Skip to main content

Main menu

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

Lung cancer in patients with fibrosing interstitial lung diseases: an overview of current knowledge and challenges

Namrata Kewalramani, Carlos Machahua, Venerino Poletti, Jacques Cadranel, Athol U. Wells, Manuela Funke-Chambour
ERJ Open Research 2022 8: 00115-2022; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00115-2022
Namrata Kewalramani
1Dept for BioMedical Research DBMR, Dept of Pulmonary Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carlos Machahua
1Dept for BioMedical Research DBMR, Dept of Pulmonary Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
2Dept of Pulmonary Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Venerino Poletti
3Dept of Thoracic Diseases, “G.B. Morgagni” Hospita, Forlì, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica Diagnostica e Sperimentale University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jacques Cadranel
4Dept of Pulmonary Medicine and Thoracic Oncology, Constitutive Reference Center of Rare Pulmonary Diseases, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon and GRC04 Theranoscan, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Athol U. Wells
5Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust and National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Manuela Funke-Chambour
1Dept for BioMedical Research DBMR, Dept of Pulmonary Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
2Dept of Pulmonary Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: manuela.funke-chambour@insel.ch
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

This article has a correction. Please see:

  • “Lung cancer in patients with fibrosing interstitial lung diseases: an overview of current knowledge and challenges”. Namrata Kewalramani, Carlos Machahua, Venerino Poletti, Jacques Cadranel, Athol U. Wells and Manuela Funke-Chambour. ERJ Open Res 2022; 8: 00115-2022. - July 01, 2022

Abstract

Patients with progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (fILD) have increased morbidity and mortality. Lung fibrosis can be associated with lung cancer. The pathogenesis of both diseases shows similarities, although not all mechanisms are understood. The combination of the diseases is challenging, due to the amplified risk of mortality, and also because lung cancer treatment carries additional risks in patients with underlying lung fibrosis. Acute exacerbations in fILD patients are linked to increased mortality, and the risk of acute exacerbations is increased after lung cancer treatment with surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Careful selection of treatment modalities is crucial to improve survival while maintaining acceptable quality of life in patients with combined lung cancer and fILD. This overview of epidemiology, pathogenesis, treatment and a possible role for antifibrotic drugs in patients with lung cancer and fILD is the summary of a session presented during the virtual European Respiratory Society Congress in 2021. The review summarises current knowledge and identifies areas of uncertainty. Most current data relate to patients with combined idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and lung cancer. There is a pressing need for additional prospective studies, required for the formulation of a consensus statement or guideline on the optimal care of patients with lung cancer and fILD.

Abstract

Lung fibrosis can be associated with lung cancer. More and better-designed studies are needed to determine the true incidence/prevalence of lung cancer in fILD. Optimal treatment strategies urgently need to be defined and evaluated. https://bit.ly/37CzTMu

Introduction

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are characterised by pathological changes in the pulmonary parenchyma, sometimes triggered by inflammation, but sometimes with an epithelial–fibrotic pathogenesis, in which inflammation is believed to play little part. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is the most common type of fibrosing ILD (fILD); almost always progresses (at a highly variable rate); and has the worst prognosis. A histological pattern of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) can be diagnostic for IPF in the absence of other causes. A definite UIP pattern on computed tomography (CT) is reliably predictive of a UIP pattern at biopsy, and is characterised by honeycombing, reticulation, traction bronchiectasis and subpleural and basal predominance [1]. A UIP pattern in IPF and other disorders tends to progress [2]. Other fILDs can develop a progressive phenotype. Once progression despite management has occurred, the disease course is usually similar to IPF [3]. Acute exacerbations are acute flares of ILD, sometimes overtly triggered, e.g. by infection or surgery and associated with high short-term mortality [4]. Acute exacerbations can also increase mortality in patients with other fILDs [5]. Antifibrotic drugs have been approved for IPF and, recently, for other progressive fILDs that decelerate disease progression and thus increase survival [1, 6–8]. Increased survival due to delayed disease progression in IPF and other progressive fILD patients leads to an increased prevalence of comorbidities and complications, with their optimal management complicated by concurrent ILD. Lung cancer as a comorbidity in ILD patients is the focus of the present review.

Epidemiology and risk factors of lung cancer in ILD patients

Lung cancer is an important comorbidity encountered in ILD patients, especially in IPF [9]. In some statements, confusion has arisen due to failure to distinguish between prevalence, incidence and cumulative incidence. In the following summary, we present an overview of current knowledge, emphasising the importance of these distinctions. Lung cancer prevalence refers to the total number of people suffering from lung cancer at a single point in time in a study population [10]; lung cancer incidence refers to the rate of development of new cases during a short time period (usually expressed as annual incidence) [10]; lung cancer cumulative incidence is the total proportion of patients developing lung cancer during a prolonged period of time (e.g. 5 years) [11].

Prevalence

A review by Ballester et al. [12] reported that the prevalence of lung cancer in IPF ranges from 2.7% to 48% and is significantly higher than in the general population. A meta-analysis has shown difference by region in prevalence of lung cancer in fILD. The prevalence in Asian cohorts is 15.3% and in European cohorts is 11.6% [13].

Incidence

Overall cancer incidence in IPF was 290 cases per 10 000 person-years in a population-based cohort study from Korea with 25 241 IPF patients and 75 723 matched controls. Risk of lung cancer was the highest, followed by lymphoma and skin cancer [14]. In a study from the United Kingdom studying incidence of lung cancer in IPF, there was an increased incidence compared to the general population (rate ratio 4.99) due to a marked increase of lung cancer incidence in IPF patients (112 per 10 000 person-years in IPF compared to 22.9 per 10 000 person-years in the general population) [15]. A study from the United States found that the incidence of lung cancer in IPF was 3.34-fold higher than in the general population [16]. This study also compared cancer laterality, primary site, histology and stage. They found statistically significant differences in lung cancer in IPF compared to lung cancer in a general population. This suggests that lung cancer in IPF is phenotypically distinctive from “sporadic” lung cancer [16]. However, in patients with ILD and rheumatoid arthritis, polymyositis/dermatomyositis or systemic sclerosis, the increase was as high as 4.95-fold [16]. Lung cancer origin and consequence can be additionally confounded in the face of risk factors such as smoking [17], silica and asbestos [18]. The histopathological UIP fibrosis pattern predisposes to pulmonary cancerous lesions [19]. Genetic factors contributing to cancer susceptibility and also predisposing to IPF include SFTPA1 and SFTPA2 [20].

Cumulative incidence

The cumulative cancer incidence rises strikingly with longer follow-up in IPF patients. In one study, the incidence of lung cancer was 1.1% at 1 year, 8.7% at 3 years, 15.9% at 5 years and 31.1% at 10 years [21]. A nationwide population-based study in Korea found the prevalence of lung cancer in IPF cases to be 6.4%. The median time from diagnosis of IPF to lung cancer development was 16.3 months [23]. The cumulative incidence of lung cancer in IPF increases from 1.7% at 1 year to 4.7% at 3 years and 7% at 5 years [22]. The incidence of lung cancer is increased in patients with ILD and COPD, but even more in patients with IPF or COPD and ILD [23].

Risk factors for cancer in fibrotic ILD are older age at diagnosis [24], smoking [24–28], male gender [25–28], IPF per se (adjusted for age, gender and smoking) [14], rapid annual decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) and low diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) [26, 28], as well as emphysema [27, 28].

Disease characteristics and prognosis of lung cancer in ILD patients

Lung cancer in IPF patients (LC-IPF) occurs more frequently in the lower lobes (p<0.001), whereas non-IPF ILD patients do not differ in localisation of lung cancer to the general population [16]. A clinicopathological study in Japan divided subjects into histological subgroups: UIP (clinically IPF group), non-UIP (clinically non-IPF ILD) and a normal group (without ILD), and showed that patients with lung cancer and UIP on histology had a subpleural lung cancer predilection in the lower lobes (75.5%), matching the typical distribution of UIP [19]. The most frequent cancer type was squamous cell cancer (62.8%) [19]. In comparison, in the non-UIP group, lung cancer occurred most frequently in the upper lobes (68.1%), with adenocarcinoma the commonest cancer type (55.2%) [19].

The occurrence of cancer within the fibrotic regions was confirmed by another study, in which lung cancer localisation within fibrotic areas was seen in 50%, followed by marginal-fibrotic areas (29%) and extrafibrotic areas (13%) [29]. Radiologically, lung cancer is most often found on CT in areas within fibrosis (44.4%) followed by adjacent areas abutting fibrosis (29.6%) [21].

