News

Drone warfare and repeated attacks on medical infrastructure are reshaping battlefield medicine in Ukraine, driving the development of underground military hospitals designed to stabilize and treat wounded soldiers close to active combat zones, rather than relying on rapid evacuation.

Since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the World Health Organization has documented nearly 3000 attacks on healthcare facilities and violations of the Geneva Conventions that protect medical personnel and healthcare infrastructure during armed conflict.

In response, Ukraine has developed underground military hospitals designed to withstand bombardment and maintain the continuity of medical care. By combining infrastructure inherited from the Cold War with rapidly constructed new facilities, the country has managed to preserve healthcare capacity and support military operations close to the frontlines.

Underground Hospital

In September 2024, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, in partnership with the Metinvest Group, opened Ukraine’s first underground military stabilization hospital near the front lines. The project was developed under Metinvest’s military support initiative, known as the Steel Front, which supplies protective infrastructure and equipment for frontline operations.

In addition to producing steel bunkers for these facilities, the company manufactures military support equipment, including mine clearing plows, drone protection screens, systems designed to intercept loitering munitions, armor plates, and vehicle reinforcements for frontline operations.

The underground hospital consists of six steel bunkers, each measuring 7.6 m in length and 2.5 m in diameter, with a total area of 500 m². The structures function as multifunctional units designed to maintain operational capability in high-threat environments. The facility includes ventilation, water supply, drainage, and electrical systems. During construction and installation, security measures aimed to reduce detectability and lower the risk for attack. The hospital also incorporates electronic warfare systems intended to strengthen operational protection.

The total investment reached 20 million Ukrainian hryvnias, approximately 385,000 euros. Of these, 7 million hryvnias funded medical equipment, while 13 million supported metal structures, construction materials, and infrastructure.

The hospital is equipped with oxygen concentrators, ventilators, cardiac monitors, defibrillators, surgical equipment, lighting systems, sterilizers, patient warming systems, and medical furniture. The complex includes two operating rooms, two resuscitation stations, a work area, and a staff rest area. Depending on the staffing and operational configuration, the hospital can stabilize wounded individuals and perform up to four simultaneous procedures. The design follows North Atlantic Treaty Organization standards for second-level field hospitals, designated Role/Echelon 2.

In a statement released by the Metinvest Group after the facility opened in 2024, Roman Kuzev, acting commander of the “East” medical task force, said: “This underground hospital is the best stabilization center available. This will allow us to provide medical care to over 100 patients a day, saving hundreds of lives for our heroes. I hope the number of such facilities will grow.”

Kuzev’s expectations materialized in 2025, when the Metinvest Group completed the construction of a second underground military hospital in one of the most active frontline sectors. The new facility provides greater protection and camouflage, and incorporates structural modifications based on lessons learned from the first hospital. It is buried more than 6 m underground and reinforced with additional protective layers.

The hospital includes four functional units housing surgical and stabilization areas, a delivery room, and a break area for healthcare personnel. The facility covers 350 m² and required an investment exceeding 21 million Ukrainian hryvnias.

The center can simultaneously support up to three surgical procedures of varying complexities. Military authorities supplied equipment, including high-flow infusion pumps, x-ray systems, oxygen concentrators, defibrillators, and additional devices. Medical services are provided by teams of up to 20 professionals, including orthopedic surgeons, general surgeons, anesthesiologists, surgical nurses, and nursing assistants.

 

Historic Origin

World War I marked a turning point in modern warfare by introducing technologies that increased battlefield violence to unprecedented levels. The widespread use of machine guns, poisonous gas, tanks, and trench warfare has turned the battlefield into an extremely deadly environment.

At the same time, the conflict drove advances in military medicine that continue to influence practice today, including blood transfusions, psychological support for soldiers experiencing so called “shell shock,” and the development of field hospitals and mobile medical units.

One of the earliest documented underground hospitals was established in Arras, France, where a network of preexisting tunnels known as boves was expanded by New Zealand engineers to provide Allied forces with a tactical advantage. The tunnels were designed to shelter troops in preparation for the 1917 Arras Offensive, allowing them to assemble safely without being detected by German forces.

The underground hospital in Arras, which opened in 1916, includes waiting rooms, operating rooms, rest areas, spaces accommodating up to 700 stretchers, and a morgue. It also features internal electrical and plumbing systems, making it one of the most advanced medical facilities of its time.

 

Shift in Care

The expanding use of drones on the battlefield has increased the risks linked to casualty evacuation, particularly aeromedical evacuation, reducing the effectiveness of traditional military care models. In response, Ukraine has adopted an approach centered on extended field care and the development of a decentralized medical system, supported by close collaboration with the private sector to rapidly secure resources and infrastructure.

These strategies represent a shift in military medicine toward prolonged onsite stabilization rather than rapid evacuation. The combined use of underground facilities and repurposed infrastructure has helped maintain medical capacity under high threat conditions, improving survival among wounded individuals, and strengthening healthcare system resilience during conflict, according to US Army reports.

In addition to serving as a model for this shift in military medicine, the underground hospital project received the Partnership for Sustainability Award 2025 in Ukraine from the United Nations Global Compact in the “Rebuilding Ukraine” category. The award, presented by the United Nations network that promotes corporate sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals, recognizes private sector initiatives that support postwar reconstruction and strengthen social and institutional resilience.

The project was recognized for its contribution to saving lives and strengthening medical capacity in areas affected by active hostility.

This article was translated from El Médico Interactivo on Univadis, part of the Medscape Professional Network.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Drone warfare and repeated attacks on medical infrastructure are reshaping battlefield medicine in Ukraine, driving the development of underground military hospitals designed to stabilize and treat wounded soldiers close to active combat zones, rather than relying on rapid evacuation.

Since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the World Health Organization has documented nearly 3000 attacks on healthcare facilities and violations of the Geneva Conventions that protect medical personnel and healthcare infrastructure during armed conflict.

In response, Ukraine has developed underground military hospitals designed to withstand bombardment and maintain the continuity of medical care. By combining infrastructure inherited from the Cold War with rapidly constructed new facilities, the country has managed to preserve healthcare capacity and support military operations close to the frontlines.

Underground Hospital

In September 2024, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, in partnership with the Metinvest Group, opened Ukraine’s first underground military stabilization hospital near the front lines. The project was developed under Metinvest’s military support initiative, known as the Steel Front, which supplies protective infrastructure and equipment for frontline operations.

In addition to producing steel bunkers for these facilities, the company manufactures military support equipment, including mine clearing plows, drone protection screens, systems designed to intercept loitering munitions, armor plates, and vehicle reinforcements for frontline operations.

The underground hospital consists of six steel bunkers, each measuring 7.6 m in length and 2.5 m in diameter, with a total area of 500 m². The structures function as multifunctional units designed to maintain operational capability in high-threat environments. The facility includes ventilation, water supply, drainage, and electrical systems. During construction and installation, security measures aimed to reduce detectability and lower the risk for attack. The hospital also incorporates electronic warfare systems intended to strengthen operational protection.

The total investment reached 20 million Ukrainian hryvnias, approximately 385,000 euros. Of these, 7 million hryvnias funded medical equipment, while 13 million supported metal structures, construction materials, and infrastructure.

The hospital is equipped with oxygen concentrators, ventilators, cardiac monitors, defibrillators, surgical equipment, lighting systems, sterilizers, patient warming systems, and medical furniture. The complex includes two operating rooms, two resuscitation stations, a work area, and a staff rest area. Depending on the staffing and operational configuration, the hospital can stabilize wounded individuals and perform up to four simultaneous procedures. The design follows North Atlantic Treaty Organization standards for second-level field hospitals, designated Role/Echelon 2.

In a statement released by the Metinvest Group after the facility opened in 2024, Roman Kuzev, acting commander of the “East” medical task force, said: “This underground hospital is the best stabilization center available. This will allow us to provide medical care to over 100 patients a day, saving hundreds of lives for our heroes. I hope the number of such facilities will grow.”

Kuzev’s expectations materialized in 2025, when the Metinvest Group completed the construction of a second underground military hospital in one of the most active frontline sectors. The new facility provides greater protection and camouflage, and incorporates structural modifications based on lessons learned from the first hospital. It is buried more than 6 m underground and reinforced with additional protective layers.

The hospital includes four functional units housing surgical and stabilization areas, a delivery room, and a break area for healthcare personnel. The facility covers 350 m² and required an investment exceeding 21 million Ukrainian hryvnias.

The center can simultaneously support up to three surgical procedures of varying complexities. Military authorities supplied equipment, including high-flow infusion pumps, x-ray systems, oxygen concentrators, defibrillators, and additional devices. Medical services are provided by teams of up to 20 professionals, including orthopedic surgeons, general surgeons, anesthesiologists, surgical nurses, and nursing assistants.

 

Historic Origin

World War I marked a turning point in modern warfare by introducing technologies that increased battlefield violence to unprecedented levels. The widespread use of machine guns, poisonous gas, tanks, and trench warfare has turned the battlefield into an extremely deadly environment.

At the same time, the conflict drove advances in military medicine that continue to influence practice today, including blood transfusions, psychological support for soldiers experiencing so called “shell shock,” and the development of field hospitals and mobile medical units.

One of the earliest documented underground hospitals was established in Arras, France, where a network of preexisting tunnels known as boves was expanded by New Zealand engineers to provide Allied forces with a tactical advantage. The tunnels were designed to shelter troops in preparation for the 1917 Arras Offensive, allowing them to assemble safely without being detected by German forces.

The underground hospital in Arras, which opened in 1916, includes waiting rooms, operating rooms, rest areas, spaces accommodating up to 700 stretchers, and a morgue. It also features internal electrical and plumbing systems, making it one of the most advanced medical facilities of its time.

 

Shift in Care

The expanding use of drones on the battlefield has increased the risks linked to casualty evacuation, particularly aeromedical evacuation, reducing the effectiveness of traditional military care models. In response, Ukraine has adopted an approach centered on extended field care and the development of a decentralized medical system, supported by close collaboration with the private sector to rapidly secure resources and infrastructure.

These strategies represent a shift in military medicine toward prolonged onsite stabilization rather than rapid evacuation. The combined use of underground facilities and repurposed infrastructure has helped maintain medical capacity under high threat conditions, improving survival among wounded individuals, and strengthening healthcare system resilience during conflict, according to US Army reports.

In addition to serving as a model for this shift in military medicine, the underground hospital project received the Partnership for Sustainability Award 2025 in Ukraine from the United Nations Global Compact in the “Rebuilding Ukraine” category. The award, presented by the United Nations network that promotes corporate sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals, recognizes private sector initiatives that support postwar reconstruction and strengthen social and institutional resilience.

The project was recognized for its contribution to saving lives and strengthening medical capacity in areas affected by active hostility.

This article was translated from El Médico Interactivo on Univadis, part of the Medscape Professional Network.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Drone warfare and repeated attacks on medical infrastructure are reshaping battlefield medicine in Ukraine, driving the development of underground military hospitals designed to stabilize and treat wounded soldiers close to active combat zones, rather than relying on rapid evacuation.

Since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the World Health Organization has documented nearly 3000 attacks on healthcare facilities and violations of the Geneva Conventions that protect medical personnel and healthcare infrastructure during armed conflict.

In response, Ukraine has developed underground military hospitals designed to withstand bombardment and maintain the continuity of medical care. By combining infrastructure inherited from the Cold War with rapidly constructed new facilities, the country has managed to preserve healthcare capacity and support military operations close to the frontlines.

Underground Hospital

In September 2024, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, in partnership with the Metinvest Group, opened Ukraine’s first underground military stabilization hospital near the front lines. The project was developed under Metinvest’s military support initiative, known as the Steel Front, which supplies protective infrastructure and equipment for frontline operations.

In addition to producing steel bunkers for these facilities, the company manufactures military support equipment, including mine clearing plows, drone protection screens, systems designed to intercept loitering munitions, armor plates, and vehicle reinforcements for frontline operations.

The underground hospital consists of six steel bunkers, each measuring 7.6 m in length and 2.5 m in diameter, with a total area of 500 m². The structures function as multifunctional units designed to maintain operational capability in high-threat environments. The facility includes ventilation, water supply, drainage, and electrical systems. During construction and installation, security measures aimed to reduce detectability and lower the risk for attack. The hospital also incorporates electronic warfare systems intended to strengthen operational protection.

