Evidence Hub

From COPD to Smoke-Related Arteriopathy: The Mechanic 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.

Preprints.org, 2025

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 mechanic 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 analysing and discussing the complex interplay between lung malignant transformation and artheriopathy, mainly focusing on the immune-inflammatory sistemic reaction. Notably - in most instances – smoking history and a consequent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohexists. A main attention is payed to the analysis of the role of immunecheckpoint inhibitors and their interaction with triple bronchodilation and antiaggreagants. Understanding the biomechanical and molecular dynamics of lung cancer progression in altered vascular territories has several translational implications in defining risk stratification, in surgical planning and therapeutic targeting: Moreover, computational modelling of the physical forces which regulate the transit and extravasation of metastatic clones in altered contexts could be of help in deciphering the whole process and in determining more…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a preprint, 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