In a large multicentre Greek cohort (n=1016), LC-IPF included squamous cell carcinoma in 34.3%, adenocarcinoma in 27.5% and small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) in 14.7% in histological samples [30]. Again, 57% of patients had cancer within the lower lobes [30]. Squamous cell carcinoma was confirmed as the most frequent histopathological type in other studies [31]. Cancer-type distributions with squamous cell cancer in 37.8% of patients and adenocarcinoma in 30.8% of patients were found in a meta-analysis of a total of 131 947 IPF patients, of whom 6384 had lung cancer, from eight different countries [32].

Survival differences between IPF without lung cancer and IPF with lung cancer were statistically significant (p<0.001) [16], with lower survival over time for those with IPF and cancer [16, 27, 33]. A single-centre retrospective study found an increased mortality in patients with connective tissue disease associated ILD with lung cancer as compared to those without lung cancer [28].

Both the histological cancer type and its stage influences survival in patients with IPF, as in the general lung cancer population. Depending on the histological type and stage, outcome in IPF patients can be additionally impacted. In a recently published study in patients with lung cancer, LC-IPF patients had a poorer prognosis than a control group of lung cancer patients (5-year survival rate 14.5% versus 30.1%, p<0.001) [34]. The IPF subgroup had a worse prognosis than the group without IPF among patients with adenocarcinoma (median survival 11 versus 26 months, p<0.001) or squamous cell carcinoma (median survival 19 versus 30 months, p=0.003) [34]. The median survival of patients with lung cancer and IPF was shorter than that of the group without IPF in stage I (34 versus 77 months, p<0.001) and III of nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) (13 months versus 18 months, p=0.013). Median survival was similar in the IPF group and the group without IPF with stage II (23 months versus 28 months, p=0.142) and stage IV NSCLC (6 months versus 7 months, p=0.220) [34]. Among patients with SCLC, the median survival of the IPF and non-IPF groups was similar in both limited (16 months versus 16 months, p=0.456) and extensive stages of SCLC (6 months versus 9 months, p=0.379) [34]. In addition to cancer type and stage, morbidity and mortality are influenced by treatment modalities in all patients, but especially in patients with IPF and fILD.

Pathogenesis of cancer in ILD

The increased prevalence and accumulative incidence of lung cancer in fILD suggest that ILD may itself promote lung cancer development [14]. Specifically, in IPF, some molecular and genetic features of its pathogenesis and progression are linked to mechanisms that favour development of malignancy [12]. Unfortunately, the evidence for pathogenesis of lung cancer in ILD patients is vague. The following hypotheses are drawn from studies in patients with fILD or lung cancer. These findings need further confirmation in ILD patients with lung cancer and should be considered carefully.

Histopathological studies in IPF, the archetype of fILD with a UIP pattern as the histological background, suggest that abnormal bronchiolar proliferation in fibrotic areas might be the pre-neoplastic lesion [35]. An immunohistochemistry study of 33 cases of lung cancer arising in patients with IPF demonstrated that neoplastic cells express bronchial markers including the transcription factor-1, napsin-A and surfactant protein A, expressed also in a minority of cases of adenocarcinoma [35].

Proteins involved in cell renewal of bronchial epithelium such as ΔNp63 were found to be overexpressed in bronchioloalveolar junctions in IPF lungs [36].

Abnormal activation of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway was documented in fibrotic areas in lung samples obtained from patients with IPF, and this pathway could be involved in squamous dysplasia and in promoting squamous carcinoma differentiation [37, 38]. Recently, single-cell sequencing and gene expression analyses have supported histopathological findings of proliferative bronchiolar structures or bronchiolisation in lung samples with a UIP pattern [38]. Increased airway epithelial cells populations at the expense of the typical alveolar epithelial cell markers were found [39]. Moreover, airway basal cell populations (CK5/6+ and ΔNp63+) have been described in the surroundings of the fibroblast foci in a study of bronchoalveolar lavage cell expression in IPF patients [40].

One of the cardinal mechanisms that may promote bronchial pre-cancerous lesions in IPF lungs is alveolar epithelial cell exhaustion [41]. Both intrinsic (e.g. genetic, ageing) and environmental factors (e.g. smoking, pollution) contribute to alveolar stem cell dysfunction in patients with IPF. These cells express senescence markers and are unable to rebuild the lung parenchyma properly after endogenous or exogenous insults. However, they acquire a senescence-associated secretory phenotype inducing aberrant activation of important regulators of cell transformation, growth and migration signals and epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) [37, 38] such as Wnt/β-catenin and Sonic Hedgehog pathways [42]. Along with formation of a fibrotic microenvironment [38], these processes lead to bronchial overgrowth and cancer cell development and progression [37]. In a subset of IPF patients, expression of membrane PD-L1 protein in alveolar and/or bronchiolar cells was documented, confirming the pathogenetic role of EMT and reinforcing the links between IPF pathogenesis and carcinogenesis [43].

Atypical squamous cells are frequently found in honeycombing areas. Serpin B4 overexpression in these metaplastic cells was related to both transforming growth factor-β and Ki-67 overexpression and was higher in patients with foci of cancer/high-grade dysplasia, showing that this pathway could be another important cofactor for cancer development in IPF lungs [44].

In addition, some genes under post-transcriptional control of miR-200 are overexpressed in bronchiolar fibroproliferative lesions of IPF lungs that are microRNAs regulating EMT and tumour cell adhesion. Proteins promoting abnormal migration of bronchiolar cells, such as laminin-5-γ2 chain and Hsp27 were found to be overexpressed in cells covering fibroblastic foci or honeycomb cysts; this further suggests that activation of EMT might have a role in abnormal bronchiolar progression in these areas [45, 46].

Along with these typical fibrosis-related mechanisms, a genomic study carried out by Hwang et al. [47] has provided a new perspective on the origin of lung cancer in ILD. The genomic profile of lung cancer associated with IPF showed a significantly higher prevalence of mutations in TP53 and BRAF in their cohort, genes implicated in cell proliferation and survival, suggesting a genetic susceptibility to lung cancer in patients with IPF [47].

In summary, bronchiolar hyperplastic–dysplastic cells are possibly the driver of lung cancer in ILD. Bronchiolisation of distal areas within UIP patterns is promoted by a profibrotic microenvironment, and the mechanisms involved in fibrosis development may also activate molecular processes able to induce pre-neoplastic, and in more advanced stages, cancerous lesions, as shown in figure 1.

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

Pathomechanisms of lung cancer and fibrosing interstitial lung disease. Dysplastic bronchial cells accumulate near fibroblastic foci. Senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) and stem-cell exhaustion contribute to dysplastic bronchial cell development. Fibrotic processes including epithelial–mesenchymal transition, Wnt/β-catenin and Sonic Hedgehog pathways contribute to cancer development. Antifibrotic drugs inhibit fibrosis and might have potential effects on cancer. HSP: heat shock protein; TGF: transforming growth factor. Created with BioRender (www.biorender.com).

Treatment of lung cancer in ILD patients

Lung cancer treatment is currently tailored to each individual according to the stage, type of cancer and the performance status of the patients. Lung cancer in ILD has some peculiarities which pose a challenge to care providers, especially in IPF patients. Patients with IPF are typically of older age, often smokers and highly comorbid. The underlying ILD leads to reduced lung functional performance and respiratory capacity (i.e. reduced FVC and DLCO). Mortality is increased with increasingly severe lung function impairment, as judged by FVC, DLCO, the Composite Physiologic Index or the ILD–Gender Age Physiology (GAP) index. In addition, underlying ILD predisposes to a risk of acute exacerbation and, thus, increased mortality [33]. Therapeutic strategies for lung cancer in patients with fILD need to be adapted according to the individual treatment risk and the prognosis of both lung cancer and underlying ILD [48].

Early and late lung cancer mortality in patients with ILD is increased after adjustment for confounding factors. Some of the reasons for early mortality are acute exacerbation of the fILD related to surgery, irradiation or anticancer drugs [49]. Late mortality may be due to lung cancer progression or relapse, and also to ILD natural history [50]. Treatment options for NSCLC have improved dramatically over the past decade. An individual and personalised treatment approach to lung cancer in patients with fILD is desirable.

An overview of modern therapeutic strategies for lung cancer with fILD other than SCLC is illustrated in figure 2 and suggestions are summarised in table 1. Next to surgical treatments for selected candidates, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) can be chosen for frail patients with early-stage cancer. Combination treatments or only chemotherapy/targeted anticancer drugs might be chosen for more advanced stages, depending on overall individual frailty and age. The individual treatment options for SCLC and NSCLC are described later.

