Literature DB >> 23794187

Screening for lung cancer.

Renée Manser1, Anne Lethaby, Louis B Irving, Christine Stone, Graham Byrnes, Michael J Abramson, Don Campbell.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the original review published in The Cochrane Library in 1999 and updated in 2004 and 2010. Population-based screening for lung cancer has not been adopted in the majority of countries. However it is not clear whether sputum examinations, chest radiography or newer methods such as computed tomography (CT) are effective in reducing mortality from lung cancer.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether screening for lung cancer, using regular sputum examinations, chest radiography or CT scanning of the chest, reduces lung cancer mortality. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched electronic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to 2012), PREMEDLINE and EMBASE (to 2012) and bibliographies. We handsearched the journal Lung Cancer (to 2000) and contacted experts in the field to identify published and unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Controlled trials of screening for lung cancer using sputum examinations, chest radiography or chest CT. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed an intention-to-screen analysis. Where there was significant statistical heterogeneity, we reported risk ratios (RRs) using the random-effects model. For other outcomes we used the fixed-effect model. MAIN
RESULTS: We included nine trials in the review (eight randomised controlled studies and one controlled trial) with a total of 453,965 subjects. In one large study that included both smokers and non-smokers comparing annual chest x-ray screening with usual care there was no reduction in lung cancer mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.07). In a meta-analysis of studies comparing different frequencies of chest x-ray screening, frequent screening with chest x-rays was associated with an 11% relative increase in mortality from lung cancer compared with less frequent screening (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.23); however several of the trials included in this meta-analysis had potential methodological weaknesses. We observed a non-statistically significant trend to reduced mortality from lung cancer when screening with chest x-ray and sputum cytology was compared with chest x-ray alone (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.03). There was one large methodologically rigorous trial in high-risk smokers and ex-smokers (those aged 55 to 74 years with ≥ 30 pack-years of smoking and who quit ≤ 15 years prior to entry if ex-smokers) comparing annual low-dose CT screening with annual chest x-ray screening; in this study the relative risk of death from lung cancer was significantly reduced in the low-dose CT group (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.92). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence does not support screening for lung cancer with chest radiography or sputum cytology. Annual low-dose CT screening is associated with a reduction in lung cancer mortality in high-risk smokers but further data are required on the cost effectiveness of screening and the relative harms and benefits of screening across a range of different risk groups and settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23794187      PMCID: PMC6464996          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001991.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  114 in total

Review 1.  Screening for lung cancer.

Authors:  E F Patz; P C Goodman; G Bepler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Overdiagnosis: An underrecognized cause of confusion and harm in cancer screening.

Authors:  W C Black
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-08-16       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Evaluating periodic multiphasic health checkups: a controlled trial.

Authors:  L G Dales; G D Friedman; M F Collen
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1979

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

Authors:  A K Kubík; D M Parkin; P Zatloukal
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Detection failures in spiral CT screening for lung cancer: analysis of CT findings.

Authors:  R Kakinuma; H Ohmatsu; M Kaneko; K Eguchi; T Naruke; K Nagai; Y Nishiwaki; A Suzuki; N Moriyama
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening.

Authors:  C I Henschke; D I McCauley; D F Yankelevitz; D P Naidich; G McGuinness; O S Miettinen; D M Libby; M W Pasmantier; J Koizumi; N K Altorki; J P Smith
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-07-10       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Reanalysis of the Mayo Lung Project data: the impact of confounding and effect modification.

Authors:  P M Marcus; P C Prorok
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 2.136

8.  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

9.  Volatile organic compounds in breath as markers of lung cancer: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  M Phillips; K Gleeson; J M Hughes; J Greenberg; R N Cataneo; L Baker; W P McVay
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-06-05       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Results of three-year mass screening programme for lung cancer using mobile low-dose spiral computed tomography scanner.

Authors:  S Sone; F Li; Z G Yang; T Honda; Y Maruyama; S Takashima; M Hasegawa; S Kawakami; K Kubo; M Haniuda; T Yamanda
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2001-01-05       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  46 in total

1.  Noninvasive Quantitative Imaging-based Biomarkers and Lung Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Matthew B Schabath; Robert J Gillies
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 2.  Health screening for older people-what are the current recommendations?

Authors:  S G Sazlina
Journal:  Malays Fam Physician       Date:  2015-04-30

3.  Screening for Lung Cancer: Balancing Hope With Doubt About Applicability.

Authors:  Hans-Werner Hense
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 5.594

4.  Imaging in the diagnosis of lung disease: more sophisticated methods require greater interdisciplinary collaboration.

Authors:  Tobias Welte
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2014-03-14       Impact factor: 5.594

5.  MicroRNA expression profiling of sputum for the detection of early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a prospective case-control study.

Authors:  R Razzak; E L R Bédard; J O Kim; S Gazala; L Guo; S Ghosh; A Joy; T Nijjar; E Wong; W H Roa
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 6.  Recommendations on screening for lung cancer.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Risk models to select high risk candidates for lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Matthew B Schabath
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-02

8.  Lung Cancer Screening Using Low Dose CT Scanning in Germany. Extrapolation of results from the National Lung Screening Trial.

Authors:  Andreas Stang; Martin Schuler; Bernd Kowall; Kaid Darwiche; Hilmar Kühl; Karl-Heinz Jöckel
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 5.594

9.  Fluctuating Behavior of the French Population in Cancer Screening: 5th Edition of the EDIFICE Survey.

Authors:  Jérôme Viguier; Jean-François Morère; Xavier Pivot; Chantal Touboul; Christine Lhomel; Sébastien Couraud; Thibault de La Motte Rouge; François Eisinger
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 5.075

10.  Predicting Malignant Nodules from Screening CT Scans.

Authors:  Samuel Hawkins; Hua Wang; Ying Liu; Alberto Garcia; Olya Stringfield; Henry Krewer; Qian Li; Dmitry Cherezov; Robert A Gatenby; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Dmitry Goldgof; Matthew B Schabath; Lawrence Hall; Robert J Gillies
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 15.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.