The total investment reached 20 million Ukrainian hryvnias, approximately 385,000 euros. Of these, 7 million hryvnias funded medical equipment, while 13 million supported metal structures, construction materials, and infrastructure.

The hospital is equipped with oxygen concentrators, ventilators, cardiac monitors, defibrillators, surgical equipment, lighting systems, sterilizers, patient warming systems, and medical furniture. The complex includes two operating rooms, two resuscitation stations, a work area, and a staff rest area. Depending on the staffing and operational configuration, the hospital can stabilize wounded individuals and perform up to four simultaneous procedures. The design follows North Atlantic Treaty Organization standards for second-level field hospitals, designated Role/Echelon 2.

In a statement released by the Metinvest Group after the facility opened in 2024, Roman Kuzev, acting commander of the “East” medical task force, said: “This underground hospital is the best stabilization center available. This will allow us to provide medical care to over 100 patients a day, saving hundreds of lives for our heroes. I hope the number of such facilities will grow.”

Kuzev’s expectations materialized in 2025, when the Metinvest Group completed the construction of a second underground military hospital in one of the most active frontline sectors. The new facility provides greater protection and camouflage, and incorporates structural modifications based on lessons learned from the first hospital. It is buried more than 6 m underground and reinforced with additional protective layers.

The hospital includes four functional units housing surgical and stabilization areas, a delivery room, and a break area for healthcare personnel. The facility covers 350 m² and required an investment exceeding 21 million Ukrainian hryvnias.

The center can simultaneously support up to three surgical procedures of varying complexities. Military authorities supplied equipment, including high-flow infusion pumps, x-ray systems, oxygen concentrators, defibrillators, and additional devices. Medical services are provided by teams of up to 20 professionals, including orthopedic surgeons, general surgeons, anesthesiologists, surgical nurses, and nursing assistants.

 

Historic Origin

World War I marked a turning point in modern warfare by introducing technologies that increased battlefield violence to unprecedented levels. The widespread use of machine guns, poisonous gas, tanks, and trench warfare has turned the battlefield into an extremely deadly environment.

At the same time, the conflict drove advances in military medicine that continue to influence practice today, including blood transfusions, psychological support for soldiers experiencing so called “shell shock,” and the development of field hospitals and mobile medical units.

One of the earliest documented underground hospitals was established in Arras, France, where a network of preexisting tunnels known as boves was expanded by New Zealand engineers to provide Allied forces with a tactical advantage. The tunnels were designed to shelter troops in preparation for the 1917 Arras Offensive, allowing them to assemble safely without being detected by German forces.

The underground hospital in Arras, which opened in 1916, includes waiting rooms, operating rooms, rest areas, spaces accommodating up to 700 stretchers, and a morgue. It also features internal electrical and plumbing systems, making it one of the most advanced medical facilities of its time.

 

Shift in Care

The expanding use of drones on the battlefield has increased the risks linked to casualty evacuation, particularly aeromedical evacuation, reducing the effectiveness of traditional military care models. In response, Ukraine has adopted an approach centered on extended field care and the development of a decentralized medical system, supported by close collaboration with the private sector to rapidly secure resources and infrastructure.

These strategies represent a shift in military medicine toward prolonged onsite stabilization rather than rapid evacuation. The combined use of underground facilities and repurposed infrastructure has helped maintain medical capacity under high threat conditions, improving survival among wounded individuals, and strengthening healthcare system resilience during conflict, according to US Army reports.

In addition to serving as a model for this shift in military medicine, the underground hospital project received the Partnership for Sustainability Award 2025 in Ukraine from the United Nations Global Compact in the “Rebuilding Ukraine” category. The award, presented by the United Nations network that promotes corporate sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals, recognizes private sector initiatives that support postwar reconstruction and strengthen social and institutional resilience.

The project was recognized for its contribution to saving lives and strengthening medical capacity in areas affected by active hostility.

This article was translated from El Médico Interactivo on Univadis, part of the Medscape Professional Network.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Approximately about 1 in 4 eligible Americans are up to date on their lung cancer screening, according to a recent study in JAMA Internal Medicine, prompting a need for clinicians to simplify referrals and scheduling of annual appointments.

Despite a 32% increase in lung cancer screening between 2022 and 2024, rates overall remain low at nearly 25%, and especially among patients between ages 50 and 54 years (11.32%; P < .05).

Determining eligibility entails calculating the total years a patient smoked cigarettes, whereas other screenings are based solely on age, such as breast cancer and colon cancer.

Some clinicians “will get into trying to do an actual pack year calculation, or where they smoked half a pack for this many years, and then they quit for this many years, and then, you know, they’re trying to do this massive calculation. And the reality is, we’re just trying to get a patient who’s at high risk for lung cancer” in for screening, said Timothy Mullett, MD, a thoracic surgeon and medical director of the Markey Cancer Center Network Development, University of Kentucky in Lexington, Kentucky, who helped the study authors.

As the second most common form of the disease, lung cancer is the leading cause of such mortality in the US. But low rates of screening mean opportunities for early detection are missed.

In an analysis of national survey data including 26,104 patients (45.6% women and 54.4% men) eligible for lung cancer screening between ages 50 and 79 years, rates increased from 18.49% to 24.49% (P < .05) over a 2-year period starting in 2022. 

Approximately one quarter of men and women were up to date on their screening (P < .05). Nearly one third of patients aged 65 years or older were up to date, whereas those between ages 50 and 54 years (11.32%), 55 and 59 years (19.45%), and 60 and 64 years (23.99%) showed lower rates.

Patients were most likely to be up to date on their screenings in the Northeast region of the country, with Massachusetts showing the highest prevalence rate (38.36%). The rate was lowest in South Dakota (13.43%).

No significant changes in rates were observed for Asian, Black, or Hispanic adults. Adults who were American Indian or Alaska native showed the largest improvement, from 18.74% in 2022 to 30.8% in 2024 (P < .05).

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends annual screening starting at age 50 for individuals who are current smokers or previous smokers who have a history of consuming at least a pack a day for two decades. Previous smokers must have quit within the previous 15 years to qualify.

Making these calculations can be tricky, Mullett said. Patients’ tobacco use can change over time and a screening tool may not account for those changes. He encourages clinicians to take time to ask patients for more detail about their history. For instance, someone who smokes a half a pack a day now may not immediately qualify for screening, but deeper probing might reveal that they previously smoked two packs a day.

Tamatha Hughes, RN, a nurse navigator for the Missouri Baptist Lung Cancer Screening Program, Missouri Baptist Medical Center in St. Louis, said she often calms fears and corrects misinformation when scheduling patients for their first screening. Some patients think the screening involves an MRI or that radiation from the CT scan is dangerous.

“We go through explaining it as simple as possible,” she said.

If she has a referral for a patient who does not move forward with scheduling, she said she will try them again a few weeks later. Annual screenings are scheduled at a patient’s first appointment, and she said her clinic has an 80% rate for returning patients.

Getting the first scan is the biggest hurdle. Many patients feel stigma or associate lung cancer with a hopeless diagnosis, which can reduce rates, Mullet said.

“There’s a sense of fatalism, because all they’ve ever experienced with lung cancer has been someone who’s died from lung cancer, their grandmother, their grandfather, died of lung cancer. And historically, lung cancer has been found in late stages over 80% of the time,” he said. But screening has drastically improved rates of survival.

“We keep trying to tell patients that this is not your grandfather’s lung cancer,” Mullett said. “This is not what you saw in your family growing up, and we can find it early and we can treat it, and we even if we find it late, we have better treatments now.”

The study was funded by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the William Stamps Farish Endowed Chair in Cancer Research, and the CDC. Mullett and Hughes reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

Kelsey Mesmer, PhD, is a freelance journalist and journalism professor at Saint Louis University in St. Louis.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Approximately about 1 in 4 eligible Americans are up to date on their lung cancer screening, according to a recent study in JAMA Internal Medicine, prompting a need for clinicians to simplify referrals and scheduling of annual appointments.

Despite a 32% increase in lung cancer screening between 2022 and 2024, rates overall remain low at nearly 25%, and especially among patients between ages 50 and 54 years (11.32%; P < .05).

Determining eligibility entails calculating the total years a patient smoked cigarettes, whereas other screenings are based solely on age, such as breast cancer and colon cancer.

Some clinicians “will get into trying to do an actual pack year calculation, or where they smoked half a pack for this many years, and then they quit for this many years, and then, you know, they’re trying to do this massive calculation. And the reality is, we’re just trying to get a patient who’s at high risk for lung cancer” in for screening, said Timothy Mullett, MD, a thoracic surgeon and medical director of the Markey Cancer Center Network Development, University of Kentucky in Lexington, Kentucky, who helped the study authors.

As the second most common form of the disease, lung cancer is the leading cause of such mortality in the US. But low rates of screening mean opportunities for early detection are missed.

In an analysis of national survey data including 26,104 patients (45.6% women and 54.4% men) eligible for lung cancer screening between ages 50 and 79 years, rates increased from 18.49% to 24.49% (P < .05) over a 2-year period starting in 2022. 

Approximately one quarter of men and women were up to date on their screening (P < .05). Nearly one third of patients aged 65 years or older were up to date, whereas those between ages 50 and 54 years (11.32%), 55 and 59 years (19.45%), and 60 and 64 years (23.99%) showed lower rates.

Patients were most likely to be up to date on their screenings in the Northeast region of the country, with Massachusetts showing the highest prevalence rate (38.36%). The rate was lowest in South Dakota (13.43%).

No significant changes in rates were observed for Asian, Black, or Hispanic adults. Adults who were American Indian or Alaska native showed the largest improvement, from 18.74% in 2022 to 30.8% in 2024 (P < .05).

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends annual screening starting at age 50 for individuals who are current smokers or previous smokers who have a history of consuming at least a pack a day for two decades. Previous smokers must have quit within the previous 15 years to qualify.

Making these calculations can be tricky, Mullett said. Patients’ tobacco use can change over time and a screening tool may not account for those changes. He encourages clinicians to take time to ask patients for more detail about their history. For instance, someone who smokes a half a pack a day now may not immediately qualify for screening, but deeper probing might reveal that they previously smoked two packs a day.

Tamatha Hughes, RN, a nurse navigator for the Missouri Baptist Lung Cancer Screening Program, Missouri Baptist Medical Center in St. Louis, said she often calms fears and corrects misinformation when scheduling patients for their first screening. Some patients think the screening involves an MRI or that radiation from the CT scan is dangerous.

“We go through explaining it as simple as possible,” she said.

If she has a referral for a patient who does not move forward with scheduling, she said she will try them again a few weeks later. Annual screenings are scheduled at a patient’s first appointment, and she said her clinic has an 80% rate for returning patients.

Getting the first scan is the biggest hurdle. Many patients feel stigma or associate lung cancer with a hopeless diagnosis, which can reduce rates, Mullet said.

“There’s a sense of fatalism, because all they’ve ever experienced with lung cancer has been someone who’s died from lung cancer, their grandmother, their grandfather, died of lung cancer. And historically, lung cancer has been found in late stages over 80% of the time,” he said. But screening has drastically improved rates of survival.

“We keep trying to tell patients that this is not your grandfather’s lung cancer,” Mullett said. “This is not what you saw in your family growing up, and we can find it early and we can treat it, and we even if we find it late, we have better treatments now.”

The study was funded by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the William Stamps Farish Endowed Chair in Cancer Research, and the CDC. Mullett and Hughes reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

Kelsey Mesmer, PhD, is a freelance journalist and journalism professor at Saint Louis University in St. Louis.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Approximately about 1 in 4 eligible Americans are up to date on their lung cancer screening, according to a recent study in JAMA Internal Medicine, prompting a need for clinicians to simplify referrals and scheduling of annual appointments.

Despite a 32% increase in lung cancer screening between 2022 and 2024, rates overall remain low at nearly 25%, and especially among patients between ages 50 and 54 years (11.32%; P < .05).

Determining eligibility entails calculating the total years a patient smoked cigarettes, whereas other screenings are based solely on age, such as breast cancer and colon cancer.

Some clinicians “will get into trying to do an actual pack year calculation, or where they smoked half a pack for this many years, and then they quit for this many years, and then, you know, they’re trying to do this massive calculation. And the reality is, we’re just trying to get a patient who’s at high risk for lung cancer” in for screening, said Timothy Mullett, MD, a thoracic surgeon and medical director of the Markey Cancer Center Network Development, University of Kentucky in Lexington, Kentucky, who helped the study authors.