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

A proposal for adapted modern therapeutic strategies for lung cancer fibrosing interstitial lung disease (fILD) other than small cell lung carcinoma. PS: performance status; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 s; DLCO: diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide; NA: not available; UIP: usual interstitial pneumonia; CT: computed tomography; FVC: forced vital capacity; GAP: gender, age, physiology; VATS: video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery; SBRT: stereotactic body radiotherapy.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Suggestions for treatment of lung cancer in fibrosing interstitial lung disease (fILD)

Small cell lung cancer in fILD

Patients with SCLC and fILD respond well to standard treatment if they can tolerate chemotherapy. The prognosis of SCLC in patients with ILD is comparable to those without ILD [48].

In SCLC patients receiving chemotherapy, overall survival in patients with ILD was not inferior to that in patients without ILD. In ILD patients with an UIP pattern, the overall survival was reduced compared to non-UIP, although this was not statistically significant [51].

Early-stage NSCLC in fILD (stage I and II)

Surgery

Surgical options in NSCLC include lobar resection or anatomical sublobar resection, pneumonectomy or wedge resection depending on the tumour localisation, size, stage and morbidity. Lobar resection has a better prognosis than partial resection in early disease. In carefully selected patients, outcome can be improved by adjuvant chemotherapy. The factors determining better outcomes are lower stages than pIIA–IIIA (according to the eighth tumour, node, metastasis classification) [52], better performance status score, younger age and absence of comorbidities [53, 54]. In these situations, mortality at 5 years is reduced by 5–15%. In real life, <60% of general lung cancer patients receive adjuvant treatment [55, 56]. When surgery is not possible due to poor performance status score, early-stage NSCLC (tumour <3 cm) can alternatively be treated by SBRT [57].

Peri-operative mortality is increased in IPF patients undergoing cancer surgery [58]. Post-operative and surgery-related mortality are increased in IPF with a lower 5-year survival after pulmonary resection of NSCLC in IPF compared to non-IPF [59]. The 5-year survival in patients with NSCLC was 43% in patients with IPF and 64.2% among those without IPF (p<0.001). Disease-free survival was similar in the groups [60]. In a matched case–control study from Korea, 33 patients with IPF who had undergone surgery were matched with 66 control patients who had undergone lung cancer surgery. The 5-year survival rate was 38% for lung cancer patients with IPF and 73% for the control group (p=0.001) [61]. In a Japanese study with 870 lung cancer patients undergoing surgery, 56 patients had IPF. Surgery-related mortality was higher in patients with lung cancer and IPF than in patients with lung cancer alone (7.1% versus 1.9%, p=0.030) [58]. One reason for increased mortality associated with surgery is acute ILD exacerbations, addressed later in the discussion of the role of antifibrotics in lung cancer treatment.

Radiotherapy

For patients with poor lung reserve or comorbidities, even in early NSCLC, surgical and chemotherapeutic options are limited. In a systematic review by Chen et al. [57] of patients with early-stage NSCLC and ILD, high levels of treatment-related toxicity and ILD-specific toxicity were documented in patients undergoing SBRT, particle beam therapy or radiofrequency ablation. Survival without treatment was 12 months. The pros and cons of undergoing potential toxic treatment versus best supportive care must be carefully considered by both clinicians and patients. A retrospective study by Onishi et al. [62] in 242 patients with ILD and early-stage lung cancer receiving SBRT found the rate of severe radiation pneumonitis to be 12.4%. The mortality rate was 6.9%. Some of the risk factors for poor outcome include FVC <70%, >10% of normal lung receiving radiation, performance status 2–4, presence of squamous cell carcinoma and clinical stage T2, as well as regular use of steroid before SBRT [62]. Very few data evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of conventional radiation therapy in ILD patients with lung cancer (LC-ILD). Radiotherapy-induced pneumonitis can add to mortality in LC-IPF and contributes to the overall poor outcome in these patients [63]. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer recommends that conventional radiotherapy should be avoided for patients with LC-IPF [64].

Late-stage NSCLC

In advanced stages, lung cancer can be treated with chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy, in general. The few prospective or case–control cohorts contain limited numbers of patients (15–100) with advanced LC-fILD, among whom IPF is present in 25–100% of cases. Almost all studies were conducted with carboplatin [65–70]. Most studies evaluated carboplatin in combination with weekly paclitaxel (or nanoparticle albumin-bound, nab-paclitaxel) [71–75], with fewer data on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) [70, 76]. The results from these studies need to be interpreted with caution. The limited database shows an unexpectedly high proportion of response rate (27–70%) in the previously cited studies. Response criteria such as tumour shrinkage have been defined to standardise response rate assessment [77]. In the studies, patients had good performance status; the histology was variable; and a high proportion of stage IIIA–B patients received chemotherapy instead of surgery/radiotherapy, enriching the population of “good prognosis” cancer patients. In addition, they did not include patients with poor lung volumes or low DLCO. The progression-free survival was 3.7–7.2 months, with an overall survival of 5.4–19.4 months. Acute exacerbation was observed in 2.8–12% of cases.

Chemotherapy, kinase inhibitors and ICIs

In retrospective studies, the overall survival was increased in lung cancer patients (with or without ILD) receiving chemotherapy compared to patients who received palliative care, as shown in a cohort studying the effects of chemotherapy in patients with LC-ILD (specifically idiopathic interstitial pneumonias) [51]. Median survival time (MST) was 25.0 versus 1.8 months (p<0.001). In patients receiving chemotherapy, the overall survival was reduced in ILD patients (MST 10.9 months versus 25.0 months, p=0.043). In NSCLC, the overall survival was reduced in patients with ILD (MST 10.6 versus 27.9 months, p=0.008) [51].

No randomised prospective controlled trial has evaluated the effects of chemotherapy on lung cancer outcome in patients with fILD. In real life, a lot of LC-fILD patients are of advanced age and have various comorbidities, increasing the risks of treatment. Acute exacerbation of ILD is an important complication of treatment. Thus, treatment options need to be tailored for individual cases, balancing individual risks and benefits. Acute exacerbation induced by chemotherapy in advanced LC-IPF increases the risk of mortality [69]. In a Japanese study of 69 patients, those with a UIP pattern on chest CT scan developed acute exacerbation after chemotherapy more frequently than those with a non-UIP pattern (30% versus 8%, p=0.005) [69]. A study by Kanaji et al. [78] observed that patients with ILD and IPF treated with paclitaxel/nab-paclitaxel had few acute exacerbations. Acute exacerbations in patients treated with docetaxel were seen in 18.4% and 20.8% of patients with ILD and IPF, respectively.

Two retrospective cohorts suggested that adding bevacizumab reduces the risk of ILD progressions or acute exacerbation, even if ILD was related to chemotherapy [70, 79]. Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and has been used for NSCLC in combination with paclitaxel [80]. Interestingly, VEGF plays a role in ILD progression, and fibrosis development could be inhibited in a pre-clinical model of VEGF-A deficient alveolar type II cells in mice [81]. Of note, nintedanib, used to reduce IPF progression, is a well-known inhibitor of the receptor tyrosine kinase VEGFR [82].

In addition to standard chemotherapy, kinase inhibitors are now standard of care for advanced NSCLC with oncogene addiction [83]. However, drug-induced ILD is more frequent with kinase inhibitors than with chemotherapy. Prior ILD is a risk factor for kinase inhibitor-associated ILD. Mortality rate for kinase inhibitor-induced ILD is high [84]. In the general population, ICI are the standard of care in second line for advanced NSCLC, with pembrolizumab, atezolizumab and cemiplimab being standard of care as first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 expression >50% or in combination with a double platinum chemotherapy in other fit patients (pembrolizumab and atezolizumab). In a phase II trial on nivolumab for advanced NSCLC in fILD, the 6-month progression-free survival rate was 56%, response rate was 39% and the disease control rate was 72% [85] with a low frequency of acute exacerbation and no treatment-related deaths. By contrast, another phase II trial with atezolizumab showed an incidence of pneumonitis in patients with fILD of 29.4%, leading to early study closure. However, in this trial, the proportion of IPF patients was high. The objective response rate was 6.3% [86]. A retrospective study confirmed increased incidence of pneumonitis in patients receiving nivolumab [87]. A retrospective study from Japan comparing nivolumab versus pembrolizumab showed noninferior outcomes with respect to progression-free survival and overall survival [88]. In summary, ICI studies are scarce, mostly consisting of retrospective cohorts, with contradictory results, limited numbers of patients, confined to Asian countries and mostly investigating patients with IPF.

