Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Surgically treated lung cancer patients: do they all smoke and would they all have been detected with lung cancer screening?

Tanel Laisaar, Bruno Sarana, Indrek Benno, Kaja-Triin Laisaar
ERJ Open Research 2018 4: 00001-2018; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00001-2018
Tanel Laisaar
1Dept of Thoracic Surgery, Lung Clinic, Tartu University Hospital, Tartu, Estonia
2Lung Clinic, Tartu University, Tartu, Estonia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bruno Sarana
1Dept of Thoracic Surgery, Lung Clinic, Tartu University Hospital, Tartu, Estonia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Indrek Benno
1Dept of Thoracic Surgery, Lung Clinic, Tartu University Hospital, Tartu, Estonia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kaja-Triin Laisaar
3Dept of Public Health, Tartu University, Tartu, Estonia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Since publication of the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) results early lung cancer detection has been widely studied, targeting individuals based on smoking history and age. However, over recent decades several changes in lung cancer epidemiology, including risk factors, have taken place. The aim of the current study was to explore smoking prevalence among lung cancer patients who had been treated surgically or undergone a diagnostic operation and whether these patients would have met the NLST inclusion criteria.

All patients operated on for lung cancer in a university hospital in Estonia between 2009 and 2015 were included. Data were collected from hospital records.

426 patients were operated on for lung cancer, with smoking history properly documented in 327 patients (87 females; median age 67 years). 170 (52%) patients were smokers, 97 (30%) patients were ex-smokers and 60 (18%) patients were nonsmokers. The proportion of females among smokers was 15%, among ex-smokers was 9% and among nonsmokers was 87%. 107 of our patients would not have met the NLST age criteria and 128 of our patients would not have met the NLST smoking criteria. In total, 183 patients (56% (79% of females and 48% of males)) would not have met the NLST inclusion criteria.

Only half of surgically treated lung cancer patients were current smokers and more than half did not meet the NLST inclusion criteria.

Abstract

Many currently surgically treated lung cancer patients, especially females, are not a target for lung cancer screening http://ow.ly/L9wY30kIQW0

Introduction

Smoking is well acknowledged as the main risk factor for lung cancer, and is estimated to be responsible for 90% of cases in males and 80% of cases in females [1]. However, over recent decades several changes have taken place in lung cancer epidemiology. Adenocarcinoma, replacing squamous cell cancer, has become the most common morphological type of lung cancer [2]. In addition to smoking, several other risk factors, e.g. second-hand smoke [3, 4], air pollution [5–7], cooking fumes [8], exposure to indoor radon [9] and comorbidities such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [10] or previous tuberculosis [11], have become more widely recognised. In recent years, lung cancer has been more frequently diagnosed in nonsmokers [12, 13] and the incidence among females is increasing in many countries [14]. In daily practice we also see that lung cancer patients are no longer limited to elderly males with a long smoking history and it has become harder to recognise patients at highest risk for lung cancer.

Following the publication of the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) in 2011 [15], lung cancer screening is being evaluated in many countries. Several cancer organisations in the USA recommend screening high-risk patients [16]. In Estonia, lung cancer screening has not been introduced.

The aim of lung cancer screening is to detect the disease at the earliest possible stage and increase survival through immediate radical treatment. Numerous studies have been conducted or are underway to define the optimal target population and evaluate the effectiveness of an organised programme. The current recommended selection criteria for lung cancer screening are based on age and smoking history. These criteria correspond to the NLST inclusion criteria: age 55–74 years, smoking history ≥30 pack-years and, if a former smoker, having quit within the previous 15 years [16]. At the same time, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Association for Thoracic Surgery recommend screening from the age of 50 years and inclusion of smokers with a smoking history ≥20 pack-years [16]. An ongoing study in Europe, the Dutch–Belgian randomised lung cancer multislice computed tomography (CT) screening trial (NELSON), has applied the widest ranges for patient selection criteria in large lung cancer screening trials: adults aged 50–75 years, who have smoked ≥15 cigarettes per day for >25 years or ≥10 cigarettes per day for >30 years and still smoking, or stopped smoking <10 years prior to the study, were considered eligible [17].

