Literature DB >> 32893112

Factors Influencing the False Positive Rate in CT Lung Cancer Screening.

Mark M Hammer1, Suzanne C Byrne2, Chung Yin Kong3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To identify factors influencing the likelihood of a false positive lung cancer screening (LCS) computed tomography (CT), which may lead to increased costs and patient anxiety.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, we examined all LCS CTs performed across our healthcare network from 2014 to 2018, recording Lung-RADS category and diagnosis of lung cancer. A false positive was defined by Lung-RADS 3-4X and no diagnosis of lung cancer within 1 year. Patient demographics and smoking history, presence of emphysema, diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, radiologist years of experience and annual volume, income level by patient zip code, and screening institution were evaluated in a multivariate logistic regression model for false positive exams.
RESULTS: A total of 5835 LCS CTs were included from 3735 patients. Lung cancer was diagnosed in 142 cases (2%). Of the LCS CTs, 905 (16%) were positive by Lung-RADS, and 766 (13%) represented false positives. Logistic regression analysis showed that screening institution (odds ratios [OR] 0.91 - 2.43), baseline scan (OR 1.43), radiologist experience (OR 0.59), patient age (OR 2.08), diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 1.34), presence of emphysema (OR 1.32), and income level (OR 0.43) were significant predictors of false positives.
CONCLUSION: A number of patient-specific and site/radiologist-specific factors influence the false positive rate in CT LCS. In particular, radiologists with less experience had a higher false positive rate. Screening programs may wish to develop quality assurance programs to compare the false positive rates of their radiologists to national benchmarks.
Copyright © 2020 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lung cancer screening; Lung-RADS; false positive; radiologist experience

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32893112      PMCID: PMC9219003          DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2020.07.040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   5.482


  13 in total

1.  Performance of Lung-RADS in the National Lung Screening Trial: a retrospective assessment.

Authors:  Paul F Pinsky; David S Gierada; William Black; Reginald Munden; Hrudaya Nath; Denise Aberle; Ella Kazerooni
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Effect of radiologist experience on the risk of false-positive results in breast cancer screening programs.

Authors:  Raquel Zubizarreta Alberdi; Ana B Fernández Llanes; Raquel Almazán Ortega; Rubén Roman Expósito; Jose M Velarde Collado; Teresa Queiro Verdes; Carmen Natal Ramos; María Ederra Sanz; Dolores Salas Trejo; Xavier Castells Oliveres
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-06-04       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  ACR-STR practice parameter for the performance and reporting of lung cancer screening thoracic computed tomography (CT): 2014 (Resolution 4).

Authors:  Ella A Kazerooni; John H M Austin; William C Black; Debra S Dyer; Todd R Hazelton; Ann N Leung; Michael F McNitt-Gray; Reginald F Munden; Sudhakar Pipavath
Journal:  J Thorac Imaging       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.000

4.  Radiologist interpretive volume and breast cancer screening accuracy in a Canadian organized screening program.

Authors:  Isabelle Théberge; Sue-Ling Chang; Nathalie Vandal; Jean-Marc Daigle; Marie-Hélène Guertin; Eric Pelletier; Jacques Brisson
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 13.506

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.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lung Cancer Screening in the United States: A Comparative Modeling Study.

Authors:  Steven D Criss; Pianpian Cao; Mehrad Bastani; Kevin Ten Haaf; Yufan Chen; Deirdre F Sheehan; Erik F Blom; Iakovos Toumazis; Jihyoun Jeon; Harry J de Koning; Sylvia K Plevritis; Rafael Meza; Chung Yin Kong
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Cost-effectiveness of CT screening in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Authors:  William C Black; Ilana F Gareen; Samir S Soneji; JoRean D Sicks; Emmett B Keeler; Denise R Aberle; Arash Naeim; Timothy R Church; Gerard A Silvestri; Jeremy Gorelick; Constantine Gatsonis
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Airflow Limitation and Histology Shift in the National Lung Screening Trial. The NLST-ACRIN Cohort Substudy.

Authors:  Robert P Young; Fenghai Duan; Caroline Chiles; Raewyn J Hopkins; Greg D Gamble; Erin M Greco; Constantine Gatsonis; Denise Aberle
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2015-11-01       Impact factor: 21.405

9.  Management of lung nodules detected by volume CT scanning.

Authors:  Rob J van Klaveren; Matthijs Oudkerk; Mathias Prokop; Ernst T Scholten; Kristiaan Nackaerts; Rene Vernhout; Carola A van Iersel; Karien A M van den Bergh; Susan van 't Westeinde; Carlijn van der Aalst; Erik Thunnissen; Dong Ming Xu; Ying Wang; Yingru Zhao; Hester A Gietema; Bart-Jan de Hoop; Harry J M Groen; Geertruida H de Bock; Peter van Ooijen; Carla Weenink; Johny Verschakelen; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Wim Timens; Dik Willebrand; Aryan Vink; Willem Mali; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-12-03       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  CT scan screening for lung cancer: risk factors for nodules and malignancy in a high-risk urban cohort.

Authors:  Alissa K Greenberg; Feng Lu; Judith D Goldberg; Ellen Eylers; Jun-Chieh Tsay; Ting-An Yie; David Naidich; Georgeann McGuinness; Harvey Pass; Kam-Meng Tchou-Wong; Doreen Addrizzo-Harris; Abraham Chachoua; Bernard Crawford; William N Rom
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  New anti-cancer explorations based on metal ions.

Authors:  Han Hu; Qi Xu; Zhimin Mo; Xiaoxi Hu; Qianyuan He; Zhanjie Zhang; Zushun Xu
Journal:  J Nanobiotechnology       Date:  2022-10-23       Impact factor: 9.429

2.  Lung Cancer Screening in Individuals With and Without Lung-Related Comorbidities.

Authors:  Eman M Metwally; M Patricia Rivera; Danielle D Durham; Lindsay Lane; Pasangi Perera; Derek Lamb; Louise M Henderson
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-09-01

Review 3.  The impact of income and education on lung cancer screening utilization, eligibility, and outcomes: a narrative review of socioeconomic disparities in lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Samuel Castro; Ernesto Sosa; Vanessa Lozano; Aamna Akhtar; Kyra Love; Jeanette Duffels; Dan J Raz; Jae Y Kim; Virginia Sun; Loretta Erhunmwunsee
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 3.005

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.