Bryan S Benn1, Mihir Parikh2, Pei H Tsau3, Eric Seeley4, Ganesh Krishna4,5. 1. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 10833 LeConte Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA. bbenn@mednet.ucla.edu. 2. Division of Thoracic Surgery and Interventional Pulmonology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Division of Thoracic Surgery, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Palo Alto, CA, USA. 4. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 5. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: While there is significant mortality and morbidity with lung cancer, early stage diagnoses carry a better prognosis. As lung cancer screening programs increase with more pulmonary nodules detected, expediting definitive treatment initiation for newly diagnosed patients is imperative. The objective of our analysis was to determine if the use of a dedicated interventional pulmonology practice decreases time delay from new diagnosis of lung cancer or metastatic disease to the chest to treatment initiation. METHODS: Retrospective chart analysis was done of 87 consecutive patients with a new diagnosis of primary lung cancer or metastatic cancer to the chest from our interventional pulmonology procedures. Demographic information and time intervals from abnormal imaging to procedure and to treatment initiation were recorded. RESULTS: Patients were older (mean age 69) and former or current smokers (72%). A median of 27 days (1-127 days) passed from our diagnostic biopsy to treatment initiation. A median of 53 total days (2-449 days) passed from abnormal imaging to definitive treatment. Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration was the most commonly used diagnostic procedure (59%), with non-small cell lung cancer the majority diagnosis (64%). For surgical patients, all biopsy-negative lymph nodes from our procedures were cancer-free at surgical excision. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to prior reports from international and United States cohorts, obtaining a tissue biopsy diagnosis through a gatekeeper interventional pulmonology practice decreases median delay from abnormal imaging to treatment initiation. This finding has the potential to positively impact patient outcomes and requires further evaluation.
PURPOSE: While there is significant mortality and morbidity with lung cancer, early stage diagnoses carry a better prognosis. As lung cancer screening programs increase with more pulmonary nodules detected, expediting definitive treatment initiation for newly diagnosed patients is imperative. The objective of our analysis was to determine if the use of a dedicated interventional pulmonology practice decreases time delay from new diagnosis of lung cancer or metastatic disease to the chest to treatment initiation. METHODS: Retrospective chart analysis was done of 87 consecutive patients with a new diagnosis of primary lung cancer or metastatic cancer to the chest from our interventional pulmonology procedures. Demographic information and time intervals from abnormal imaging to procedure and to treatment initiation were recorded. RESULTS:Patients were older (mean age 69) and former or current smokers (72%). A median of 27 days (1-127 days) passed from our diagnostic biopsy to treatment initiation. A median of 53 total days (2-449 days) passed from abnormal imaging to definitive treatment. Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration was the most commonly used diagnostic procedure (59%), with non-small cell lung cancer the majority diagnosis (64%). For surgical patients, all biopsy-negative lymph nodes from our procedures were cancer-free at surgical excision. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to prior reports from international and United States cohorts, obtaining a tissue biopsy diagnosis through a gatekeeper interventional pulmonology practice decreases median delay from abnormal imaging to treatment initiation. This finding has the potential to positively impact patient outcomes and requires further evaluation.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bronchoscopy; Chest imaging; Interventional pulmonology; Lung cancer; Wait time
Authors: Peter Vilmann; Paul Frost Clementsen; Sara Colella; Mette Siemsen; Paul De Leyn; Jean-Marc Dumonceau; Felix J Herth; Alberto Larghi; Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros; Enrique Vasquez-Sequeiros; Cesare Hassan; Laurence Crombag; Daniël A Korevaar; Lars Konge; Jouke T Annema Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2015-06-01 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: David S Ettinger; Wallace Akerley; Hossein Borghaei; Andrew C Chang; Richard T Cheney; Lucian R Chirieac; Thomas A D'Amico; Todd L Demmy; Ramaswamy Govindan; Frederic W Grannis; Stefan C Grant; Leora Horn; Thierry M Jahan; Ritsuko Komaki; Feng-Ming Spring Kong; Mark G Kris; Lee M Krug; Rudy P Lackner; Inga T Lennes; Billy W Loo; Renato Martins; Gregory A Otterson; Jyoti D Patel; Mary C Pinder-Schenck; Katherine M Pisters; Karen Reckamp; Gregory J Riely; Eric Rohren; Theresa A Shapiro; Scott J Swanson; Kurt Tauer; Douglas E Wood; Stephen C Yang; Kristina Gregory; Miranda Hughes Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2013-06-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Alisa M Shea; Lesley H Curtis; Bradley G Hammill; Lisa D DiMartino; Amy P Abernethy; Kevin A Schulman Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-07-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michael K Gould; Jessica Donington; William R Lynch; Peter J Mazzone; David E Midthun; David P Naidich; Renda Soylemez Wiener Journal: Chest Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Yichen Zhang; Michael J Simoff; David Ost; Oliver J Wagner; James Lavin; Beth Nauman; Mei-Chin Hsieh; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Brian Pettiford; Lizheng Shi Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-04-14 Impact factor: 4.430