The aim of the current study was to explore smoking prevalence among surgically treated lung cancer patients and to evaluate whether these patients would have met the current lung cancer screening criteria.

Patients and methods

A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate all lung cancer patients who had been treated surgically or undergone a diagnostic operation in the Dept of Thoracic Surgery at Tartu University Hospital (Tartu, Estonia) between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2015. Our department is one of the two lung cancer surgical care centres in Estonia. We perform 50–60 lung cancer operations a year, which accounts for ∼40% of the lung cancer operations performed in Estonia. The proportion of lung cancer patients receiving surgical treatment is (and was during the study years) ∼20%.

Although the majority of patients in the current study underwent radical lung cancer surgery, patients who had undergone a thoracoscopic operation to establish the morphological diagnosis of lung cancer and patients with cancer defined as inoperable during the operation were also included.

Data on patients’ demographic characteristics, smoking history, cancer stage (according to TNM (tumour/node/metastasis) classification [18]), cancer morphology and treatment were obtained from hospital records. A CT scan was performed during diagnostic workup in all patients.

Smoking history was calculated in pack-years. Current smokers were persons who, at the time of the surgery, were smoking daily, occasionally or had quit smoking <1 year ago. Ex-smokers were persons who had quit smoking >1 year ago, but had smoked ≥100 cigarettes in their lifetime. Nonsmokers were persons who had smoked <100 cigarettes in their lifetime.

Approval for the study was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Tartu (protocol number 243/T-23).

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to characterise the study sample. The Chi-squared or Fisher's exact test was used to assess associations between the variables of interest. A two-sided p-value ≤0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

Results

During the study period, 426 patients were operated on for lung cancer, with a fully documented smoking history in 327 (76.8%) of the cases (240 males and 87 females; median (range) age 67 (17–88) years).

Age

34 (10.4%) patients were aged <55 years and 73 (22.3%) patients were aged >74 years, thus altogether 107 (32.7%) patients would not have met the NLST study age criteria for lung cancer screening (figure 1). 13 (4.0%) patients were aged <50 years and 63 (19.3%) patients were aged >75 years, thus altogether 76 patients (23.2%) would not have met the age criteria for the NELSON study.

FIGURE 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1

Age distribution of 327 surgically treated lung cancer patients stratified by National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) screening criteria. 107 patients (32.7%) would not have met the NLST age criteria: 34 (10.4%) patients were aged <55 years and 73 (22.3%) were aged >74 years.

Smoking

Out of the 327 patients with smoking information available, only 170 (52.0%) were current smokers, while 97 (29.7%) were ex-smokers and 60 (18.3%) were lifetime nonsmokers. The median (range) duration of smoking in current smokers was 40 (10–94.5) pack-years. Among current smokers, the smoking history was <30 pack-years in 31 (18.2%) patients. Among ex-smokers, 28 (29%) patients had a smoking history <30 pack-years; among ex-smokers with a smoking history >30 years, nine patients had quit smoking >15 years ago. Altogether 128 (39.1%) patients (nonsmokers, current and ex-smokers with a smoking history of <30 pack-years, and ex-smokers who had quit >15 years ago) did not meet the smoking criteria of the NLST study for lung cancer screening (figure 2).

FIGURE 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 2

Smoking status of 327 surgically treated lung cancer patients stratified by National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) screening criteria. 128 (39.1%) patients would not have met the NLST smoking criteria: 60 nonsmokers, 37 ex-smokers (38%) who had a smoking history <30 pack-years or had quit smoking >15 years ago and 31 current smokers (18%) who had a smoking history <30 pack-years.

As smoking history was recorded in pack-years, and not in number of cigarettes smoked, we were not able to analyse our patients’ smoking history according to the NELSON study criteria.

NLST screening criteria

Combining age (<55 and >74 years) and smoking history (nonsmokers, current and ex-smokers with a smoking history of <30 pack-years, and ex-smokers who had quit >15 years ago), altogether 183 (56.0%) of our patients who were operated on for lung cancer would not have met the NLST study criteria for lung cancer screening.