As the second most common form of the disease, lung cancer is the leading cause of such mortality in the US. But low rates of screening mean opportunities for early detection are missed.

In an analysis of national survey data including 26,104 patients (45.6% women and 54.4% men) eligible for lung cancer screening between ages 50 and 79 years, rates increased from 18.49% to 24.49% (P < .05) over a 2-year period starting in 2022. 

Approximately one quarter of men and women were up to date on their screening (P < .05). Nearly one third of patients aged 65 years or older were up to date, whereas those between ages 50 and 54 years (11.32%), 55 and 59 years (19.45%), and 60 and 64 years (23.99%) showed lower rates.

Patients were most likely to be up to date on their screenings in the Northeast region of the country, with Massachusetts showing the highest prevalence rate (38.36%). The rate was lowest in South Dakota (13.43%).

No significant changes in rates were observed for Asian, Black, or Hispanic adults. Adults who were American Indian or Alaska native showed the largest improvement, from 18.74% in 2022 to 30.8% in 2024 (P < .05).

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends annual screening starting at age 50 for individuals who are current smokers or previous smokers who have a history of consuming at least a pack a day for two decades. Previous smokers must have quit within the previous 15 years to qualify.

Making these calculations can be tricky, Mullett said. Patients’ tobacco use can change over time and a screening tool may not account for those changes. He encourages clinicians to take time to ask patients for more detail about their history. For instance, someone who smokes a half a pack a day now may not immediately qualify for screening, but deeper probing might reveal that they previously smoked two packs a day.

Tamatha Hughes, RN, a nurse navigator for the Missouri Baptist Lung Cancer Screening Program, Missouri Baptist Medical Center in St. Louis, said she often calms fears and corrects misinformation when scheduling patients for their first screening. Some patients think the screening involves an MRI or that radiation from the CT scan is dangerous.

“We go through explaining it as simple as possible,” she said.

If she has a referral for a patient who does not move forward with scheduling, she said she will try them again a few weeks later. Annual screenings are scheduled at a patient’s first appointment, and she said her clinic has an 80% rate for returning patients.

Getting the first scan is the biggest hurdle. Many patients feel stigma or associate lung cancer with a hopeless diagnosis, which can reduce rates, Mullet said.

“There’s a sense of fatalism, because all they’ve ever experienced with lung cancer has been someone who’s died from lung cancer, their grandmother, their grandfather, died of lung cancer. And historically, lung cancer has been found in late stages over 80% of the time,” he said. But screening has drastically improved rates of survival.

“We keep trying to tell patients that this is not your grandfather’s lung cancer,” Mullett said. “This is not what you saw in your family growing up, and we can find it early and we can treat it, and we even if we find it late, we have better treatments now.”

The study was funded by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the William Stamps Farish Endowed Chair in Cancer Research, and the CDC. Mullett and Hughes reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

Kelsey Mesmer, PhD, is a freelance journalist and journalism professor at Saint Louis University in St. Louis.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Chest CT is being ordered too often for incidental pulmonary nodules found on neck imaging, according to a study at one US health system.

It’s not uncommon for neck CT or MRI to show nodules in the lung apices, but there’s been no data on how often those incidental findings turn out to be lung cancer.

For the new study, researchers analyzed data of 22,173 patients who underwent neck, brachial plexus, or parathyroid imaging at the Massachusetts General Brigham in Boston.

Of those patients, 273 (1.2%) had requests for supplemental chest CTs due to incidental lung findings. Ultimately, only one new lung cancer was detected — an indolent adenocarcinoma — yielding a 2-year incidence rate of 0.40%.

The results suggest that recommendations for chest CT “should likely be substantially decreased,” the researchers conclude in the Journal of the American College of Radiology — though they also acknowledge a need for studies of larger datasets.

As for what drives such CT requests, study co-author Mark Hammer, MD, a thoracic radiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School in Boston, offered one possibility: Neuroradiologists, who typically interpret neck imaging, might be less familiar with lung nodule follow-up guidelines.

At his institution, Hammer told Medscape Medical News, thoracic radiologists generally follow the Fleischner Society guidelines on management of incidentally detected pulmonary nodules.

“The reality is that neuroradiologists are often unfamiliar with those guidelines and may recommend follow-up for nodules that do not require it,” he said.

The Fleischner guidelines don’t recommend imaging nodules smaller than 6 mm given the very low cancer risk. For nodules of 6-8 mm, they recommend follow-up chest CTs at 3-12 months to see if the nodule has grown or changed. For larger or otherwise suspicious lesions, they advise prompt evaluation.

But while guidelines exist, follow-up decisions after neck imaging are largely at the discretion of the provider, said Dave Yousem, MD, MBA, a neuroradiologist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

According to Yousem, some physicians might be comfortable with the possibility of missing a low-risk indolent cancer to spare many patients from unnecessary CTs. But there’s also concern that overlooking even one tumor could trigger litigation, he said.

Hammer’s team found that of all patients with chest CT recommendations, only 171 (62.6%) underwent scanning — a rate consistent with previous reports of incidentaloma follow-up.

Hammer said, thoracic radiologists might have been applying the Fleischner guidelines, but some patients might simply have been lost to follow-up, among other possibilities.

He and his colleagues said recommendations for additional imaging should be evidence-based and judicious to ensure “appropriate follow-up and early detection of lung cancer.”

Potential solutions, they added, include incidentaloma tracking systems, improved communication between providers, and AI-assisted image interpretation.

The study was funded by the Association of University Radiologists and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Hammer and Yousem had no relevant disclosures.

M. Alexander Otto is a physician assistant with a master’s degree in medical science and a journalism degree from Newhouse. He is an award-winning medical journalist who worked for several major news outlets before joining Medscape. He is also an MIT Knight Science Journalism fellow. Email: aotto@medscape.net.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Chest CT is being ordered too often for incidental pulmonary nodules found on neck imaging, according to a study at one US health system.

It’s not uncommon for neck CT or MRI to show nodules in the lung apices, but there’s been no data on how often those incidental findings turn out to be lung cancer.

For the new study, researchers analyzed data of 22,173 patients who underwent neck, brachial plexus, or parathyroid imaging at the Massachusetts General Brigham in Boston.

Of those patients, 273 (1.2%) had requests for supplemental chest CTs due to incidental lung findings. Ultimately, only one new lung cancer was detected — an indolent adenocarcinoma — yielding a 2-year incidence rate of 0.40%.

The results suggest that recommendations for chest CT “should likely be substantially decreased,” the researchers conclude in the Journal of the American College of Radiology — though they also acknowledge a need for studies of larger datasets.

As for what drives such CT requests, study co-author Mark Hammer, MD, a thoracic radiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School in Boston, offered one possibility: Neuroradiologists, who typically interpret neck imaging, might be less familiar with lung nodule follow-up guidelines.

At his institution, Hammer told Medscape Medical News, thoracic radiologists generally follow the Fleischner Society guidelines on management of incidentally detected pulmonary nodules.

“The reality is that neuroradiologists are often unfamiliar with those guidelines and may recommend follow-up for nodules that do not require it,” he said.

The Fleischner guidelines don’t recommend imaging nodules smaller than 6 mm given the very low cancer risk. For nodules of 6-8 mm, they recommend follow-up chest CTs at 3-12 months to see if the nodule has grown or changed. For larger or otherwise suspicious lesions, they advise prompt evaluation.

But while guidelines exist, follow-up decisions after neck imaging are largely at the discretion of the provider, said Dave Yousem, MD, MBA, a neuroradiologist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

According to Yousem, some physicians might be comfortable with the possibility of missing a low-risk indolent cancer to spare many patients from unnecessary CTs. But there’s also concern that overlooking even one tumor could trigger litigation, he said.

Hammer’s team found that of all patients with chest CT recommendations, only 171 (62.6%) underwent scanning — a rate consistent with previous reports of incidentaloma follow-up.

Hammer said, thoracic radiologists might have been applying the Fleischner guidelines, but some patients might simply have been lost to follow-up, among other possibilities.

He and his colleagues said recommendations for additional imaging should be evidence-based and judicious to ensure “appropriate follow-up and early detection of lung cancer.”

Potential solutions, they added, include incidentaloma tracking systems, improved communication between providers, and AI-assisted image interpretation.

The study was funded by the Association of University Radiologists and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Hammer and Yousem had no relevant disclosures.

M. Alexander Otto is a physician assistant with a master’s degree in medical science and a journalism degree from Newhouse. He is an award-winning medical journalist who worked for several major news outlets before joining Medscape. He is also an MIT Knight Science Journalism fellow. Email: aotto@medscape.net.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Chest CT is being ordered too often for incidental pulmonary nodules found on neck imaging, according to a study at one US health system.

It’s not uncommon for neck CT or MRI to show nodules in the lung apices, but there’s been no data on how often those incidental findings turn out to be lung cancer.

For the new study, researchers analyzed data of 22,173 patients who underwent neck, brachial plexus, or parathyroid imaging at the Massachusetts General Brigham in Boston.

Of those patients, 273 (1.2%) had requests for supplemental chest CTs due to incidental lung findings. Ultimately, only one new lung cancer was detected — an indolent adenocarcinoma — yielding a 2-year incidence rate of 0.40%.

The results suggest that recommendations for chest CT “should likely be substantially decreased,” the researchers conclude in the Journal of the American College of Radiology — though they also acknowledge a need for studies of larger datasets.

As for what drives such CT requests, study co-author Mark Hammer, MD, a thoracic radiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School in Boston, offered one possibility: Neuroradiologists, who typically interpret neck imaging, might be less familiar with lung nodule follow-up guidelines.

At his institution, Hammer told Medscape Medical News, thoracic radiologists generally follow the Fleischner Society guidelines on management of incidentally detected pulmonary nodules.

“The reality is that neuroradiologists are often unfamiliar with those guidelines and may recommend follow-up for nodules that do not require it,” he said.

The Fleischner guidelines don’t recommend imaging nodules smaller than 6 mm given the very low cancer risk. For nodules of 6-8 mm, they recommend follow-up chest CTs at 3-12 months to see if the nodule has grown or changed. For larger or otherwise suspicious lesions, they advise prompt evaluation.

But while guidelines exist, follow-up decisions after neck imaging are largely at the discretion of the provider, said Dave Yousem, MD, MBA, a neuroradiologist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

According to Yousem, some physicians might be comfortable with the possibility of missing a low-risk indolent cancer to spare many patients from unnecessary CTs. But there’s also concern that overlooking even one tumor could trigger litigation, he said.

Hammer’s team found that of all patients with chest CT recommendations, only 171 (62.6%) underwent scanning — a rate consistent with previous reports of incidentaloma follow-up.

Hammer said, thoracic radiologists might have been applying the Fleischner guidelines, but some patients might simply have been lost to follow-up, among other possibilities.

He and his colleagues said recommendations for additional imaging should be evidence-based and judicious to ensure “appropriate follow-up and early detection of lung cancer.”

Potential solutions, they added, include incidentaloma tracking systems, improved communication between providers, and AI-assisted image interpretation.

The study was funded by the Association of University Radiologists and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Hammer and Yousem had no relevant disclosures.

M. Alexander Otto is a physician assistant with a master’s degree in medical science and a journalism degree from Newhouse. He is an award-winning medical journalist who worked for several major news outlets before joining Medscape. He is also an MIT Knight Science Journalism fellow. Email: aotto@medscape.net.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Several newly identified biomarkers can help distinguish invasive aspergillosis from aspergillus colonization in lung transplant recipients, according to data from a new study presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation.

Aspergillus, a common environmental mold, can cause potentially serious infection or asymptomatic colonization in patients who have significant lung disease or are immunosuppressed, said Aaron Mishkin, MD, associate professor of medicine at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Philadelphia, who was not involved in the study.

“Determining if the aspergillus that is present is a colonizing organism vs disease is challenging clinically,” Mishkin said. Clinicians currently rely on criteria including a compatible patient, imaging findings, and a laboratory-based diagnostic such as tissue from a biopsy, cultures, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or fungal antigen detection, said Mishkin. “Fungal antigen detection has variable specificity and sensitivity,” he noted. New biomarkers that look for an immune response could help differentiate between colonization and infection by assessing an immune-mediated inflammatory response, the hallmark of infection, he said.

