Literature DB >> 25123333

Interval lung cancers not detected on screening chest X-rays: How are they different?

Paul A Kvale1, Christine Cole Johnson2, Martin Tammemägi3, Pamela M Marcus4, Carl J Zylak5, David L Spizarny6, William Hocking7, Martin Oken8, John Commins9, Lawrence Ragard10, Ping Hu11, Christine Berg12, Philip Prorok13.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial provides us an opportunity to describe interval lung cancers not detected by screening chest X-ray (CXR) compared to screen-detected cancers.
METHODS: Participants were screened for lung cancer with CXR at baseline and annually for two (never smokers) or three (ever smokers) more years. Screen-detected cancers were those with a positive CXR and diagnosed within 12 months. Putative interval cancers were those with a negative CXR screen but with a diagnosis of lung cancer within 12 months. Potential interval cancers were re-reviewed to determine whether lung cancer was missed and probably present during the initial interpretation or whether the lesion was a "true interval" cancer.
RESULTS: 77,445 participants were randomized to the intervention arm with 70,633 screened. Of 5227 positive screens from any screening round, 299 resulted in screen-detected lung cancers; 151 had potential interval cancers with 127 CXR available for re-review. Cancer was probably present in 45/127 (35.4%) at time of screening; 82 (64.6%) were "true interval" cancers. Compared to screen-detected cancers, true interval cancers were more common among males, persons with <12 years education and those with a history of smoking. True interval lung cancers were more often small cell, 28.1% vs. 7.4%, and less often adenocarcinoma, 25.6% vs. 56.2% (p<0.001), more advanced stage IV (30.5% vs. 16.6%, p<0.02), and less likely to be in the right upper lobe, 17.1% vs. 36.1% (p<0.02).
CONCLUSION: True interval lung cancers differ from CXR-screen-detected cancers with regard to demographic variables, stage, cell type and location. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00002540.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chest X-ray screen-detected lung cancers; Chest radiograph; Lung cancer; PLCO Cancer Screening Trial; Pulmonary tumour; Screening interval lung cancers

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25123333      PMCID: PMC4232302          DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.07.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lung Cancer        ISSN: 0169-5002            Impact factor:   5.705


  15 in total

1.  National survey of the pattern of care for carcinoma of the lung.

Authors:  E W Humphrey; C R Smart; D P Winchester; G D Steele; J W Yarbro; K C Chu; H H Triolo
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 5.209

2.  Lack of benefit from semi-annual screening for cancer of the lung: follow-up report of a randomized controlled trial on a population of high-risk males in Czechoslovakia.

Authors:  A Kubik; D M Parkin; M Khlat; J Erban; J Polak; M Adamec
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1990-01-15       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Pulmonary nodules: computer-aided detection in digital chest images.

Authors:  M L Giger; K Doi; H MacMahon; C E Metz; F F Yin
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 5.333

4.  Cancer statistics, 2014.

Authors:  Rebecca Siegel; Jiemin Ma; Zhaohui Zou; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2014-01-07       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Miss rate of lung cancer on the chest radiograph in clinical practice.

Authors:  L G Quekel; A G Kessels; R Goei; J M van Engelshoven
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 9.410

6.  Radiologic errors in patients with lung cancer.

Authors:  J V Forrest; P J Friedman
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1981-06

7.  Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Memorial Sloan-Kettering study.

Authors:  B J Flehinger; M R Melamed; M B Zaman; R T Heelan; W B Perchick; N Martini
Journal:  Am Rev Respir Dis       Date:  1984-10

8.  Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Johns Hopkins study.

Authors:  J K Frost; W C Ball; M L Levin; M S Tockman; R R Baker; D Carter; J C Eggleston; Y S Erozan; P K Gupta; N F Khouri
Journal:  Am Rev Respir Dis       Date:  1984-10

9.  Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Mayo Clinic study.

Authors:  R S Fontana; D R Sanderson; W F Taylor; L B Woolner; W E Miller; J R Muhm; M A Uhlenhopp
Journal:  Am Rev Respir Dis       Date:  1984-10

10.  Screening for early lung cancer. Results of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering study in New York.

Authors:  M R Melamed; B J Flehinger; M B Zaman; R T Heelan; W A Perchick; N Martini
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 9.410

View more
  2 in total

1.  Sensitivity of chest X-ray for detecting lung cancer in people presenting with symptoms: a systematic review.

Authors:  Stephen H Bradley; Sarah Abraham; Matthew Ej Callister; Adam Grice; William T Hamilton; Rocio Rodriguez Lopez; Bethany Shinkins; Richard D Neal
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Estimating lung cancer risk from chest X-ray and symptoms: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Stephen H Bradley; Nathaniel Luke Fielding Hatton; Rehima Aslam; Bobby Bhartia; Matthew Ej Callister; Martyn Pt Kennedy; Luke Ta Mounce; Bethany Shinkins; William T Hamilton; Richard D Neal
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 5.386

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.