Sex

We saw statistically significant smoking history differences between male and female patients (p<0.0001). Among females, only 26 (30%) were current smokers, while nine (10%) were ex-smokers and 52 (60%) were nonsmokers. Among males, there were 144 (60%) current smokers, 88 (36.7%) ex-smokers and eight (3.3%) nonsmokers.

Analysing males and females separately, 69 of our female patients (79.3%) and 114 of our male patients (47.5%) operated on for lung cancer would not have met the NLST study lung cancer screening criteria (p<0.0001) (figure 3). In both males and females, 33% did not meet the age criteria (p=0.944); 75% of our female patients and 27% of our male patients did not meet the smoking criteria (p<0.0001).

FIGURE 3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 3

Sex of 327 surgically treated lung cancer patients stratified by National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) screening criteria. 69 females (79.3%) and 114 males (47.5%) would not have met the NLST inclusion criteria.

Cancer stage

Cancer stage distribution in our patients at the time of operation is presented in figure 4. The largest proportion of patients (31.8%) had stage IA lung cancer. All stage I–III patients underwent radical lung cancer resection. Stage IV patients included those who underwent diagnostic thoracoscopy (22 patients), had a solitary distant metastasis but were operated on with radical intent (15 patients) and one case that was defined inoperable during the operation. There was no statistically significant difference between the distribution of patients fulfilling and not fulfilling the NLST criteria in different cancer stages (p=0.072).

FIGURE 4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 4

Cancer stage distribution of 327 surgically treated lung cancer patients stratified by National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) screening criteria. 183 (56%) patients would not have met the NLST inclusion criteria, equally distributed between all stages (p=0.072).

Cancer morphology

Morphologically, adenocarcinoma was seen most frequently (166 (50.8%) patients), followed by squamous cell cancer (113 (34.5%) patients), carcinoid (15 (4.6%) patients), large cell cancer (13 (4.0%) patients), small cell cancer (11 (3.4%) patients) and other types (nine (2.7%) patients). Cancer morphology was statistically different when comparing ex-smokers and smokers with nonsmokers (p<0.0001). Among ex-smokers and smokers combined, adenocarcinoma and squamous cell cancer were diagnosed in 45.3% and 41.6% of cases, respectively. Among nonsmokers, adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in 75% of cases and squamous cell cancer in 3% of cases.

Discussion

It is well known that smoking is the main risk factor for lung cancer. However, recent studies have indicated that the proportion of nonsmokers and ex-smokers among lung cancer patients has increased over time. A study in France demonstrated that in 2010, compared with 2000, male lung cancer patients were more frequently never-smokers (4.7% versus 2.5%; p<0.0001), active and former smokers were less commonly heavy consumers (43.7 versus 45.1 pack-years; p=0.003), and in former smokers the duration of smoking had decreased (34.8 versus 35.8 years; p=0.007) and the duration of cessation had increased (15.3 versus 11.4 years; p<0.0001) [19].

In our study population (mainly early-stage lung cancer patients, treated surgically) the proportion of nonsmokers was 18.3%, ex-smokers 29.7% and current smokers only 52%. Analysing male and female patients separately, we saw that 60% of females were lifetime nonsmokers, whereas only 3.3% of males fell into this category. Other researchers have also demonstrated sex differences in the role of smoking in lung cancer development [20, 21]. In the NLST study population, 59% were male and 41% were female [5] compared with 73% and 27%, respectively, in our study population. Similar male predominance is typically observed in surgical lung cancer studies [22, 23].

Currently, lung cancer is diagnosed at an early stage, when surgical treatment (i.e. the most effective treatment modality) is still applicable, only in a minority of cases. Thus, to improve the treatment results, early detection of lung cancer through screening would be more than justified. According to a recent study, only 26.7% of subjects diagnosed with lung cancer in the USA would have met the NLST eligibility criteria [24]. As NLST had demonstrated a 20% lung cancer mortality reduction in the study population, in the total US population this would translate into only ∼5% reduction in lung cancer mortality [24]. According to Pinsky and Berg [24], to achieve this modest benefit, 6% of the population aged >40 years should be screened for lung cancer. Expanding the age range and smoking criteria, the number of cancer cases detected would increase, but so would the size of the population to be screened [24].

