Reginald F Munden1, Caroline Chiles2, Phillip M Boiselle3, JoRean D Sicks4, Denise R Aberle5, Constantine A Gatsonis6. 1. Department of Radiology, Clinical Operations and Cancer Services, Wake Forest Baptist Health and School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Electronic address: munden@wakehealth.edu. 2. Wake Forest University Health Sciences Center, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 3. Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida. 4. Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 5. Department of Radiological Sciences/MII, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California. 6. Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) all cases with a 4-mm nodule (micronodule) and no other findings were classified as a negative study. The prevalence and malignant potential of micronodules in the NLST is evaluated to understand if this classification was appropriate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the NLST a total of 53,452 participants were enrolled with 26,722 undergoing low-dose computed tomography (CT) screening. To determine whether a micronodule developed into a lung cancer, a list from the NLST database of those participants who developed lung cancer and had a micronodule recorded was selected. The CT images of this subset were reviewed by experienced, fellowship-trained thoracic radiologists (R.F.M., C.C., P.M.B., and D.R.A.), all of whom participated as readers in the NLST. RESULTS: There were 26,722 participants who underwent CT in the NLST, of which 11,326 (42%) participants had at least one CT with a micronodule. Five thousand five hundred sixty (49%) of these participants had at least one positive CT examination, of which 409 (3.6%) subsequently were diagnosed with lung cancer. Of the 409 lung cancer cases with a micronodule recorded, there were 13 cases in which a micronodule developed into lung cancer. Considering the 13 cases, they represent 1.2% (13 of 1089) of the lung cancers diagnosed in the CT arm of the NLST and 0.11% (13 of 11,326) of the total micronodule cases. Additionally they represent 0.23% (13 of 5560) of the micronodule and at least one positive CT examination cases and 3.2% (13 of 409) of the micronodule cases diagnosed with lung cancer. The average size of the nodule at baseline (recorded as maximum diameter by perpendicular diameter) was 3.0 × 2.5 mm (ranges 2 x 4 mm and 2 x 4 mm) and at the positive CT the nodule was 11.1 × 8.6 mm (ranges, 6 x 20 mm and 5 x 14 mm); a difference of average change in size of 8.1 × 6.1 mm. The average number of days from first CT with a micronodule recorded to positive CT was 459 days (range, 338 - 723 days), the mean time from first CT with micronodule to lung cancer diagnosis was 617 days (range, 380 - 1140 days) and the mean time from positive CT to lung cancer diagnosis was 160 days (range, 18 - 417 days). Histologically, there was one small cell carcinoma and 12 non-small cell with stages of IA in 8 (62%), stage IB in 2 (15%), and 1 each stage IIIA, IIIB, and IV. The overall survival of NSCLC cases with a micronodule was not significantly different than the survival of the CT subset diagnosed with NSCL (p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: Micronodules are common among lung cancer-screened participants and are capable of developing into lung cancer; however, following micronodules by annual CT screening surveillance is appropriate and does not impact overall survival or outcome.
INTRODUCTION: In the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) all cases with a 4-mm nodule (micronodule) and no other findings were classified as a negative study. The prevalence and malignant potential of micronodules in the NLST is evaluated to understand if this classification was appropriate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the NLST a total of 53,452 participants were enrolled with 26,722 undergoing low-dose computed tomography (CT) screening. To determine whether a micronodule developed into a lung cancer, a list from the NLST database of those participants who developed lung cancer and had a micronodule recorded was selected. The CT images of this subset were reviewed by experienced, fellowship-trained thoracic radiologists (R.F.M., C.C., P.M.B., and D.R.A.), all of whom participated as readers in the NLST. RESULTS: There were 26,722 participants who underwent CT in the NLST, of which 11,326 (42%) participants had at least one CT with a micronodule. Five thousand five hundred sixty (49%) of these participants had at least one positive CT examination, of which 409 (3.6%) subsequently were diagnosed with lung cancer. Of the 409 lung cancer cases with a micronodule recorded, there were 13 cases in which a micronodule developed into lung cancer. Considering the 13 cases, they represent 1.2% (13 of 1089) of the lung cancers diagnosed in the CT arm of the NLST and 0.11% (13 of 11,326) of the total micronodule cases. Additionally they represent 0.23% (13 of 5560) of the micronodule and at least one positive CT examination cases and 3.2% (13 of 409) of the micronodule cases diagnosed with lung cancer. The average size of the nodule at baseline (recorded as maximum diameter by perpendicular diameter) was 3.0 × 2.5 mm (ranges 2 x 4 mm and 2 x 4 mm) and at the positive CT the nodule was 11.1 × 8.6 mm (ranges, 6 x 20 mm and 5 x 14 mm); a difference of average change in size of 8.1 × 6.1 mm. The average number of days from first CT with a micronodule recorded to positive CT was 459 days (range, 338 - 723 days), the mean time from first CT with micronodule to lung cancer diagnosis was 617 days (range, 380 - 1140 days) and the mean time from positive CT to lung cancer diagnosis was 160 days (range, 18 - 417 days). Histologically, there was one small cell carcinoma and 12 non-small cell with stages of IA in 8 (62%), stage IB in 2 (15%), and 1 each stage IIIA, IIIB, and IV. The overall survival of NSCLC cases with a micronodule was not significantly different than the survival of the CT subset diagnosed with NSCL (p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: Micronodules are common among lung cancer-screened participants and are capable of developing into lung cancer; however, following micronodules by annual CT screening surveillance is appropriate and does not impact overall survival or outcome.
Authors: Heber MacMahon; John H M Austin; Gordon Gamsu; Christian J Herold; James R Jett; David P Naidich; Edward F Patz; Stephen J Swensen Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Helmut Prosch; Gertraud Strasser; Elisabeth Oschatz; Ewald Schober; Barbara Schneider; Gerhard H Mostbeck Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.959
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
Authors: Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; Jonathan D Clapp; Kathy L Clingan; Ilana F Gareen; David A Lynch; Pamela M Marcus; Paul F Pinsky Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-11-22 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: David S Gierada; Paul Pinsky; Hrudaya Nath; Caroline Chiles; Fenghai Duan; Denise R Aberle Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-10-18 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Benedikt H Heidinger; Mario Silva; Constance de Margerie-Mellon; Paul A VanderLaan; Alexander A Bankier Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2019-12
Authors: Asha Bonney; Reem Malouf; Corynne Marchal; David Manners; Kwun M Fong; Henry M Marshall; Louis B Irving; Renée Manser Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-08-03
Authors: Peter J Mazzone; Gerard A Silvestri; Lesley H Souter; Tanner J Caverly; Jeffrey P Kanne; Hormuzd A Katki; Renda Soylemez Wiener; Frank C Detterbeck Journal: Chest Date: 2021-07-13 Impact factor: 9.410