Literature DB >> 27130532

Screening for lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Muhammad Usman Ali1, John Miller2, Leslea Peirson3, Donna Fitzpatrick-Lewis4, Meghan Kenny5, Diana Sherifali6, Parminder Raina7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine evidence on benefits and harms of screening average to high-risk adults for lung cancer using chest radiology (CXR), sputum cytology (SC) and low-dose computed tomography (LDCT).
METHODS: This systematic review was conducted to provide up to date evidence for Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) lung cancer screening guidelines. Four databases were searched to March 31, 2015 along with utilizing a previous Cochrane review search. Randomized trials reporting benefits were included; any design was included for harms. Meta-analyses were performed if possible. PROSPERO #CRD42014009984.
RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included. For lung cancer mortality there was no benefit of CXR screening, with or without SC. Pooled results from three small trials comparing LDCT to usual care found no significant benefits for lung cancer mortality. One large high quality trial showed statistically significant reductions of 20% in lung cancer mortality over a follow-up of 6.5years, for LDCT compared with CXR. LDCT screening was associated with: overdiagnosis of 10.99-25.83%; 11.18 deaths and 52.03 patients with major complications per 1000 undergoing invasive follow-up procedures; median estimate for false positives of 25.53% for baseline/once-only screening and 23.28% for multiple rounds; and 9.74 and 5.28 individuals per 1000 screened, with benign conditions underwent minor and major invasive follow-up procedures.
CONCLUSION: The evidence does not support CXR screening with or without sputum cytology for lung cancer. High quality evidence showed that in selected high-risk individuals, LDCT screening significantly reduced lung cancer mortality and all-cause mortality. However, for its implementation at a population level, the current evidence warrants the development of standardized practices for screening with LDCT and follow-up invasive testing to maximize accuracy and reduce potential associated harms.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lung cancer; Primary health care; Screening; Systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27130532     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.04.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  30 in total

Review 1.  Understanding and communicating risk: Measures of outcome and the magnitude of benefits and harms.

Authors:  Neil R Bell; James A Dickinson; Roland Grad; Harminder Singh; Danielle Kasperavicius; Brett D Thombs
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 3.275

2. 

Authors:  Neil R Bell; James A Dickinson; Roland Grad; Harminder Singh; Danielle Kasperavicius; Brett D Thombs
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 3.  Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT: a Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Richard M Hoffman; Rami P Atallah; Roger D Struble; Robert G Badgett
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Lung cancer screening primer: Key information for primary care providers.

Authors:  Anna N Wilkinson; Stephen Lam
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 3.275

5. 

Authors:  Anna N Wilkinson; Stephen Lam
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 3.275

6.  Reproducibility of radiomic features of pulmonary nodules between low-dose CT and conventional-dose CT.

Authors:  Yufan Gao; Minghui Hua; Jun Lv; Yanhe Ma; Yanzhen Liu; Min Ren; Yaohua Tian; Ximing Li; Hong Zhang
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-04

7.  Community-based Lung Cancer Screening Results in Relation to Patient and Radiologist Characteristics: The PROSPR Consortium.

Authors:  Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; Nikki M Carroll; Stacey A Honda; Caroline Joyce; Nandita Mitra; Christine Neslund-Dudas; Oluwatosin Olaiya; Katharine A Rendle; Mitchell D Schnall; Anil Vachani; Debra P Ritzwoller
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2022-03

Review 8.  Effect of inspiratory muscle training associated or not to physical rehabilitation in preoperative anatomic pulmonary resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Cindy de Oliveira Vacchi; Bianca Andrade Martha; Fabrício Edler Macagnan
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2021-08-21       Impact factor: 3.359

9.  2020 Innovation-Based Optimism for Lung Cancer Outcomes.

Authors:  Erin L Schenk; Tejas Patil; Jose Pacheco; Paul A Bunn
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2020-12-20

Review 10.  Recommendations for lung cancer screening in Southern Africa.

Authors:  Coenraad F N Koegelenberg; Shane Dorfman; Ivan Schewitz; Guy A Richards; Shaun Maasdorp; Clifford Smith; Keertan Dheda
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 2.895

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.