In our study, we were able to demonstrate that when applying the NLST screening criteria, we would have been able to detect lung cancer in 44% of the surgically treated lung cancer patients. However, based on age and/or smoking history, many of our patients would not have qualified for the screening. Currently, more and more elderly patients, including octogenarians, receive efficient surgical treatment for lung cancer [23, 25]. Thus, an upper limit for age (alone) should probably not be set. Elderly individuals could be assessed, as before any surgical intervention, for fitness for the potential radical treatment and only when fit continue in the lung cancer screening programme. In addition, the increase of lung cancer incidence among nonsmokers, especially females, needs to be considered when planning future screening studies. Other risk factors, such as previous history of lung cancer or tuberculosis, COPD, or exposure to radon or other carcinogens, are currently not taken into account when selecting individuals for lung cancer screening. Further studies are needed to establish their role among lung cancer screening criteria.

Limitations

The limitation of our study was the retrospective nature, which did not allow us to record smoking habits in more detail (e.g. in number of cigarettes smoked per day). Smoking information had been collected as part of the routine medical history at hospital admission and was self-reported, but missing in a quarter of the patients. We could have been more confident in the conclusions drawn had a detailed smoking history been available for all of the patients. Although this was a single-centre study, it included ∼40% of patients operated on for lung cancer in Estonia.

Conclusions

In conclusion, while screening is a promising tool for detecting lung cancer at an early stage and thereby improving survival, our study demonstrated that half of lung cancer patients might not be captured by screening when following the NLST criteria. In particular, female nonsmokers and older male smokers, currently not targeted by lung cancer screening, yet constituting a considerable proportion of patients operated on for lung cancer, should be carefully considered.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank Inge Ringmets (Institute of Family Medicine and Public Health, Tartu University, Tartu, Estonia) for statistical assistance.

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: K-T. Laisaar reports grants from the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research (grant IUT34-17), during the conduct of the study.

  • Received January 3, 2018.
  • Accepted June 28, 2018.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2018

