Lung cancer screening: Clinical practice guidelines in oncology
University of Washington1, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center2, Johns Hopkins University3, Northwestern University4, Brigham and Women's Hospital5, University of Michigan6, University of South Florida7, University of Nebraska–Lincoln8, University of California, San Francisco9, Stanford University10, Vanderbilt University11, Washington University in St. Louis12, Ohio State University13, University of Utah14, Roswell Park Cancer Institute15, City of Hope National Medical Center16, Harvard University17, Duke University18, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center19, Fox Chase Cancer Center20
01 Feb 2012-Journal of The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (Cold Spring Publishing LLC)-Vol. 10, Iss: 2, pp 240-265
TL;DR: A focus on multidisciplinary programs (incorporating primary care doctors, pulmonologists, radiologists, thoracic surgeons, medical oncologists, and pathologists) will be helpful to optimize decision-making and minimize interventions for patients with benign lung disease.
Abstract: Lung cancer screening with LDCT is a complex and controversial topic, with inherent risks and benefits. Results from the large, prospective, randomized NLST show that lung cancer screening with LDCT can decrease lung cancer–specific mortality by 20% and even decrease all-cause mortality by 7%.8 The NLST results indicate that to prevent one death from lung cancer, 320 high-risk individuals must be screened with LDCT. However, the NLST findings have not been replicated yet in a separate cohort. Further analysis of the NLST is underway, including comparative effectiveness modeling. The cost-effectiveness and true benefit-to-risk ratio for lung cancer screening still must be determined. At some point, an acceptable level of risk will have to be deemed appropriate for the benefits of screening.
The NCCN Lung Cancer Screening Panel recommends helical LDCT screening for select patients at high risk for lung cancer based on the NLST results, nonrandomized studies, and observational data. These guidelines discuss in detail the criteria for determining which patients are at high risk, and the algorithm provides recommendations for evaluating and following-up nodules detected on LDCT screening (e.g., solid and part-solid nodules).
Smokers should always be encouraged to quit smoking tobacco (http://www.smokefree.gov/). Programs using behavioral counseling combined with medications that promote smoking cessation (approved by the FDA) can be very useful (see Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: Quick Reference Guide for Clinicians; http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/tobacco/tobaqrg.htm).
When considering lung cancer screening, it is important to have a full understanding of all risks and benefits related to screening with LDCT. As policies for implementing lung screening programs are designed, a focus on multidisciplinary programs (incorporating primary care doctors, pulmonologists, radiologists, thoracic surgeons, medical oncologists, and pathologists) will be helpful to optimize decision-making and minimize interventions for patients with benign lung disease.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: Predictive tools based on patient and nodule characteristics can be used to accurately estimate the probability that lung nodules detected on baseline screening low-dose CT scans are malignant, according to a population-based prospective study.
Abstract: A B S T R AC T Background Major issues in the implementation of screening for lung cancer by means of lowdose computed tomography (CT) are the definition of a positive result and the management of lung nodules detected on the scans. We conducted a populationbased prospective study to determine factors predicting the probability that lung nodules detected on the first screening low-dose CT scans are malignant or will be found to be malignant on follow-up. Methods We analyzed data from two cohorts of participants undergoing low-dose CT screening. The development data set included participants in the Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer Study (PanCan). The validation data set included participants involved in chemoprevention trials at the British Columbia Cancer Agency (BCCA), sponsored by the U.S. National Cancer Institute. The final outcomes of all nodules of any size that were detected on baseline low-dose CT scans were tracked. Parsimonious and fuller multivariable logistic-regression models were prepared to estimate the probability of lung cancer. Results In the PanCan data set, 1871 persons had 7008 nodules, of which 102 were malignant, and in the BCCA data set, 1090 persons had 5021 nodules, of which 42 were malignant. Among persons with nodules, the rates of cancer in the two data sets were 5.5% and 3.7%, respectively. Predictors of cancer in the model included older age, female sex, family history of lung cancer, emphysema, larger nodule size, location of the nodule in the upper lobe, part-solid nodule type, lower nodule count, and spiculation. Our final parsimonious and full models showed excellent discrimination and calibration, with areas under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve of more than 0.90, even for nodules that were 10 mm or smaller in the validation set. Conclusions Predictive tools based on patient and nodule characteristics can be used to accurately estimate the probability that lung nodules detected on baseline screening low-dose CT scans are malignant. (Funded by the Terry Fox Research Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00751660.)
955 citations
TL;DR: The use of the PLCO(M2012) model was more sensitive than the NLST criteria for lung-cancer detection and compared the accuracy of PLCo(M 2012) criteria withNLST criteria to detect lung cancer.
