So thank you again Dr. Martin for sharing your list with us.

Thanks.

Good to be here again, Jeff.

So we finished up the lung cancer topic and screening and so forth, and now we're going to move on to part two.

So there's still some lung cancer in here, but there's going to be a bit of esophagus and other topics as well.

So one of the things I've now got a routine down where I contact the editors of the Annals of Thoracic Surgery and JTCVS, and I ask them to give me metrics on what was downloaded the most, what's been cited the most.

what's sort of gotten the most attention in the last couple of years.

So I think that could be a really great project for the future.

Your second topic is on lung cancer epidemiology.

So, Jeff, there's two really great papers that came out from the same group of authors with a slightly different focus, and it's looking at differences in epidemiology between non-smoking individuals and people with a history of smoking.

This is a question that comes up a lot.

People who, especially who've never been tobacco users, will ask all kinds of questions about why do they have this, but that's part two.

But part one is more just having a good sense of the frequency of genomic alterations and just the overall epidemiology differences between the two.

So in the JAMA review paper, they talk about the non-smoking individual's and people with a history of smoking.

And overall now it's about 15 or 20% of people with a new diagnosis of lung cancer would be lifelong non-smoking individuals.

And then just to answer your question about what happens when you expand criteria, preliminarily, what we're finding is that screening efficiency doesn't seem to lower at all or that much, depending on the cohort that you're studying, if you expand the criteria thoughtfully.