Lung cancer screening by nodule volume in Lung-RADS v1.1: negative baseline CT yields potential for increased screening interval

Construction of a risk screening and visualization system for pulmonary nodule in physical examination population based on feature self-recognition machine learning model

Objective

To assess the effectiveness of a feature self-recognition machine learning model in screening for pulmonary nodule risk in a physical examination population and to evaluate the constructed visualization system.

Methods

We analyzed data from 4,861 individuals who underwent chest CT exams during their physical examinations at the Western Theater General Hospital of the People's Liberation Army from January 2023 to November 2023. Among them, 1,168 had positive CT reports for pulmonary nodules, while 3,693 had negative findings. We developed a machine learning model using the XGBoost algorithm and employed an improved sooty tern optimization algorithm (ISTOA) for feature selection. The significance of the selected features was evaluated through univariate analysis and multivariable logistic stepwise regression analysis. A visualization system was created to estimate the risk of developing pulmonary nodules.

Results

Multivariable analysis identified older age, smoking or passive smoking, high psychological stress within the past year, occupational exposure (e.g., air pollution at the workplace), presence of chronic lung diseases, and elevated carcinoembryonic antigen levels as significant risk factors for pulmonary nodules. The feature self-recognition machine learning model further highlighted age, smoking or passive smoking, high psychological stress, occupational exposure, chronic lung diseases, family history of lung cancer, decreased albumin levels, and elevated carcinoembryonic antigen as key predictors for early pulmonary nodule risk, demonstrating superior performance.

Conclusion

The feature self-recognition machine learning model effectively aids in the early prediction and clinical identification of pulmonary nodule risk, facilitating timely intervention and improving patient prognosis.

Advancements in lung cancer: a comprehensive perspective on diagnosis, staging, therapy and follow-up from the SAKK Working Group on Imaging in Diagnosis and Therapy Monitoring

In 2015, around 4400 individuals received a diagnosis of lung cancer, and Switzerland recorded approximately 3200 deaths related to lung cancer. Advances in detection, such as lung cancer screening and improved treatments, have led to increased identification of early-stage lung cancer and higher chances of long-term survival. This progress has introduced new considerations in imaging, emphasising non-invasive diagnosis and characterisation techniques like radiomics. Treatment aspects, such as preoperative assessment and the implementation of immune response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (iRECIST), have also seen advancements. For those undergoing curative treatment for lung cancer, guidelines propose follow-up with computed tomography (CT) scans within a specific timeframe. However, discrepancies exist in published guidelines, and there is a lack of universally accepted recommendations for follow-up procedures. This white paper aims to provide a certain standard regarding the use of imaging on the diagnosis, staging, treatment and follow-up of patients with lung cancer.

Recommendations for the implementation of a national lung cancer screening program in Portugal-A consensus statement

Lung cancer (LC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Lung Cancer Screening (LCS) programs that use low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) have been shown to reduce LC mortality by up to 25 % and are considered cost-effective. The European Health Union has encouraged its Member States to explore the feasibility of LCS implementation in their respective countries. The task force conducted a comprehensive literature review and engaged in extensive discussions to provide recommendations. These recommendations encompass the essential components required to initiate pilot LCS programs following the guidelines established by the World Health Organization. They were tailored to align with the specific context of the Portuguese healthcare system. The document addresses critical aspects, including the eligible population, methods for issuing invitations, radiological prerequisites, procedures for reporting results, referral processes, diagnostic strategies, program implementation, and ongoing monitoring. Furthermore, the task force emphasized that pairing LCS with evidence-based smoking cessation should be the standard of care for a high-quality screening program. This document also identifies areas for further research. These recommendations aim to guarantee that the implementation of a Portuguese LCS program ensures high-quality standards, consistency, and uniformity across centres.

Recurrent medical imaging exposures for the care of patients: one way forward

Medical imaging is both valuable and essential in the care of patients. Much of this imaging depends on ionizing radiation with attendant responsibilities for judicious use when performing an examination. This responsibility applies in settings of both individual as well as multiple (recurrent) imaging with associated repeated radiation exposures. In addressing the roles and responsibilities of the medical communities in the paradigm of recurrent imaging, both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) have issued position statements, each affirmed by other organizations. The apparent difference in focus and approach has resulted in a lack of clarity and continued debate. Aiming towards a coherent approach in dealing with radiation exposure in recurrent imaging, the IAEA convened a panel of experts, the purpose of which was to identify common ground and reconcile divergent perspectives. The effort has led to clarifying recommendations for radiation exposure aspects of recurrent imaging, including the relevance of patient agency and the provider-patient covenant in clinical decision-making. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: An increasing awareness, generating some lack of clarity and divergence in perspectives, with patients receiving relatively high radiation doses (e.g., ≥ 100 mSv) from recurrent imaging warrants a multi-stakeholder accord for the benefit of patients, providers, and the imaging community. KEY POINTS: • Recurrent medical imaging can result in an accumulation of exposures which exceeds 100 milli Sieverts. • Professional organizations have different perspectives on roles and responsibilities for recurrent imaging. • An expert panel reconciles differing perspectives for addressing radiation exposure from recurrent medical imaging.