Palliative care

In addition to tumour-directed treatments, palliative care should be considered early in the treatment process. Palliative care medicine is often wrongly perceived as a terminal-phase treatment [89]. It is centred on patient needs, providing comfort and symptom control.

fILD and lung cancer are each fatal in isolation and their combination has a synergistic effect in increasing mortality and reducing quality of life. A review published by Naccache et al. [48] summarises this grim scenario. In patients with lung cancer and fILD after resection, a second lung cancer is observed in 36% of cases. In combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE), 43% of patients with lung cancer do not receive standard care because of underlying CPFE. In advanced fILD, 20–25% of patients are unable to receive chemotherapy due to frailty, and 50% of patients receive only one type of chemotherapy [48].

Role of antifibrotics in ILD and cancer

Antifibrotics reduce acute exacerbation due to cancer treatment

Cancer treatment-associated mortality, especially in patients undergoing surgical resection, can be attributed to acute exacerbation. The incidence of post-operative acute exacerbation was 6.4% in a single centre study from Tokyo [90]. In a multicentric data analysis from Japan, post-operative acute exacerbation of ILD occurred in 164 (9.3%) patients with an overall mortality rate of 44% [91]. The timing peak of acute exacerbation was at day 4. 64% developed acute exacerbation in the first 10 days post-surgery [91].

Risk factors for acute exacerbation after surgical resection include type of surgery, elevated KL-6 levels, male sex, reduced vital capacity (%), history of acute exacerbation, pre-operative steroid use and a UIP pattern on CT [48, 92]. In patients with LC-ILD, surgical procedures have shown the strongest association with acute exacerbation, possibly due to handling of the lungs, lymphatics and vasculature during the intervention [91]. The risk of acute exacerbation increases according to the volume of lung removed, with the highest risk for pneumonectomy and lowest risk for wedge resection. Minimally invasive surgery such as video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery does not reduce the risk of acute exacerbation [93]. Controlling intra-operative intravenous fluid has been shown to be protective for development of acute exacerbation in IPF patients undergoing lung cancer surgery [94]. A single-centre study from Japan found that high oxygen concentration with single-lung ventilation and hyperventilation with high airway pressure increased the risk of acute exacerbation in idiopathic interstitial pneumonia patients undergoing surgical resection [95].

In a retrospective review of pre-operative CT and histopathological examination in patients who underwent resection for lung cancer, the incidence of clinical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS; synonymous with acute exacerbation in ILD patients), was 31.8% in patients with “interstitial pneumonia” defined histologically, which was strikingly higher than the 1.5% prevalence observed in the “interstitial pneumonia-negative group” [59]. This suggests that the histopathological presence of interstitial pneumonia trumps other risk factors for post-operative ARDS, manifesting clinically as breathlessness and histologically as diffuse alveolar damage [96]. An observational study by Oishi et al. [97] suggests that high maximum standardised uptake values in positron emission tomography imaging in idiopathic interstitial pneumonia areas may predict both acute exacerbation after lung resection and short-term survival. Ueno et al. [98] noted that ILD GAP index can predict prognosis in patients with lung cancer and ILD undergoing surgical resection.

The benefits of antifibrotic agents in patients with LC-ILD

Antifibrotic drugs have been observed to reduce acute exacerbation in IPF. In the INPULSIS trials of nintedanib in IPF, the frequency of acute exacerbation was reduced in the active treatment arm [99], although data on this potential benefit of pirfenidone are less conclusive in the general IPF population. Paradoxically, studies of the benefits of antifibrotic agents in reducing acute exacerbation prevalence in LC-ILD patients following cancer interventions are mostly confined to pirfenidone.

The potential efficacy of peri-operative pirfenidone in reducing the incidence of post-operative acute exacerbation IPF and thus reducing post-operative mortality, has been explored in retrospective cohorts of lung cancer patients undergoing resection surgery (summarised in table 2) [100–103]. These studies have several limitations. Underpowered retrospective cohorts are subject to publication bias and to potential differences in standard of peri-operative and post-operative care between active and inactive arms if open therapy is used. In two studies, a rigorous protocol for the duration of pre-operative pirfenidone was used, raising the possibility that the whole operative protocol was more rigorous in this patient subgroup. It is clearly possible that baseline difference between treated and untreated groups might have separately influenced post-operative outcomes. Therefore, while the data from these studies are suggestive of a pirfenidone protective effect, a prospective placebo-controlled study is required if peri-operative pirfenidone is to become standard of care. It should be noted that all three studies were conducted in Japan, with the possibility that genetic factors might limit the generalisability of the findings. Nintedanib has not been studied in this context, as pirfenidone has been the antifibrotic therapy routinely used in Japan. In addition, nintedanib has potential bleeding side-effects due to anti-angiogenic properties that might complicate cancer treatment [104].

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Core features of studies of post-operative outcomes, comparing patients treated and not treated with peri-operative pirfenidone (poPirf)

There is some evidence that antifibrotic therapy reduces the risk of radiation pneumonitis in animal studies, but there are no compelling human data. In animal experiments, a study by Sun et al. [105] found that oral pirfenidone prevents radiation-induced interstitial fibrosis when administered in rats. A study in 266 mice showed that nintedanib administration diminishes histological signs of radiation-induced lung damage [106]. A study by Qin et al. [107] observed that pirfenidone also protects against radiation-induced pulmonary fibrosis in mice. Human data are needed to establish proof of concept before a definitive trial.

Data are beginning to emerge that antifibrotic therapy may facilitate chemotherapy by reducing complications of chemotherapy. The prevalence of acute exacerbations with chemotherapy in lung cancer/IPF is estimated to be 10–30%. A study with carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel with and without nintedanib was designed to demonstrate that addition of nintedanib prolongs the interval to acute exacerbation [108]. The results of this trial are expected soon. In a study of 14 IPF patients with NSCLC receiving first-line chemotherapy (carboplatin+paclitaxel) in combination with pirfenidone, no acute exacerbations or adverse safety signals were reported [109]. Although there are currently insufficient data to establish proof of concept, the potential importance of these observations fully justifies a high priority for larger prospective studies.

Direct effects of antifibrotics on cancer

Over the past decade, the treatment of fibrotic ILD has been revolutionised by the use of antifibrotic drugs that reduce fibrosis progression in IPF and other progressive fibrosing ILDs [110]. Pirfenidone and nintedanib are currently the only approved antifibrotic drugs, with additional candidate antifibrotic therapies undergoing clinical trial evaluation. As the pathogenesis of ILD and lung cancer includes overlapping pathways, it is theoretically possible that antifibrotic therapy has antineoplastic effects [12]. Interestingly, nintedanib in association with docetaxel is an approved second-line cancer drug for selected NSCLC patients and has been used in patients with IPF and cancer [111].

Several reports show that pirfenidone targets pathways implicated in lung cancer pathogenesis. Pirfenidone inhibits cancer fibroblasts, and enhances ICI efficacy in mice [112]. In vivo studies confirm targeting of cancer fibroblasts and inhibition of fibroblasts and stroma cross-talk [113]. Pirfenidone induces cell cycle arrest in human and mouse cells and inhibits cancer proliferation [114]. In vivo, it interferes with the urokinase system and may influence the stability of tumour blood cells [115]. In vivo, it may revert EMT in lung adenocarcinoma [116]. However, human data are required for proof of concept (table 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3

Current role of antifibrotic drugs in lung cancer and fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (fILD)

Retrospective study data from 261 IPF patients with and without pirfenidone showed lung cancer incidence of 2.2% in the pirfenidone group and 22% in the non-pirfenidone group (p<0.001) [117]. On multivariable analysis, lung cancer incidence was lower in patients treated with pirfenidone (hazard ratio (HR) 0.11, p=0.003) and higher in patients with concurrent emphysema (HR=3.22, p=0.009) [117]. However, these data, if confirmed, do not indicate that pirfenidone prevents cancer genesis. Lung cancer manifests as a pulmonary nodule after perhaps 30 tumour doubling times. If we assign average doubling time as 4–6 months, it follows that lung cancer is present for >10 years by the time it is diagnosable [118]. Therefore, the data suggest that pirfenidone may slow cancer progression before it is clinically detectable. If so, it is possible that the lengthier survival achieved by antifibrotic therapy will not necessarily result in a major increase in the lung cancer burden.

