Carlijn Michelle van der Aalst

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) causes irreversible myocardial damage, heart failure, life-threatening arrythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD), and is a main driver of CVD mortality and morbidity. To control the forecasted increase in CVD burden for both the individual and society, improved strategies for the prevention of AMI and SCD are required. Current prevention of AMI and SCD is directed towards risk-modifying interventions, guided by risk assessment using clinical risk prediction scores (CRPSs) and the coronary artery calcium score (CACS). Early detection of more advanced coronary artery disease (CAD), beyond risk assessment by CRPSs or CACS, is a promising strategy to allow personalized treatment for the improved prevention of AMI and SCD in the general population. We review evidence for further testing, beyond CRPSs and CACS, and therapies focusing on promising targets, including subclinical obstructive CAD, high-risk plaques, and silent myocardial ischemia. We also evaluate the potential of multi-modality imaging to enhance the conduction of adequately powered trials to provide high-quality evidence on the impact of add-on tests and therapies in the prevention of AMI and SCD in asymptomatic individuals. To conclude, we discuss the occurrence of AMI and SCD in individuals currently estimated to be at “low-risk” by the current strategy based on CRPSs, and methods to improve prevention of AMI and SCD in this “low-risk” population.

Background Recent studies have shown that the coronary artery calcium (CAC) score can be improved by addition of CAC distribution over the coronary vessels.(1,2) Scoring of CAC is a highly repetitive and labour intensive task for radiologists. However, determining the number of affected vessels can be automated with the help of a deep learning based algorithm. Nevertheless, so far

Two large-scale RCTs have shown computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening to be efficacious in reducing lung cancer mortality (8–24% in men, 26–59% in women). However, lung cancer screening implicitly means personalised and risk-based approaches. Health care systems’ implementation of personalised screening and prevention is still sparse, and likely to be of variable quality, because of important remaining uncertainties, which have been incompletely addressed or not at all so far. Further optimisation of lung cancer screening programs is expected to reduce harms and maintain or enhance benefit for eligible European citizens, whilst significantly reducing health care costs. Some main uncertainties (e.g., Risk-based eligibility, Risk-based screening intervals, Volume CT screening, Smoking Cessation, Gender and Sex differences, Cost-Effectiveness) are discussed in this review. 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN (acronym for: Towards INdividually tailored INvitations, screening INtervals and INtegrated co-morbidity reducing strategies in lung cancer screening) is the first multi-centred implementation trial on volume CT lung cancer screening amongst 24,000 males and females, at high risk for developing lung cancer, across five European countries, started in January 2020. Through providing answers to the remaining questions with this trial, many EU citizens will swiftly benefit from this high-quality screening technology, others will face less harms than previously anticipated, and health care costs will be substantially reduced. Implementing a new cancer screening programme is a major task, with many stakeholders and many possible facilitators but also barriers and obstacle.

Randomized-controlled trials have confirmed substantial reductions in lung cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening. Evidence on how to integrate smoking cessation support in lung cancer screening is however scarce. This represents a significant gap in the literature, as a combined strategy of lung cancer screening and smoking cessation greatly reduces the mortality risk due to lung cancer and other related comorbidities. In this review, a literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar was performed to identify randomized-controlled and observational studies investigating the effect of lung cancer screening trials and integrated cessation interventions on smoking cessation. Of the 236 identified records, we included 32 original publications. Smoking cessation rates in lung cancer screening trials are promising. Especially findings suspicious for lung cancer and referral to a physician might function as a teachable moment to motivate smoking abstinence in current smokers or recent quitters. More intensive, personalized and multi-modality smoking cessation interventions delivered by a clinician appear to be the most successful in influencing smoking behavior. While it is evident that smoking cessation should be incorporated in lung cancer screening, further research is required to ascertain the optimal treatment type, modality, timing, and content of communication including the incorporation of CT results to motivate health behavior change.

Two large-scale RCTs have shown Computed Tomography (CT) lung cancer screening to be efficacious in reducing lung cancer mortality (8-24% in men, versus 26-59% in women). However, implementation is likely to be limited, slow and of variable quality throughout Europe, because of important remaining uncertainties, which have been incompletely addressed or not at all so far. Our 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN (TOWARDS INDIVIDUALLY TAILORED INVITATIONS, SCREENING INTERVALS, AND INTEGRATED CO-MORBIDITY REDUCING STRATEGIES IN LUNG CANCER SCREENING) proposal is the first multi-centered implementation trial on volume CT lung cancer screening amongst 26,000 males and females, at high risk for developing lung cancer, across five European countries. Main objective is to assess whether lung cancer stage I/II is comparable between personalized screening (biennial) and annual screening in baseline test negatives (24,000; 1:1). We envisage that with the answers to key questions established by this trial, many European citizens will swiftly benefit from this high-quality screening technology, others will face less harms than previously anticipated, and health care costs will be reduced to a large extent. 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN is performed by a multidisciplinary consortium of leading experts in the field of population-based cancer screening (NELSON, UKLS, ITALUNG, LUSI), CT imaging, biomarkers, treatment, modelling, and understanding health behaviour, and in both new and existing high quality centres. Aim of the presentation is to introduce the study design, the eligibility for participating in the trial and mentioning the challenges in the recruitment, smoking cessation, and CAC research.

Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was demonstrated in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) to reduce mortality from the disease. European mortality data has recently become available from the Nelson randomised controlled trial, which confirmed lung cancer mortality reductions by 26% in men and 39–61% in women. Recent studies in Europe and the USA also showed positive results in screening workers exposed to asbestos. All European experts attending the “Initiative for European Lung Screening (IELS)”—a large international group of physicians and other experts concerned with lung cancer—agreed that LDCT-LCS should be implemented in Europe. However, the economic impact of LDCT-LCS and guidelines for its effective and safe implementation still need to be formulated. To this purpose, the IELS was asked to prepare recommendations to implement LCS and examine outstanding issues. A subgroup carried out a comprehensive literature review on LDCT-LCS and presented findings at a meeting held in Milan in November 2018. The present recommendations reflect that consensus was reached.

The aim of this review is to provide clinicians with an overview of the role of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring across the spectrum ranging from asymptomatic individuals to chronic chest pain patients. We will briefly introduce the technical background of CAC scoring, summarize the major guidelines per type of patient at risk and discuss latest research with respect to CAC. Finally, the reader should be able to determine when CAC scoring is indicated or may be of added value.