To tease out potential biomarkers associated with invasive aspergillosis, Christine Ng, MS, a researcher at the University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and colleagues performed RNA sequencing on samples from 14 control lung transplant patients, 34 with aspergillus colonization, and seven with invasive aspergillosis. They identified potential candidate genes in 15 control samples, 17 aspergillus colonization samples, and 15 invasive aspergillosis samples.

Overall, signaling pathway analysis showed robust immune response, T-cell immunity, and leukocyte immunity in patients with invasive aspergillosis. By contrast, patients with aspergillus colonization showed enriched cellular responses (response to stimuli, epithelium development).

In a real-time quantitative PCR analysis, the researchers validated three biomarkers specific to invasive aspergillosis (IRF7, ZBP1, CYP27B1). Biomarkers AKR1C2, FGF10, and VGLL3 demonstrated specificity for aspergillus colonization. Additionally, biomarkers PTGER3, LPAR3, and COL14A1 were significant when aspergillus colonization was compared to controls but not in comparisons between invasive aspergillosis and aspergillus colonization. 

The study findings were limited by the small sample size, and larger studies are needed before they can be implemented in clinical practice, the researchers wrote. However, the results suggest that the new biomarkers reveal distinct host immune patterns and may improve differentiation of aspergillosis from colonization in lung transplant recipients, they concluded.

Clinical Implications and Next Steps

RNA testing can help differentiate colonization vs infection, Mishkin said. “Colonization is not typically treated, whereas infection would be treated with an anti-fungal and, in the case of a transplant recipient, a reduction in immunosuppression,” he said. “In lung transplantation, a delicate equilibrium must be maintained between achieving optimal immunosuppression and minimizing or treating infection. Any tools that can aid in this decision-making have the potential to enhance patient outcomes,” he added.

The current study was limited by the use of data only from a single center, and the broader applicability to additional populations, broader geographic areas, and a larger number of organisms remains unknown, Mishkin said. “This type of assay does have the possibility of applicability to a larger number of fungal and even bacterial species,” he noted.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Several newly identified biomarkers can help distinguish invasive aspergillosis from aspergillus colonization in lung transplant recipients, according to data from a new study presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation.

Aspergillus, a common environmental mold, can cause potentially serious infection or asymptomatic colonization in patients who have significant lung disease or are immunosuppressed, said Aaron Mishkin, MD, associate professor of medicine at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Philadelphia, who was not involved in the study.

“Determining if the aspergillus that is present is a colonizing organism vs disease is challenging clinically,” Mishkin said. Clinicians currently rely on criteria including a compatible patient, imaging findings, and a laboratory-based diagnostic such as tissue from a biopsy, cultures, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or fungal antigen detection, said Mishkin. “Fungal antigen detection has variable specificity and sensitivity,” he noted. New biomarkers that look for an immune response could help differentiate between colonization and infection by assessing an immune-mediated inflammatory response, the hallmark of infection, he said.

To tease out potential biomarkers associated with invasive aspergillosis, Christine Ng, MS, a researcher at the University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and colleagues performed RNA sequencing on samples from 14 control lung transplant patients, 34 with aspergillus colonization, and seven with invasive aspergillosis. They identified potential candidate genes in 15 control samples, 17 aspergillus colonization samples, and 15 invasive aspergillosis samples.

Overall, signaling pathway analysis showed robust immune response, T-cell immunity, and leukocyte immunity in patients with invasive aspergillosis. By contrast, patients with aspergillus colonization showed enriched cellular responses (response to stimuli, epithelium development).

In a real-time quantitative PCR analysis, the researchers validated three biomarkers specific to invasive aspergillosis (IRF7, ZBP1, CYP27B1). Biomarkers AKR1C2, FGF10, and VGLL3 demonstrated specificity for aspergillus colonization. Additionally, biomarkers PTGER3, LPAR3, and COL14A1 were significant when aspergillus colonization was compared to controls but not in comparisons between invasive aspergillosis and aspergillus colonization. 

The study findings were limited by the small sample size, and larger studies are needed before they can be implemented in clinical practice, the researchers wrote. However, the results suggest that the new biomarkers reveal distinct host immune patterns and may improve differentiation of aspergillosis from colonization in lung transplant recipients, they concluded.

Clinical Implications and Next Steps

RNA testing can help differentiate colonization vs infection, Mishkin said. “Colonization is not typically treated, whereas infection would be treated with an anti-fungal and, in the case of a transplant recipient, a reduction in immunosuppression,” he said. “In lung transplantation, a delicate equilibrium must be maintained between achieving optimal immunosuppression and minimizing or treating infection. Any tools that can aid in this decision-making have the potential to enhance patient outcomes,” he added.

The current study was limited by the use of data only from a single center, and the broader applicability to additional populations, broader geographic areas, and a larger number of organisms remains unknown, Mishkin said. “This type of assay does have the possibility of applicability to a larger number of fungal and even bacterial species,” he noted.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Several newly identified biomarkers can help distinguish invasive aspergillosis from aspergillus colonization in lung transplant recipients, according to data from a new study presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation.

Aspergillus, a common environmental mold, can cause potentially serious infection or asymptomatic colonization in patients who have significant lung disease or are immunosuppressed, said Aaron Mishkin, MD, associate professor of medicine at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Philadelphia, who was not involved in the study.

“Determining if the aspergillus that is present is a colonizing organism vs disease is challenging clinically,” Mishkin said. Clinicians currently rely on criteria including a compatible patient, imaging findings, and a laboratory-based diagnostic such as tissue from a biopsy, cultures, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or fungal antigen detection, said Mishkin. “Fungal antigen detection has variable specificity and sensitivity,” he noted. New biomarkers that look for an immune response could help differentiate between colonization and infection by assessing an immune-mediated inflammatory response, the hallmark of infection, he said.

To tease out potential biomarkers associated with invasive aspergillosis, Christine Ng, MS, a researcher at the University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and colleagues performed RNA sequencing on samples from 14 control lung transplant patients, 34 with aspergillus colonization, and seven with invasive aspergillosis. They identified potential candidate genes in 15 control samples, 17 aspergillus colonization samples, and 15 invasive aspergillosis samples.

Overall, signaling pathway analysis showed robust immune response, T-cell immunity, and leukocyte immunity in patients with invasive aspergillosis. By contrast, patients with aspergillus colonization showed enriched cellular responses (response to stimuli, epithelium development).

In a real-time quantitative PCR analysis, the researchers validated three biomarkers specific to invasive aspergillosis (IRF7, ZBP1, CYP27B1). Biomarkers AKR1C2, FGF10, and VGLL3 demonstrated specificity for aspergillus colonization. Additionally, biomarkers PTGER3, LPAR3, and COL14A1 were significant when aspergillus colonization was compared to controls but not in comparisons between invasive aspergillosis and aspergillus colonization. 

The study findings were limited by the small sample size, and larger studies are needed before they can be implemented in clinical practice, the researchers wrote. However, the results suggest that the new biomarkers reveal distinct host immune patterns and may improve differentiation of aspergillosis from colonization in lung transplant recipients, they concluded.

Clinical Implications and Next Steps

RNA testing can help differentiate colonization vs infection, Mishkin said. “Colonization is not typically treated, whereas infection would be treated with an anti-fungal and, in the case of a transplant recipient, a reduction in immunosuppression,” he said. “In lung transplantation, a delicate equilibrium must be maintained between achieving optimal immunosuppression and minimizing or treating infection. Any tools that can aid in this decision-making have the potential to enhance patient outcomes,” he added.

The current study was limited by the use of data only from a single center, and the broader applicability to additional populations, broader geographic areas, and a larger number of organisms remains unknown, Mishkin said. “This type of assay does have the possibility of applicability to a larger number of fungal and even bacterial species,” he noted.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Blast exposure has been associated with a wide range of negative outcomes, including alterations in brain structure and function, poorer cognitive functioning, and increased severity of psychiatric and health symptoms. Long-term effects also include chronic secondary downstream effects, such as neuroinflammation, neurotoxicity, cellular senescence, and neurodegeneration.

Now, a recent US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) study of 114 post-9/11 combat veterans suggests that lifetime blast exposure severity is independently associated with accelerated epigenetic aging, even after accounting for PTSD and TBI. The field of epigenetics refers to how environment influences genes by changing the chemicals attached to them. 

This cross-sectional study analyzed participants enrolled in 2 coordinated VA research protocols: the Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium Study 34 and the Post-Deployment Mental Health Study. Researchers measured biological aging using DunedinPACE, an epigenetic biomarker derived from whole-blood DNA methylation data.

Greater blast exposure severity was significantly associated with faster DunedinPACE. Mild TBI history was also independently associated with faster aging, whereas PTSD diagnosis was not. No significant interaction effects were observed. Exploratory analyses suggested that higher-intensity and more frequent blast exposures contributed to more accelerated aging. 

The researchers said their findings suggest that accelerated biological aging may represent a pathway linking blast exposure to increased vulnerability for age-related disease and could inform early identification of at-risk veterans. 

Preclinical work has “undeniably demonstrated that primary blast forces can directly induce neurotrauma with associated, ongoing symptoms,” according to the authors of a 2024 study. “[H]owever, these findings have not translated into clinical work.” Most human studies of blast exposure use data obtained from assessments of TBI. That approach is limited, they said, because blast exposure does not always result in symptoms of concussion or TBI, and clinical symptoms of TBI are not necessary for blast-induced neurotrauma to occur. 

Moreover, understanding how and why blast exposure often results in negative consequences is still lagging, and interventions and treatments have lagged comparatively, the researchers noted. In large part, they added, this is because there is no broadly endorsed definition of blast exposure. They illustrated their point with examples of terms used in earlier research: blast TBI, primary blast TBI, pressure severity, distance from the blast, and frequency of exposure. The lack of standardized language, they suggested, “prevents synthesis of existing literature into a cohesive understanding of the field.”

Those researchers called for concerted and collaborative efforts to advance the study of blast exposure, including developing a standardized definition of blast exposure and curating an empirical literature base allowing clear comparisons of results across studies. They also urged raising awareness about blast-related negative outcomes with education at all levels: continuing education opportunities, round tables at annual conference meetings, grand rounds in hospital or academic medical center settings, and journal clubs.

Blast exposure has been associated with a wide range of negative outcomes, including alterations in brain structure and function, poorer cognitive functioning, and increased severity of psychiatric and health symptoms. Long-term effects also include chronic secondary downstream effects, such as neuroinflammation, neurotoxicity, cellular senescence, and neurodegeneration.

Now, a recent US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) study of 114 post-9/11 combat veterans suggests that lifetime blast exposure severity is independently associated with accelerated epigenetic aging, even after accounting for PTSD and TBI. The field of epigenetics refers to how environment influences genes by changing the chemicals attached to them. 

This cross-sectional study analyzed participants enrolled in 2 coordinated VA research protocols: the Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium Study 34 and the Post-Deployment Mental Health Study. Researchers measured biological aging using DunedinPACE, an epigenetic biomarker derived from whole-blood DNA methylation data.

Greater blast exposure severity was significantly associated with faster DunedinPACE. Mild TBI history was also independently associated with faster aging, whereas PTSD diagnosis was not. No significant interaction effects were observed. Exploratory analyses suggested that higher-intensity and more frequent blast exposures contributed to more accelerated aging. 

The researchers said their findings suggest that accelerated biological aging may represent a pathway linking blast exposure to increased vulnerability for age-related disease and could inform early identification of at-risk veterans. 

Preclinical work has “undeniably demonstrated that primary blast forces can directly induce neurotrauma with associated, ongoing symptoms,” according to the authors of a 2024 study. “[H]owever, these findings have not translated into clinical work.” Most human studies of blast exposure use data obtained from assessments of TBI. That approach is limited, they said, because blast exposure does not always result in symptoms of concussion or TBI, and clinical symptoms of TBI are not necessary for blast-induced neurotrauma to occur. 

Moreover, understanding how and why blast exposure often results in negative consequences is still lagging, and interventions and treatments have lagged comparatively, the researchers noted. In large part, they added, this is because there is no broadly endorsed definition of blast exposure. They illustrated their point with examples of terms used in earlier research: blast TBI, primary blast TBI, pressure severity, distance from the blast, and frequency of exposure. The lack of standardized language, they suggested, “prevents synthesis of existing literature into a cohesive understanding of the field.”