The use of antifibrotic therapy for ILD in fILD patients with lung cancer

In untreated patients diagnosed with lung cancer and ILD, there is no evidence that use of antifibrotic agents should differ from their use in ILD in general. If lung cancer is advanced, without the option of radical interventions, and the approach is broadly palliative, the introduction of antifibrotic drugs with the goal of slowing ILD progression is unlikely to be helpful and may reduce quality of life. However, this scenario aside, there are no data to suggest that ILD management should be modified. When a definite or working diagnosis of IPF is made, antifibrotic therapy may improve life expectancy with the added possibility that acute exacerbation triggered by resection surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy may be reduced in prevalence, as discussed earlier. When an alternative diagnosis to IPF is made, and ILD is overtly progressive, the documented benefits of antifibrotic therapy in progressively fibrotic ILD justify its use [7, 110, 119]. It should be acknowledged that patients with fibrotic ILD associated with lung cancer were not included in these trials. However, the uniformity of treatment effects across a wide variety of non-IPF disorders in the INBUILD nintedanib trial can reasonably be extrapolated to this group of patients. There are no data to suggest that antifibrotic therapy in patients with pre-existing ILD should be discontinued when lung cancer is diagnosed. However, non-IPF patients managed with immunosuppressive therapy should ideally be discussed, case by case, with an oncologist, in view of the possible deleterious effects of these treatments in promulgating cancer progression.

Conclusion and outlook

More and better-designed studies are needed to determine the true incidence/prevalence of lung cancer in fILD. Optimal treatment strategies need to be defined and evaluated. The development of centres of excellence for ILD and cancer has the potential to improve patient care. As most studies included IPF patients, future studies need to include connective tissue disease associated ILD and other ILDs.

Footnotes

  • This article has been revised according to the correction published in ERJ Open Res 2022; 8: 50115-2022 [https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.50115-2022].

  • Provenance: Commissioned article, peer reviewed.

  • Conflict of interest: N. Kewalramani reports grants and nonfinancial support from CSL Behring outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: C. Machahua has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: V. Poletti reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, AMBU and ERBE, outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: J. Cadranel reports fees for participation on boards of experts for the development of cancer drugs from AbbVie, AZ, BI, BMS, Jansen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda.

  • Conflict of interest: A.U. Wells reports personal fees and nonfinancial support from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer and Roche Pharmaceuticals, and personal fees from Blade, outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Funke-Chambour reports grants from Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche, and other support from MSD, outside the submitted work.

  • Received March 1, 2022.
  • Accepted April 18, 2022.
  • Copyright ©The authors 2022
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org