Surveillance of subsolid nodules avoids unnecessary resections in lung cancer screening: long-term results of the prospective BioMILD trial

Background

The management of subsolid nodules (SSNs) in lung cancer screening (LCS) is still a topic of debate, with no current uniform strategy to deal with these lesions at risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The BioMILD LCS trial has implemented a prospective conservative approach for SSNs, managing with annual low-dose computed tomography nonsolid nodules (NSNs) and part-solid nodules (PSNs) with a solid component <5 mm, regardless of the size of the nonsolid component. The present study aims to determine the lung cancer (LC) detection and survival in BioMILD volunteers with SSNs.

Materials and methods

Eligible participants were 758 out of 4071 (18.6%) BioMILD volunteers without baseline LC and at least one SSN detected at the baseline or further low-dose computed tomography rounds. The outcomes of the study were LC detection and long-term survival.

Results

A total of 844 NSNs and 241 PSNs were included. LC detection was 3.7% (31 out of 844) in NSNs and 7.1% (17 out of 241) in PSNs, being significantly greater in prevalent than incident nodules (8.4% versus 1.3% in NSNs; 14.1% versus 2.1% in PSNs; p-value for both nodule types p<0.01). Most LCs from SSNs were stage I (42/48, 87.5%), resectable (47/48, 97.9%), and caused no deaths. The 8-year cumulative survival of volunteers with LC derived from SSNs and not derived from SSNs was 93.8% and 74.9%, respectively.

Conclusion

Conservative management of SSNs in LCS enables timely diagnosis and treatment of LCs arising from SSNs while ensuring the resection of more aggressive LCs detected away from SSNs.

Interpreting Lung Cancer Screening CTs: Practical Approach to Lung Cancer Screening and Application of Lung-RADS

Lung cancer screening via low-dose computed tomography (CT) reduces mortality from lung cancer, and eligibility criteria have recently been expanded to include patients aged 50 to 80 with at least 20 pack-years of smoking history. Lung cancer screening CTs should be interepreted with use of Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS), a reporting guideline system that accounts for nodule size, density, and growth. The revised version of Lung-RADS includes several important changes, such as expansion of the definition of juxtapleural nodules, discussion of atypical pulmonary cysts, and stepped management for suspicious nodules. By using Lung-RADS, radiologists and clinicians can adopt a uniform approach to nodules detected during CT lung cancer screening and reduce false positives.

Performance of Lung-RADS in different target populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Multiple lung cancer screening studies reported the performance of Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS), but none systematically evaluated its performance across different populations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance of Lung-RADS (versions 1.0 and 1.1) for detecting lung cancer in different populations.

METHODS

We performed literature searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases on October 21, 2022, for studies that evaluated the accuracy of Lung-RADS in lung cancer screening. A bivariate random-effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity, and heterogeneity was explored in stratified and meta-regression analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies with 104,224 participants were included. For version 1.0 (27 studies, 95,413 individuals), pooled sensitivity was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-0.99) and pooled specificity was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87-0.92). Studies in high-risk populations showed higher sensitivity (0.98 [95% CI: 0.92-0.99] vs. 0.84 [95% CI: 0.50-0.96]) and lower specificity (0.87 [95% CI: 0.85-0.88] vs. 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92-0.97]) than studies in general populations. Non-Asian studies tended toward higher sensitivity (0.97 [95% CI: 0.91-0.99] vs. 0.91 [95% CI: 0.67-0.98]) and lower specificity (0.88 [95% CI: 0.85-0.90] vs. 0.93 [95% CI: 0.88-0.96]) than Asian studies. For version 1.1 (4 studies, 8811 individuals), pooled sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.83-0.96) and specificity was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.67-0.90).

CONCLUSION

Among studies using Lung-RADS version 1.0, considerable heterogeneity in sensitivity and specificity was noted, explained by population type (high risk vs. general), population area (Asia vs. non-Asia), and cancer prevalence.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Meta-regression of lung cancer screening studies using Lung-RADS version 1.0 showed considerable heterogeneity in sensitivity and specificity, explained by the different target populations, including high-risk versus general populations, Asian versus non-Asian populations, and populations with different lung cancer prevalence.

KEY POINTS

• High-risk population studies showed higher sensitivity and lower specificity compared with studies performed in general populations by using Lung-RADS version 1.0. • In non-Asian studies, the diagnostic performance of Lung-RADS version 1.0 tended to be better than in Asian studies. • There are limited studies on the performance of Lung-RADS version 1.1, and evidence is lacking for Asian populations.