Abstract: Background The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) used risk factors for lung cancer (e.g., ≥30 pack-years of smoking and <15 years since quitting) as selection criteria for lung-cancer screening. Use of an accurate model that incorporates additional risk factors to select persons for screening may identify more persons who have lung cancer or in whom lung cancer will develop. Methods We modified the 2011 lung-cancer risk-prediction model from our Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial to ensure applicability to NLST data; risk was the probability of a diagnosis of lung cancer during the 6-year study period. We developed and validated the model (PLCOM2012) with data from the 80,375 persons in the PLCO control and intervention groups who had ever smoked. Discrimination (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve [AUC]) and calibration were assessed. In the validation data set, 14,144 of 37,332 persons (37.9%) met NLST criteria. For comparison, 14,144 highest-risk...
699 citations
Thomas Jefferson University1, Louisiana State University2, NorthShore University HealthSystem3, University of Chicago4, Washington University in St. Louis5, University of Minnesota6, Johns Hopkins University7, University of Washington8, Emory University9, Harvard University10, Eli Lilly and Company11, LSU Health Sciences Center Shreveport12, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center13, Duke University14, University of California, San Francisco15, University of Virginia16, American Cancer Society17
TL;DR: Based on the results of the National Lung Screening Trial, the American Cancer Society is issuing an initial guideline for lung cancer screening as mentioned in this paper, which recommends that clinicians with access to high-volume, high-quality screening and treatment centers should initiate a discussion about screening with apparently healthy patients aged 55 years to 74 years who have at least a 30-pack-year smoking history and who currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years.
Abstract: Findings from the National Cancer Institute’s National Lung Screening Trial established that lung cancer mortality in specific high-risk groups can be reduced by annual screening with low-dose computed tomography. These findings indicate that the adoption of lung cancer screening could save many lives. Based on the results of the National Lung Screening Trial, the American Cancer Society is issuing an initial guideline for lung cancer screening. This guideline recommends that clinicians with access to high-volume, high-quality lung cancer screening and treatment centers should initiate a discussion about screening with apparently healthy patients aged 55 years to 74 years who have at least a 30–pack-year smoking history and who currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. A process of informed and shared decision-making with a clinician related to the potential benefits, limitations, and harms associated with screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography should occur before any decision is made to initiate lung cancer screening. Smoking cessation counseling remains a high priority for clinical attention in discussions with current smokers, who should be informed of their continuing risk of lung cancer. Screening should not be viewed as an alternative to smoking cessation. CA Cancer J Clin 2013;000:000-000. V C 2013 American Cancer Society.
635 citations
TL;DR: Screening with low-dose CT prevented the greatest number of deaths from lung cancer among participants who were at highest risk and prevented very few deaths among those at lowest risk.
Abstract: Background In the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), screening with low-dose computed tomography (CT) resulted in a 20% reduction in lung-cancer mortality among participants between the ages of 55 and 74 years with a minimum of 30 pack-years of smoking and no more than 15 years since quitting. It is not known whether the benefits and potential harms of such screening vary according to lung-cancer risk. Methods We assessed the variation in efficacy, the number of false positive results, and the number of lung-cancer deaths prevented among 26,604 participants in the NLST who underwent low-dose CT screening, as compared with the 26,554 participants who underwent chest radiography, according to the quintile of 5-year risk of lung-cancer death (ranging from 0.15 to 0.55% in the lowest-risk group [quintile 1] to more than 2.00% in the highest-risk group [quintile 5]). Results The number of lung-cancer deaths per 10,000 person-years that were prevented in the CT-screening group, as compared with the radiograp...
484 citations
TL;DR: The American Cancer Society (ACS) publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection along with a report on data and trends in cancer screening rates and select issues related to cancer screening as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Each year, the American Cancer Society (ACS) publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection along with a report on data and trends in cancer screening rates and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, we summarize current ACS cancer screening guidelines. The latest data on utilization of cancer screening from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) also is described, as are several issues related to screening coverage under the Affordable Care Act, including the expansion of the Medicaid program.
375 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: A substantial proportion of the worldwide burden of cancer could be prevented through the application of existing cancer control knowledge and by implementing programs for tobacco control, vaccination, and early detection and treatment, as well as public health campaigns promoting physical activity and a healthier dietary intake.
