Literature DB >> 11147613

Czech Study on Lung Cancer Screening: post-trial follow-up of lung cancer deaths up to year 15 since enrollment.

A K Kubík1, D M Parkin, P Zatloukal.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The study was launched in the mid-1970s to explore the capability of screening by chest X-ray and sputum cytology to be used as an effective component of the lung cancer control program in the Czech Republic, a Central European country with a high and increasing occurrence of lung cancer in men at that time. A complementary objective of this report is to ascertain whether the cumulative numbers of lung cancer deaths would equalize in the two randomized groups during a prolonged follow-up period.
METHODS: Six thousand three hundred sixty-four males who were heavy cigarette smokers, aged 40-64 years, were enrolled during a general health survey in 6 districts of the Czech Republic. At initial X-ray and sputum examination, 19 prevalent lung carcinoma cases were diagnosed. After stratified randomization, the remaining subjects entered a 3-year study: the intervention group (3171 participants) was subjected to semiannual chest X-rays and sputum investigation whereas the controls (3174 participants) had 1 examination only by chest X-rays and sputum investigation, 3 years after entry. During a further 3-year follow-up, a chest X-ray was taken at the end of Years 4, 5, and 6 for both the intervention and control groups. Subjects in both groups who were suspected to have lung carcinoma or other disease on the basis of screening results or symptoms were subjected to appropriate diagnostic studies and treatment. Data on all causes of death in Years 1-6 and on deaths from the lung cancer in Years 7-15 of participants in the intervention and control groups were compared.
RESULTS: The incidence rate of lung carcinoma from the intervention group was significantly higher than from the controls in the initial 3-year study period (P < 0.05), but not for the initial 6-year period (P = 0.06). Lung carcinoma cases detected by screening were identified at an earlier stage, were more often resectable, and had a significantly better survival than interval cases diagnosed mainly because of symptoms. There was no significant difference in the lung cancer mortality rate between the 2 groups in the initial 3-year study period or during follow-up prolonged up to Year 15 since enrollment.
CONCLUSIONS: The study gave no evidence that screening for lung cancer by chest X-ray is beneficial in terms of reducing mortality. Based on the results of this study, there is no justification to recommend semiannual screening as a component of a comprehensive lung cancer control program.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11147613     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(20001201)89:11+<2363::aid-cncr9>3.3.co;2-n

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  29 in total

1.  The National Lung Screening Trial: overview and study design.

Authors:  Denise R Aberle; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Timothy R Church; Richard M Fagerstrom; Barbara Galen; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Jonathan Goldin; John K Gohagan; Bruce Hillman; Carl Jaffe; Barnett S Kramer; David Lynch; Pamela M Marcus; Mitchell Schnall; Daniel C Sullivan; Dorothy Sullivan; Carl J Zylak
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 2.  Cancer screening in renal transplant recipients: what is the evidence?

Authors:  Germaine Wong; Jeremy R Chapman; Jonathan C Craig
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 8.237

Review 3.  Lung cancer screening: promise and pitfalls.

Authors:  Judith J Smith; Christine D Berg
Journal:  Semin Oncol Nurs       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.315

4.  Estimating long-term effectiveness of lung cancer screening in the Mayo CT screening study.

Authors:  Pamela M McMahon; Chung Yin Kong; Bruce E Johnson; Milton C Weinstein; Jane C Weeks; Karen M Kuntz; Jo-Anne O Shepard; Stephen J Swensen; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-05-05       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 5.  Computer-aided diagnosis of lung cancer and pulmonary embolism in computed tomography-a review.

Authors:  Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Chuan Zhou; Berkman Sahiner
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 6.  Lung cancer in HIV Infection.

Authors:  Deepthi Mani; Missak Haigentz; David M Aboulafia
Journal:  Clin Lung Cancer       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 4.785

Review 7.  Screening for lung cancer using low-dose computed tomography: concerns about the application in low-risk individuals.

Authors:  Jiu-Wei Cui; Wei Li; Fu-Jun Han; Yu-Di Liu
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2015-06

Review 8.  Lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Antonio Gutierrez; Robert Suh; Fereidoun Abtin; Scott Genshaft; Kathleen Brown
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.513

9.  Primary care radiography in the early diagnosis of lung cancer.

Authors:  Trevor K Rogers
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2010-03-16       Impact factor: 3.909

Review 10.  American Cancer Society lung cancer screening guidelines.

Authors:  Richard Wender; Elizabeth T H Fontham; Ermilo Barrera; Graham A Colditz; Timothy R Church; David S Ettinger; Ruth Etzioni; Christopher R Flowers; G Scott Gazelle; Douglas K Kelsey; Samuel J LaMonte; James S Michaelson; Kevin C Oeffinger; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Daniel C Sullivan; William Travis; Louise Walter; Andrew M D Wolf; Otis W Brawley; Robert A Smith
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 508.702

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.