Factors influencing the outcome of volumetry tools for pulmonary nodule analysis: a systematic review and attempted meta-analysis

Health systems worldwide are implementing lung cancer screening programmes to identify early-stage lung cancer and maximise patient survival. Volumetry is recommended for follow-up of pulmonary nodules and outperforms other measurement methods. However, volumetry is known to be influenced by multiple factors. The objectives of this systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42022370233) are to summarise the current knowledge regarding factors that influence volumetry tools used in the analysis of pulmonary nodules, assess for significant clinical impact, identify gaps in current knowledge and suggest future research. Five databases (Medline, Scopus, Journals@Ovid, Embase and Emcare) were searched on the 21st of September, 2022, and 137 original research studies were included, explicitly testing the potential impact of influencing factors on the outcome of volumetry tools. The summary of these studies is tabulated, and a narrative review is provided. A subset of studies (n = 16) reporting clinical significance were selected, and their results were combined, if appropriate, using meta-analysis. Factors with clinical significance include the segmentation algorithm, quality of the segmentation, slice thickness, the level of inspiration for solid nodules, and the reconstruction algorithm and kernel in subsolid nodules. Although there is a large body of evidence in this field, it is unclear how to apply the results from these studies in clinical practice as most studies do not test for clinical relevance. The meta-analysis did not improve our understanding due to the small number and heterogeneity of studies testing for clinical significance. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Many studies have investigated the influencing factors of pulmonary nodule volumetry, but only 11% of these questioned their clinical relevance in their management. The heterogeneity among these studies presents a challenge in consolidating results and clinical application of the evidence. KEY POINTS: • Factors influencing the volumetry of pulmonary nodules have been extensively investigated. • Just 11% of studies test clinical significance (wrongly diagnosing growth). • Nodule size interacts with most other influencing factors (especially for smaller nodules). • Heterogeneity among studies makes comparison and consolidation of results challenging. • Future research should focus on clinical applicability, screening, and updated technology.

Development of a Novel Circulating Autoantibody Biomarker Panel for the Identification of Patients with 'Actionable' Pulmonary Nodules

Due to poor compliance and uptake of LDCT screening among high-risk populations, lung cancer is often diagnosed in advanced stages where treatment is rarely curative. Based upon the American College of Radiology's Lung Imaging and Reporting Data System (Lung-RADS) 80-90% of patients screened will have clinically "non-actionable" nodules (Lung-RADS 1 or 2), and those harboring larger, clinically "actionable" nodules (Lung-RADS 3 or 4) have a significantly greater risk of lung cancer. The development of a companion diagnostic method capable of identifying patients likely to have a clinically actionable nodule identified during LDCT is anticipated to improve accessibility and uptake of the paradigm and improve early detection rates. Using protein microarrays, we identified 501 circulating targets with differential immunoreactivities against cohorts characterized as possessing either actionable (n = 42) or non-actionable (n = 20) solid pulmonary nodules, per Lung-RADS guidelines. Quantitative assays were assembled on the Luminex platform for the 26 most promising targets. These assays were used to measure serum autoantibody levels in 841 patients, consisting of benign (BN; n = 101), early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; n = 245), other early-stage malignancies within the lung (n = 29), and individuals meeting United States Preventative Screening Task Force (USPSTF) screening inclusion criteria with both actionable (n = 87) and non-actionable radiologic findings (n = 379). These 841 patients were randomly split into three cohorts: Training, Validation 1, and Validation 2. Of the 26 candidate biomarkers tested, 17 differentiated patients with actionable nodules from those with non-actionable nodules. A random forest model consisting of six autoantibody (Annexin 2, DCD, MID1IP1, PNMA1, TAF10, ZNF696) biomarkers was developed to optimize our classification performance; it possessed a positive predictive value (PPV) of 61.4%/61.0% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.7%/83.9% against Validation cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. This panel may improve patient selection methods for lung cancer screening, serving to greatly reduce the futile screening rate while also improving accessibility to the paradigm for underserved populations.

Radiation Exposure to Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening: Should We Be Concerned?

Lung cancer screening (LCS) programs through low-dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) are being implemented in several countries worldwide. Radiation exposure of healthy individuals due to prolonged CT screening rounds and, eventually, the additional examinations required in case of suspicious findings may represent a concern, thus eventually reducing the participation in an LCS program. Therefore, the present review aims to assess the potential radiation risk from LDCT in this setting, providing estimates of cumulative dose and radiation-related risk in LCS in order to improve awareness for an informed and complete attendance to the program. After summarizing the results of the international trials on LCS to introduce the benefits coming from the implementation of a dedicated program, the screening-related and participant-related factors determining the radiation risk will be introduced and their burden assessed. Finally, future directions for a personalized screening program as well as technical improvements to reduce the delivered dose will be presented.

[China National Lung Cancer Screening Guideline with Low-dose Computed Tomography (2023 Version)]

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in China. The effectiveness of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening has been further validated in recent years, and significant progress has been made in research on identifying high-risk individuals, personalizing screening interval, and management of screen-detected findings. The aim of this study is to revise China national lung cancer screening guideline with LDCT (2018 version). The China Lung Cancer Early Detection and Treatment Expert Group (CLCEDTEG) designated by the China's National Health Commission, and China Lung Oncolgy Group experts, jointly participated in the revision of Chinese lung cancer screening guideline (2023 version). This revision is based on the recent advances in LDCT lung cancer screening at home and abroad, and the epidemiology of lung cancer in China. The following aspects of the guideline were revised: (1) lung cancer risk factors besides smoking were considered for the identification of high risk population; (2) LDCT scan parameters were further classified; (3) longer screening interval is recommended for individuals who had negative LDCT screening results for two consecutive rounds; (4) the follow-up interval for positive nodules was extended from 3 months to 6 months; (5) the role of multi-disciplinary treatment (MDT) in the management of positive nodules, diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer were emphasized. This revision clarifies the screening, intervention and treatment pathways, making the LDCT screening guideline more appropriate for China. Future researches based on emerging technologies, including biomarkers and artificial intelligence, are needed to optimize LDCT screening in China in the future.
.

