications rates as an indicator of a procedure-related complication. Additionally, they estimated 1-year medical costs associated with complications. More than 340,000 patients were included in the study, and the overall complication rate was far higher than what was reported in the NLST. This difference was more pronounced in the older group in the study cohort (23.8% vs 8.5%). The associated economic burden of complications was substantial, and cost more than the initial procedure itself.
Although this was not a lung cancer screening cohort and used an administrative database, some valuable lessons can be offered from this study. First, complication rates of procedures like those performed in the NLST are likely to be higher in low-volume centers. Second, in order to minimize procedures, associated complications, and costs, we should be cognizant of the diagnostic limitations of each type of intervention when evaluating patients with lung nodules, wisely choosing the correct procedure for the correct patient after multidisciplinary discussion. We should seek to minimize biopsies of lesions that are likely benign. Third, it is evident that more research is needed regarding this topic. The ideal study would need to include both academic and community-based lung cancer screening programs, and, prospectively, analyze the diagnostic yield and complication rates, as well as downstream costs. Finally, the results of this study call all of us to properly follow the lung cancer screening guidelines and reconcile them with our common sense when evaluating a patient with a screen-detected nodule. Injudicious testing invites unnecessary complications, increases the cost of care, and diverts resources from those more likely to benefit from appropriate interventions.
Jose Cardenas-Garcia, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member
Douglas Arenberg, MD, FCCP
NetWork Member
Pediatric Chest Medicine
microRNAs: A New Biomarker
Biomarkers are essential tools in a clinician’s armamentarium. Biomarkers have multiple uses being indicators of a pathologic or physiologic process. One promising biomarker, now studied across multiple disorders, is microRNA (miRNA).
miRNAs are short (18–22 nucleotide) regulatory RNAs that bind mRNAs and decrease protein translation. miRNAs are generally co-transcribed with neighboring genes or co-transcribed within a cluster of miRNAs (a polycistronic cluster). Over 2,000 miRNAs are listed on miRBase (http://www.mirbase.org/), considered the central repository.
Function and biomarker utility of miRNAs are specific to the cells in which they are expressed. miRNAs isolated from circulating plasma exosomes have been shown to be stable over time, which is key in establishing their utility (Sanz-Rubio, et al. Sci Rep. 2018;8[1]:10306).
miRNAs have been credited with the function of micromanaging the circadian clock and sleep homeostasis in virtually all living organisms (Goodwin, et al. Cell Rep. 2018;23[13]:3776; Mehta, et al. J Mol Biol. 2013;425[19]:3609).
Preliminary work has identified dysregulated miRNAs in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (Li, et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96[34]:e7917). Exosomal miRNA has been shown to predict and protect against severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia (Lal, et al. JCI Insight. 2018;3[5]. pii: 93994).
Circadian miRNAs in salivary samples were found to have “altered” expression in autistic children with disordered sleep relative to peers with typical sleep (Hicks, et al. PLoS One. 2018;13[7]:e0198288). Collection from salivary samples facilitates multiple timed collection feasible at home and has multiple benefits.
Work on miRNAs, though preliminary, appears promising in providing a much-needed new perspective on pathophysiology and treatment in many disease processes.
Harish Rao, MD
Steering Committee Member
Pulmonary Physiology, Function, and Rehabilitation
Using impulse oscillometry in clinical practice
Impulse oscillometry (iOS) is an effort-independent test that requires minimal cooperation from the patient. It provides measures of respiratory mechanics during normal tidal breathing, including resistance (R), reactance (X), and impedance (Z) (Oostveen E, et al. Eur Respir J. 2003;22[6]:1026).
Airway R is largely, but not entirely, determined by cross-sectional area (Poiseuille’s Law). X is a surrogate for lung elastance, which is the inverse of compliance. Z is the combination of R and X and isn’t used clinically.
There are several benefits to using iOS, as opposed to or in conjunction with standard spirometry. First, iOS yields respiratory function measurements for patients, like the elderly and young children, who cannot provide acceptable and reproducible spirometry (Pezzoli L, et al. Age Ageing. 2003;32[1]:43). Second, it provides a real-world assessment of lung function because R and X values are obtained during tidal breathing. Humans don’t use the forced maneuvers needed for spirometry during normal daily activities, which weakens the correlation of FEV1 with respiratory symptoms. Forced maneuvers also create artifacts from gas compression and cause small airway closure, which limits inferences made from standard spirometry (Brusasco V, et al. Eur Respir J. 2005;26[5]:948). Lastly, R and X provide information not available from spirometry, and iOS is particularly sensitive for detecting small airway dysfunction (Berger K, et al. Chest. 2015;148[5]:1131).
