Evidence Hub

From COPD to Smoke-Related Arteriopathy: The Mechanical and Immune–Inflammatory Landscape Underlying Lung Cancer Distant Spreading—A Narrative Review

Giulia Maria Stella, Francesco Rocco Bertuccio, Cristina Novy, Chandra Bortolotto, Ilaria Salzillo, Fabio Perrotta, Vito D’Agnano, Valentina Conio et al.

Cells, 2025

8 citations

Abstract

Metastatic dissemination defines a complex phenomenon driven by genetic forces and, importantly, determined by interaction between cancer cells and the surrounding stroma. Although the biologic and immune reactions which characterize the process have been widely and extensively evaluated, fewer data are available regarding the mechanical and physical forces to which circulating neoplastic clones are exposed. It should be hypothesized that this interaction can be modified in case of concomitant pathologic conditions, such as chronic vasculopathy, which frequently occurs in lung cancer patients. We here aim at analyzing and discussing the complex interplay between lung malignant transformation and arteriopathy, mainly focusing on the immune-inflammatory systemic reaction. Notably-in most instances-smoking-related fixed airflow obstruction, including but not limited to COPD, frequently coexists and contributes to both tumor progression and vascular complications. Attention is paid mainly to the analysis of the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors and their interaction with triple bronchodilation and antiaggregants. Understanding the biomechanical and molecular dynamics of lung cancer progression in altered vascular territories has several translational implications in defining risk stratification and in surgical planning and therapeutic targeting. Moreover, computational modeling of the physical forces which regulate the transit and extravasation of metastatic clones in altered…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a review, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free