References

  1. ↵
    1. Raghu G,
    2. Remy-Jardin M,
    3. Myers JL, et al.
    Diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. An official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT clinical practice guideline. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2018; 198: e44–e68. doi:10.1164/rccm.201807-1255ST
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Lynch JP,
    2. Saggar R,
    3. Weigt SS, et al.
    Usual interstitial pneumonia. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2006; 27: 634–651. doi:10.1055/s-2006-957335
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Wijsenbeek M,
    2. Cottin V
    . Spectrum of fibrotic lung diseases. N Engl J Med 2020; 383: 958–968. doi:10.1056/NEJMra2005230
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Collard HR,
    2. Moore BB,
    3. Flaherty KR, et al.
    Acute exacerbations of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007; 176: 636–643. doi:10.1164/rccm.200703-463PP
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Miyashita K,
    2. Kono M,
    3. Saito G, et al.
    Prognosis after acute exacerbation in patients with interstitial lung disease other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Clin Respir J 2021; 15: 336–344. doi:10.1111/crj.13304
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Richeldi L,
    2. Costabel U,
    3. Selman M, et al.
    Efficacy of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1079–1087. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1103690
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Maher TM,
    2. Corte TJ,
    3. Fischer A, et al.
    Pirfenidone in patients with unclassifiable progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Respir Med 2020; 8: 147–157. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(19)30341-8
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Wollin L,
    2. Distler JHW,
    3. Redente EF, et al.
    Potential of nintedanib in treatment of progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases. Eur Respir J 2019; 54: 1900161. doi:10.1183/13993003.00161-2019
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Margaritopoulos GA,
    2. Antoniou KM,
    3. Wells AU
    . Comorbidities in interstitial lung diseases. Eur Respir Rev 2017; 26: 160027. doi:10.1183/16000617.0027-2016
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Noordzij M,
    2. Dekker FW,
    3. Zoccali C, et al.
    Measures of disease frequency: prevalence and incidence. Nephron Clin Pract 2010; 115: c17–c20. doi:10.1159/000286345
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Dong H,
    2. Robison LL,
    3. Leisenring WM, et al.
    Estimating the burden of recurrent events in the presence of competing risks: the method of mean cumulative count. Am J Epidemiol 2015; 181: 532–540. doi:10.1093/aje/kwu289
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Ballester B,
    2. Milara J,
    3. Cortijo J
    . Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and lung cancer: mechanisms and molecular targets. Int J Mol Sci 2019; 20: 593. doi:10.3390/ijms20030593
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Brown SAW,
    2. Dobelle M,
    3. Padilla M, et al.
    Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and lung cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2019; 16: 1041–1051. doi:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201807-481OC
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Lee HY,
    2. Lee J,
    3. Lee CH, et al.
    Risk of cancer incidence in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a nationwide cohort study. Respirology 2021; 26: 180–187. doi:10.1111/resp.13911
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Le Jeune I,
    2. Gribbin J,
    3. West J, et al.
    The incidence of cancer in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and sarcoidosis in the UK. Respir Med 2007; 101: 2534–2540. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2007.07.012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Yoon JH,
    2. Nouraie M,
    3. Chen X, et al.
    Characteristics of lung cancer among patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and interstitial lung disease – analysis of institutional and population data. Respir Res 2018; 19: 195. doi:10.1186/s12931-018-0899-4
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Krist AH,
    2. Davidson KW,
    3. Mangione CM, et al.
    Screening for lung cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. JAMA 2021; 325: 962–970. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.1117
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Brüske-Hohlfeld I,
    2. Möhner M,
    3. Pohlabeln H, et al.
    Occupational lung cancer risk for men in Germany: results from a pooled case-control study. Am J Epidemiol 2000; 151: 384–395. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a010218
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Watanabe Y,
    2. Kawabata Y,
    3. Koyama N, et al.
    A clinicopathological study of surgically resected lung cancer in patients with usual interstitial pneumonia. Respir Med 2017; 129: 158–163. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2017.06.015
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    1. Benusiglio PR,
    2. Fallet V,
    3. Sanchis-Borja M, et al.
    Lung cancer is also a hereditary disease. Eur Respir Rev 2021; 30: 210045. doi:10.1183/16000617.0045-2021
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. Yoo H,
    2. Jeong B-H,
    3. Chung MJ, et al.
    Risk factors and clinical characteristics of lung cancer in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pulm Med. 2019; 19: 149. doi:10.1186/s12890-019-0905-8
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. Song MJ,
    2. Kim SY,
    3. Park MS, et al.
    A nationwide population-based study of incidence and mortality of lung cancer in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 2596. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-82182-8
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Choi W,
    2. Park SH,
    3. Park BJ, et al.
    Interstitial lung disease and lung cancer development: a 5-year nationwide population-based study. Cancer Res Treat 2018; 50: 374–381. doi:10.4143/crt.2017.119
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. Hironaka M,
    2. Fukayama M
    . Pulmonary fibrosis and lung carcinoma: a comparative study of metaplastic epithelia in honeycombed areas of usual interstitial pneumonia with or without lung carcinoma. Pathol Int 1999; 49: 1060–1066. doi:10.1046/j.1440-1827.1999.00989.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Kawai T,
    2. Yakumaru K,
    3. Suzuki M, et al.
    Diffuse interstitial pulmonary fibrosis and lung cancer. Acta Pathol Jpn 1987; 37: 11–19. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1827.1987.tb03130.x
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Ozawa Y,
    2. Suda T,
    3. Naito T, et al.
    Cumulative incidence of and predictive factors for lung cancer in IPF. Respirology 2009; 14: 723–728. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1843.2009.01547.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Tomassetti S,
    2. Gurioli C,
    3. Ryu JH, et al.
    The impact of lung cancer on survival of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Chest 2015; 147: 157–164. doi:10.1378/chest.14-0359
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Watanabe S,
    2. Saeki K,
    3. Waseda Y, et al.
    Lung cancer in connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease: clinical features and impact on outcomes. J Thorac Dis 2018; 10: 799–807. doi:10.21037/jtd.2017.12.134
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    1. Kawasaki H,
    2. Nagai K,
    3. Yokose T, et al.
    Clinicopathological characteristics of surgically resected lung cancer associated with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. J Surg Oncol 2001; 76: 53–57. doi:10.1002/1096-9098(200101)76:1<53::AID-JSO1009>3.0.CO;2-T
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Tzouvelekis A,
    2. Karampitsakos T,
    3. Gomatou G, et al.
    Lung cancer in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. A retrospective multicenter study in Greece. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2020; 60: 101880. doi:10.1016/j.pupt.2019.101880
    OpenUrlPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Karampitsakos T,
    2. Tzilas V,
    3. Tringidou R, et al.
    Lung cancer in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2017; 45: 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.pupt.2017.03.016
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. JafariNezhad AR,
    2. YektaKooshali MH
    . Lung cancer in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2018; 13: e0202360. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0202360
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Gibiot Q,
    2. Monnet I,
    3. Levy P, et al.
    Interstitial lung disease associated with lung cancer: a case-control study. J Clin Med 2020; 9: 700. doi:10.3390/jcm9030700
    OpenUrl
  34. ↵
    1. Kim HC,
    2. Lee S,
    3. Song JW
    . Impact of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis on clinical outcomes of lung cancer patients. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 8312. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-87747-1
    OpenUrl
  35. ↵
    1. Caliò A,
    2. Lever V,
    3. Rossi A, et al.
    Increased frequency of bronchiolar histotypes in lung carcinomas associated with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Histopathology 2017; 71: 725–735. doi:10.1111/his.13269
    OpenUrl
  36. ↵
    1. Chilosi M,
    2. Poletti V,
    3. Murer B, et al.
    Abnormal re-epithelialization and lung remodeling in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: the role of deltaN-p63. Lab Invest 2002; 82: 1335–1345. doi:10.1097/01.LAB.0000032380.82232.67
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Chilosi M,
    2. Poletti V,
    3. Zamò A, et al.
    Aberrant Wnt/β-catenin pathway activation in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Pathol 2003; 162: 1495–1502. doi:10.1016/S0002-9440(10)64282-4
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Renzoni EA,
    2. Poletti V,
    3. Mackintosh JA
    . Disease pathology in fibrotic interstitial lung disease: is it all about usual interstitial pneumonia? Lancet 2021; 398: 1437–1449. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01961-9
    OpenUrl
  39. ↵
    1. Adams TS,
    2. Schupp JC,
    3. Poli S, et al.
    Single-cell RNA-seq reveals ectopic and aberrant lung-resident cell populations in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Sci Adv 2020; 6: eaba1983. doi:10.1126/sciadv.aba1983
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  40. ↵
    1. Prasse A,
    2. Binder H,
    3. Schupp JC, et al.
    BAL cell gene expression is indicative of outcome and airway basal cell involvement in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2019; 199: 622–630. doi:10.1164/rccm.201712-2551OC
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  41. ↵
    1. Chilosi M,
    2. Doglioni C,
    3. Murer B, et al.
    Epithelial stem cell exhaustion in the pathogenesis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Sarcoidosis Vasc Diffuse Lung Dis 2010; 27: 7–18.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Froidure A,
    2. Marchal-Duval E,
    3. Homps-Legrand M, et al.
    Chaotic activation of developmental signalling pathways drives idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Eur Respir Rev 2020; 29: 190140. doi:10.1183/16000617.0140-2019
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. ↵
    1. Kronborg-White S,
    2. Madsen LB,
    3. Bendstrup E, et al.
    PD-L1 expression in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. J Clin Med 2021; 10: 5562. doi:10.3390/jcm10235562
    OpenUrl
  44. ↵
    1. Calabrese F,
    2. Lunardi F,
    3. Balestro E, et al.
    Serpin B4 isoform overexpression is associated with aberrant epithelial proliferation and lung cancer in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Pathology 2012; 44: 192–198. doi:10.1097/PAT.0b013e3283511b61
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  45. ↵