Clinical and disease-specific indications for iOS are still being established. As discussed above, iOS is appropriate for any patient unable to perform spirometry. As new inhalers designed to deliver medication to the distal airways become available, subtle abnormalities detected via iOS will provide a target for specific therapies (Lipworth B. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2013;110[4]:233). iOS shows significant promise as a noninvasive assessment for supraglottic diseases, like vocal cord dysfunction, and can quantify changes over time following invasive intervention to relieve upper airway obstruction (Bikov A, et al. Chest. 2015;148[3]:731; Horan T, et al. Chest. 2001:120[1]:69). As their comfort level with interpretation improves, pulmonologists will find iOS is an important tool for disease diagnosis and treatment.
Aaron Holley, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member
Pulmonary Vascular Disease
Hemodynamic definition of pulmonary hypertension changed
Many patients worldwide went to bed February 26, 2018, with normal pulmonary pressures and woke up the next morning with pulmonary hypertension (PH). That day, experts met at the World Symposium on PH in Nice, France, and changed the definition of resting PH from a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) of greater than or equal to 25 mm Hg to a mPAP greater 20 mm Hg (Simmoneau, et al. Eur Respir J. 2019;53:1801913). The First World Health Organization symposium on PH in 1973 established the 25 mm Hg cutoff to distinguish primary PH from what was then considered less severe forms of PH. This definition, acknowledged as arbitrary and conservative at the time, has persisted due to a paucity of data establishing a definitively abnormal mPAP threshold.
Two contemporary findings provide justification for the definition change: (1)Normal mPAP is 14 ± 3.3 mm Hg in healthy subjects (Kovacs, et al. Eur Respir J. 2009;34[4]:888). (2) Patients with mPAP greater than 20 mm Hg suffer worse outcomes compared with control subjects (Maron, et al. Circulation. 2016;133[13]:1240).
Preserving the other hemodynamic criteria for group 1 PH, pulmonary artery wedge pressure less than or equal to 15 mm Hg and pulmonary vascular resistance greater than or equal to 3 Wood units, experts also recommend applying the new definition to all pre-capillary PH, including groups 3, 4, and applicable group 5 diagnoses.
Importantly, new guidelines do not recommend treating PH patients with mPAP 21-24 mm Hg: “A change in the hemodynamic definition of PH due to [pulmonary vascular diseases] does not imply treating these additional patients, but highlights the importance of close monitoring in this population.”
John Kingrey, MD
Steering Committee Member
Thoracic Oncology
Lung Cancer and Women
While the overall incidence of lung cancer (LC) has decreased among both men and women, the decline among men has been steeper compared with women. Further, in women born in the 1950s to 1960s, the incidence has actually increased and cannot be fully explained by sex differences in smoking behavior (Jemal, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1999). Data suggest that women may be more susceptible to the harmful effects of tobacco and that the biology of LC may be different in women. In addition, LC in nonsmokers is more likely to occur in women.
LC is the leading cause of cancer death in both women and men worldwide, but the dramatic rise in the mortality rate from LC in women was qualified as a “full blown epidemic” in the Surgeon General’s 2001 Women and Smoking report.
The benefits of lung cancer screening (LCS) in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) were higher in women than in men and significantly greater in the subset of women (16%) that entered the Nelson trial – reduction in 10-year LC mortality of 61% vs. 26% in men (De Koning, et al. J Thorac Oncol. 2018;13[10]: suppl S185. Abstract PL02.05). A retrospective review of patients diagnosed with LC between 2005 and 2011 showed that only 37% of women vs. 50% of men met LCS criteria (Wang, et al. JAMA 2015;313[8]:853).
Lung cancer needs to be recognized as an important women’s health issue, and there is need for continued attention to sex differences in LC risk, LCS criteria, and outcomes.
Anne Gonzalez, MD, FCCP
Steering Committee Member