Those researchers called for concerted and collaborative efforts to advance the study of blast exposure, including developing a standardized definition of blast exposure and curating an empirical literature base allowing clear comparisons of results across studies. They also urged raising awareness about blast-related negative outcomes with education at all levels: continuing education opportunities, round tables at annual conference meetings, grand rounds in hospital or academic medical center settings, and journal clubs.

Blast exposure has been associated with a wide range of negative outcomes, including alterations in brain structure and function, poorer cognitive functioning, and increased severity of psychiatric and health symptoms. Long-term effects also include chronic secondary downstream effects, such as neuroinflammation, neurotoxicity, cellular senescence, and neurodegeneration.

Now, a recent US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) study of 114 post-9/11 combat veterans suggests that lifetime blast exposure severity is independently associated with accelerated epigenetic aging, even after accounting for PTSD and TBI. The field of epigenetics refers to how environment influences genes by changing the chemicals attached to them. 

This cross-sectional study analyzed participants enrolled in 2 coordinated VA research protocols: the Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium Study 34 and the Post-Deployment Mental Health Study. Researchers measured biological aging using DunedinPACE, an epigenetic biomarker derived from whole-blood DNA methylation data.

Greater blast exposure severity was significantly associated with faster DunedinPACE. Mild TBI history was also independently associated with faster aging, whereas PTSD diagnosis was not. No significant interaction effects were observed. Exploratory analyses suggested that higher-intensity and more frequent blast exposures contributed to more accelerated aging. 

The researchers said their findings suggest that accelerated biological aging may represent a pathway linking blast exposure to increased vulnerability for age-related disease and could inform early identification of at-risk veterans. 

Preclinical work has “undeniably demonstrated that primary blast forces can directly induce neurotrauma with associated, ongoing symptoms,” according to the authors of a 2024 study. “[H]owever, these findings have not translated into clinical work.” Most human studies of blast exposure use data obtained from assessments of TBI. That approach is limited, they said, because blast exposure does not always result in symptoms of concussion or TBI, and clinical symptoms of TBI are not necessary for blast-induced neurotrauma to occur. 

Moreover, understanding how and why blast exposure often results in negative consequences is still lagging, and interventions and treatments have lagged comparatively, the researchers noted. In large part, they added, this is because there is no broadly endorsed definition of blast exposure. They illustrated their point with examples of terms used in earlier research: blast TBI, primary blast TBI, pressure severity, distance from the blast, and frequency of exposure. The lack of standardized language, they suggested, “prevents synthesis of existing literature into a cohesive understanding of the field.”

Those researchers called for concerted and collaborative efforts to advance the study of blast exposure, including developing a standardized definition of blast exposure and curating an empirical literature base allowing clear comparisons of results across studies. They also urged raising awareness about blast-related negative outcomes with education at all levels: continuing education opportunities, round tables at annual conference meetings, grand rounds in hospital or academic medical center settings, and journal clubs.

Women veterans who live in rural areas face multifaceted challenges in managing chronic pain. Some barriers are logistical, including distance from health care facilities and the time required to get there, while others are financial, such as the cost of gas. Researchers from the Veterans Rural Health Resource Center and the Iowa City Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System designed a telehealth intervention specifically for rural women. What the study revealed was that social interactions and camaraderie may be just as important in reducing pain as gentle exercise and behavioral changes.

The participants, recruited from a Midwestern VA health care system, were dealing with chronic pain. In baseline measurements, average scores on the Pain, Enjoyment of Life, and General Activity three-item scale (PEG-3) indicated severe pain and functional interference. Notably, the researchers point out, rural women veterans with chronic pain are less likely than urban veterans to receive specialty pain care.

The researchers designed a program of pain self-management options, allowing the participants to sample from a range of empirically supported approaches in one easily accessible format. The program was primarily delivered over video, to support group processes as well as access to video-based components of the intervention (such as yoga lessons) or to display pages from the participant manual for in-session review. The researchers planned it as a women-only space, to provide a “psychologically safe, gender-sensitive, empowering environment.” 

Eight weekly 90-minute sessions featured mindful movement (gentle yoga, graduated walking), peer connection and support, and an introduction to an evidence-based pain or lifestyle self-management topic such as nutrition. The program also included content based on previous work in chronic pain including acceptance and commitment therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, and dialectical behavior therapy.

Of the 44 participants, 84% completed the intervention. About half of treatment completers (47%) were deemed responders, reporting a ≥ 30% reduction on their PEG-3 total scores. On the Global Impression of Change scale, 87% reported improvement. 

Of the 30 participants who provided follow-up data, 94% were satisfied or very satisfied; no one reported being dissatisfied with the intervention. 

In qualitative interviews, though, the researchers say a clear theme emerged, reflecting the impact and benefit of the balance of three social and psychological components: rapport with facilitators, connection with other women veterans, and maintenance of individuality. 

In fact, the social support elements of the current intervention may have directly contributed to the observed improvements in pain severity and interference, the researchers suggest. They also cite another potential mechanism: impacting loneliness. Other studies have found that loneliness is prevalent among rural-dwelling women with chronic illnesses; research in rural settings also suggests that interventions focused on shared interests and common experiences might reduce loneliness. Moreover, reducing loneliness may have an independent benefit: In that research, loneliness was a risk factor for developing the pain, depression, and fatigue symptom cluster. 

The women in the telehealth study often spoke about the emotional benefits and camaraderie of the group sessions. They reported feeling understood. “The most memorable thing was that I just felt good,” one participant said. “…They helped me approach what was going on in my life. …[T]hey never grouped us together. We were all individuals with similar problems.”

Social support might help to buffer stress, which in turn may improve the experience of pain, via its effect on stressor appraisals and coping resources. Thus, their findings pair well, the researchers say, with the creation of the Women Veterans Network (WoVeN), a national peer-facilitated social support intervention aimed at ameliorating loneliness and increasing support among women veterans. Ultimately, they suggest, their findings may lead to help for women veterans living with chronic pain—whether they live in the country or the city.

Women veterans who live in rural areas face multifaceted challenges in managing chronic pain. Some barriers are logistical, including distance from health care facilities and the time required to get there, while others are financial, such as the cost of gas. Researchers from the Veterans Rural Health Resource Center and the Iowa City Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System designed a telehealth intervention specifically for rural women. What the study revealed was that social interactions and camaraderie may be just as important in reducing pain as gentle exercise and behavioral changes.

The participants, recruited from a Midwestern VA health care system, were dealing with chronic pain. In baseline measurements, average scores on the Pain, Enjoyment of Life, and General Activity three-item scale (PEG-3) indicated severe pain and functional interference. Notably, the researchers point out, rural women veterans with chronic pain are less likely than urban veterans to receive specialty pain care.

The researchers designed a program of pain self-management options, allowing the participants to sample from a range of empirically supported approaches in one easily accessible format. The program was primarily delivered over video, to support group processes as well as access to video-based components of the intervention (such as yoga lessons) or to display pages from the participant manual for in-session review. The researchers planned it as a women-only space, to provide a “psychologically safe, gender-sensitive, empowering environment.” 

Eight weekly 90-minute sessions featured mindful movement (gentle yoga, graduated walking), peer connection and support, and an introduction to an evidence-based pain or lifestyle self-management topic such as nutrition. The program also included content based on previous work in chronic pain including acceptance and commitment therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, and dialectical behavior therapy.

Of the 44 participants, 84% completed the intervention. About half of treatment completers (47%) were deemed responders, reporting a ≥ 30% reduction on their PEG-3 total scores. On the Global Impression of Change scale, 87% reported improvement. 

Of the 30 participants who provided follow-up data, 94% were satisfied or very satisfied; no one reported being dissatisfied with the intervention. 

In qualitative interviews, though, the researchers say a clear theme emerged, reflecting the impact and benefit of the balance of three social and psychological components: rapport with facilitators, connection with other women veterans, and maintenance of individuality. 

In fact, the social support elements of the current intervention may have directly contributed to the observed improvements in pain severity and interference, the researchers suggest. They also cite another potential mechanism: impacting loneliness. Other studies have found that loneliness is prevalent among rural-dwelling women with chronic illnesses; research in rural settings also suggests that interventions focused on shared interests and common experiences might reduce loneliness. Moreover, reducing loneliness may have an independent benefit: In that research, loneliness was a risk factor for developing the pain, depression, and fatigue symptom cluster. 

The women in the telehealth study often spoke about the emotional benefits and camaraderie of the group sessions. They reported feeling understood. “The most memorable thing was that I just felt good,” one participant said. “…They helped me approach what was going on in my life. …[T]hey never grouped us together. We were all individuals with similar problems.”

Social support might help to buffer stress, which in turn may improve the experience of pain, via its effect on stressor appraisals and coping resources. Thus, their findings pair well, the researchers say, with the creation of the Women Veterans Network (WoVeN), a national peer-facilitated social support intervention aimed at ameliorating loneliness and increasing support among women veterans. Ultimately, they suggest, their findings may lead to help for women veterans living with chronic pain—whether they live in the country or the city.

Women veterans who live in rural areas face multifaceted challenges in managing chronic pain. Some barriers are logistical, including distance from health care facilities and the time required to get there, while others are financial, such as the cost of gas. Researchers from the Veterans Rural Health Resource Center and the Iowa City Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System designed a telehealth intervention specifically for rural women. What the study revealed was that social interactions and camaraderie may be just as important in reducing pain as gentle exercise and behavioral changes.

The participants, recruited from a Midwestern VA health care system, were dealing with chronic pain. In baseline measurements, average scores on the Pain, Enjoyment of Life, and General Activity three-item scale (PEG-3) indicated severe pain and functional interference. Notably, the researchers point out, rural women veterans with chronic pain are less likely than urban veterans to receive specialty pain care.

The researchers designed a program of pain self-management options, allowing the participants to sample from a range of empirically supported approaches in one easily accessible format. The program was primarily delivered over video, to support group processes as well as access to video-based components of the intervention (such as yoga lessons) or to display pages from the participant manual for in-session review. The researchers planned it as a women-only space, to provide a “psychologically safe, gender-sensitive, empowering environment.” 

Eight weekly 90-minute sessions featured mindful movement (gentle yoga, graduated walking), peer connection and support, and an introduction to an evidence-based pain or lifestyle self-management topic such as nutrition. The program also included content based on previous work in chronic pain including acceptance and commitment therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, and dialectical behavior therapy.

Of the 44 participants, 84% completed the intervention. About half of treatment completers (47%) were deemed responders, reporting a ≥ 30% reduction on their PEG-3 total scores. On the Global Impression of Change scale, 87% reported improvement. 

Of the 30 participants who provided follow-up data, 94% were satisfied or very satisfied; no one reported being dissatisfied with the intervention. 

In qualitative interviews, though, the researchers say a clear theme emerged, reflecting the impact and benefit of the balance of three social and psychological components: rapport with facilitators, connection with other women veterans, and maintenance of individuality. 

In fact, the social support elements of the current intervention may have directly contributed to the observed improvements in pain severity and interference, the researchers suggest. They also cite another potential mechanism: impacting loneliness. Other studies have found that loneliness is prevalent among rural-dwelling women with chronic illnesses; research in rural settings also suggests that interventions focused on shared interests and common experiences might reduce loneliness. Moreover, reducing loneliness may have an independent benefit: In that research, loneliness was a risk factor for developing the pain, depression, and fatigue symptom cluster. 

The women in the telehealth study often spoke about the emotional benefits and camaraderie of the group sessions. They reported feeling understood. “The most memorable thing was that I just felt good,” one participant said. “…They helped me approach what was going on in my life. …[T]hey never grouped us together. We were all individuals with similar problems.”

Social support might help to buffer stress, which in turn may improve the experience of pain, via its effect on stressor appraisals and coping resources. Thus, their findings pair well, the researchers say, with the creation of the Women Veterans Network (WoVeN), a national peer-facilitated social support intervention aimed at ameliorating loneliness and increasing support among women veterans. Ultimately, they suggest, their findings may lead to help for women veterans living with chronic pain—whether they live in the country or the city.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has adopted new technology designed to make it easier and faster for veterans to schedule appointments with community care health care practitioners (HCPs).