Abstract: The global burden of cancer continues to increase largely because of the aging and growth of the world population alongside an increasing adoption of cancer-causing behaviors, particularly smoking, in economically developing countries. Based on the GLOBOCAN 2008 estimates, about 12.7 million cancer cases and 7.6 million cancer deaths are estimated to have occurred in 2008; of these, 56% of the cases and 64% of the deaths occurred in the economically developing world. Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among females, accounting for 23% of the total cancer cases and 14% of the cancer deaths. Lung cancer is the leading cancer site in males, comprising 17% of the total new cancer cases and 23% of the total cancer deaths. Breast cancer is now also the leading cause of cancer death among females in economically developing countries, a shift from the previous decade during which the most common cause of cancer death was cervical cancer. Further, the mortality burden for lung cancer among females in developing countries is as high as the burden for cervical cancer, with each accounting for 11% of the total female cancer deaths. Although overall cancer incidence rates in the developing world are half those seen in the developed world in both sexes, the overall cancer mortality rates are generally similar. Cancer survival tends to be poorer in developing countries, most likely because of a combination of a late stage at diagnosis and limited access to timely and standard treatment. A substantial proportion of the worldwide burden of cancer could be prevented through the application of existing cancer control knowledge and by implementing programs for tobacco control, vaccination (for liver and cervical cancers), and early detection and treatment, as well as public health campaigns promoting physical activity and a healthier dietary intake. Clinicians, public health professionals, and policy makers can play an active role in accelerating the application of such interventions globally.
52,293 citations
TL;DR: Screening with the use of low-dose CT reduces mortality from lung cancer, as compared with the radiography group, and the rate of death from any cause was reduced.
Abstract: Background The aggressive and heterogeneous nature of lung cancer has thwarted efforts to reduce mortality from this cancer through the use of screening. The advent of low-dose helical computed tomography (CT) altered the landscape of lung-cancer screening, with studies indicating that low-dose CT detects many tumors at early stages. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) was conducted to determine whether screening with low-dose CT could reduce mortality from lung cancer. Methods From August 2002 through April 2004, we enrolled 53,454 persons at high risk for lung cancer at 33 U.S. medical centers. Participants were randomly assigned to undergo three annual screenings with either low-dose CT (26,722 participants) or single-view posteroanterior chest radiography (26,732). Data were collected on cases of lung cancer and deaths from lung cancer that occurred through December 31, 2009. Results The rate of adherence to screening was more than 90%. The rate of positive screening tests was 24.2% with low-dose CT and 6.9% with radiography over all three rounds. A total of 96.4% of the positive screening results in the low-dose CT group and 94.5% in the radiography group were false positive results. The incidence of lung cancer was 645 cases per 100,000 person-years (1060 cancers) in the low-dose CT group, as compared with 572 cases per 100,000 person-years (941 cancers) in the radiography group (rate ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.23). There were 247 deaths from lung cancer per 100,000 person-years in the low-dose CT group and 309 deaths per 100,000 person-years in the radiography group, representing a relative reduction in mortality from lung cancer with low-dose CT screening of 20.0% (95% CI, 6.8 to 26.7; P=0.004). The rate of death from any cause was reduced in the low-dose CT group, as compared with the radiography group, by 6.7% (95% CI, 1.2 to 13.6; P=0.02). Conclusions Screening with the use of low-dose CT reduces mortality from lung cancer. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; National Lung Screening Trial ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00047385.).
7,710 citations
TL;DR: Overall cancer death rates decreased in all racial/ethnic groups in both men and women from 1998 through 2007, with the exception of American Indian/Alaska Native women, in whom rates were stable.
Abstract: Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths expected in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival based on incidence data from the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries and mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics. A total of 1,596,670 new cancer cases and 571,950 deaths from cancer are projected to occur in the United States in 2011. Overall cancer incidence rates were stable in men in the most recent time period after decreasing by 1.9% per year from 2001 to 2005; in women, incidence rates have been declining by 0.6% annually since 1998. Overall cancer death rates decreased in all racial/ethnic groups in both men and women from 1998 through 2007, with the exception of American Indian/Alaska Native women, in whom rates were stable. African American and Hispanic men showed the largest annual decreases in cancer death rates during this time period (2.6% and 2.5%, respectively). Lung cancer death rates showed a significant decline in women after continuously increasing since the 1930s. The reduction in the overall cancer death rates since 1990 in men and 1991 in women translates to the avoidance of about 898,000 deaths from cancer. However, this progress has not benefitted all segments of the population equally; cancer death rates for individuals with the least education are more than twice those of the most educated. The elimination of educational and racial disparities could potentially have avoided about 37% (60,370) of the premature cancer deaths among individuals aged 25 to 64 years in 2007 alone. Further progress can be accelerated by applying existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population with an emphasis on those groups in the lowest socioeconomic bracket. CA Cancer J Clin 2011. © 2011 American Cancer Society.
4,161 citations
TL;DR: This new adenocarcinoma classification is needed to provide uniform terminology and diagnostic criteria, especially for bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC), the overall approach to small nonresection cancer specimens, and for multidisciplinary strategic management of tissue for molecular and immunohistochemical studies.
3,850 citations
TL;DR: Suggestions include additional cutoffs for tumor size, with tumors >7 cm moving from T2 to T3; reassigning the category given to additional pulmonary nodules in some locations; and reclassifying pleural effusion as an M descriptor.
3,466 citations