Literature DB >> 24955929

CT screening for lung cancer: alternative definitions of positive test result based on the national lung screening trial and international early lung cancer action program databases.

Rowena Yip1, Claudia I Henschke, David F Yankelevitz, James P Smith.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the usefulness of alternative nodule size thresholds in a population undergoing computed tomographic (CT) screening for lung cancer and to compare the reported International Early Lung Cancer Action Program ( I-ELCAP International Early Lung Cancer Action Program ) results with the National Lung Screening Trial ( NLST National Lung Screening Trial ) results.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved this retrospective analysis. Informed consent was obtained according to HIPAA compliance. Findings in the CT cohort in the NLST National Lung Screening Trial of 25 813 participants who underwent baseline CT in 2002-2004 were reviewed. The frequency of solid and part-solid pulmonary nodules and the lung cancer diagnoses using an alternative nodule threshold of 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, and 9.0 mm were determined. Proportional reduction in the frequency of positive results and their 95% confidence intervals using each of the alternative thresholds were calculated.
RESULTS: The frequency of positive results in the baseline round in the CT arm of the NLST National Lung Screening Trial using the definition of a positive result of any parenchymal, solid or part-solid, noncalcified nodule of 5.0 mm or larger was 15.8% (4080 of 25 813). Using alternative thresholds of 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, and 9.0 mm, the frequencies of positive results were 10.5% (2700 of 25 813, 7.2% (1847 of 25 813), 5.3% (1362 of 25 813), and 4.1% (1007 of 25 813), respectively, and the corresponding proportional reduction in additional CT scans would have been 33.8% (1380 of 1480), 54.7% (2233 of 4080), 66.6% (2718 of 4080), and 73.8% (3013 of 4080), respectively. Concomitantly, the proportion of lung cancer diagnoses determined within the first 12 months would be delayed up to 9 months for 0.9% (two of 232), 2.6% (six of 232), 6.0% (14 of 232), and 9.9% (23 of 232) of the patients, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The NLST National Lung Screening Trial results are similar to those previously reported for the I-ELCAP International Early Lung Cancer Action Program and suggest that, even for high-risk participants in the NLST National Lung Screening Trial , higher thresholds of nodule size should be considered and prospectively evaluated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24955929     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14132950

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  32 in total

1.  Optimizing lung cancer screening: nodule size, volume doubling time, morphology and evaluation of other diseases.

Authors:  Firdaus A A Mohamed Hoesein; Pim A de Jong; Onno M Mets
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-02

2.  The Puzzle of the Perifissural Nodule.

Authors:  Charles S White; Geoffrey D Rubin
Journal:  Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging       Date:  2020-08-27

3.  Lung cancer screening: the path forward.

Authors:  Caroline Chiles; Reginald F Munden
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2018-06

4.  Comparison Between Radiological Semantic Features and Lung-RADS in Predicting Malignancy of Screen-Detected Lung Nodules in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Authors:  Qian Li; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Ying Liu; Jin Qi; Matthew B Schabath; Zhaoxiang Ye; Robert J Gillies
Journal:  Clin Lung Cancer       Date:  2017-10-13       Impact factor: 4.785

5.  Micronodules Detected on Computed Tomography During the National Lung Screening Trial: Prevalence and Relation to Positive Studies and Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Reginald F Munden; Caroline Chiles; Phillip M Boiselle; JoRean D Sicks; Denise R Aberle; Constantine A Gatsonis
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2019-07-08       Impact factor: 15.609

Review 6.  Advancing and sharing the knowledge base of CT screening for lung cancer.

Authors:  David F Yankelevitz; Claudia I Henschke
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-04

7.  Indeterminate pulmonary nodules: risk for having or for developing lung cancer?

Authors:  Pierre P Massion; Ronald C Walker
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2014-10-27

Review 8.  Quality assurance and quantitative imaging biomarkers in low-dose CT lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Chara E Rydzak; Samuel G Armato; Ricardo S Avila; James L Mulshine; David F Yankelevitz; David S Gierada
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-10-27       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 9.  Risk factors assessment and risk prediction models in lung cancer screening candidates.

Authors:  Mariusz Adamek; Ewa Wachuła; Sylwia Szabłowska-Siwik; Agnieszka Boratyn-Nowicka; Damian Czyżewski
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-04

10.  Perceptions and Utilization of Lung Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Physicians.

Authors:  Dan J Raz; Geena X Wu; Martin Consunji; Rebecca Nelson; Canlan Sun; Loretta Erhunmwunsee; Betty Ferrell; Virginia Sun; Jae Y Kim
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 15.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.