Malignant Central Airway Obstruction (MCAO) encompasses significant and symptomatic narrowing of the central airways that can occur due to primary lung cancer or metastatic disease. Therapeutic bronchoscopy is associated with high technical success and symptomatic relief and includes a wide range of airway interventions including airway stents. Published literature suggests that stenting practices vary significantly across the world primarily due to lack of guidance. This document aims to address this knowledge gap by addressing relevant questions related to airway stenting in MCAO. An international group of 17 experts from 17 institutions across 11 countries with experience in using airway stenting for MCAO was convened as part of this guideline statement through the World Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (WABIP). We performed a literature and internet search for reports addressing six clinically relevant questions. This guideline statement, consisting of recommendations addressing these six PICO questions, was formulated by a systematic and rigorous process involving the evaluation of published evidence, augmented with expert experience when necessary. Panel members participated in the development of the final recommendations using the modified Delphi technique. image

Endobronchial tuberculosis (EBTB) is defined as tuberculous infection of the tracheobronchial tree. The exact pathogenesis is unclear, and it has a heterogenous clinical course. Its diagnosis requires the clinician to have a high index of suspicion based on clinical symptoms and radiological features. Computed tomography and bronchoscopy are useful tools in its evaluation. The goal of treatment is in the eradication of tuberculous bacilli with appropriate anti-tuberculous therapy. Use of corticosteroids is controversial for the prevention of tracheobronchial stenosis. Interventional bronchoscopy or surgical intervention is employed to restore airway patency once significant stenosis occurs.

This clinical study presents a comprehensive investigation into the utility of breath analysis as a non-invasive method for the early detection of lung cancer. The study enrolled 14 lung cancer patients, 14 non-lung cancer controls with diverse medical conditions, and 3 tuberculosis (TB) patients for biomarker discovery. Matching criteria including age, gender, smoking history, and comorbidities were strictly followed to ensure reliable comparisons. A systematic breath sampling protocol utilizing a BIO-VOC sampler was employed, followed by VOC analysis using Thermal Desorption–Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry (TD-GC/MS). The resulting VOC profiles were subjected to stringent statistical analysis, including Orthogonal Projections to Latent Structures—Discriminant Analysis (OPLS-DA), Kruskal–Wallis test, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis. Notably, 13 VOCs exhibited statistically significant differences between lung cancer patients and controls. The combination of eight VOCs (hexanal, heptanal, octanal, benzaldehyde, undecane, phenylacetaldehyde, decanal, and benzoic acid) demonstrated substantial discriminatory power with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.85, a sensitivity of 82%, and a specificity of 76% in the discovery set. Validation in an independent cohort yielded an AUC of 0.78, a sensitivity of 78%, and a specificity of 64%. Further analysis revealed that elevated aldehyde levels in lung cancer patients’ breath could be attributed to overactivated Alcohol Dehydrogenase (ADH) pathways in cancerous tissues. Addressing methodological challenges, this study employed a matching of physiological and pathological confounders, controlled room air samples, and standardized breath sampling techniques. Despite the limitations, this study’s findings emphasize the potential of breath analysis as a diagnostic tool for lung cancer and suggest its utility in differentiating tuberculosis from lung cancer. However, further research and validation are warranted for the translation of these findings into clinical practice.

Background: Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) may uncover incidental findings (IFs) unrelated to lung cancer. There may be potential benefits from identifying clinically significant IFs that warrant intervention and potential harms related to identifying IFs that are not clinically significant but may result in additional evaluation, clinician effort, patient anxiety, complications, and excess cost. Objectives: To identify knowledge and research gaps and develop and prioritize research questions to address the approach to and management of IFs. Methods: We convened a multidisciplinary panel to review the available literature on IFs detected in lung cancer screening LDCT examinations, focusing on variability and standardizing reporting, management of IFs, and evaluation of the benefits and harms of IFs, particularly cardiovascular-related IFs. We used a three-round modified Delphi process to prioritize research questions. Results: This statement identifies knowledge gaps in 1) reporting of IFs, 2) management of IFs, and 3) identifying and reporting coronary artery calcification found on lung cancer screening LDCT. Finally, we present the panel’s initial 36 research questions and the final 20 prioritized questions. Conclusions: This statement provides a prioritized research agenda to further efforts focused on evaluating, managing, and increasing awareness of IFs in lung cancer screening.