Decision analysis of the effectiveness of lung cancer screening using autofluorescence bronchoscopy and computed tomography

Background: Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer death in the developed world. Most cancers are associated with tobacco smoking. A primary hope for reducing lung cancer has been prevention of smoking and successful smoking cessation programs. To date, these programs have not been as successful as anticipated. Objective: The aim of the current study was to evaluate whether lung cancer screening combining low dose computed tomography with autofluorescence bronchoscopy (combined CT & AFB) is superior to CT or AFB screening alone in improving lung cancer specific survival. In addition, the extent of improvement and ideal conditions for combined CT & AFB screening were evaluated. Methods: We applied decision analysis and Monte Carlo simulation modeling using TreeAge Software to evaluate our study aims. Histology- and stage specific probabilities of lung cancer 5-year survival proportions were taken from Surveillance and Epidemiologic End Results (SEER) Registry data. Screeningassociated data was taken from the US NCI Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO), National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), and US NCI Lung Screening Study (LSS), other relevant published data and expert opinion. Results: Decision Analysis - Combined CT and AFB was the best approach at Improving 5-year survival (Overall Expected Survival (OES) in the entire screened population was 0.9863) and in lung cancer patients only (Lung Cancer Specific Expected Survival (LOSES) was 0.3256). Combined screening was slightly better than CT screening alone (OES = 0.9859; LCSES = 0.2966), and substantially better than AFB screening alone (OES = 0.9842; LCSES = 0.2124), which was considerably better than no screening (OES = 0.9829; LCSES = 0.1445). Monte Carlo simulation modeling revealed that expected survival in the screened population and lung cancer patients is highest when screened using CT and combined CT and AFB. CT alone and combined screening was substantially better than AFB screening alone or no screening. For LCSES, combined CT and AFB screening is significantly better than CT alone (0.3126 vs. 0.2938, p< 0.0001). Conclusions: Overall, these analyses suggest that combined CT and AFB is slightly better than CT alone at improving lung cancer survival, and both approaches are substantially better than AFB screening alone or no screening.

The crystal and molecular structure of thiamine hydroiodide /|nWilliam Edward Lee. -- 260 St. Catharines [Ont.] : Dept. of Chemistry, Brock University,

The x-ray crystal structure of thiamine hydroiodide,C1ZH18N40S12' has been determined. The unit cell parameters are a = 13.84 ± 0.03, o b = 7.44 ± 0.01, c = 20.24 ± 0.02 A, 8 = 120.52 ± 0.07°, space group P2/c, z = 4. A total of 1445 reflections having ,2 > 2o(F2), 26 < 40° were collected on a Picker four-circle diffractometer with MoKa radiation by the 26 scan technique. The structure was solved by the heavy atom method. The iodine and sulphur atoms were refined anisotropically; only the positional parameters were refined for the hydrogen atoms. Successive least squares cycles yielded an unweighted R factor of 0.054. The site of protonation of the pyrimidine ring is the nitrogen opposite the amino group. The overall structure conforms very closely to the structures of other related thiamine compounds. The bonding surrounding the iodine atoms is distorted tetrahedral. The iodine atoms make several contacts with surrounding atoms most of them at or near the van der Waal's distances A thiaminium tetrachlorocobaltate salt was produced whose molecular and crystal structure was j~dged to be isomorphous to thiaminium tetrachlorocadmate.