This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Gibson GJ,
    2. Loddenkemper R,
    3. Sibille Y, et al.
    , eds. Lung cancer. In: European Lung White Book. 2nd Edn. Sheffield, European Respiratory Society, 2013; pp. 224–237.
  2. ↵
    1. Devesa SS,
    2. Bray F,
    3. Vizcaino AP, et al.
    International lung cancer trends by histologic type: male:female differences diminishing and adenocarcinoma rates rising. Int J Cancer 2005; 117: 294–299.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    US Dept of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006.
  4. ↵
    1. Boffetta P
    . Involuntary smoking and lung cancer. Scand J Work Environ Health 2002; 28: Suppl. 2, 30–40.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Hamra GB,
    2. Guha N,
    3. Cohen A, et al.
    Outdoor particulate matter exposure and lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Health Perspect 2014; 122: 906–911.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Raaschou-Nielsen O,
    2. Andersen ZJ,
    3. Beelen R, et al.
    Air pollution and lung cancer incidence in 17 European cohorts: prospective analyses from the European Study of Cohorts for Air Pollution Effects (ESCAPE). Lancet Oncol 2013; 14: 813–822.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Pope C,
    2. Burnett R,
    3. Thun M, et al.
    Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. JAMA 2002; 287: 1132–1141.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Xue Y,
    2. Jiang Y,
    3. Jin S, et al.
    Association between cooking oil fume exposure and lung cancer among Chinese nonsmoking women: a meta-analysis. Onco Targets Ther 2016; 9: 2987–2992.
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Darby S,
    2. Hill D,
    3. Auvinen A, et al.
    Radon in homes and risk of lung cancer: collaborative analysis of individual data from 13 European case-control studies. BMJ 2005; 330: 223.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Wu AH,
    2. Fontham ET,
    3. Reynolds P, et al.
    Previous lung disease and risk of lung cancer among lifetime nonsmoking women in the United States. Am J Epidemiol 1995; 141: 1023–1032.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Zheng W,
    2. Blot W,
    3. Liao M, et al.
    Lung cancer and prior tuberculosis infection in Shanghai. Br J Cancer 1987; 56: 501–505.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Pelosof L,
    2. Ahn C,
    3. Gao A, et al.
    Proportion of never-smoker non-small cell lung cancer patients at three diverse institutions. J Natl Cancer Inst 2017; 109: djw295.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Cufari ME,
    2. Proli C,
    3. De Sousa P, et al.
    Increasing frequency of non-smoking lung cancer: presentation of patients with early disease to a tertiary institution in the UK. Eur J Cancer 2017; 84: 55–59.
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Malhotra J,
    2. Malvezzi M,
    3. Negri E, et al.
    Risk factors for lung cancer worldwide. Eur Respir J 2016; 48: 889–902.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 395–409.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Boiselle PM
    . Computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA 2013; 309: 1163–1170.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Van Iersel CA,
    2. De Koning HJ,
    3. Draisma G, et al.
    Risk-based selection from the general population in a screening trial: selection criteria, recruitment and power for the Dutch-Belgian randomised lung cancer multi-slice CT screening trial (NELSON). Int J Cancer 2007; 120: 868–874.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Sobin LH,
    2. Gospodarowicz MK,
    3. Wittekind C
    , eds. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. 7th Edn. Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.
  18. ↵
    1. Debieuvre D,
    2. Oster JP,
    3. Riou R, et al.
    The new face of non-small-cell lung cancer in men: results of two French prospective epidemiological studies conducted 10 years apart. Lung Cancer 2016; 91: 1–6.
    OpenUrl
  19. ↵
    1. Lortet-Tieulent J,
    2. Renteria E,
    3. Sharp L, et al.
    Convergence of decreasing male and increasing female incidence rates in major tobacco-related cancers in Europe in 1988–2010. Eur J Cancer 2015; 51: 1144–1163.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Zang EA,
    2. Wynder EL
    . Differences in lung cancer risk between men and women: examination of the evidence. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996; 88: 183–192.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Pagès PB,
    2. Cottenet J,
    3. Mariet AS, et al.
    In-hospital mortality following lung cancer resection: nationwide administrative database. Eur Respir J 2016; 47: 1809–1817.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Fanucchi O,
    2. Ambrogi MC,
    3. Dini P, et al.
    Surgical treatment of non-small cell lung cancer in octogenarians. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2011; 12: 749–753.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Pinsky PF,
    2. Berg CD
    . Applying the National Lung Screening Trial eligibility criteria to the US population: what percent of the population and of incident lung cancers would be covered? J Med Screen 2012; 19: 154–156.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Tutic-Horn M,
    2. Gambazzi F,
    3. Rocco G, et al.
    Curative resection for lung cancer in octogenarians is justified. J Thorac Dis 2017; 9: 296–302.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 4 Issue 3 Table of Contents
ERJ Open Research: 4 (3)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Surgically treated lung cancer patients: do they all smoke and would they all have been detected with lung cancer screening?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Surgically treated lung cancer patients: do they all smoke and would they all have been detected with lung cancer screening?
Tanel Laisaar, Bruno Sarana, Indrek Benno, Kaja-Triin Laisaar
ERJ Open Research Jul 2018, 4 (3) 00001-2018; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00001-2018

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Surgically treated lung cancer patients: do they all smoke and would they all have been detected with lung cancer screening?
Tanel Laisaar, Bruno Sarana, Indrek Benno, Kaja-Triin Laisaar
ERJ Open Research Jul 2018, 4 (3) 00001-2018; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00001-2018
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Patients and methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgement
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • COPD and smoking
  • Lung cancer
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Original articles

  • Endobronchial autologous BM-MSCs in IPF patients
  • Effect of β-blockers on the risk of COPD exacerbations
  • Recurrence of symptoms after childhood LRTI
Show more Original articles

Lung cancer

  • Gene expression profile of EMT in tumours of NSCLC patients
  • CT on lung cancer screening
  • Exosomes from EGFR-mutated adenocarcinoma induce a partial/hybrid EMT
Show more Lung cancer

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About ERJ Open Research

  • Editorial board
  • Journal information
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Online ISSN: 2312-0541

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society