Quantitative parameters of enhanced dual-energy computed tomography for differentiating lung cancers from benign lesions in solid pulmonary nodules

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate the ability of quantitative parameters of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) and nodule size for differentiation between lung cancers and benign lesions in solid pulmonary nodules.

Materials and Methods

A total of 151 pathologically confirmed solid pulmonary nodules including 78 lung cancers and 73 benign lesions from 147 patients were consecutively and retrospectively enrolled who underwent dual-phase contrast-enhanced DECT. The following features were analyzed: diameter, volume, Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) categorization, and DECT-derived quantitative parameters including effective atomic number (Zeff), iodine concentration (IC), and normalized iodine concentration (NIC) in arterial and venous phases. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to build a combined model. The diagnostic performance was assessed by area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity.

Results

The independent factors for differentiating lung cancers from benign solid pulmonary nodules included diameter, Lung-RADS categorization of diameter, volume, Zeff in arterial phase (Zeff_A), IC in arterial phase (IC_A), NIC in arterial phase (NIC_A), Zeff in venous phase (Zeff_V), IC in venous phase (IC_V), and NIC in venous phase (NIC_V) (all P < 0.05). The IC_V, NIC_V, and combined model consisting of diameter and NIC_V showed good diagnostic performance with AUCs of 0.891, 0.888, and 0.893, which were superior to the diameter, Lung-RADS categorization of diameter, volume, Zeff_A, and Zeff_V (all P < 0.001). The sensitivities of IC_V, NIC_V, and combined model were higher than those of IC_A and NIC_A (all P < 0.001). The combined model did not increase the AUCs compared with IC_V (P = 0.869) or NIC_V (P = 0.633).

Conclusion

The DECT-derived IC_V and NIC_V may be useful in differentiating lung cancers from benign lesions in solid pulmonary nodules.

Strategies for Reducing False-Positive Screening Results for Intermediate-Size Nodules Evaluated Using Lung-RADS: A Secondary Analysis of National Lung Screening Trial Data

BACKGROUND. Lung-RADS version 1.1 (v1.1) classifies all solid nodules less than 6 mm as category 2. Lung-RADS v1.1 also classifies solid intermediate-size (6 to < 10 mm) nodules as category 2 if they are perifissural and have a triangular, polygonal, or ovoid shape (indicative of intrapulmonary lymph nodes). Additional category 2 criteria could reduce false-positive results of screening examinations. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of proposed strategies for reducing false-positive results for intermediate-size nodules on lung cancer screening CT evaluated using Lung-RADS v1.1. METHODS. This retrospective study entailed secondary analysis of National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) data. Of 1387 solid nodules measuring 6.0-9.5 mm on baseline screening CT examinations in the NLST, all 38 nodules in patients who developed cancer and a random sample of 200 nodules in patients who did not develop cancer were selected for further evaluation. Cancers were required to correspond with the baseline nodule on manual review. After exclusions, the sample included 223 patients (median age, 62 years; 143 men, 80 women; 196 benign nodules, 27 malignant nodules). Two thoracic radiologists independently reviewed baseline examinations to record nodule diameter and volume using semiautomated software and to determine whether nodules had perifissural location; other subpleural location; and triangular, polygonal, or ovoid shape. Different schemes for category 2 assignment were compared. RESULTS. Across readers, standard Lung-RADS v1.1 had sensitivity of 89-93% and specificity of 26-31%. A modification assigning nodules less than 10 mm with triangular, polygonal, or ovoid shape in other subpleural locations (vs only perifissural location) as category 2 had sensitivity of 85-93% and specificity of 47-51%. Lung-RADS v1.1 using volume cutoffs had sensitivity of 89-93% and specificity of 37% (both readers). The sensitivity of both modified Lung-RADS v1.1 and Lung-RADS v1.1 with volume cutoffs was not significantly different from standard Lung-RADS v1.1 (all p > .05). However, both schemes' specificity was significantly better than standard Lung-RADS v1.1 (all p < .05). Combining the two strategies yielded sensitivity of 85-93% and specificity of 58-59%. CONCLUSION. Classifying intermediate-size nodules with triangular, polygonal, or ovoid shape in any subpleural (not just perifissural) location as category 2 and using volume- rather than diameter-based measurements improves Lung-RADS specificity without decreased sensitivity. CLINICAL IMPACT. The findings can help reduce false-positive results, decreasing 6-month follow-up examinations for benign findings.

Impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer-related mortality

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related death in the world, however lung cancer screening has not been implemented in most countries at a population level. A previous Cochrane Review found limited evidence for the effectiveness of lung cancer screening with chest radiography (CXR) or sputum cytology in reducing lung cancer-related mortality, however there has been increasing evidence supporting screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT).  OBJECTIVES: To determine whether screening for lung cancer using LDCT of the chest reduces lung cancer-related mortality and to evaluate the possible harms of LDCT screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed the search in collaboration with the Information Specialist of the Cochrane Lung Cancer Group and included the Cochrane Lung Cancer Group Trial Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library, current issue), MEDLINE (accessed via PubMed) and Embase in our search. We also searched the clinical trial registries to identify unpublished and ongoing trials. We did not impose any restriction on language of publication. The search was performed up to 31 July 2021.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of lung cancer screening using LDCT and reporting mortality or harm outcomes.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors were involved in independently assessing trials for eligibility, extraction of trial data and characteristics, and assessing risk of bias of the included trials using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Primary outcomes were lung cancer-related mortality and harms of screening. We performed a meta-analysis, where appropriate, for all outcomes using a random-effects model. We only included trials in the analysis of mortality outcomes if they had at least 5 years of follow-up. We reported risk ratios (RRs) and hazard ratios (HRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and used the I2 statistic to investigate heterogeneity.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 trials in this review with a total of 94,445 participants. Trials were conducted in Europe and the USA in people aged 40 years or older, with most trials having an entry requirement of ≥ 20 pack-year smoking history (e.g. 1 pack of cigarettes/day for 20 years or 2 packs/day for 10 years etc.). One trial included male participants only. Eight trials were phase three RCTs, with two feasibility RCTs and one pilot RCT. Seven of the included trials had no screening as a comparison, and four trials had CXR screening as a comparator. Screening frequency included annual, biennial and incrementing intervals. The duration of screening ranged from 1 year to 10 years. Mortality follow-up was from 5 years to approximately 12 years.  None of the included trials were at low risk of bias across all domains. The certainty of evidence was moderate to low across different outcomes, as assessed by GRADE. In the meta-analysis of trials assessing lung cancer-related mortality, we included eight trials (91,122 participants), and there was a reduction in mortality of 21% with LDCT screening compared to control groups of no screening or CXR screening (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87; 8 trials, 91,122 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were probably no differences in subgroups for analyses by control type, sex, geographical region, and nodule management algorithm. Females appeared to have a larger lung cancer-related mortality benefit compared to males with LDCT screening. There was also a reduction in all-cause mortality (including lung cancer-related) of 5% (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.99; 8 trials, 91,107 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Invasive tests occurred more frequently in the LDCT group (RR 2.60, 95% CI 2.41 to 2.80; 3 trials, 60,003 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, analysis of 60-day postoperative mortality was not significant between groups (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.94; 2 trials, 409 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  False-positive results and recall rates were higher with LDCT screening compared to screening with CXR, however there was low-certainty evidence in the meta-analyses due to heterogeneity and risk of bias concerns. Estimated overdiagnosis with LDCT screening was 18%, however the 95% CI was 0 to 36% (risk difference (RD) 0.18, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.36; 5 trials, 28,656 participants; low-certainty evidence). Four trials compared different aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using various measures. Anxiety was pooled from three trials, with participants in LDCT screening reporting lower anxiety scores than in the control group (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.43, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.27; 3 trials, 8153 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were insufficient data to comment on the impact of LDCT screening on smoking behaviour.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence supports a reduction in lung cancer-related mortality with the use of LDCT for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations (those over the age of 40 with a significant smoking exposure). However, there are limited data on harms and further trials are required to determine participant selection and optimal frequency and duration of screening, with potential for significant overdiagnosis of lung cancer. Trials are ongoing for lung cancer screening in non-smokers.

Nationwide lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography: implementation and first results of the HUNCHEST screening program

OBJECTIVES

Lung cancer (LC) kills more people than any other cancer in Hungary. Hence, there is a clear rationale for considering a national screening program. The HUNCHEST pilot program primarily aimed to investigate the feasibility of a population-based LC screening in Hungary, and determine the incidence and LC probability of solitary pulmonary nodules.

METHODS

A total of 1890 participants were assigned to undergo low-dose CT (LDCT) screening, with intervals of 1 year between procedures. Depending on the volume, growth, and volume doubling time (VDT), screenings were defined as negative, indeterminate, or positive. Non-calcified lung nodules with a volume > 500 mm3 and/or a VDT < 400 days were considered positive. LC diagnosis was based on histology.

RESULTS

At baseline, the percentage of negative, indeterminate, and positive tests was 81.2%, 15.1%, and 3.7%, respectively. The frequency of positive and indeterminate LDCT results was significantly higher in current smokers (vs. non-smokers or former smokers; p < 0.0001) and in individuals with COPD (vs. those without COPD, p < 0.001). In the first screening round, 1.2% (n = 23) of the participants had a malignant lesion, whereas altogether 1.5% (n = 29) of the individuals were diagnosed with LC. The overall positive predictive value of the positive tests was 31.6%. Most lung malignancies were diagnosed at an early stage (86.2% of all cases).

