Tomography Screening For Lung Cancer Research Articles

Preliminary experiences with low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening in Hungary

Lung cancer has the highest mortality rate of all types of cancers both in developed countries and Hungary. To obtain experience and facilitate the application of low-dose computed tomography-based lung cancer screening as a targeted public health screening procedure. Volunteers without thoracic complaints above the age of 40 years (n = 963) were screened for lung cancer using digital chest radiography and low-dose computed tomography. Two lung cancers were found among the participants screened with digital chest radiography (0.2%). After informed consent, 173 individuals with normal chest radiography findings (n = 943) took the opportunity to voluntarily participate in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. After 3 or 12 months, 65 individuals had follow up control examinations based on the size and characteristics of the detected lesions. Among them, one participant was found to have lung cancer using low-dose computed tomography. These results indicate that low-dose computed tomography-based lung cancer screening as a public health screening procedure can enhance the success of screening with 50% (from 0.2% to 0.3%). The cost-benefit ratio can be raised if chest radiography is performed prior to the low-dose computed tomography examination.

Computed Tomographic Screening for Lung Cancer

Computed Tomographic Screening for Lung Cancer

Coronary artery calcium score on low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening.

To evaluate the feasibility of coronary artery calcium score (CACS) on low-dose non-gated chest CT (ngCCT). Sixty consecutive individuals (30 males; 73 ± 7 years) scheduled for risk stratification by means of unenhanced ECG-triggered cardiac computed tomography (gCCT) underwent additional unenhanced ngCCT. All CT scans were performed on a 64-slice CT scanner (Somatom Sensation 64 Cardiac, Siemens, Germany). CACS was calculated using conventional methods/scores (Volume, Mass, Agatston) as previously described in literature. The CACS value obtained were compared. The Mayo Clinic classification was used to stratify cardiovascular risk based on Agatston CACS. Differences and correlations between the two methods were compared. A P-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Mean CACS values were significantly higher for gCCT as compared to ngCCT (Volume: 418 ± 747 vs 332 ± 597; Mass: 89 ± 151 vs 78 ± 141; Agatston: 481 ± 854 vs 428 ± 776; P < 0.05). The correlation between the two values was always very high (Volume: r = 0.95; Mass: r = 0.97; Agatston: r = 0.98). Of the 6 patients with 0 Agatston score on gCCT, 2 (33%) showed an Agatston score > 0 in the ngCCT. Of the 3 patients with 1-10 Agatston score on gCCT, 1 (33%) showed an Agatston score of 0 in the ngCCT. Overall, 23 (38%) patients were reclassified in a different cardiovascular risk category, mostly (18/23; 78%) shifting to a lower risk in the ngCCT. The estimated radiation dose was significantly higher for gCCT (DLP 115.8 ± 50.7 vs 83.8 ± 16.3; Effective dose 1.6 ± 0.7 mSv vs 1.2 ± 0.2 mSv; P < 0.01). CACS assessment is feasible on ngCCT; the variability of CACS values and the associated re-stratification of patients in cardiovascular risk groups should be taken into account.

Balancing curability and unnecessary surgery in the context of computed tomography screening for lung cancer

Surgical management is a critical component of computed tomography (CT) screening for lung cancer. We report the results for US sites in a large ongoing screening program, the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program (I-ELCAP). We identified all patients who underwent surgical resection. We compared the results before (1993-2005) and after (2006-2011) termination of the National Lung Screening Trial to identify emerging trends. Among 31,646 baseline and 37,861 annual repeat CT screenings, 492 patients underwent surgical resection; 437 (89%) were diagnosed with lung cancer; 396 (91%) had clinical stage I disease. In the 54 (11%) patients with nonmalignant disease, resection was sublobar in 48 and lobectomy in 6. The estimated cure rate based on the 15-year Kaplan-Meier survival for all 428 patients (excluding 9 typical carcinoids) with lung cancer was 84% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80%-88%) and 88% (95% CI, 83%-92%) for clinical stage I disease resected within 1month of diagnosis. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and sublobar resection increased significantly, from 10% to 34% (P<.0001) and 22% to 34% (P=.01) respectively; there were no significant differences in the percentage of malignant diagnoses (90% vs 87%, P=.36), clinical stage I (92% vs 89%, P=.33), pathologic stage I (85% vs 82%, P=.44), tumor size (P=.61), or cell type (P=.81). The frequency and extent of surgery for nonmalignant disease can be minimized in a CT screening program and provide a high cure rate for those diagnosed with lung cancer and undergoing surgical resection.

A systematic review of the characteristics associated with recall rates, detection rates and positive predictive values of computed tomography screening for lung cancer.