Through the External Provider Scheduling (EPS) system, VA employees can access the scheduling systems of participating community care HCPs. As of March 2026, 27,000 community care HCPs were participating in EPS across 78 medical specialties.

Without this system, VA employees have to call multiple community care HCPs and relay that information back to veterans before booking an appointment. As a result, a single VA employee could only schedule a handful of community care appointments per day, and it could take days or even weeks to book an appointment for a veteran.

Now, the new system—implemented in all VA facilities starting in late 2025—enables VA employees to schedule as many as 25 appointments daily.

“We are making it easier and more convenient than ever for those who have worn the uniform to choose the care that best fits their lifestyle,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said in a news release.

The VA goal is to sign up thousands of additional community care HCPs in 2026 as part of its continuing efforts to deliver timely, veteran-centered care. There is no cost for institutions to participate in the program.

Select Medical, an outpatient rehabilitation organization with > 1900 centers in 39 states and the District of Columbia, became aware of this opportunity in the first half of 2025: “At that time, we met with key VA stakeholders to learn more about the new program, the challenges it would address, and how it worked to evaluate our ability to participate,” said Chad Smith, president of the company’s outpatient division, headquartered in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania.

“We immediately saw the value in what the VA was seeking to accomplish and wanted to be part of providing increased access to exceptional care for our nation’s veterans,” Smith said.

In July 2025, Smith noted, Select Medical piloted the program in 2 states. After successful deployment, the organization broadened its participation to 15 states, offering “seamless access to care” to > 3000 veterans. They receive outpatient rehabilitative care, including physical and occupational therapy.

“The External Provider Scheduling system creates a more streamlined way for veterans and VA administrators to manage the appointment process,” Smith said.

Northwell Health in Lake Success, New York, expressed interest in the program last summer when approached by the VA and “jumped at it,” said Juan Serrano, MBA, MS, vice president of military liaison services at Northwell Health.

The Long Island-based system, which already had a long-standing relationship with the VA, rolled out the program to give veterans the ability to see community care HCPs, Serrano said.

The program started in November, with the first appointment booked in December. From then until the end of April, the program booked 69 appointments for almost 80 veterans, with gastroenterology and otolaryngology representing the highest volume specialties.

Veterans also have gained entry to several other specialty clinics, including imaging services. The program has decreased waiting times for veterans’ appointments and helped them establish rapport with community care HCPs, Serrano said.

“One of the biggest setbacks and difficulties veterans experience is timely access to care outside of the VA,” he said, adding, “as an organization, we made a pledge to create a pathway for veterans to complement the work of the VA and give veterans access to our network.”

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has adopted new technology designed to make it easier and faster for veterans to schedule appointments with community care health care practitioners (HCPs).

Through the External Provider Scheduling (EPS) system, VA employees can access the scheduling systems of participating community care HCPs. As of March 2026, 27,000 community care HCPs were participating in EPS across 78 medical specialties.

Without this system, VA employees have to call multiple community care HCPs and relay that information back to veterans before booking an appointment. As a result, a single VA employee could only schedule a handful of community care appointments per day, and it could take days or even weeks to book an appointment for a veteran.

Now, the new system—implemented in all VA facilities starting in late 2025—enables VA employees to schedule as many as 25 appointments daily.

“We are making it easier and more convenient than ever for those who have worn the uniform to choose the care that best fits their lifestyle,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said in a news release.

The VA goal is to sign up thousands of additional community care HCPs in 2026 as part of its continuing efforts to deliver timely, veteran-centered care. There is no cost for institutions to participate in the program.

Select Medical, an outpatient rehabilitation organization with > 1900 centers in 39 states and the District of Columbia, became aware of this opportunity in the first half of 2025: “At that time, we met with key VA stakeholders to learn more about the new program, the challenges it would address, and how it worked to evaluate our ability to participate,” said Chad Smith, president of the company’s outpatient division, headquartered in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania.

“We immediately saw the value in what the VA was seeking to accomplish and wanted to be part of providing increased access to exceptional care for our nation’s veterans,” Smith said.

In July 2025, Smith noted, Select Medical piloted the program in 2 states. After successful deployment, the organization broadened its participation to 15 states, offering “seamless access to care” to > 3000 veterans. They receive outpatient rehabilitative care, including physical and occupational therapy.

“The External Provider Scheduling system creates a more streamlined way for veterans and VA administrators to manage the appointment process,” Smith said.

Northwell Health in Lake Success, New York, expressed interest in the program last summer when approached by the VA and “jumped at it,” said Juan Serrano, MBA, MS, vice president of military liaison services at Northwell Health.

The Long Island-based system, which already had a long-standing relationship with the VA, rolled out the program to give veterans the ability to see community care HCPs, Serrano said.

The program started in November, with the first appointment booked in December. From then until the end of April, the program booked 69 appointments for almost 80 veterans, with gastroenterology and otolaryngology representing the highest volume specialties.

Veterans also have gained entry to several other specialty clinics, including imaging services. The program has decreased waiting times for veterans’ appointments and helped them establish rapport with community care HCPs, Serrano said.

“One of the biggest setbacks and difficulties veterans experience is timely access to care outside of the VA,” he said, adding, “as an organization, we made a pledge to create a pathway for veterans to complement the work of the VA and give veterans access to our network.”

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has adopted new technology designed to make it easier and faster for veterans to schedule appointments with community care health care practitioners (HCPs).

Through the External Provider Scheduling (EPS) system, VA employees can access the scheduling systems of participating community care HCPs. As of March 2026, 27,000 community care HCPs were participating in EPS across 78 medical specialties.

Without this system, VA employees have to call multiple community care HCPs and relay that information back to veterans before booking an appointment. As a result, a single VA employee could only schedule a handful of community care appointments per day, and it could take days or even weeks to book an appointment for a veteran.

Now, the new system—implemented in all VA facilities starting in late 2025—enables VA employees to schedule as many as 25 appointments daily.

“We are making it easier and more convenient than ever for those who have worn the uniform to choose the care that best fits their lifestyle,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said in a news release.

The VA goal is to sign up thousands of additional community care HCPs in 2026 as part of its continuing efforts to deliver timely, veteran-centered care. There is no cost for institutions to participate in the program.

Select Medical, an outpatient rehabilitation organization with > 1900 centers in 39 states and the District of Columbia, became aware of this opportunity in the first half of 2025: “At that time, we met with key VA stakeholders to learn more about the new program, the challenges it would address, and how it worked to evaluate our ability to participate,” said Chad Smith, president of the company’s outpatient division, headquartered in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania.

“We immediately saw the value in what the VA was seeking to accomplish and wanted to be part of providing increased access to exceptional care for our nation’s veterans,” Smith said.

In July 2025, Smith noted, Select Medical piloted the program in 2 states. After successful deployment, the organization broadened its participation to 15 states, offering “seamless access to care” to > 3000 veterans. They receive outpatient rehabilitative care, including physical and occupational therapy.

“The External Provider Scheduling system creates a more streamlined way for veterans and VA administrators to manage the appointment process,” Smith said.

Northwell Health in Lake Success, New York, expressed interest in the program last summer when approached by the VA and “jumped at it,” said Juan Serrano, MBA, MS, vice president of military liaison services at Northwell Health.

The Long Island-based system, which already had a long-standing relationship with the VA, rolled out the program to give veterans the ability to see community care HCPs, Serrano said.

The program started in November, with the first appointment booked in December. From then until the end of April, the program booked 69 appointments for almost 80 veterans, with gastroenterology and otolaryngology representing the highest volume specialties.

Veterans also have gained entry to several other specialty clinics, including imaging services. The program has decreased waiting times for veterans’ appointments and helped them establish rapport with community care HCPs, Serrano said.

“One of the biggest setbacks and difficulties veterans experience is timely access to care outside of the VA,” he said, adding, “as an organization, we made a pledge to create a pathway for veterans to complement the work of the VA and give veterans access to our network.”

TOPLINE:

Among women aged > 65 years who were at a high risk for cervical cancer and required screening, only 5.2% received appropriate screening. Women with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia had a greater likelihood of appropriate screening.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers conducted a retrospective study to assess the rates of appropriate cervical cancer screening among 1787 women aged 66 years or older (median, 76 years; 96.3% White) who had a Medicare wellness visit or an annual gynecologic visit in a healthcare system in 2022.
• Data on age at the last cervical cancer screening, history of hysterectomy, human papillomavirus (HPV) status, and history of a diagnosis of cervical cancer or cervical dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, and immune deficiency status were assessed.
• Participants were categorized into 2 groups: those at high risk for cervical cancer (prior high-grade cervical dysplasia or cancer, an immunocompromised status, or lack of two normal cytology results in the past 10 years; n = 250) and those at average risk (having no high-risk features and adequate prior screening or having a prior hysterectomy with no history of high-grade cervical dysplasia; n = 1537).
• The screening cessation criteria were based on adequate prior screening, defined as two prior negative cervical cancer screenings in the past 10 years, the absence of high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer, and no immune deficiency.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 4.9% of patients had a history of inadequate prior screening; among women at high risk, 5.2% were appropriately screened.
• The odds of continued screening were greater for women with a history of a positive HPV test results (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.4; P = .016), a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia (aOR, 3.8; P = .009), and those without prior hysterectomy (aOR, 2.2; P = .005).
• Among women at high risk for cervical cancer, those with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia had increased odds of appropriate screening (aOR, 6.7; P = .002), whereas the odds decreased with every 5-year increase in age (aOR, 0.5; P = .031). Women with prior hysterectomy were less likely to be over-screened (aOR, 0.3; P < .001) than those without.
• Among the 79 women who underwent screening, 97.5% had normal cytology results; the remaining women had abnormal cytology results (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or atypical squamous cells); all patients with abnormal cytology results met high-risk criteria and were screened appropriately.

IN PRACTICE:

“[The study] findings suggest that most clinicians and patients are aware of recommendations to stop cervical cancer screening after age 65 years. However, there may be a lack of awareness regarding continued screening in high-risk patients or those with inadequate prior screening. The lack of prior screening history and results in the medical record suggests that providers may not understand the importance of these factors to inform cervical cancer screening in older patients,” the authors of the study wrote.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Daniel Rodriguez, BS, Kolschowsky Research and Education Institute, Sarasota Memorial Health Care System, Sarasota, Florida. It was published online on April 23, 2026, in the Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease.

LIMITATIONS:

Screening history in electronic medical records may be incomplete.

DISCLOSURES:

The Sarasota Memorial Healthcare Foundation provided financial support for this research. The authors declared having no conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Among women aged > 65 years who were at a high risk for cervical cancer and required screening, only 5.2% received appropriate screening. Women with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia had a greater likelihood of appropriate screening.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers conducted a retrospective study to assess the rates of appropriate cervical cancer screening among 1787 women aged 66 years or older (median, 76 years; 96.3% White) who had a Medicare wellness visit or an annual gynecologic visit in a healthcare system in 2022.
• Data on age at the last cervical cancer screening, history of hysterectomy, human papillomavirus (HPV) status, and history of a diagnosis of cervical cancer or cervical dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, and immune deficiency status were assessed.
• Participants were categorized into 2 groups: those at high risk for cervical cancer (prior high-grade cervical dysplasia or cancer, an immunocompromised status, or lack of two normal cytology results in the past 10 years; n = 250) and those at average risk (having no high-risk features and adequate prior screening or having a prior hysterectomy with no history of high-grade cervical dysplasia; n = 1537).
• The screening cessation criteria were based on adequate prior screening, defined as two prior negative cervical cancer screenings in the past 10 years, the absence of high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer, and no immune deficiency.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 4.9% of patients had a history of inadequate prior screening; among women at high risk, 5.2% were appropriately screened.
• The odds of continued screening were greater for women with a history of a positive HPV test results (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.4; P = .016), a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia (aOR, 3.8; P = .009), and those without prior hysterectomy (aOR, 2.2; P = .005).
• Among women at high risk for cervical cancer, those with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia had increased odds of appropriate screening (aOR, 6.7; P = .002), whereas the odds decreased with every 5-year increase in age (aOR, 0.5; P = .031). Women with prior hysterectomy were less likely to be over-screened (aOR, 0.3; P < .001) than those without.
• Among the 79 women who underwent screening, 97.5% had normal cytology results; the remaining women had abnormal cytology results (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or atypical squamous cells); all patients with abnormal cytology results met high-risk criteria and were screened appropriately.

