Literature DB >> 25312998

Lung cancer detectability by test, histology, stage, and gender: estimates from the NLST and the PLCO trials.

Kevin Ten Haaf1, Joost van Rosmalen2, Harry J de Koning3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Implementing optimal lung cancer screening programs requires knowledge of the natural history and detectability of lung cancer. This information can be derived from the results of clinical trials with the aid of microsimulation models.
METHODS: Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program and individual-level data from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) and the Prostate, Lung, Colon, and Ovarian Cancer Screening trial (PLCO) were used to investigate the sensitivity (by histology and stage) of CT and chest radiography (CXR) and the mean preclinical sojourn time (MPST) of lung cancer (by gender, histology, and stage). The MISCAN-Lung model was used to reproduce the lung cancer incidence by method of detection (clinically or screen-detected), gender, histology, and stage in both trials and SEER, by calibrating CT and CXR sensitivity and natural history parameters.
RESULTS: CT sensitivity ranges from 8.83% to 99.35% and CXR sensitivity from 2.51% to 97.31%, depending on histology and stage. CT sensitivity for stage IA is more than 3-fold higher compared with CXR, for all histologies. The total MPST estimates for lung cancer progressing through preclinical stages IA to IV range from 3.09 to 5.32 years for men and 3.35 to 6.01 years for women. The largest difference in total MPST between genders was estimated for adenocarcinoma.
CONCLUSIONS: We estimate longer MPSTs for lung cancer compared with previous research, suggesting a greater window of opportunity for lung cancer screening. IMPACT: This study provides detailed insights into the natural history of lung cancer and CT screening effectiveness. ©2014 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25312998      PMCID: PMC4357842          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0745

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  25 in total

1.  The National Lung Screening Trial: overview and study design.

Authors:  Denise R Aberle; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Timothy R Church; Richard M Fagerstrom; Barbara Galen; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Jonathan Goldin; John K Gohagan; Bruce Hillman; Carl Jaffe; Barnett S Kramer; David Lynch; Pamela M Marcus; Mitchell Schnall; Daniel C Sullivan; Dorothy Sullivan; Carl J Zylak
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Sojourn time and lead time projection in lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Dongfeng Wu; Diane Erwin; Gary L Rosner
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2010-11-13       Impact factor: 5.705

3.  Clarifying differences in natural history between models of screening: the case of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Carolyn M Rutter; Amy B Knudsen; Ann G Zauber; James E Savarino; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Rob Boer; Eric J Feuer; J Dik F Habbema; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Screening by chest radiograph and lung cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) randomized trial.

Authors:  Martin M Oken; Willam G Hocking; Paul A Kvale; Gerald L Andriole; Saundra S Buys; Timothy R Church; E David Crawford; Mona N Fouad; Claudine Isaacs; Douglas J Reding; Joel L Weissfeld; Lance A Yokochi; Barbara O'Brien; Lawrence R Ragard; Joshua M Rathmell; Thomas L Riley; Patrick Wright; Neil Caparaso; Ping Hu; Grant Izmirlian; Paul F Pinsky; Philip C Prorok; Barnett S Kramer; Anthony B Miller; John K Gohagan; Christine D Berg
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening.

Authors:  Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Jonathan D Clapp; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Annual Report to the Nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2008, featuring cancers associated with excess weight and lack of sufficient physical activity.

Authors:  Christie Eheman; S Jane Henley; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Eric J Jacobs; Maria J Schymura; Anne-Michelle Noone; Liping Pan; Robert N Anderson; Janet E Fulton; Betsy A Kohler; Ahmedin Jemal; Elizabeth Ward; Marcus Plescia; Lynn A G Ries; Brenda K Edwards
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Global cancer statistics.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Freddie Bray; Melissa M Center; Jacques Ferlay; Elizabeth Ward; David Forman
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2011-02-04       Impact factor: 508.702

8.  Prostate-specific antigen screening in the United States vs in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer-Rotterdam.

Authors:  Elisabeth M Wever; Gerrit Draisma; Eveline A M Heijnsdijk; Monique J Roobol; Rob Boer; Suzie J Otto; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-02-08       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Chapter 7: Description of MISCAN-lung, the Erasmus MC Lung Cancer microsimulation model for evaluating cancer control interventions.

Authors:  F W Schultz; R Boer; H J de Koning
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.000

10.  Chapter 5: Actual and counterfactual smoking prevalence rates in the U.S. population via microsimulation.

Authors:  Jihyoun Jeon; Rafael Meza; Martin Krapcho; Lauren D Clarke; Jeff Byrne; David T Levy
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.000

View more
  30 in total

1.  Examining Gender Differences in Lung Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Simran Randhawa; Shelby R Sferra; Chandra Das; Larry R Kaiser; Grace X Ma; Cherie P Erkmen
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2020-10

2.  Potential Impact of Cessation Interventions at the Point of Lung Cancer Screening on Lung Cancer and Overall Mortality in the United States.

Authors:  Pianpian Cao; Jihyoun Jeon; David T Levy; Jinani C Jayasekera; Christopher J Cadham; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Kathryn L Taylor; Rafael Meza
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2020-03-08       Impact factor: 15.609

3.  Development of a RNA-Seq Based Prognostic Signature in Lung Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Sudhanshu Shukla; Joseph R Evans; Rohit Malik; Felix Y Feng; Saravana M Dhanasekaran; Xuhong Cao; Guoan Chen; David G Beer; Hui Jiang; Arul M Chinnaiyan
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Cost-effectiveness of lung MRI in lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Bradley D Allen; Mark L Schiebler; Gregor Sommer; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Juergen Biederer; Timothy J Kruser; James C Carr; Gordon Hazen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Biomarkers in lung cancer screening: the importance of study design.

Authors:  David R Baldwin; Matthew E Callister; Philip A Crosbie; Emma L O'Dowd; Robert C Rintoul; Hilary A Robbins; Robert J C Steele
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2021-01-14       Impact factor: 16.671

6.  Identifying Patients for Whom Lung Cancer Screening Is Preference-Sensitive: A Microsimulation Study.

Authors:  Tanner J Caverly; Pianpian Cao; Rodney A Hayward; Rafael Meza
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening: why modelling is essential.

Authors:  Kevin Ten Haaf; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2015-06-12       Impact factor: 3.710

8.  Genetic variant of IRAK2 in the toll-like receptor signaling pathway and survival of non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Yinghui Xu; Hongliang Liu; Shun Liu; Yanru Wang; Jichun Xie; Thomas E Stinchcombe; Li Su; Ruyang Zhang; David C Christiani; Wei Li; Qingyi Wei
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 7.396

9.  Should Never-Smokers at Increased Risk for Lung Cancer Be Screened?

Authors:  Kevin Ten Haaf; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 15.609

10.  Cost-effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Population-based Breast Cancer Screening: A Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis.

Authors:  Valérie D V Sankatsing; Karolina Juraniec; Sabine E Grimm; Manuela A Joore; Ruud M Pijnappel; Harry J de Koning; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.