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening has been shown to reduce mortality from lung cancer but at a substantial cost in diagnostic activity. The objective of this study was to investigate the characteristics of screening programmes associated with recall rates, detection rates and positive predictive values (PPVs). We conducted a systematic review of randomised trials and observational studies on LDCT screening for lung cancer. A meta-regression using random-effect logistic regressions was carried out to assess factors influencing recall rates for further investigation, cancer detection rates and PPVs of recall. We used data from 63 372 prevalent screens from 16 studies of LDCT screening for lung cancer and 79 302 incident screens from nine studies. In univariable analysis, the use of a cut-off size to define nodules warranting further investigation at prevalent screens reduced recall rates [odds ratio (OR) = 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.82 and OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.21-0.84 for cut-off sizes of 3-4 and 5-8 mm, respectively], without significant changes in detection rates and PPVs. The number of readers (1 or ≥2) was not associated with changes in recall rates, detection rates and PPVs at prevalent and incident screens. Using the volumetry software at incident screens significantly increased the PPV (OR = 5.02, 95% CI 1.65-15.28) as a result of a decrease in recall rates (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.12-0.51), without significant changes in detection rates. These results highlight the value of using a cut-off size for nodules warranting further investigation with lower recall rates at prevalent screens, whereas the volumetric assessment software at incident screens results in lower recall rates and higher PPVs. The presence of positron emission tomography in the work-up protocol might be associated with lower rates of surgical procedures for benign findings, although this hypothesis deserves further investigation.

Sublobar resection is equivalent to lobectomy for clinical stage 1A lung cancer in solid nodules

A single randomized trial established lobectomy as the standard of care for the surgical treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Recent advances in imaging/staging modalities and detection of smaller tumors have once again rekindled interest in sublobar resection for early-stage disease. The objective of this study was to compare lung cancer survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer with a diameter of 30 mm or less with clinical stage 1 disease who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. We identified 347 patients diagnosed with lung cancer who underwent lobectomy (n = 294) or sublobar resection (n = 53) for non-small cell lung cancer manifesting as a solid nodule in the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program from 1993 to 2011. Differences in the distribution of the presurgical covariates between sublobar resection and lobectomy were assessed using unadjusted P values determined by logistic regression analysis. Propensity scoring was performed using the same covariates. Differences in the distribution of the same covariates between sublobar resection and lobectomy were assessed using adjusted P values determined by logistic regression analysis with adjustment for the propensity scores. Lung cancer-specific survival was determined by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox survival regression analysis was used to compare sublobar resection with lobectomy, adjusted for the propensity scores, surgical, and pathology findings, when adjusted and stratified by propensity quintiles. Among 347 patients, 10-year Kaplan-Meier for 53 patients treated by sublobar resection compared with 294 patients treated by lobectomy was 85% (95% confidence interval, 80-91) versus 86% (confidence interval, 75-96) (P = .86). Cox survival analysis showed no significant difference between sublobar resection and lobectomy when adjusted for propensity scores or when using propensity quintiles (P = .62 and P = .79, respectively). For those with cancers 20 mm or less in diameter, the 10-year rates were 88% (95% confidence interval, 82-93) versus 84% (95% confidence interval, 73-96) (P = .45), and Cox survival analysis showed no significant difference between sublobar resection and lobectomy using either approach (P = .42 and P = .52, respectively). Sublobar resection and lobectomy have equivalent survival for patients with clinical stage IA non-small cell lung cancer in the context of computed tomography screening for lung cancer.

Value of low-dose spiral computed tomography in lung cancer screening

To explore the application value of low-dose spiral computed tomography (LDCT) in lung cancer screening. A total of 2251 asymptomatic subjects undergoing chest LDCT scan at Center of Physical Examination, Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University between June 2011 and December 2012 were prospectively enrolled. The incidence rates of lung nodule and lung cancer were analyzed to compare the value of LDCT screening in subjects with smoking-related high, medium and low risks of lung cancer. The value of serum tumor biomarker in the reduction of false positive of LDCT was also discussed. Among all subjects, 9.9% (222/2251) displayed at least 1 non-calcified nodule with a diameter ≥ 4 mm. Two subjects were diagnosed with lung cancer and 1 of them received surgical resection. Other subjects with lung nodules were followed. There was no statistical difference in the incidence rates of lung nodule between the high, medium and low-risk groups of lung cancer associated with smoking (8.8%, 9.5% and 10.1%, P = 0.864). The incidence rates of lung nodule in subjects ≥ 55 years old were higher than that of those <55 years old (12.7% vs 9.1%, P = 0.034). Female gender had a high risk of ground glass opacity (GGO) or ground glass nodule (GGN) (P = 0.015). The independent or combined increase of serum tumor biomarkers of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), neuron specific enolase (NSE), cytokeratin fragment 21-1 (Cyfra211) and squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC) might not predicate the incidence of lung nodule. LDCT screening is highly valuable in lung cancer screening.