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of key characteristics, our prospective cohort study appears consistent to that of comparable studies. Altogether, the results of the HUNCHEST pilot program suggest that LDCT screening may facilitate early diagnosis and thus curative-intent treatment in LC.

KEY POINTS

• The HUNCHEST pilot study is the first nationwide low-dose CT screening program in Hungary. • In the first screening round, 1.2% of the participants had a malignant lesion, whereas altogether 1.5% of the individuals were diagnosed with lung cancer. • The overall positive predictive value of the positive tests in the HUNCHEST screening program was 31.6%.

Diagnostic study on clinical feasibility of an AI-based diagnostic system as a second reader on mobile CT images: a preliminary result

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) has breathed new life into the lung nodules detection and diagnosis. However, whether the output information from AI will translate into benefits for clinical workflow or patient outcomes in a real-world setting remains unknown. This study was to demonstrate the feasibility of an AI-based diagnostic system deployed as a second reader in imaging interpretation for patients screened for pulmonary abnormalities in a clinical setting.

METHODS

The study included patients from a lung cancer screening program conducted in Sichuan Province, China using a mobile computed tomography (CT) scanner which traveled to medium-size cities between July 10th, 2020 and September 10th, 2020. Cases that were suspected to have malignant nodules by junior radiologists, senior radiologists or AI were labeled a high risk (HR) tag as HR-junior, HR-senior and HR-AI, respectively, and included into final analysis. The diagnosis efficacy of the AI was evaluated by calculating negative predictive value and positive predictive value when referring to the senior readers' final results as the gold standard. Besides, characteristics of the lesions were compared among cases with different HR labels.

RESULTS

In total, 251/3,872 patients (6.48%, male/female: 91/160, median age, 66 years) with HR lung nodules were included. The AI algorithm achieved a negative predictive value of 88.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 62.2-98.0%] and a positive predictive value of 55.6% (95% CI: 49.0-62.0%). The diagnostic duration was significantly reduced when AI was used as a second reader (223±145.6 vs. 270±143.17 s, P<0.001). The information yielded by AI affected the radiologist's decision-making in 35/145 cases. Lesions of HR cases had a higher volume [309.9 (214.9-732.5) vs. 141.3 (79.3-380.8) mm3, P<0.001], lower average CT number [-511.0 (-576.5 to -100.5) vs. -191.5 (-487.3 to 22.5), P=0.010], and pure ground glass opacity rather than solid.

CONCLUSIONS

The AI algorithm had high negative predictive value but low positive predictive value in diagnosing HR lung lesions in a clinical setting. Deploying AI as a second reader could help avoid missed diagnoses, reduce diagnostic duration, and strengthen diagnostic confidence for radiologists.

Low-dose CT for lung cancer screening: position paper from the Italian college of thoracic radiology

Smoking is the main risk factor for lung cancer (LC), which is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Independent randomized controlled trials, governmental and inter-governmental task forces, and meta-analyses established that LC screening (LCS) with chest low dose computed tomography (LDCT) decreases the mortality of LC in smokers and former smokers, compared to no-screening, especially in women. Accordingly, several Italian initiatives are offering LCS by LDCT and smoking cessation to about 10,000 high-risk subjects, supported by Private or Public Health Institutions, envisaging a possible population-based screening program. Because LDCT is the backbone of LCS, Italian radiologists with LCS expertise are presenting this position paper that encompasses recommendations for LDCT scan protocol and its reading. Moreover, fundamentals for classification of lung nodules and other findings at LDCT test are detailed along with international guidelines, from the European Society of Thoracic Imaging, the British Thoracic Society, and the American College of Radiology, for their reporting and management in LCS. The Italian College of Thoracic Radiologists produced this document to provide the basics for radiologists who plan to set up or to be involved in LCS, thus fostering homogenous evidence-based approach to the LDCT test over the Italian territory and warrant comparison and analyses throughout National and International practices.

European lung cancer screening: valuable trial evidence for optimal practice implementation

Lung cancer screening (LCS) by low-dose computed tomography is a strategy for secondary prevention of lung cancer. In the last two decades, LCS trials showed several options to practice secondary prevention in association with primary prevention, however, the translation from trial to practice is everything but simple. In 2020, the European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society published their joint statement paper on LCS. This commentary aims to provide the readership with detailed description about hurdles and potential solutions that could be encountered in the practice of LCS.

Deep-learning reconstruction for ultra-low-dose lung CT: Volumetric measurement accuracy and reproducibility of artificial ground-glass nodules in a phantom study

OBJECTIVES

The lung nodule volume determined by CT is used for nodule diagnoses and monitoring tumor responses to therapy. Increased image noise on low-dose CT degrades the measurement accuracy of the lung nodule volume. We compared the volumetric accuracy among deep-learning reconstruction (DLR), model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR), and hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) at an ultra-low-dose setting.

