Literature DB >> 26485620

Results of the Randomized Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial with Focus on High-Risk Profiling.

Mathilde M W Wille1,2, Asger Dirksen1, Haseem Ashraf1,3, Zaigham Saghir4, Karen S Bach5, John Brodersen6, Paul F Clementsen1,7, Hanne Hansen8, Klaus R Larsen4, Jann Mortensen9, Jakob F Rasmussen6, Niels Seersholm1, Birgit G Skov10, Laura H Thomsen1, Philip Tønnesen11, Jesper H Pedersen12.   

Abstract

RATIONALE: As of April 2015, participants in the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial had been followed for at least 5 years since their last screening.
OBJECTIVES: Mortality, causes of death, and lung cancer findings are reported to explore the effect of computed tomography (CT) screening.
METHODS: A total of 4,104 participants aged 50-70 years at the time of inclusion and with a minimum 20 pack-years of smoking were randomized to have five annual low-dose CT scans (study group) or no screening (control group).
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Follow-up information regarding date and cause of death, lung cancer diagnosis, cancer stage, and histology was obtained from national registries. No differences between the two groups in lung cancer mortality (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.6; P = 0.888) or all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.27; P = 0.867) were observed. More cancers were found in the screening group than in the no-screening group (100 vs. 53, respectively; P < 0.001), particularly adenocarcinomas (58 vs. 18, respectively; P < 0.001). More early-stage cancers (stages I and II, 54 vs. 10, respectively; P < 0.001) and stage IIIa cancers (15 vs. 3, respectively; P = 0.009) were found in the screening group than in the control group. Stage IV cancers were nonsignificantly more frequent in the control group than in the screening group (32 vs. 23, respectively; P = 0.278). For the highest-stage cancers (T4N3M1, 21 vs. 8, respectively; P = 0.025), this difference was statistically significant, indicating an absolute stage shift. Older participants, those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and those with more than 35 pack-years of smoking had a significantly increased risk of death due to lung cancer, with nonsignificantly fewer deaths in the screening group.
CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant effects of CT screening on lung cancer mortality were found, but the results of post hoc high-risk subgroup analyses showed nonsignificant trends that seem to be in good agreement with the results of the National Lung Screening Trial. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00496977).

Entities:  

Keywords:  chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; computed tomography; lung cancer; screening

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26485620     DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201505-1040OC

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med        ISSN: 1073-449X            Impact factor:   21.405


  78 in total

Review 1.  Lung cancer screening-low dose CT for lung cancer screening: recent trial results and next steps.

Authors:  Emma Louise O'Dowd; David R Baldwin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Patient factors to consider before lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Chin A Yi; Tae Jung Kim; Kyung Soo Lee
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Recommendations from the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) regarding computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Europe.

Authors:  Jesper Holst Pedersen; Witold Rzyman; Giulia Veronesi; Thomas A D'Amico; Paul Van Schil; Laureano Molins; Gilbert Massard; Gaetano Rocco
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 4.191

4.  Surrogate Markers and the Association of Low-Dose CT Lung Cancer Screening With Mortality.

Authors:  Kaitlin M Woo; Mithat Gönen; Geoffrey Schnorr; Gerard A Silvestri; Peter B Bach
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 31.777

5.  Improving CT screening for lung cancer with a highly predictive risk model.

Authors:  Cristiano Rampinelli; Marta Minotti
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-04

6.  Estimation of Overdiagnosis of Lung Cancer in Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening: A Secondary Analysis of the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial.

Authors:  Bruno Heleno; Volkert Siersma; John Brodersen
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 7.  Cancer-Specific Mortality, All-Cause Mortality, and Overdiagnosis in Lung Cancer Screening Trials: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Mark H Ebell; Michelle Bentivegna; Cassie Hulme
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 5.166

8.  Erratum to inequivalence of non-aggressiveness in clinically diagnosed lung cancers and overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening trials.

Authors:  Jerome M Reich; Jong S Kim
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Update in Lung Cancer 2015.

Authors:  Avrum Spira; Balazs Halmos; Charles A Powell
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 10.  Lung cancer screening in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors:  Jessica Gonzalez; Marta Marín; Pablo Sánchez-Salcedo; Javier J Zulueta
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.