Literature DB >> 23697514

Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer.

Timothy R Church, William C Black, Denise R Aberle, Christine D Berg, Kathy L Clingan, Fenghai Duan, Richard M Fagerstrom, Ilana F Gareen, David S Gierada, Gordon C Jones, Irene Mahon, Pamela M Marcus, JoRean D Sicks, Amanda Jain, Sarah Baum.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lung 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.
METHODS: At 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.
RESULTS: A 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.
CONCLUSIONS: The 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.).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23697514      PMCID: PMC3762603          DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1209120

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  27 in total

1.  The Mayo Lung Project: a perspective.

Authors:  R S Fontana
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Methodological issues in estimating smoking-attributable mortality in the United States.

Authors:  A M Malarcher; J Schulman; L A Epstein; M J Thun; P Mowery; B Pierce; L Escobedo; G A Giovino
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2000-09-15       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 3.  Chest radiography as the comparison for spiral CT in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Authors:  Timothy R Church
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Global cancer statistics, 2002.

Authors:  D Max Parkin; Freddie Bray; J Ferlay; Paola Pisani
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial of the National Cancer Institute: history, organization, and status.

Authors:  J K Gohagan; P C Prorok; R B Hayes; B S Kramer
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2000-12

6.  Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up.

Authors:  P M Marcus; E J Bergstralh; R M Fagerstrom; D E Williams; R Fontana; W F Taylor; P C Prorok
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-08-16       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Screening for lung cancer with low-dose spiral computed tomography.

Authors:  Stephen J Swensen; James R Jett; Jeff A Sloan; David E Midthun; Thomas E Hartman; Anne-Marie Sykes; Gregory L Aughenbaugh; Frank E Zink; Shauna L Hillman; Gayle R Noetzel; Randolph S Marks; Amy C Clayton; Peter C Pairolero
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2002-02-15       Impact factor: 21.405

8.  Lung cancer screening with CT: Mayo Clinic experience.

Authors:  Stephen J Swensen; James R Jett; Thomas E Hartman; David E Midthun; Jeff A Sloan; Anne-Marie Sykes; Gregory L Aughenbaugh; Medy A Clemens
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-01-24       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Cancer statistics, 2013.

Authors:  Rebecca Siegel; Deepa Naishadham; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 508.702

10.  That the effects of smoking should be measured in pack-years: misconceptions 4.

Authors:  J Peto
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  330 in total

1.  Cons: long-term CT-scan follow-up is not the standard of care in patients curatively treated for an early stage non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Jan P van Meerbeeck; Halil Sirimsi
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2015-08

Review 2.  Advancing biomedical imaging.

Authors:  Ralph Weissleder; Matthias Nahrendorf
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-11-24       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Initial staging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. What is the place of bronchoscopy and upper GI endoscopy?

Authors:  Cyril Page; Emily Lucas-Gourdet; Aurélie Biet-Hornstein; Vladimir Strunski
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-03-30       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  LungTech, an EORTC Phase II trial of stereotactic body radiotherapy for centrally located lung tumours: a clinical perspective.

Authors:  S Adebahr; S Collette; E Shash; M Lambrecht; C Le Pechoux; C Faivre-Finn; D De Ruysscher; H Peulen; J Belderbos; R Dziadziuszko; C Fink; M Guckenberger; C Hurkmans; U Nestle
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Imaging Surveillance for Surgically Resected Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Is More Always Better?

Authors:  Melanie Subramanian; Jingxia Liu; Caprice Greenberg; Jessica Schumacher; George J Chang; Timothy L McMurry; Amanda B Francescatti; Tara R Semenkovich; Jessica L Hudson; Bryan F Meyers; Varun Puri; Benjamin D Kozower
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 5.209

Review 6.  Principles of Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Paul F Pinsky
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2015-06-20       Impact factor: 2.741

7.  Assessing the Generalizability of the National Lung Screening Trial: Comparison of Patients with Stage 1 Disease.

Authors:  Nichole T Tanner; Lin Dai; Brett C Bade; Mulugeta Gebregziabher; Gerard A Silvestri
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 8.  Implementing lung cancer screening in the real world: opportunity, challenges and solutions.

Authors:  Robert J Optican; Caroline Chiles
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2015-08

9.  Progress in the Treatment and Outcomes for Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Jacob Y Shin; Ja Kyoung Yoon; Gaurav Marwaha
Journal:  Lung       Date:  2018-03-17       Impact factor: 2.584

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.