METHODS

Artificial ground-glass nodules (6 mm and 10 mm diameters, -660 HU) placed at the lung-apex and the middle-lung field in chest phantom were scanned by 320-row CT with the ultra-low-dose setting of 6.3 mAs. Each scan data set was reconstructed by DLR, MBIR, and HIR. The volumes of nodules were measured semi-automatically, and the absolute percent volumetric error (APEvol) was calculated. The APEvol provided by each reconstruction were compared by the Tukey-Kramer method. Inter- and intraobserver variabilities were evaluated by a Bland-Altman analysis with limits of agreements.

RESULTS

DLR provided a lower APEvol compared to MBIR and HIR. The APEvol of DLR (1.36%) was significantly lower than those of the HIR (8.01%, p = 0.0022) and MBIR (7.30%, p = 0.0053) on a 10-mm-diameter middle-lung nodule. DLR showed narrower limits of agreement compared to MBIR and HIR in the inter- and intraobserver agreement of the volumetric measurement.

CONCLUSIONS

DLR showed higher accuracy compared to MBIR and HIR for the volumetric measurement of artificial ground-glass nodules by ultra-low-dose CT.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

DLR with ultra-low-dose setting allows a reduction of dose exposure, maintaining accuracy for the volumetry of lung nodule, especially in patients which deserve a long-term follow-up.

The Future of Lung Cancer Screening: Current Challenges and Research Priorities

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, primarily because most people present when the stage is too advanced to offer any reasonable chance of cure. Over the last two decades, evidence has accumulated to show that early detection of lung cancer, using low-radiation dose computed tomography, in people at higher risk of the condition reduces their mortality. Many countries are now making progress with implementing programmes, although some have concerns about cost-effectiveness. Lung cancer screening is complex, and many factors influence clinical and cost-effectiveness. It is important to develop strategies to optimise each element of the intervention from selection and participation through optimal scanning, management of findings and treatment. The overall aim is to maximise benefits and minimise harms. Additional integrated interventions must include at least smoking cessation. In this review, we summarize the evidence that has accumulated to guide optimisation of lung cancer screening, discuss the remaining open questions about the best approach and identify potential barriers to successful implementation.

Volumetric Measurements in Lung Cancer Screening Reduces Unnecessary Low-Dose Computed Tomography Scans: Results from a Single-Center Prospective Trial on 4119 Subjects

This study aims to compare the low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) outcome and volume-doubling time (VDT) derived from the measured volume (MV) and estimated volume (EV) of pulmonary nodules (PNs) detected in a single-center lung cancer screening trial. MV, EV and VDT were obtained for prevalent pulmonary nodules detected at the baseline round of the bioMILD trial. The LDCT outcome (based on bioMILD thresholds) and VDT categories were simulated on PN- and screenee-based analyses. A weighted Cohen’s kappa test was used to assess the agreement between diagnostic categories as per MV and EV, and 1583 screenees displayed 2715 pulmonary nodules. In the PN-based analysis, 40.1% PNs were included in different LDCT categories when measured by MV or EV. The agreements between MV and EV were moderate (κ = 0.49) and fair (κ = 0.37) for the LDCT outcome and VDT categories, respectively. In the screenee-based analysis, 46% pulmonary nodules were included in different LDCT categories when measured by MV or EV. The agreements between MV and EV were moderate (κ = 0.52) and fair (κ = 0.34) for the LDCT outcome and VDT categories, respectively. Within a simulated lung cancer screening based on a recommendation by estimated volumetry, the number of LDCTs performed for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules was higher compared with in prospective volumetric management.

Scan-based competing death risk model for reevaluating lung cancer computed tomography screening eligibility

PURPOSE

A baseline CT scan for lung cancer (LC) screening may reveal information indicating that certain LC screening participants can be screened less, and instead require dedicated early cardiac and respiratory clinical input. We aimed to develop and validate competing death (CD) risk models using CT information to identify participants with a low LC and a high CD risk.

METHODS

Participant demographics and quantitative CT measures of LC, cardiovascular disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were considered for deriving a logistic regression model for predicting five-year CD risk using a sample from the National Lung Screening Trial (n=15 000). Multicentric Italian Lung Detection data was used to perform external validation (n=2287).

RESULTS

Our final CD model outperformed an external pre-scan model (CDRAT) in both the derivation (Area under the curve=0.744 [95% confidence interval=0.727 to 0.761] and 0.677 [0.658 to 0.695], respectively) and validation cohorts (0.744 [0.652 to 0.835] and 0.725 [0.633 to 0.816], respectively). By also taking LC incidence risk into consideration, we suggested a risk threshold where a subgroup (6258/23 096, 27%) was identified with a number needed to screen to detect one LC of 216 (versus 23 in the remainder of the cohort) and ratio of 5.41 CDs per LC case (versus 0.88). The respective values in the validation cohort subgroup (774/2287, 34%) were 129 (versus 29) and 1.67 (versus 0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluating both LC and CD risks post-scan may improve the efficiency of LC screening and facilitate the initiation of multidisciplinary trajectories among certain participants.

