Literature DB >> 20404381

Cumulative incidence of false-positive test results in lung cancer screening: a randomized trial.

Jennifer M Croswell1, Stuart G Baker, Pamela M Marcus, Jonathan D Clapp, Barnett S Kramer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Direct-to-consumer promotion of lung cancer screening has increased, especially low-dose computed tomography (CT). However, screening exposes healthy persons to potential harms, and cumulative false-positive rates for low-dose CT have never been formally reported.
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the cumulative risk that a person who participated in a 1- or 2-year lung cancer screening examination would receive at least 1 false-positive result, as well as rates of unnecessary diagnostic procedures.
DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial of low-dose CT versus chest radiography. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00006382)
SETTING: Feasibility study for the ongoing National Lung Screening Trial. PATIENTS: Current or former smokers, aged 55 to 74 years, with a smoking history of 30 pack-years or more and no history of lung cancer (n = 3190). INTERVENTION: Random assignment to low-dose CT or chest radiography with baseline and 1 repeated annual screening; 1-year follow-up after the final screening. Randomization was centralized and stratified by age, sex, and study center. MEASUREMENTS: False-positive screenings, defined as a positive screening with a completed negative work-up or 12 months or more of follow-up with no lung cancer diagnosis.
RESULTS: By using a Kaplan-Meier analysis, a person's cumulative probability of 1 or more false-positive low-dose CT examinations was 21% (95% CI, 19% to 23%) after 1 screening and 33% (CI, 31% to 35%) after 2. The rates for chest radiography were 9% (CI, 8% to 11%) and 15% (CI, 13% to 16%), respectively. A total of 7% of participants with a false-positive low-dose CT examination and 4% with a false-positive chest radiography had a resulting invasive procedure. LIMITATIONS: Screening was limited to 2 rounds. Follow-up after the second screening was limited to 12 months. The false-negative rate is probably an underestimate.
CONCLUSION: Risks for false-positive results on lung cancer screening tests are substantial after only 2 annual examinations, particularly for low-dose CT. Further study of resulting economic, psychosocial, and physical burdens of these methods is warranted. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20404381     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-8-201004200-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  56 in total

Review 1.  Screening for lung cancer using low-dose spiral CT: 10 years later, state of the art.

Authors:  M Zompatori; M Mascalchi; F Ciccarese; N Sverzellati; U Pastorino
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 2.  Update in lung cancer and mesothelioma 2012.

Authors:  Charles A Powell; Balazs Halmos; Serge P Nana-Sinkam
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 21.405

3.  Population-based risk for complications after transthoracic needle lung biopsy of a pulmonary nodule: an analysis of discharge records.

Authors:  Renda Soylemez Wiener; Lisa M Schwartz; Steven Woloshin; H Gilbert Welch
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-08-02       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 4.  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

5.  Update in lung cancer and oncological disorders 2010.

Authors:  Balazs Halmos; Charles A Powell
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2011-08-01       Impact factor: 21.405

6.  Lung Cancer Field Cancerization: Implications for Screening by Low-Dose Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Ana I Robles; Curtis C Harris
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 7.  Unleashing the power of proteomics to develop blood-based cancer markers.

Authors:  Ayumu Taguchi; Samir M Hanash
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 8.327

8.  Procedures for risk-stratification of lung cancer using buccal nanocytology.

Authors:  H Subramanian; P Viswanathan; L Cherkezyan; R Iyengar; S Rozhok; M Verleye; J Derbas; J Czarnecki; H K Roy; V Backman
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 3.732

9.  Radiological Image Traits Predictive of Cancer Status in Pulmonary Nodules.

Authors:  Ying Liu; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Thomas Atwater; Sanja Antic; Qian Li; Ronald C Walker; Gary T Smith; Pierre P Massion; Matthew B Schabath; Robert J Gillies
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 12.531

10.  A Gene Expression Classifier from Whole Blood Distinguishes Benign from Malignant Lung Nodules Detected by Low-Dose CT.

Authors:  Andrew V Kossenkov; Rehman Qureshi; Noor B Dawany; Jayamanna Wickramasinghe; Qin Liu; R Sonali Majumdar; Celia Chang; Sandy Widura; Trisha Kumar; Wen-Hwai Horng; Eric Konnisto; Gerard Criner; Jun-Chieh J Tsay; Harvey Pass; Sai Yendamuri; Anil Vachani; Thomas Bauer; Brian Nam; William N Rom; Michael K Showe; Louise C Showe
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 12.701

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.