    1. Chilosi M,
    2. Caliò A,
    3. Rossi A, et al.
    Epithelial to mesenchymal transition-related proteins ZEB1, β-catenin, and β-tubulin-III in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Mod Pathol 2017; 30: 26–38. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2016.147
    OpenUrl
  46. ↵
    1. Moimas S,
    2. Salton F,
    3. Kosmider B, et al.
    miR-200 family members reduce senescence and restore idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis type II alveolar epithelial cell transdifferentiation. ERJ Open Res 2019; 5: 00138–2019. doi:10.1183/23120541.00138-2019
    OpenUrl
  47. ↵
    1. Hwang JA,
    2. Kim D,
    3. Chun SM, et al.
    Genomic profiles of lung cancer associated with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. J Pathol 2018; 244: 25–35. doi:10.1002/path.4978
    OpenUrlPubMed
  48. ↵
    1. Naccache JM,
    2. Gibiot Q,
    3. Monnet I, et al.
    Lung cancer and interstitial lung disease: a literature review. J Thorac Dis 2018; 10: 3829–3844. doi:10.21037/jtd.2018.05.75
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  49. ↵
    1. King CS,
    2. Nathan SD
    . Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: effects and optimal management of comorbidities. Lancet Respir Med 2017; 5: 72–84. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(16)30222-3
    OpenUrl
  50. ↵
    1. Tzouvelekis A,
    2. Spagnolo P,
    3. Bonella F, et al.
    Patients with IPF and lung cancer: diagnosis and management. Lancet Respir Med 2018; 6: 86–88. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30478-2
    OpenUrl
  51. ↵
    1. Kashiwabara K,
    2. Semba H,
    3. Fujii S, et al.
    Difference in benefit of chemotherapy between small cell lung cancer patients with interstitial pneumonia and patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Anticancer Res 2015; 35: 1065–1071.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  52. ↵
    1. Detterbeck FC,
    2. Boffa DJ,
    3. Kim AW, et al.
    The eighth edition lung cancer stage classification. Chest 2017; 151: 193–203. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2016.10.010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. ↵
    1. Homma S,
    2. Bando M,
    3. Azuma A, et al.
    Japanese guideline for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Respir Investig 2018; 56: 268–291. doi:10.1016/j.resinv.2018.03.003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. ↵
    1. Ogura T,
    2. Takigawa N,
    3. Tomii K, et al.
    Summary of the Japanese Respiratory Society statement for the treatment of lung cancer with comorbid interstitial pneumonia. Respir Investig 2019; 57: 512–533. doi:10.1016/j.resinv.2019.06.001
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  55. ↵
    1. Toubat O,
    2. Atay SM,
    3. Kim AW, et al.
    Disparities in guideline-concordant treatment for pathologic N1 non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2020; 109: 1512–1520. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.11.059
    OpenUrl
  56. ↵
    1. Barni S,
    2. Maiello E,
    3. di Maio M, et al.
    Adherence to AIOM (Italian Association of Medical Oncology) lung cancer guidelines in Italian clinical practice: results from the RIGHT-3 (research for the identification of the most effective and highly accepted clinical guidelines for cancer treatment) study. Lung Cancer 2015; 90: 234–242. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.08.005
    OpenUrl
  57. ↵
    1. Chen H,
    2. Senan S,
    3. Nossent EJ, et al.
    Treatment-related toxicity in patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer and coexisting interstitial lung disease: a systematic review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 98: 622–631. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.03.010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. ↵
    1. Watanabe A,
    2. Higami T,
    3. Ohori S, et al.
    Is lung cancer resection indicated in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 136: 1357–1363. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.07.016
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. ↵
    1. Saito H,
    2. Minamiya Y,
    3. Nanjo H, et al.
    Pathological finding of subclinical interstitial pneumonia as a predictor of postoperative acute respiratory distress syndrome after pulmonary resection. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011; 39: 190–194. doi:10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.05.017
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. ↵
    1. Kawasaki H,
    2. Nagai K,
    3. Yoshida J, et al.
    Postoperative morbidity, mortality, and survival in lung cancer associated with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. J Surg Oncol 2002; 81: 33–37. doi:10.1002/jso.10145
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  61. ↵
    1. Lee T,
    2. Park JY,
    3. Lee HY, et al.
    Lung cancer in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: clinical characteristics and impact on survival. Respir Med 2014; 108: 1549–1555. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2014.07.020
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  62. ↵
    1. Onishi H,
    2. Yamashita H,
    3. Shioyama Y, et al.
    Stereotactic body radiation therapy for patients with pulmonary interstitial change: high incidence of fatal radiation pneumonitis in a retrospective multi-institutional study. Cancers 2018; 10: 257. doi:10.3390/cancers10080257
    OpenUrl
  63. ↵
    1. Kim H,
    2. Yoo H,
    3. Pyo H, et al.
    Impact of underlying pulmonary diseases on treatment outcomes in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2019; 14: 2273–2281. doi:10.2147/COPD.S210759
    OpenUrlPubMed
  64. ↵
    1. de Ruysscher D,
    2. Faivre-Finn C,
    3. Moeller D, et al.
    European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) recommendations for planning and delivery of high-dose, high precision radiotherapy for lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 2017; 124: 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2017.06.003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. ↵
    1. Okuda K,
    2. Hirose T,
    3. Oki Y, et al.
    Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of combination chemotherapy with vinorelbine and platinum agents for patients with non-small cell lung cancer with interstitial lung disease. Anticancer Res 2012; 32: 5475–5480.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Watanabe N,
    2. Niho S,
    3. Kirita K, et al.
    Vinorelbine and cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer with interstitial pneumonia. Anticancer Res 2015; 35: 1697–1702.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Kinoshita T,
    2. Azuma K,
    3. Sasada T, et al.
    Chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer complicated by idiopathic interstitial pneumonia. Oncol Lett 2012; 4: 477–482. doi:10.3892/ol.2012.753
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Choi MK,
    2. Hong JY,
    3. Chang W, et al.
    Safety and efficacy of gemcitabine or pemetrexed in combination with a platinum in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and prior interstitial lung disease. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2014; 73: 1217–1225. doi:10.1007/s00280-014-2458-0
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. ↵
    1. Kenmotsu H,
    2. Naito T,
    3. Kimura M, et al.
    The risk of cytotoxic chemotherapy-related exacerbation of interstitial lung disease with lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2011; 6: 1242–1246. doi:10.1097/JTO.0b013e318216ee6b
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  67. ↵
    1. Enomoto Y,
    2. Kenmotsu H,
    3. Watanabe N, et al.
    Efficacy and safety of combined carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab for patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer with pre-existing interstitial lung disease: a retrospective multi-institutional study. Anticancer Res 2015; 35: 4259–4263.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. ↵
    1. Shukuya T,
    2. Ishiwata T,
    3. Hara M, et al.
    Carboplatin plus weekly paclitaxel treatment in non-small cell lung cancer patients with interstitial lung disease. Anticancer Res 2010; 30: 4357–4361.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Minegishi Y,
    2. Sudoh J,
    3. Kuribayasi H, et al.
    The safety and efficacy of weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin for advanced non-small cell lung cancer with idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Lung Cancer 2011; 71: 70–74. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2010.04.014
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Asahina H,
    2. Oizumi S,
    3. Takamura K, et al.
    A prospective phase II study of carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and concomitant interstitial lung disease (HOT1302). Lung Cancer 2019; 138: 65–71. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.09.020
    OpenUrl
    1. Kenmotsu H,
    2. Yoh K,
    3. Mori K, et al.
    Phase II study of nab-paclitaxel + carboplatin for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and interstitial lung disease. Cancer Sci 2019; 110: 3738–3745. doi:10.1111/cas.14217
    OpenUrl
  69. ↵
    1. Fukuizumi A,
    2. Minegishi Y,
    3. Omori M, et al.
    Weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer complicated by idiopathic interstitial pneumonias: a single-arm phase II study. Int J Clin Oncol 2019; 24: 1543–1548. doi:10.1007/s10147-019-01516-9
    OpenUrl
  70. ↵
    1. Shimizu R,
    2. Fujimoto D,
    3. Kato R, et al.
    The safety and efficacy of paclitaxel and carboplatin with or without bevacizumab for treating patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer with interstitial lung disease. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2014; 74: 1159–1166. doi:10.1007/s00280-014-2590-x
    OpenUrlPubMed
  71. ↵
    1. Eisenhauer EA,
    2. Therasse P,
    3. Bogaerts J, et al.
    New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 228–247. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  72. ↵
    1. Kanaji N,
    2. Tadokoro A,
    3. Kita N, et al.
    Impact of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis on advanced non-small cell lung cancer survival. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2016; 142: 1855–1865. doi:10.1007/s00432-016-2199-z
    OpenUrl
  73. ↵
    1. Hamada S,
    2. Ichiyasu H,
    3. Ikeda T, et al.
    Protective effect of bevacizumab on chemotherapy-related acute exacerbation of interstitial lung disease in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. BMC Pulm Med 2019; 19: 72. doi:10.1186/s12890-019-0838-2
    OpenUrl
  74. ↵
    1. Sandler A,
    2. Gray R,
    3. Perry MC, et al.
    Paclitaxel-carboplatin alone or with bevacizumab for non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2542–2550. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa061884
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  75. ↵
    1. Barratt SL,
    2. Blythe T,
    3. Jarrett C, et al.
    Differential expression of VEGF-Axxx isoforms is critical for development of pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2017; 196: 479–493. doi:10.1164/rccm.201603-0568OC
    OpenUrlPubMed
  76. ↵
    1. Wollin L,
    2. Wex E,
    3. Pautsch A, et al.
    Mode of action of nintedanib in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Eur Respir J 2015; 45: 1434–1445. doi:10.1183/09031936.00174914
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  77. ↵
    1. Tsakonas G,
    2. Ekman S
    . Oncogene-addicted non-small cell lung cancer and immunotherapy. J Thorac Dis 2018; 10: S1547–S1555. doi:10.21037/jtd.2018.01.82
    OpenUrl
  78. ↵
    1. Saito Y,
    2. Gemma A
    . Current status of DILD in molecular targeted therapies. Int J Clin Oncol 2012; 17: 534–541. doi:10.1007/s10147-012-0494-5
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  79. ↵
    1. Fujimoto D,
    2. Yomota M,
    3. Sekine A, et al.
    Nivolumab for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with mild idiopathic interstitial pneumonia: a multicenter, open-label single-arm phase II trial. Lung Cancer 2019; 134: 274–278. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.06.001
