Literature DB >> 22705252

Longitudinal multistage model for lung cancer incidence, mortality, and CT detected indolent and aggressive cancers.

William D Hazelton1, Gary Goodman, William N Rom, Melvyn Tockman, Mark Thornquist, Suresh Moolgavkar, Joel L Weissfeld, Ziding Feng.   

Abstract

It is currently not known whether most lung cancers detected by computerized tomography (CT) screening are aggressive and likely to be fatal if left untreated, or if a sizable fraction are indolent and unlikely to cause death during the natural lifetime of the individual. We developed a longitudinal biologically-based model of the relationship between individual smoking histories and the probability for lung cancer incidence, CT screen detection, lung cancer mortality, and other-cause mortality. The longitudinal model relates these different outcomes to an underlying lung cancer disease pathway and an effective other-cause mortality pathway, which are both influenced by the individual smoking history. The longitudinal analysis provides additional information over that available if these outcomes were analyzed separately, including testing if the number of CT detected and histologically-confirmed lung cancers is consistent with the expected number of lung cancers "in the pipeline". We assume indolent nodules undergo Gompertz growth and are detectable by CT, but do not grow large enough to contribute significantly to symptom-based lung cancer incidence or mortality. Likelihood-based model calibration was done jointly to data from 6878 heavy smokers without asbestos exposure in the control (placebo) arm of the Carotene and Retinol Efficacy Trial (CARET); and to 3,642 heavy smokers with comparable smoking histories in the Pittsburgh Lung Screening Study (PLuSS), a single-arm prospective trial of low-dose spiral CT screening for diagnosis of lung cancer. Model calibration was checked using data from two other single-arm prospective CT screening trials, the New York University Lung Cancer Biomarker Center (NYU) (n=1,021), and Moffitt Cancer Center (Moffitt) cohorts (n=677). In the PLuSS cohort, we estimate that at the end of year 2, after the baseline and first annual CT exam, that 33.0 (26.9, 36.9)% of diagnosed lung cancers among females and 7.0 (4.9,11.7)% among males were overdiagnosed due to being indolent cancers. At the end of the PLuSS study, with maximum follow-up of 5.8 years, we estimate that due to early detection by CT and limited follow-up, an additional 2.2 (2.0,2.4)% of all diagnosed cancers among females and 7.1 (6.7,8.0)% among males would not have been diagnosed in the absence of CT screening. We also find a higher apparent cure rate for lung cancer among CARET females than males, consistent with the larger indolent fraction of CT detected and histologically confirmed lung cancers among PLuSS females. This suggests that there are significant gender differences in the aggressiveness of lung cancer. Females may have an inherently higher proportion of indolent lung cancers than males, or aggressive lung cancers may be brought into check by the immune system more frequently among females than males.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22705252      PMCID: PMC3412888          DOI: 10.1016/j.mbs.2012.05.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Math Biosci        ISSN: 0025-5564            Impact factor:   2.144


  46 in total

1.  Threshold regression for survival data with time-varying covariates.

Authors:  Mei-Ling Ting Lee; G A Whitmore; Bernard A Rosner
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Stem cells and the natural history of lung cancer: implications for lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Rob J van Klaveren; Susan C van't Westeinde; Bart-Jan de Hoop; Henk C Hoogsteden
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 12.531

3.  Modeling progression in radiation-induced lung adenocarcinomas.

Authors:  Hatim Fakir; Werner Hofmann; Rainer K Sachs
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2010-01-08       Impact factor: 1.925

4.  Modeling the transition of lung cancer from early to advanced stage.

Authors:  Maksim A Pashkevich; Bronislava M Sigal; Sylvia K Plevritis
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 2.506

Review 5.  The revised TNM staging system for lung cancer.

Authors:  Ramon Rami-Porta; John J Crowley; Peter Goldstraw
Journal:  Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 1.520

6.  Clinicopathological characteristics of screen-detected lung cancers.

Authors:  Riken Kawachi; Shun-ichi Watanabe; Hisao Asamura
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 15.609

7.  Revisiting stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer: analysis of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results data.

Authors:  William N William; Heather Y Lin; J Jack Lee; Scott M Lippman; Jack A Roth; Edward S Kim
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2009-03-24       Impact factor: 9.410

8.  The Pittsburgh Lung Screening Study (PLuSS): outcomes within 3 years of a first computed tomography scan.

Authors:  David O Wilson; Joel L Weissfeld; Carl R Fuhrman; Stephen N Fisher; Paula Balogh; Rodney J Landreneau; James D Luketich; Jill M Siegfried
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2008-07-17       Impact factor: 21.405

9.  5-year lung cancer screening experience: growth curves of 18 lung cancers compared to histologic type, CT attenuation, stage, survival, and size.

Authors:  Rebecca M Lindell; Thomas E Hartman; Stephen J Swensen; James R Jett; David E Midthun; Jayawant N Mandrekar
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2009-07-06       Impact factor: 9.410

10.  Characterization of side population cells from human airway epithelium.

Authors:  Tillie-Louise Hackett; Furquan Shaheen; Andrew Johnson; Samuel Wadsworth; Dmitri V Pechkovsky; David B Jacoby; Anthony Kicic; Stephen M Stick; Darryl A Knight
Journal:  Stem Cells       Date:  2008-07-24       Impact factor: 6.277

View more
  4 in total

1.  Comparative analysis of 5 lung cancer natural history and screening models that reproduce outcomes of the NLST and PLCO trials.

Authors:  Rafael Meza; Kevin ten Haaf; Chung Yin Kong; Ayca Erdogan; William C Black; Martin C Tammemagi; Sung Eun Choi; Jihyoun Jeon; Summer S Han; Vidit Munshi; Joost van Rosmalen; Paul Pinsky; Pamela M McMahon; Harry J de Koning; Eric J Feuer; William D Hazelton; Sylvia K Plevritis
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography.

Authors:  Caroline Chiles
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 3.  Quantifying and monitoring overdiagnosis in cancer screening: a systematic review of methods.

Authors:  Jamie L Carter; Russell J Coletti; Russell P Harris
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2015-01-07

4.  Predicting colorectal cancer risk from adenoma detection via a two-type branching process model.

Authors:  Brian M Lang; Jack Kuipers; Benjamin Misselwitz; Niko Beerenwinkel
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 4.475

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.