Computed tomography screening for lung cancer: Results of ten years of annual screening and validation of cosmos prediction model

IntroductionIt is unclear how long low-dose computed tomographic (LDCT) screening should continue in populations at high risk of lung cancer. We assessed outcomes and the predictive ability of the COSMOS prediction model in volunteers screened for 10 years. Materials and methodsSmokers and former smokers (>20 pack-years), >50 years, were enrolled over one year (2000–2001), receiving annual LDCT for 10 years. The frequency of screening-detected lung cancers was compared with COSMOS and Bach risk model estimates. ResultsAmong 1035 recruited volunteers (71% men, mean age 58 years) compliance was 65% at study end. Seventy-one (6.95%) lung cancers were diagnosed, 12 at baseline. Disease stage was: IA in 48 (66.6%); IB in 6; IIA in 5; IIB in 2; IIIA in 5; IIIB in 1; IV in 5; and limited small cell cancer in 3. Five- and ten-year survival were 64% and 57%, respectively, 84% and 65% for stage I. Ten (12.1%) received surgery for a benign lesion. The number of lung cancers detected during the first two screening rounds was close to that predicted by the COSMOS model, while the Bach model accurately predicted frequency from the third year on. ConclusionsNeither cancer frequency nor proportion at stage I decreased over 10 years, indicating that screening should not be discontinued. Most cancers were early stage, and overall survival was high. Only a limited number of invasive procedures for benign disease were performed. The Bach model – designed to predict symptomatic cancers – accurately predicted cancer frequency from the third year, suggesting that overdiagnosis is a minor problem in lung cancer screening. The COSMOS model – designed to estimate screening-detected lung cancers – accurately predicted cancer frequency at baseline and second screening round.

Low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer: results of the first screening round

Evaluation of: National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Church TR, Black WC, Aberle DR et al. Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 368, 1980-1991 (2013). In 2011, the US NLST trial demonstrated that mortality from lung cancer can be reduced by using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening rather than chest x-ray (CXR) screening. This paper from the US NLST research team focuses on the results of the initial round of LDCT for lung cancer. A total of 53,439 participants were included and randomly assigned to LDCT screening (n = 26,715) or CXR screening (n = 26,724). In total, 27.3% of the participants in the LDCT group and 9.2% in the CXR group had a positive screening result. As a result, 3.8% (LDCT group) and 5.7% (CXR group) of these subjects were diagnosed with lung cancer. The sensitivity (93.8%) and specificity (73.4%) for lung cancer were higher for LDCT compared with CXR screening; 73.5 and 91.3%, respectively.

Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: Where Are We Now?

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening has been shown to result in detection of earlier-stage lung cancers, with a 20% reduction in cancer-related deaths. LDCT screening offers significant potential benefits to selected patients; however, many questions remain, including questions about the applicability of lung cancer screening in clinical practice.

Perilous potential: The chance to save lives, or lose them, through low dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer

Perilous potential: The chance to save lives, or lose them, through low dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer

Cost-Effectiveness of Baseline Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: The Israeli Experience

ObjectiveReduced mortality with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening was demonstrated in a large randomized controlled study of high-risk individuals. Cost-effectiveness must be assessed before routine LDCT screening is considered. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of LDCT lung cancer screening in Israel. MethodsA decision analytic framework was used to evaluate the decision to screen or not screen from the health system perspective. The screening arm included 842 moderate-to-heavy smokers aged 45 years or older, screened at Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center from 1998 to 2004. In the usual-care arm, stage distribution and stage-specific life expectancy were obtained from the Israel National Cancer Registry data for 1994 to 2006. Lifetime stage-specific costs were estimated from medical records of patients diagnosed and treated at Hadassah Medical Center in the period 2003 to 2004. The analysis considered possible biases—lead time, overdiagnosis, and self-selection. Cost per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) gained by screening was estimated. ResultsBase-case incremental cost per QALY gained was $1464 (2011 prices). Extensive sensitivity analysis affirmed the low cost per QALY gained. The cost per QALY gained is lower than $10,000 with probability 0.937 and is lower than $20,000 with probability 0.978. ConclusionsOur analysis suggests that baseline LDCT lung cancer screening in Israel presents a good value for the money and should be considered for inclusion in the National List of Health Services financed publicly.

Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer

Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer

Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer

Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer

Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer

Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer

Volumetric computed tomography screening for lung cancer: three rounds of the NELSON trial

Several medical associations recommended lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography scanning for high-risk groups. Counselling of the candidates on the potential harms and benefits and their lung cancer risk is a prerequisite for screening. In the NELSON trial, screenings are considered positive for (part) solid lung nodules with a volume >500 mm3 and for (part) solid or nonsolid nodules with a volume-doubling time <400 days. For this study, the performance of the NELSON strategy in three screening rounds was evaluated and risk calculations were made for a follow-up period of 5.5 years. 458 (6%) of the 7582 participants screened had a positive screen result and 200 (2.6%) were diagnosed with lung cancer. The positive screenings had a predictive value of 40.6% and only 1.2% of all scan results were false-positive. In a period of 5.5 years, the risk of screen-detected lung cancer strongly depends on the result of the first scan: 1.0% after a negative baseline result, 5.7% after an indeterminate baseline and 48.3% after a positive baseline. The screening strategy yielded few positive and false-positive scans with a reasonable positive predictive value. The 5.5-year lung cancer risk calculations aid clinicians in counselling candidates for lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography.

Cribado del cáncer de pulmón

Lung cancer is a very important disease, curable in early stages. There have been trials trying to show the utility of chest x-ray or computed tomography in Lung Cancer Screening for decades. In 2011, National Lung Screening Trial results were published, showing a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality in patients with low dose computed tomography screened for three years. These results are very promising and several scientific societies have included lung cancer screening in their guidelines. Nevertheless we have to be aware of lung cancer screening risks, such as: overdiagnosis, radiation and false positive results. Moreover, there are many issues to be solved, including choosing the appropriate group to be screened, the duration of the screening program, intervals between screening and its cost-effectiveness. Ongoing trials will probably answer some of these questions. This article reviews the current evidence on lung cancer screening.

Results of Initial Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening for Lung Cancer

BackgroundLung cancer is the largest contributor to mortality from cancer. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) showed that screening with low-dose helical computed tomography (CT) rather than with chest radiography reduced mortality from lung cancer. We describe the screening, diagnosis, and limited treatment results from the initial round of screening in the NLST to inform and improve lung-cancer–screening programs.MethodsAt 33 U.S. centers, from August 2002 through April 2004, we enrolled asymptomatic participants, 55 to 74 years of age, with a history of at least 30 pack-years of smoking. The participants were randomly assigned to undergo annual screening, with the use of either low-dose CT or chest radiography, for 3 years. Nodules or other suspicious findings were classified as positive results. This article reports findings from the initial screening examination.ResultsA total of 53,439 eligible participants were randomly assigned to a study group (26,715 to low-dose CT and 26,724 to chest radiography); 26,309 participants (98.5%) and 26,035 (97.4%), respectively, underwent screening. A total of 7191 participants (27.3%) in the low-dose CT group and 2387 (9.2%) in the radiography group had a positive screening result; in the respective groups, 6369 participants (90.4%) and 2176 (92.7%) had at least one follow-up diagnostic procedure, including imaging in 5717 (81.1%) and 2010 (85.6%) and surgery in 297 (4.2%) and 121 (5.2%). Lung cancer was diagnosed in 292 participants (1.1%) in the low-dose CT group versus 190 (0.7%) in the radiography group (stage 1 in 158 vs. 70 participants and stage IIB to IV in 120 vs. 112). Sensitivity and specificity were 93.8% and 73.4% for low-dose CT and 73.5% and 91.3% for chest radiography, respectively.ConclusionsThe NLST initial screening results are consistent with the existing literature on screening by means of low-dose CT and chest radiography, suggesting that a reduction in mortality from lung cancer is achievable at U.S. screening centers that have staff experienced in chest CT. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; NLST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00047385.)

What Defines a Positive Result in Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer

The National Lung Screening Trial showed that, among current and former smokers (age range, 55–74; smoking history, ≥30 pack-years), annual screening

Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer

Low-dose computed tomography (CT) screening was shown to reduce lung cancer-specific mortality in a large randomized trial of a high-risk population. The decision to pursue CT screening for lung cancer is a timely question raised by individuals at risk of lung cancer and by their health care practitioners. To discuss the evidence for use of chest x-rays and low-dose CT in screening for lung cancer; to describe potential benefits, harms, and uncertainties of CT screening; and to review current guidelines for CT screening. MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched from 1984 to 2012. Additional citations were obtained from lists of references from select research and review articles on this topic. Evidence was graded using the American Hospital Association level of evidence guidelines. Low-dose CT screening has been associated with a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality in a large randomized controlled trial (National Lung Screening Trial [NLST]) of a high-risk population. Mortality data have not yet been reported for 5 other randomized controlled trials, and the sample sizes were too small to detect a meaningful difference in 2 other completed trials. A major risk of CT screening is a high false-positive rate, with associated risks and costs associated with follow-up CT scans and the potential for more invasive diagnostic procedures. Published guidelines for screening indicate a consensus that screening may be indicated for individuals who meet entry criteria for the NLST, but some guidelines expand their recommendations for screening beyond these criteria. Individuals at high risk of lung cancer who meet the criteria for CT screening in published guidelines should participate in an informed and shared decision-making process by discussing the potential benefits, harms, and uncertainties of screening with their physicians.