Integrated prognostication of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma by contrast-enhanced computed tomography: the adjunct yield of radiomics

Purpose

To test radiomics for prognostication of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMCC) and to develop a comprehensive risk model.

Methods

Histologically proven IMCC (representing the full range of stages) were retrospectively analyzed by volume segmentation on baseline hepatic venous phase computed tomography (CT), by two readers with different experience (R1 and R2). Morphological CT features included: tumor size, hepatic satellite lesions, lymph node and distant metastases. Radiomic features (RF) were compared across CT protocols and readers. Univariate analysis against overall survival (OS) warranted ranking and selection of RF into radiomic signature (RSign), which was dichotomized into high and low-risk strata (RSign*). Models without and with RSign* (Model 1 and 2, respectively) were compared.

Results

Among 78 patients (median follow-up 262 days, IQR 73–957), 62/78 (79%) died during the study period, 46/78 (59%) died within 1 year. Up to 10% RF showed variability across CT protocols; 37/108 (34%) RF showed variability due to manual segmentation. RSign stratified OS (univariate: HR 1.37 for R1, HR 1.28 for R2), RSign* was different between readers (R1 0.39; R2 0.57). Model 1 showed AUC 0.71, which increased in Model 2: AUC 0.81 (p < 0.001) and AIC 89 for R1, AUC 0.81 (p = 0.001) and AIC 90.2 for R2.

Conclusion

The use of RF into a unified RSign score stratified OS in patients with IMCC. Dichotomized RSign* classified survival strata, its inclusion in risk models showed adjunct yield. The cut-off value of RSign* was different between readers, suggesting that the use of reference values is hampered by interobserver variability.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00261-021-03183-9.

A Low-Dose CT-Based Radiomic Model to Improve Characterization and Screening Recall Intervals of Indeterminate Prevalent Pulmonary Nodules

Lung cancer (LC) is currently one of the main causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) of the chest has been proven effective in secondary prevention (i.e., early detection) of LC by several trials. In this work, we investigated the potential impact of radiomics on indeterminate prevalent pulmonary nodule (PN) characterization and risk stratification in subjects undergoing LDCT-based LC screening. As a proof-of-concept for radiomic analyses, the first aim of our study was to assess whether indeterminate PNs could be automatically classified by an LDCT radiomic classifier as solid or sub-solid (first-level classification), and in particular for sub-solid lesions, as non-solid versus part-solid (second-level classification). The second aim of the study was to assess whether an LCDT radiomic classifier could automatically predict PN risk of malignancy, and thus optimize LDCT recall timing in screening programs. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity. The experimental results showed that an LDCT radiomic machine learning classifier can achieve excellent performance for characterization of screen-detected PNs (mean AUC of 0.89 ± 0.02 and 0.80 ± 0.18 on the blinded test dataset for the first-level and second-level classifiers, respectively), providing quantitative information to support clinical management. Our study showed that a radiomic classifier could be used to optimize LDCT recall for indeterminate PNs. According to the performance of such a classifier on the blinded test dataset, within the first 6 months, 46% of the malignant PNs and 38% of the benign ones were identified, improving early detection of LC by doubling the current detection rate of malignant nodules from 23% to 46% at a low cost of false positives. In conclusion, we showed the high potential of LDCT-based radiomics for improving the characterization and optimizing screening recall intervals of indeterminate PNs.

Lung Cancer Screening: Evidence, Risks, and Opportunities for Implementation

BACKGROUND

 Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Several trials with different screening approaches have recognized the role of lung cancer screening with low-dose CT for reducing lung cancer mortality. The efficacy of lung cancer screening depends on many factors and implementation is still pending in most European countries.

METHODS

 This review aims to portray current evidence on lung cancer screening with a focus on the potential for opportunities for implementation strategies. Pillars of lung cancer screening practice will be discussed according to the most updated literature (PubMed search until November 16, 2020).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

 The NELSON trial showed reduction of lung cancer mortality, thus confirming previous results of independent European studies, notably by volume of lung nodules. Heterogeneity in patient recruitment could influence screening efficacy, hence the importance of risk models and community-based screening. Recruitment strategies develop and adapt continuously to address the specific needs of the heterogeneous population of potential participants, the most updated evidence comes from the UK. The future of lung cancer screening is a tailored approach with personalized continuous stratification of risk, aimed at reducing costs and risks.

KEY POINTS

  · Secondary prevention of lung cancer by low-dose computed tomography showed a reduction of lung cancer mortality.. · Semi-automated volume measurement and use of volume doubling time should be the reference method for optimization of risks, namely controlling measurement variability and the false-positive rate.. · A conservative approach with surveillance of subsolid nodules can be one of the strategies to reduce the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment.. · The goal of a tailored approach with personalized risk stratification aims to reduce costs and risks. A longer interval between rounds is one option for participants at lower risk..

CITATION FORMAT

· Tringali G, Milanese G, Ledda RE et al. Lung Cancer Screening: Evidence, Risks, and Opportunities for Implementation. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2021; 193: 1153 - 1161.