IN PRACTICE:

“[The study] findings suggest that most clinicians and patients are aware of recommendations to stop cervical cancer screening after age 65 years. However, there may be a lack of awareness regarding continued screening in high-risk patients or those with inadequate prior screening. The lack of prior screening history and results in the medical record suggests that providers may not understand the importance of these factors to inform cervical cancer screening in older patients,” the authors of the study wrote.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Daniel Rodriguez, BS, Kolschowsky Research and Education Institute, Sarasota Memorial Health Care System, Sarasota, Florida. It was published online on April 23, 2026, in the Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease.

LIMITATIONS:

Screening history in electronic medical records may be incomplete.

DISCLOSURES:

The Sarasota Memorial Healthcare Foundation provided financial support for this research. The authors declared having no conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Among women aged > 65 years who were at a high risk for cervical cancer and required screening, only 5.2% received appropriate screening. Women with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia had a greater likelihood of appropriate screening.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers conducted a retrospective study to assess the rates of appropriate cervical cancer screening among 1787 women aged 66 years or older (median, 76 years; 96.3% White) who had a Medicare wellness visit or an annual gynecologic visit in a healthcare system in 2022.
• Data on age at the last cervical cancer screening, history of hysterectomy, human papillomavirus (HPV) status, and history of a diagnosis of cervical cancer or cervical dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, and immune deficiency status were assessed.
• Participants were categorized into 2 groups: those at high risk for cervical cancer (prior high-grade cervical dysplasia or cancer, an immunocompromised status, or lack of two normal cytology results in the past 10 years; n = 250) and those at average risk (having no high-risk features and adequate prior screening or having a prior hysterectomy with no history of high-grade cervical dysplasia; n = 1537).
• The screening cessation criteria were based on adequate prior screening, defined as two prior negative cervical cancer screenings in the past 10 years, the absence of high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer, and no immune deficiency.

TAKEAWAY:

• Overall, 4.9% of patients had a history of inadequate prior screening; among women at high risk, 5.2% were appropriately screened.
• The odds of continued screening were greater for women with a history of a positive HPV test results (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.4; P = .016), a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia (aOR, 3.8; P = .009), and those without prior hysterectomy (aOR, 2.2; P = .005).
• Among women at high risk for cervical cancer, those with a history of high-grade cervical dysplasia had increased odds of appropriate screening (aOR, 6.7; P = .002), whereas the odds decreased with every 5-year increase in age (aOR, 0.5; P = .031). Women with prior hysterectomy were less likely to be over-screened (aOR, 0.3; P < .001) than those without.
• Among the 79 women who underwent screening, 97.5% had normal cytology results; the remaining women had abnormal cytology results (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or atypical squamous cells); all patients with abnormal cytology results met high-risk criteria and were screened appropriately.

IN PRACTICE:

“[The study] findings suggest that most clinicians and patients are aware of recommendations to stop cervical cancer screening after age 65 years. However, there may be a lack of awareness regarding continued screening in high-risk patients or those with inadequate prior screening. The lack of prior screening history and results in the medical record suggests that providers may not understand the importance of these factors to inform cervical cancer screening in older patients,” the authors of the study wrote.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Daniel Rodriguez, BS, Kolschowsky Research and Education Institute, Sarasota Memorial Health Care System, Sarasota, Florida. It was published online on April 23, 2026, in the Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease.

LIMITATIONS:

Screening history in electronic medical records may be incomplete.

DISCLOSURES:

The Sarasota Memorial Healthcare Foundation provided financial support for this research. The authors declared having no conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Women who undergo surgery for breast cancer often hear that they should take it easy with exercise during recovery. But new research looking at intense strength training puts that advice into question.

The study, of nearly 200 women who’d undergone lumpectomy or mastectomy, found that a 3-month weight-training program helped patients make substantial gains in strength, mobility, balance, and body composition.

And while previous studies have examined resistance exercise during breast cancer surgery recovery, this program pumped up the intensity: Most women progressed to deadlifting 100 to 200 pounds, even though few had ever performed strength training before.

“Most of these patients can do a lot more than we think,” said principal investigator Colin Champ, MD, director of the Exercise Oncology and Resiliency Center at Allegheny Health Network in Pittsburgh.

The findings were presented at The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) Annual Meeting, held in Seattle from April 29 to May 3.

Pumping Up the Intensity

For the analysis, Champ and his colleagues pooled the results of 3 small prospective studies of their strength conditioning program, including one that previously reported no worsening in patients’ lymphedema, and instead, showed signs of improvement.

The researchers evaluated program participants’ physical and functional gains and whether any of those parameters differed by the extent of their breast cancer surgery.

In total, there were 197 participants, including 85 who’d undergone mastectomies and 112 who’d had lumpectomies; 26 patients also had axillary lymph node dissection.

All of the women attended the same 3-month supervised strength-training program, starting at various points in their recovery process. Nearly half started at 3 months postdiagnosis.

According to Champ, the program addresses a full range of motion, with the exercise intensity building over a short period — similar to what professional athletes do in early training. The specific exercises include split squats, dumbbell presses, and dumbbell rows, done 3 days per week, for about 45-60 minutes.

Most participants, Champ said, start with deadlifting around 70 pounds (lifting weight from the floor to hip level). “If you can carry groceries, you can deadlift 60 or 70 pounds,” he noted.

Each month, the weight and sets increase, while the repetitions decrease.

“We just had a woman in her 70s who deadlifted about 200 pounds” as the program progressed, Champ said.

Benefits Regardless of Surgery Type

Women in the current analysis underwent baseline and post-program testing of body composition and functional parameters, including strength, mobility, and balance. Mastectomy patients (median age, 51 years) were younger than lumpectomy patients (median age, 59 years). They were also more likely to have had chemotherapy (45% vs 27%).

Overall, Champ’s team found that both surgery groups showed statistically significant improvements in muscle and body fat percentages over the course of the program, with muscle mass increasing by 1 percentage point on average and body fat declining by 1.5 percentage points.

Similarly, functional movement scores, grip strength, loads lifted, and balance skills also improved, with comparable benefits regardless of surgery type or whether lymph node dissection was performed.

By the end of the program’s third week, Champ said, most women could deadlift 100-pound weights. And by the 3-month mark, many were able to lift 200-pound loads.

Champ called the results empowering, and he hopes they help reframe the traditional mindset that intense strength training is too heavy a lift after breast cancer surgery.

A surgical oncologist who was not involved in the study agreed.

“This gives us something concrete to say to patients,” said Tina Hieken, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. “We have more data to say it’s safe for you to exercise.’’

Hieken, who chaired the meeting’s scientific program committee, also noted that the findings pertain to women of all baseline fitness levels.

For her part, Hieken already encourages patients to walk for exercise and spend time outdoors — in part for the mental well-being benefits.

With patients facing so much uncertainty after a cancer diagnosis, she said, “this is something an individual can take control of.”

Champ and Hieken had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Women who undergo surgery for breast cancer often hear that they should take it easy with exercise during recovery. But new research looking at intense strength training puts that advice into question.

The study, of nearly 200 women who’d undergone lumpectomy or mastectomy, found that a 3-month weight-training program helped patients make substantial gains in strength, mobility, balance, and body composition.

And while previous studies have examined resistance exercise during breast cancer surgery recovery, this program pumped up the intensity: Most women progressed to deadlifting 100 to 200 pounds, even though few had ever performed strength training before.

“Most of these patients can do a lot more than we think,” said principal investigator Colin Champ, MD, director of the Exercise Oncology and Resiliency Center at Allegheny Health Network in Pittsburgh.

The findings were presented at The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) Annual Meeting, held in Seattle from April 29 to May 3.

Pumping Up the Intensity

For the analysis, Champ and his colleagues pooled the results of 3 small prospective studies of their strength conditioning program, including one that previously reported no worsening in patients’ lymphedema, and instead, showed signs of improvement.

The researchers evaluated program participants’ physical and functional gains and whether any of those parameters differed by the extent of their breast cancer surgery.

In total, there were 197 participants, including 85 who’d undergone mastectomies and 112 who’d had lumpectomies; 26 patients also had axillary lymph node dissection.

All of the women attended the same 3-month supervised strength-training program, starting at various points in their recovery process. Nearly half started at 3 months postdiagnosis.

According to Champ, the program addresses a full range of motion, with the exercise intensity building over a short period — similar to what professional athletes do in early training. The specific exercises include split squats, dumbbell presses, and dumbbell rows, done 3 days per week, for about 45-60 minutes.

Most participants, Champ said, start with deadlifting around 70 pounds (lifting weight from the floor to hip level). “If you can carry groceries, you can deadlift 60 or 70 pounds,” he noted.

Each month, the weight and sets increase, while the repetitions decrease.

“We just had a woman in her 70s who deadlifted about 200 pounds” as the program progressed, Champ said.

Benefits Regardless of Surgery Type

Women in the current analysis underwent baseline and post-program testing of body composition and functional parameters, including strength, mobility, and balance. Mastectomy patients (median age, 51 years) were younger than lumpectomy patients (median age, 59 years). They were also more likely to have had chemotherapy (45% vs 27%).

Overall, Champ’s team found that both surgery groups showed statistically significant improvements in muscle and body fat percentages over the course of the program, with muscle mass increasing by 1 percentage point on average and body fat declining by 1.5 percentage points.

Similarly, functional movement scores, grip strength, loads lifted, and balance skills also improved, with comparable benefits regardless of surgery type or whether lymph node dissection was performed.

By the end of the program’s third week, Champ said, most women could deadlift 100-pound weights. And by the 3-month mark, many were able to lift 200-pound loads.

Champ called the results empowering, and he hopes they help reframe the traditional mindset that intense strength training is too heavy a lift after breast cancer surgery.

A surgical oncologist who was not involved in the study agreed.

“This gives us something concrete to say to patients,” said Tina Hieken, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. “We have more data to say it’s safe for you to exercise.’’

Hieken, who chaired the meeting’s scientific program committee, also noted that the findings pertain to women of all baseline fitness levels.

For her part, Hieken already encourages patients to walk for exercise and spend time outdoors — in part for the mental well-being benefits.

With patients facing so much uncertainty after a cancer diagnosis, she said, “this is something an individual can take control of.”

Champ and Hieken had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Women who undergo surgery for breast cancer often hear that they should take it easy with exercise during recovery. But new research looking at intense strength training puts that advice into question.

The study, of nearly 200 women who’d undergone lumpectomy or mastectomy, found that a 3-month weight-training program helped patients make substantial gains in strength, mobility, balance, and body composition.

And while previous studies have examined resistance exercise during breast cancer surgery recovery, this program pumped up the intensity: Most women progressed to deadlifting 100 to 200 pounds, even though few had ever performed strength training before.

“Most of these patients can do a lot more than we think,” said principal investigator Colin Champ, MD, director of the Exercise Oncology and Resiliency Center at Allegheny Health Network in Pittsburgh.

The findings were presented at The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) Annual Meeting, held in Seattle from April 29 to May 3.

Pumping Up the Intensity

For the analysis, Champ and his colleagues pooled the results of 3 small prospective studies of their strength conditioning program, including one that previously reported no worsening in patients’ lymphedema, and instead, showed signs of improvement.

The researchers evaluated program participants’ physical and functional gains and whether any of those parameters differed by the extent of their breast cancer surgery.

In total, there were 197 participants, including 85 who’d undergone mastectomies and 112 who’d had lumpectomies; 26 patients also had axillary lymph node dissection.

All of the women attended the same 3-month supervised strength-training program, starting at various points in their recovery process. Nearly half started at 3 months postdiagnosis.

According to Champ, the program addresses a full range of motion, with the exercise intensity building over a short period — similar to what professional athletes do in early training. The specific exercises include split squats, dumbbell presses, and dumbbell rows, done 3 days per week, for about 45-60 minutes.

Most participants, Champ said, start with deadlifting around 70 pounds (lifting weight from the floor to hip level). “If you can carry groceries, you can deadlift 60 or 70 pounds,” he noted.

Each month, the weight and sets increase, while the repetitions decrease.

“We just had a woman in her 70s who deadlifted about 200 pounds” as the program progressed, Champ said.

