Lung cancer causes more deaths than any other cancer, but for too long, it has not been given the policy attention it deserves. Lung cancer is the main cause of cancer-related deaths in Europe1, and its burden will remain high for several decades to come. Even though smoking rates are gradually declining2, people who used to smoke remain at high risk of lung cancer for many years after quitting3, and environmental factors such as air pollution are a growing cause of lung cancer in the entire population4.
We have the means to reduce the burden of lung cancer on our society, but it will require a comprehensive and integrated approach. Importantly, we need to dispel the perception that lung cancer is a self-inflicted condition. We could start by treating smoking as an addiction and reducing stigma towards both smoking and lung cancer. Early detection needs to be enhanced by implementing largescale screening programmes that target high-risk individuals, alongside smoking cessation programmes. The evidence is clear that screening high-risk individuals using low-dose computed tomography scans offers a safe and effective way to shift diagnosis to earlier stages and reduce mortality from lung cancer5,6. Complementary approaches, such as incidental pulmonary nodule identification, management protocols and rapid referral pathways from primary to secondary care, are also important to improve early detection7,8. Improvements to lung cancer care pathways are needed to ensure all people have access to multidisciplinary care that encompasses specialist diagnosis, personalised treatments, and palliative and survivorship care7,8. Finally, targeted efforts are required to reduce geographical and socioeconomic disparities in access and outcomes9,10.
Making these changes can deliver benefits beyond lung cancer. Targeted screening programmes offer the opportunity for early detection of other non-communicable diseases (NCDs), such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and some forms of heart disease11-13. Tackling lung cancer can help countries progress towards reducing the overall burden of NCDs on their societies and contribute to greater health system sustainability.
With the implementation of Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan and as we look to post-COVID recovery, we have the opportunity to put in place what is needed to improve outcomes for people with lung cancer and reduce the burden the condition poses on our societies. Lung cancer has, for too long, been denied due attention as a public health priority. The time to act is now.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors have each completed and submitted an ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. M. Racovita, E. Wheeler, S. Wait, D. Bancroft, and R. Eastabrook (The Health Policy Partnership) report fees from AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Elekta, and Philip , related to the current work, and funds from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Advanced Accelerator Applications, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, GE Healthcare, Elekta, Vifor Pharma, UCB, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Philips, outside the submitted work. J. Jassem reports fees from AstraZeneca, MSD, and Exact Sciences, outside the submitted work. S. Novello reports consulting fees from BMS, Eli LILLY, Takeda, ROCHE, Pfizer, Astrazeneca, BI, MSD, Abbvie, Pharmamar, and Beigene, outside the submitted work. A. M. Braid reports consulting fees from Lungevity and honoraria from Roche, outside the submitted work. The rest of the authors have nothing to disclose.
FUNDING
This study is jointly funded by AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Philips and Elekta. All outputs are non-promotional, evidence-based and shaped by the authors, who had editorial control and provided their time for free.
ETHICAL APPROVAL AND INFORMED CONSENT
Ethical approval and informed consent were not required for this study.
DATA AVAILABILITY
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created.
PROVENANCE AND PEER REVIEW
Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
DISCLAIMER
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors.
REFERENCES
- 1.Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, et al. Global Cancer Observatory: Cancer Today. International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2020. Updated December 1, 2020. Accessed November 25, 2021. https://gco.iarc.fr/today. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Islami F, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global trends of lung cancer mortality and smoking prevalence. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2015;4(4):327–338. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2015.08.04. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Tindle HA, Stevenson Duncan M, Greevy RA, et al. Lifetime Smoking History and Risk of Lung Cancer: Results From the Framingham Heart Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018;110(11):1201–1207. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djy041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Myers R, Brauer M, Dummer T, et al. High-Ambient Air Pollution Exposure Among Never Smokers Versus Ever Smokers With Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2021;16(11):1850–1858. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.06.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.de Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, de Jong PA, et al. Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Volume CT Screening in a Randomized Trial. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(6):503–513. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1911793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.National Lung Screening Trial Research Team Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(5):395–409. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1102873. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Lam S, Tammemagi M. Contemporary issues in the implementation of lung cancer screening. Eur Respir Rev. 2021;30(161):200288. doi: 10.1183/16000617.0288-2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Pollock M, Craig R, Chojecki D, et al. Initiatives to Accelerate the Diagnostic Phase of Cancer Care: An Environmental Scan. Institute of Health Economics; 2018. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Public Health England PHE screening inequalities strategy. Updated October 22, 2020. Accessed November 25, 2021. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-population-screening-inequalities-strategy/phe-screening-inequalities-strategy.
- 10.Ali N, Lifford KJ, Carter B, et al. Barriers to uptake among high-risk individuals declining participation in lung cancer screening: a mixed methods analysis of the UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) trial. BMJ Open. 2015;5(7):e008254. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008254. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Reiter MJ, Nemesure A, Madu E, Reagan L, Plank A. Frequency and distribution of incidental findings deemed appropriate for S modifier designation on low-dose CT in a lung cancer screening program. Lung Cancer. 2018;120:1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.03.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Ruparel M, Quaife SL, Dickson JL, et al. Evaluation of cardiovascular risk in a lung cancer screening cohort. Thorax. 2019;74(12):1140–1146. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2018-212812. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ruparel M, Quaife SL, Dickson JL, et al. Prevalence, Symptom Burden, and Underdiagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in a Lung Cancer Screening Cohort. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020;17(7):869–878. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201911-857OC. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created.