David S Gierada1, Paul F Pinsky2. 1. Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO. Electronic address: gieradad@wustl.edu. 2. Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is limited information about survival of stage I lung cancer diagnosed by screening. RESEARCH QUESTION: What was the survival rate of screen-detected stage I lung cancer in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), and was it affected by screening method, patient or tumor characteristics, or treatment method? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The study cohort consisted of all NLST participants with screen-detected stage I lung cancer. Lung cancer-specific survival for stage I overall and for IA and IB substages were compared in the low-dose CT and chest radiography (CXR) screening randomization arms and with an analogous cohort from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute; the cumulative incidence competing risk method was used for analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between lung cancer-specific survival and screening arm, patient factors, primary tumor size, and treatment. RESULTS: There were 324 screen-detected stage I lung cancers in the low-dose CT arm and 125 in the CXR arm. The 10-year survival in the low-dose CT arm was greater than in the CXR arm (73.4% vs 64.6%; P = .05), and both were greater than in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cohort (55.6%; P < .001 vs low-dose CT arm, P = .04 vs CXR arm). Proportional hazards models revealed a greater likelihood of survival in the low-dose CT arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.5-0.98) and with primary tumor size below the median of 17 mm (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.88). There was no survival difference between treatment with limited resection vs full resection (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.6-1.9), whereas nonsurgical treatment was associated with a reduced likelihood of survival compared with full resection (HR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.6-6.0). INTERPRETATION: Long-term lung cancer-specific survival of stage I lung cancer was greater with low-dose CT imaging than with CXR screening or in the general population, for smaller primary tumor size, and with surgical treatment.
BACKGROUND: There is limited information about survival of stage I lung cancer diagnosed by screening. RESEARCH QUESTION: What was the survival rate of screen-detected stage I lung cancer in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), and was it affected by screening method, patient or tumor characteristics, or treatment method? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The study cohort consisted of all NLST participants with screen-detected stage I lung cancer. Lung cancer-specific survival for stage I overall and for IA and IB substages were compared in the low-dose CT and chest radiography (CXR) screening randomization arms and with an analogous cohort from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute; the cumulative incidence competing risk method was used for analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between lung cancer-specific survival and screening arm, patient factors, primary tumor size, and treatment. RESULTS: There were 324 screen-detected stage I lung cancers in the low-dose CT arm and 125 in the CXR arm. The 10-year survival in the low-dose CT arm was greater than in the CXR arm (73.4% vs 64.6%; P = .05), and both were greater than in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cohort (55.6%; P < .001 vs low-dose CT arm, P = .04 vs CXR arm). Proportional hazards models revealed a greater likelihood of survival in the low-dose CT arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.5-0.98) and with primary tumor size below the median of 17 mm (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.88). There was no survival difference between treatment with limited resection vs full resection (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.6-1.9), whereas nonsurgical treatment was associated with a reduced likelihood of survival compared with full resection (HR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.6-6.0). INTERPRETATION: Long-term lung cancer-specific survival of stage I lung cancer was greater with low-dose CT imaging than with CXR screening or in the general population, for smaller primary tumor size, and with surgical treatment.
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
Authors: Jessica Donington; Mark Ferguson; Peter Mazzone; John Handy; Matthew Schuchert; Hiran Fernando; Billy Loo; Michael Lanuti; Alberto de Hoyos; Frank Detterbeck; Arjun Pennathur; John Howington; Rodney Landreneau; Gerard Silvestri Journal: Chest Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Denise R Aberle; Sarah DeMello; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Brenda Brewer; Timothy R Church; Kathy L Clingan; Fenghai Duan; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine A Gatsonis; David S Gierada; Amanda Jain; Gordon C Jones; Irene Mahon; Pamela M Marcus; Joshua M Rathmell; JoRean Sicks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-09-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Gregory M M Videtic; Jessica Donington; Meredith Giuliani; John Heinzerling; Tomer Z Karas; Chris R Kelsey; Brian E Lally; Karen Latzka; Simon S Lo; Drew Moghanaki; Benjamin Movsas; Andreas Rimner; Michael Roach; George Rodrigues; Shervin M Shirvani; Charles B Simone; Robert Timmerman; Megan E Daly Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-06-05
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: Harry J de Koning; Carlijn M van der Aalst; Pim A de Jong; Ernst T Scholten; Kristiaan Nackaerts; Marjolein A Heuvelmans; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Carla Weenink; Uraujh Yousaf-Khan; Nanda Horeweg; Susan van 't Westeinde; Mathias Prokop; Willem P Mali; Firdaus A A Mohamed Hoesein; Peter M A van Ooijen; Joachim G J V Aerts; Michael A den Bakker; Erik Thunnissen; Johny Verschakelen; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Joan E Walter; Kevin Ten Haaf; Harry J M Groen; Matthijs Oudkerk Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Eric J Burks; Jiarui Zhang; Travis B Sullivan; Xingyi Shi; Jacob M Sands; Shawn M Regis; Brady J McKee; Andrea B McKee; Sherry Zhang; Hanqiao Liu; Gang Liu; Avrum Spira; Jennifer Beane; Marc E Lenburg; Kimberly M Rieger-Christ Journal: Cancer Treat Res Commun Date: 2021-11-10