Benefits Regardless of Surgery Type

Women in the current analysis underwent baseline and post-program testing of body composition and functional parameters, including strength, mobility, and balance. Mastectomy patients (median age, 51 years) were younger than lumpectomy patients (median age, 59 years). They were also more likely to have had chemotherapy (45% vs 27%).

Overall, Champ’s team found that both surgery groups showed statistically significant improvements in muscle and body fat percentages over the course of the program, with muscle mass increasing by 1 percentage point on average and body fat declining by 1.5 percentage points.

Similarly, functional movement scores, grip strength, loads lifted, and balance skills also improved, with comparable benefits regardless of surgery type or whether lymph node dissection was performed.

By the end of the program’s third week, Champ said, most women could deadlift 100-pound weights. And by the 3-month mark, many were able to lift 200-pound loads.

Champ called the results empowering, and he hopes they help reframe the traditional mindset that intense strength training is too heavy a lift after breast cancer surgery.

A surgical oncologist who was not involved in the study agreed.

“This gives us something concrete to say to patients,” said Tina Hieken, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. “We have more data to say it’s safe for you to exercise.’’

Hieken, who chaired the meeting’s scientific program committee, also noted that the findings pertain to women of all baseline fitness levels.

For her part, Hieken already encourages patients to walk for exercise and spend time outdoors — in part for the mental well-being benefits.

With patients facing so much uncertainty after a cancer diagnosis, she said, “this is something an individual can take control of.”

Champ and Hieken had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Dual checkpoint blockade allowed 70.6% of patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEJAC) to avoid surgery in a small cohort of the INFINITY study.

MSI-H tumors account for roughly 10% of early G/GEJACs. They respond well to immunotherapy, with high rates of pathologic complete responses. The Italian INFINITY trial set out to test whether some patients with these tumors might not need gastrectomy.

The trial treated MSI-H patients with durvalumab 1500 mg once a month for 3 months along with 1 300-mg dose of the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) blocker tremelimumab on day 1. The 18 patients in cohort 1 proceeded to surgery, with a 60% pathologic complete response rate. An additional 18 patients in cohort 2 were the subject of a presentation at the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting 2026. These patients were assessed for clinical complete response; if present, they went on to surveillance; if not, they had surgery.

To qualify for a clinical complete response and surveillance, patients were required to have negative findings on CT and PET scans; tumor-informed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA); and upper endoscopy with ultrasound, including bite-on-bite biopsies and nodal sampling. Surveillance afterward included CT, endoscopy with biopsies, and ctDNA every 12 weeks for up to 2 years.

Among 17 evaluable patients, 1 withdrew consent during immunotherapy, 13 (76%) had a clinical complete response and started surveillance, and the other 4 went to surgery. One patient in the surveillance group had a local regrowth after 4 months, underwent salvage surgery, and remained disease-free. At a median follow-up of 27.1 months, there were no additional progression events.

Overall, 12 of the 17 patients (70.6%) were gastrectomy-free at 2 years without additional treatment. Progression-free survival was 94.1%, and all patients were alive.

“The results are very encouraging,” lead investigator Alberto Leone, MD, said while presenting the results at the AACR annual meeting.

“Nonoperative management could be a safe and effective strategy for patients achieving a clinical complete response after only 3 months of dual immunotherapy,” said Leone, who is a gastrointestinal medical oncologist at the Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy. “However, the optimal strategy needs to be established in larger randomized trials.”

Study discussant Yelena Janjagian, MD, gastrointestinal medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, said the findings were important, particularly given that 70.6% of patients avoided a potentially life-altering gastrectomy.

In addition to surgery, the study also calls into question the need for chemotherapy, long the backbone of management alongside surgery, she said. To replace it, however, “it appears that dual checkpoint blockade will be required for a chemotherapy-free approach to achieve organ preservation.”

“Anti-PD-1 alone is not sufficient; we need CTLA-4 to expand and reactivate tumor-specific immunity,” Janjagian continued.

Ultimately, she expects immunotherapy to shift management of MSI-H cancers away from surgery, although some patients will still likely need an operation.

In addition to being MSI-H, patients in the study were mismatch repair deficient and Epstein-Barr virus-negative with T2/T3 tumors; T4 tumors were excluded.

Tumor-agnostic plasma ctDNA was positive at baseline in 13 patients and cleared in 11 after treatment. Higher baseline plasma ctDNA trended toward a lower likelihood of reaching a clinical complete response. Specificity was 100%, so when positive, the test was “very highly informative,” Leone said.

Three patients had grade 3 adverse events (hyperthyroidism, increased gamma-glutamyl transferase, and colitis) that resolved with steroids. There were no grade 4 events, treatment discontinuation, or deaths.

The work was funded by the GONO Foundation and AstraZeneca, the maker of durvalumab and tremelimumab. Leone reported having no disclosures. Janjagian reported having extensive industry ties, including travel funding, consulting fees, and research support from AstraZeneca.

M. Alexander Otto is a physician assistant with a master’s degree in medical science and a journalism degree from Newhouse. He is an award-winning medical journalist who worked for several major news outlets before joining Medscape. Alex is also an MIT Knight Science Journalism fellow. Email: aotto@medscape.net 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Dual checkpoint blockade allowed 70.6% of patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEJAC) to avoid surgery in a small cohort of the INFINITY study.

MSI-H tumors account for roughly 10% of early G/GEJACs. They respond well to immunotherapy, with high rates of pathologic complete responses. The Italian INFINITY trial set out to test whether some patients with these tumors might not need gastrectomy.

The trial treated MSI-H patients with durvalumab 1500 mg once a month for 3 months along with 1 300-mg dose of the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) blocker tremelimumab on day 1. The 18 patients in cohort 1 proceeded to surgery, with a 60% pathologic complete response rate. An additional 18 patients in cohort 2 were the subject of a presentation at the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting 2026. These patients were assessed for clinical complete response; if present, they went on to surveillance; if not, they had surgery.

To qualify for a clinical complete response and surveillance, patients were required to have negative findings on CT and PET scans; tumor-informed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA); and upper endoscopy with ultrasound, including bite-on-bite biopsies and nodal sampling. Surveillance afterward included CT, endoscopy with biopsies, and ctDNA every 12 weeks for up to 2 years.

Among 17 evaluable patients, 1 withdrew consent during immunotherapy, 13 (76%) had a clinical complete response and started surveillance, and the other 4 went to surgery. One patient in the surveillance group had a local regrowth after 4 months, underwent salvage surgery, and remained disease-free. At a median follow-up of 27.1 months, there were no additional progression events.

Overall, 12 of the 17 patients (70.6%) were gastrectomy-free at 2 years without additional treatment. Progression-free survival was 94.1%, and all patients were alive.

“The results are very encouraging,” lead investigator Alberto Leone, MD, said while presenting the results at the AACR annual meeting.

“Nonoperative management could be a safe and effective strategy for patients achieving a clinical complete response after only 3 months of dual immunotherapy,” said Leone, who is a gastrointestinal medical oncologist at the Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy. “However, the optimal strategy needs to be established in larger randomized trials.”

Study discussant Yelena Janjagian, MD, gastrointestinal medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, said the findings were important, particularly given that 70.6% of patients avoided a potentially life-altering gastrectomy.

In addition to surgery, the study also calls into question the need for chemotherapy, long the backbone of management alongside surgery, she said. To replace it, however, “it appears that dual checkpoint blockade will be required for a chemotherapy-free approach to achieve organ preservation.”

“Anti-PD-1 alone is not sufficient; we need CTLA-4 to expand and reactivate tumor-specific immunity,” Janjagian continued.

Ultimately, she expects immunotherapy to shift management of MSI-H cancers away from surgery, although some patients will still likely need an operation.

In addition to being MSI-H, patients in the study were mismatch repair deficient and Epstein-Barr virus-negative with T2/T3 tumors; T4 tumors were excluded.

Tumor-agnostic plasma ctDNA was positive at baseline in 13 patients and cleared in 11 after treatment. Higher baseline plasma ctDNA trended toward a lower likelihood of reaching a clinical complete response. Specificity was 100%, so when positive, the test was “very highly informative,” Leone said.

Three patients had grade 3 adverse events (hyperthyroidism, increased gamma-glutamyl transferase, and colitis) that resolved with steroids. There were no grade 4 events, treatment discontinuation, or deaths.

The work was funded by the GONO Foundation and AstraZeneca, the maker of durvalumab and tremelimumab. Leone reported having no disclosures. Janjagian reported having extensive industry ties, including travel funding, consulting fees, and research support from AstraZeneca.

M. Alexander Otto is a physician assistant with a master’s degree in medical science and a journalism degree from Newhouse. He is an award-winning medical journalist who worked for several major news outlets before joining Medscape. Alex is also an MIT Knight Science Journalism fellow. Email: aotto@medscape.net 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Dual checkpoint blockade allowed 70.6% of patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEJAC) to avoid surgery in a small cohort of the INFINITY study.

MSI-H tumors account for roughly 10% of early G/GEJACs. They respond well to immunotherapy, with high rates of pathologic complete responses. The Italian INFINITY trial set out to test whether some patients with these tumors might not need gastrectomy.

The trial treated MSI-H patients with durvalumab 1500 mg once a month for 3 months along with 1 300-mg dose of the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) blocker tremelimumab on day 1. The 18 patients in cohort 1 proceeded to surgery, with a 60% pathologic complete response rate. An additional 18 patients in cohort 2 were the subject of a presentation at the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting 2026. These patients were assessed for clinical complete response; if present, they went on to surveillance; if not, they had surgery.

To qualify for a clinical complete response and surveillance, patients were required to have negative findings on CT and PET scans; tumor-informed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA); and upper endoscopy with ultrasound, including bite-on-bite biopsies and nodal sampling. Surveillance afterward included CT, endoscopy with biopsies, and ctDNA every 12 weeks for up to 2 years.

Among 17 evaluable patients, 1 withdrew consent during immunotherapy, 13 (76%) had a clinical complete response and started surveillance, and the other 4 went to surgery. One patient in the surveillance group had a local regrowth after 4 months, underwent salvage surgery, and remained disease-free. At a median follow-up of 27.1 months, there were no additional progression events.

Overall, 12 of the 17 patients (70.6%) were gastrectomy-free at 2 years without additional treatment. Progression-free survival was 94.1%, and all patients were alive.

“The results are very encouraging,” lead investigator Alberto Leone, MD, said while presenting the results at the AACR annual meeting.

“Nonoperative management could be a safe and effective strategy for patients achieving a clinical complete response after only 3 months of dual immunotherapy,” said Leone, who is a gastrointestinal medical oncologist at the Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy. “However, the optimal strategy needs to be established in larger randomized trials.”

Study discussant Yelena Janjagian, MD, gastrointestinal medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, said the findings were important, particularly given that 70.6% of patients avoided a potentially life-altering gastrectomy.

In addition to surgery, the study also calls into question the need for chemotherapy, long the backbone of management alongside surgery, she said. To replace it, however, “it appears that dual checkpoint blockade will be required for a chemotherapy-free approach to achieve organ preservation.”

“Anti-PD-1 alone is not sufficient; we need CTLA-4 to expand and reactivate tumor-specific immunity,” Janjagian continued.

Ultimately, she expects immunotherapy to shift management of MSI-H cancers away from surgery, although some patients will still likely need an operation.

In addition to being MSI-H, patients in the study were mismatch repair deficient and Epstein-Barr virus-negative with T2/T3 tumors; T4 tumors were excluded.

Tumor-agnostic plasma ctDNA was positive at baseline in 13 patients and cleared in 11 after treatment. Higher baseline plasma ctDNA trended toward a lower likelihood of reaching a clinical complete response. Specificity was 100%, so when positive, the test was “very highly informative,” Leone said.

Three patients had grade 3 adverse events (hyperthyroidism, increased gamma-glutamyl transferase, and colitis) that resolved with steroids. There were no grade 4 events, treatment discontinuation, or deaths.

The work was funded by the GONO Foundation and AstraZeneca, the maker of durvalumab and tremelimumab. Leone reported having no disclosures. Janjagian reported having extensive industry ties, including travel funding, consulting fees, and research support from AstraZeneca.

M. Alexander Otto is a physician assistant with a master’s degree in medical science and a journalism degree from Newhouse. He is an award-winning medical journalist who worked for several major news outlets before joining Medscape. Alex is also an MIT Knight Science Journalism fellow. Email: aotto@medscape.net 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.