    OpenUrl
  80. ↵
    1. Ikeda S,
    2. Kato T,
    3. Kenmotsu H, et al.
    A phase 2 study of atezolizumab for pretreated NSCLC with idiopathic interstitial pneumonitis. J Thorac Oncol 2020; 15: 1935–1942. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2020.08.018
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  81. ↵
    1. Kanai O,
    2. Kim YH,
    3. Demura Y, et al.
    Efficacy and safety of nivolumab in non-small cell lung cancer with preexisting interstitial lung disease. Thorac Cancer 2018; 9: 847–855. doi:10.1111/1759-7714.12759
    OpenUrlPubMed
  82. ↵
    1. Tasaka Y,
    2. Honda T,
    3. Nishiyama N, et al.
    Non-inferior clinical outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer patients with interstitial lung disease. Lung Cancer 2021; 155: 120–126. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2021.03.014
    OpenUrl
  83. ↵
    1. Kreuter M,
    2. Bendstrup E,
    3. Russell AM, et al.
    Palliative care in interstitial lung disease: living well. Lancet Respir Med 2017; 5: 968–980. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30383-1
    OpenUrl
  84. ↵
    1. Goto T,
    2. Maeshima A,
    3. Oyamada Y, et al.
    Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis as a prognostic factor in non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2014; 19: 266–273. doi:10.1007/s10147-013-0566-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  85. ↵
    1. Sato T,
    2. Teramukai S,
    3. Kondo H, et al.
    Impact and predictors of acute exacerbation of interstitial lung diseases after pulmonary resection for lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 147: 1604–1611. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.09.050
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  86. ↵
    1. Sato T,
    2. Kondo H,
    3. Watanabe A, et al.
    A simple risk scoring system for predicting acute exacerbation of interstitial pneumonia after pulmonary resection in lung cancer patients. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015; 63: 164–172. doi:10.1007/s11748-014-0487-6
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  87. ↵
    1. Miyajima M,
    2. Watanabe A,
    3. Sato T, et al.
    What factors determine the survival of patients with an acute exacerbation of interstitial lung disease after lung cancer resection? Surg Today 2018; 48: 404–415. doi:10.1007/s00595-017-1605-8
    OpenUrl
  88. ↵
    1. Mizuno Y,
    2. Iwata H,
    3. Shirahashi K, et al.
    The importance of intraoperative fluid balance for the prevention of postoperative acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis after pulmonary resection for primary lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2012; 41: e161–e165. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezs147
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  89. ↵
    1. Sakamoto S,
    2. Homma S,
    3. Mun M, et al.
    Acute exacerbation of idiopathic interstitial pneumonia following lung surgery in 3 of 68 consecutive patients: a retrospective study. Intern Med 2011; 50: 77–85. doi:10.2169/internalmedicine.50.3390
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  90. ↵
    1. Thompson BT,
    2. Chambers RC,
    3. Liu KD
    . Acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 562–572. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1608077
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  91. ↵
    1. Oishi H,
    2. Sakurada A,
    3. Notsuda H, et al.
    Correlation between preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT findings and postoperative short-term prognosis in lung cancer patients with idiopathic interstitial pneumonia after lung resection. Respir Investig 2021; 59: 106–113. doi:10.1016/j.resinv.2020.08.007
    OpenUrl
  92. ↵
    1. Ueno F,
    2. Kitaguchi Y,
    3. Shiina T, et al.
    The interstitial lung disease-gender-age-physiology index can predict the prognosis in surgically resected patients with interstitial lung disease and concomitant lung cancer. Respiration 2020; 99: 9–18. doi:10.1159/000502849
    OpenUrl
  93. ↵
    1. Richeldi L,
    2. du Bois RM,
    3. Raghu G, et al.
    Efficacy and safety of nintedanib in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 2071–2082. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1402584
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  94. ↵
    1. Iwata T,
    2. Yoshida S,
    3. Fujiwara T, et al.
    Effect of perioperative pirfenidone treatment in lung cancer patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Ann Thorac Surg 2016; 102: 1905–1910. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.05.094
    OpenUrl
    1. Iwata T,
    2. Yoshino I,
    3. Yoshida S, et al.
    A phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of perioperative pirfenidone for prevention of acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in lung cancer patients undergoing pulmonary resection: West Japan Oncology Group 6711L (PEOPLE Study). Respir Res 2016; 17: 90. doi:10.1186/s12931-016-0398-4
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Sekihara K,
    2. Aokage K,
    3. Miyoshi T, et al.
    Perioperative pirfenidone treatment as prophylaxis against acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a single-center analysis. Surg Today 2020; 50: 905–911. doi:10.1007/s00595-020-01978-9
    OpenUrl
  95. ↵
    1. Kanayama M,
    2. Mori M,
    3. Matsumiya H, et al.
    Perioperative pirfenidone treatment for lung cancer patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Surg Today 2020; 50: 469–474. doi:10.1007/s00595-019-01923-5
    OpenUrl
  96. ↵
    1. Kolonics-Farkas AM,
    2. Šterclová M,
    3. Mogulkoc N, et al.
    Anticoagulant use and bleeding risk in central European patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) treated with antifibrotic therapy: real-world data from EMPIRE. Drug Saf 2020; 43: 971–980. doi:10.1007/s40264-020-00978-5
    OpenUrl
  97. ↵
    1. Sun YW,
    2. Zhang YY,
    3. Ke XJ, et al.
    Pirfenidone prevents radiation-induced intestinal fibrosis in rats by inhibiting fibroblast proliferation and differentiation and suppressing the TGF-β1/Smad/CTGF signaling pathway. Eur J Pharmacol 2018; 822: 199–206. doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2018.01.027
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  98. ↵
    1. de Ruysscher D,
    2. Granton PV,
    3. Lieuwes NG, et al.
    Nintedanib reduces radiation-induced microscopic lung fibrosis but this cannot be monitored by CT imaging: a preclinical study with a high precision image-guided irradiator. Radiother Oncol 2017; 124: 482–487. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2017.07.014
    OpenUrl
  99. ↵
    1. Qin W,
    2. Liu B,
    3. Yi M, et al.
    Antifibrotic agent pirfenidone protects against development of radiation-induced pulmonary fibrosis in a murine model. Radiat Res 2018; 190: 396–403. doi:10.1667/RR15017.1
    OpenUrl
  100. ↵
    1. Otsubo K,
    2. Kishimoto J,
    3. Kenmotsu H, et al.
    Treatment rationale and design for J-SONIC: a randomized study of carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel with or without nintedanib for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Clin Lung Cancer 2018; 19: e5–e9. doi:10.1016/j.cllc.2017.06.003
    OpenUrl
  101. ↵
    1. Yamamoto Y,
    2. Yano Y,
    3. Kuge T, et al.
    Safety and effectiveness of pirfenidone combined with carboplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Thorac Cancer 2020; 11: 3317–3325. doi:10.1111/1759-7714.13675
    OpenUrl
  102. ↵
    1. Wells AU,
    2. Flaherty KR,
    3. Brown KK, et al.
    Nintedanib in patients with progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases – subgroup analyses by interstitial lung disease diagnosis in the INBUILD trial: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. Lancet Respir Med 2020; 8: 453–460. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30036-9
    OpenUrl
  103. ↵
    1. Bosch ME,
    2. Díez RA,
    3. Agudo SG, et al.
    Nintedanib in combination with docetaxel for second-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer; GENESIS-SEFH drug evaluation report. Farm Hosp 2016; 40: 316–327. doi:10.7399/fh.2016.40.4.10455
    OpenUrl
  104. ↵
    1. Qin W,
    2. Zou J,
    3. Huang Y, et al.
    Pirfenidone facilitates immune infiltration and enhances the antitumor efficacy of PD-L1 blockade in mice. Oncoimmunology 2020; 9: 1824631. doi:10.1080/2162402X.2020.1824631
    OpenUrl
  105. ↵
    1. Fujiwara A,
    2. Funaki S,
    3. Fukui E, et al.
    Effects of pirfenidone targeting the tumor microenvironment and tumor-stroma interaction as a novel treatment for non-small cell lung cancer. Sci Rep 2020; 10: 10900. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-67904-8
    OpenUrl
  106. ↵
    1. Marwitz S,
    2. Turkowski K,
    3. Nitschkowski D, et al.
    The multi-modal effect of the anti-fibrotic drug pirfenidone on NSCLC. Front Oncol 2020; 9: 1550. doi:10.3389/fonc.2019.01550
    OpenUrl
  107. ↵
    1. Krämer M,
    2. Markart P,
    3. Drakopanagiotakis F, et al.
    Pirfenidone inhibits motility of NSCLC cells by interfering with the urokinase system. Cell Signal 2020; 65: 109432. doi:10.1016/j.cellsig.2019.109432
    OpenUrl
  108. ↵
    1. Kurimoto R,
    2. Ebata T,
    3. Iwasawa S, et al.
    Pirfenidone may revert the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in human lung adenocarcinoma. Oncol Lett 2017; 14: 944–950. doi:10.3892/ol.2017.6188
    OpenUrl
  109. ↵
    1. Miura Y,
    2. Saito T,
    3. Tanaka T, et al.
    Reduced incidence of lung cancer in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis treated with pirfenidone. Respir Investig 2018; 56: 72–79. doi:10.1016/j.resinv.2017.09.007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  110. ↵
    1. Heuvelmans MA,
    2. Vliegenthart R,
    3. de Koning HJ, et al.
    Quantification of growth patterns of screen-detected lung cancers: the NELSON study. Lung Cancer 2017; 108: 48–54. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2017.02.021
    OpenUrl
  111. ↵
    1. Behr J,
    2. Prasse A,
    3. Kreuter M, et al.
    Pirfenidone in patients with progressive fibrotic interstitial lung diseases other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (RELIEF): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial. Lancet Respir Med 2021; 9: 476–486. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30554-3
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 8 Issue 2 Table of Contents
ERJ Open Research: 8 (2)
  • 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.
Lung cancer in patients with fibrosing interstitial lung diseases: an overview of current knowledge and challenges
(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
Lung cancer in patients with fibrosing interstitial lung diseases: an overview of current knowledge and challenges
Namrata Kewalramani, Carlos Machahua, Venerino Poletti, Jacques Cadranel, Athol U. Wells, Manuela Funke-Chambour
ERJ Open Research Apr 2022, 8 (2) 00115-2022; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00115-2022

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Lung cancer in patients with fibrosing interstitial lung diseases: an overview of current knowledge and challenges
Namrata Kewalramani, Carlos Machahua, Venerino Poletti, Jacques Cadranel, Athol U. Wells, Manuela Funke-Chambour
ERJ Open Research Apr 2022, 8 (2) 00115-2022; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00115-2022
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
    • Epidemiology and risk factors of lung cancer in ILD patients
    • Disease characteristics and prognosis of lung cancer in ILD patients
    • Pathogenesis of cancer in ILD
    • Treatment of lung cancer in ILD patients
    • Role of antifibrotics in ILD and cancer
    • Conclusion and outlook
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Interstitial and orphan lung disease
  • Lung cancer
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • The “vicious circle” of chronic cough
  • Non-response and response to biologics for severe asthma
  • Ethnic variation in asthma healthcare outcomes
Show more Reviews

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