Clinicoradiological outcomes after radical radiotherapy for lung cancer in patients with interstitial lung disease.

Objective: Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is relatively common in patients with lung cancer with an incidence of 7.5%. Historically pre-existing ILD was a contraindication to radical radiotherapy owing to increased radiation pneumonitis rates, worsened fibrosis and poorer survival compared with non-ILD cohorts. Herein, the clinical and radiological toxicity outcomes of a contemporaneous cohort are described. Methods: Patients with ILD treated with radical radiotherapy for lung cancer at a regional cancer centre were collected prospectively. Radiotherapy planning, tumour characteristics, and pre- and post-treatment functional and radiological parameters were recorded. Cross-sectional images were independently assessed by two Consultant Thoracic Radiologists. Results: Twenty-seven patients with co-existing ILD received radical radiotherapy from February 2009 to April 2019, with predominance of usual interstitial pneumonia subtype (52%). According to ILD-GAP scores, most patients were Stage I. After radiotherapy, localised (41%) or extensive (41%) progressive interstitial changes were noted for most patients yet dyspnoea scores (n = 15 available) and spirometry (n = 10 available) were stable. One-third of patients with ILD went on to receive long-term oxygen therapy, which was significantly more than the non-ILD cohort. Median survival trended towards being worse compared with non-ILD cases (17.8 vs 24.0 months, p = 0.834). Conclusion: Radiological progression of ILD and reduced survival were observed post-radiotherapy in this small cohort receiving lung cancer radiotherapy, although a matched functional decline was frequently absent. Although there is an excess of early deaths, long-term disease control is achievable. Advances in knowledge: For selected patients with ILD, long-term lung cancer control without severely impacting respiratory function may be possible with radical radiotherapy, albeit with a slightly higher risk of death.

Experience With an On-Site Coronary Computed Tomography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve Algorithm for the Assessment of Intermediate Coronary Stenoses.

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) derived from coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) is a new technique for the diagnosis of ischemic coronary artery stenoses. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a novel on-site computed tomography-based fractional flow reserve algorithm (CT-FFR) compared with invasive FFR as the gold standard, and to determine whether its diagnostic performance is affected by interobserver variations in lumen segmentation. We enrolled 44 consecutive patients (64.6 ± 8.9 years, 34% female) with 60 coronary atherosclerotic lesions who underwent coronary CTA and invasive coronary angiography in 2 centers. An FFR value ≤0.8 was considered significant. Coronary CTA scans were evaluated by 2 expert readers, who manually adjusted the semiautomated coronary lumen segmentations for effective diameter stenosis (EDS) assessment and on-site CT-FFR simulation. The mean CT-FFR value was 0.77 ± 0.15, whereas the mean EDS was 43.6 ± 16.9%. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of CT-FFR versus EDS with a cutoff of 50% were the following: 91%, 72%, 63%, and 93% versus 52%, 87%, 69%, and 77%, respectively. The on-site CT-FFR demonstrated significantly better diagnostic performance compared with EDS (area under the curve 0.89 vs 0.74, respectively, p <0.001). The CT-FFR areas under the curve of the 2 readers did not show any significant difference (0.89 vs 0.88, p = 0.74). In conclusion, on-site CT-FFR simulation is feasible and has better diagnostic performance than anatomic stenosis assessment. Furthermore, the diagnostic performance of the on-site CT-FFR simulation algorithm does not depend on the readers' semiautomated lumen segmentation adjustments.

The Essentials of Cardiac Computerized Tomography.

Cardiac computerized tomography (CT) has evolved from a research tool to an important diagnostic investigation in cardiology, and is now recommended in European, US, and UK guidelines. This review is designed to give the reader an overview of the current state of cardiac CT. The role of cardiac CT is multifaceted, and includes risk stratification, disease detection, coronary plaque quantification, defining congenital heart disease, planning for structural intervention, and, more recently, assessment of ischemia. This paper addresses basic principles as well as newer evidence.

A comparison of Diamond Forrester and coronary calcium scores as gatekeepers for investigations of stable chest pain.

To determine if calcium scores (CS) could act as a more effective gatekeeper than Diamond Forrester (DF) in the assessment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). A sub-study of the Cardiac CT for the Assessment of Chest Pain and Plaque (CAPP) study, a randomised control trial evaluating the cost-effectiveness of cardiac CT in symptomatic patients with stable chest pain. Stable pain was defined as troponin negative pain without symptoms of unstable angina. 250 patients undergoing cardiac CT had both DF scores and CS calculated, with the accuracy of both evaluated against CT coronary angiogram. Criteria given in UK national guidelines were compared. Of the 250 patients, 4 withdrew. 140 (57 %) patients were male. The mean DF was 47.8 and mean CS 172.5. Of the 144 patients with non-anginal pain 19.4 % had significant disease (>50 % stenosis). In general the DF over estimated the presence of CAD whereas the CS reclassified patients to lower risk groups, with 91 in the high risk DF category compared to 26 in the CS. Both receiver operating curve and McNemar Bowker test analysis suggested the DF was less accurate in the prediction of CAD compared to CS [Formula: see text] Projected downstream investigations were also calculated, with the cost per number of significant stenoses identified cheaper with the CS criteria. Patients with suspected stable CAD are more accurately risk stratified by CS compared to the traditional DF. CS was more successful in the prediction of significant stenosis and appears to be more effective at targeting clinical resources to those patients that are in need of them.