RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Most lung cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage and therefore have a poor prognosis. One major challenge is to choose the most adapted sampling technique to obtain a rapid pathological diagnosis so as to start treatment as early as possible. A growing number of techniques have been developed in recent years. This study sought to assess the diagnostic efficiency of each, along with the respective duration of the diagnostic pathways. METHODS: This retrospective, bicentric, observational study enrolled patients with inoperable lung cancer (stage III or IV) diagnosed in 2018-2019. Diagnostic efficiency was assessed based on the different examinations performed to achieve a precise diagnosis (pathology, immunohistochemistry, and/or molecular biology). The time between the first medical contact and treatment initiation was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 625 patients were included (median age 67 years; men 67 %; adenocarcinoma 55 %). The most frequent examinations were bronchial endoscopy (n = 469, 75 %), followed by metastasis biopsy (n = 137, 21.9 %) and guided transthoracic core-needle biopsy (TCNB) (n = 116, 18.6 %). 372 patients had only one procedure (59.5 %), mainly bronchial endoscopy (n = 217, 34.7 %) and metastasis biopsy (n = 71, 11 %). The most efficient examination was thoracic surgery (surgical pleural biopsy, (n = 32, 100 %); mediastinoscopy (n = 26, 96.3 %); surgical pulmonary biopsy (n = 14, 93.3 %). The second most efficient examination was metastasis biopsy (n = 126, 94 %) followed by guided TCNB (n = 108, 93.1 %). The median time from first medical contact to first examination was 4 days (interquartile range 25 %-75 % 1-8). The median time from first medical contact to pathological result was 17 days (10-34). The median time from first medical contact to treatment start was 48 days (30-69). CONCLUSIONS: In order to make an accurate and rapid diagnosis of lung cancer, it is crucial to choose the most appropriate technique. Bronchial endoscopy remains the first-line examination for central lesions, as it is efficient and easily accessible. Guided TCNB and metastasis biopsy are the preferred techniques for peripheral lesions. The choice of the diagnostic technique should be part of a multidisciplinary approach and a dedicated pathway to optimize initial management.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), some physiological parameters measured during a 6-min walk test (6-MWT) impart reliable prognostic information. Sit-to-stand tests (STSTs) are field exercise tests that are easier to implement than the 6-MWT in daily practice. OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to test the reproducibility and compare 2 STSTs (the 1-min STST [1-STST] and the semi-paced 3-min chair rise test [3-CRT]) in IPF, and to determine if selected physiological parameters (speed of displacement and changes in pulse oxygen saturation [SpO2]) are interchangeable between the STSTs and the 6-MWT. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with stable IPF were studied in 3 French expert centers. To test reproducibility, intra-class correlations (ICCs) of parameters measured during tests performed 7-14 days apart were calculated. To test interchangeability, the agreement and correlation of physiological responses measured during STSTs and during 6-MWT were studied. RESULTS: Vertical displacements and changes in SpO2 during both STSTs were reproducible, with ICCs ranging from 0.78 [0.63-0.87] to 0.95 [0.92-0.97]. Vertical displacements during 1-STST and 3-CRT were correlated with 6-MWT distance (correlation coefficients (r) of 0.72 and 0.77, respectively; p < 0.001). Similarly, correlations were found between changes in SpO2 measured during the 2 STSTs and the 6-MWT, with coefficients ranging from 0.73 to 0.91 (p < 0.001). Distance walked and SpO2 during 6-MWT were well estimated from vertical displacement and SpO2 during the 2 STSTs, respectively. CONCLUSION: The correlations found between the 2 STSTs and the 6-MWT suggest that STSTs may be of interest to assess displacement and exercise-induced changes in SpO2 in IPF patients.
