Analysis of the baseline performance of five UK lung cancer screening programmes

Patients' experiences of, and psychological responses to, surveillance for pulmonary nodules detected through lung cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

Low-dose CT screening reduces lung cancer mortality among high-risk populations, and detects indeterminate pulmonary nodules that require subsequent surveillance. This period of uncertainty could result in patients experiencing lung cancer-related distress, anxiety and worry. This multicentre qualitative study explored patients' experiences and psychological responses to disclosing and communicating nodule surveillance.

METHODS

Eligible participants were purposively sampled from four lung cancer screening sites in England to ensure diversity with respect to region, service setting, individual characteristics and surveillance pathways. Thirty-nine patients (23 females), aged 55-80 years, who had undergone their first nodule surveillance scan, participated in one-to-one remote semi-structured interviews. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using applied thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants reported a broad spectrum of psychological responses to the way their nodule finding was communicated and their experiences of undergoing surveillance. Understanding what a nodule is and what a surveillance process entails was important for explaining patient psychological reactions and behavioural outcomes. Perceived support and effective communication with healthcare professionals were instrumental in decreasing patients' distress, uncertainty and concern, and increasing reassurance, knowledge about nodules and psychological preparation for the possibility of surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

While current letter-based means of nodule disclosure and communication were acceptable to patients, there is a need to improve the way nodules are communicated using lay language. Brief verbal consultations with healthcare professionals could provide clearer guidance to patients undergoing surveillance and increase their understanding about the surveillance process and subsequent scans, resulting in improved affective, behavioural and cognitive outcomes.

The present and future of lung cancer screening: latest evidence

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Early lung cancer detection improves lung cancer-related mortality and survival. This report summarizes presentations and panel discussions from a webinar, "The Present and Future of Lung Cancer Screening: Latest Evidence and AI Perspectives." The webinar provided the perspectives of experts from the United States, United Kingdom, and China on evidence-based recommendations and management in lung cancer screening (LCS), barriers, and the role of artificial intelligence (AI). With several countries now incorporating the utilization of AI in their screening programs, AI offers potential solutions to some of the challenges associated with LCS.

Action plan for an international imaging framework for implementation of global low-dose CT screening for lung cancer

Reduction in lung cancer mortality is achievable through low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening in high-risk individuals. Many countries are progressing from local LDCT screening studies to national screening programs. Implementation of effective large-scale screening programs is complex and requires a multi-disciplinary approach. A recent overview of the technical aspects of implementing high quality LDCT for screening resulted from the inaugural international expert meeting of the Alliance for Global Implementation of Lung and Cardiac Early Disease Detection and Treatment (AGILE). This covers the most important aspects of the CT imaging process: standardisation in CT image acquisition and interpretation, CT protocol management, technology developments and minimal requirements, integration of lung cancer biomarkers, and the role of AI in CT lung nodule detection, segmentation, and classification, and related data security issues.

Low-dose CT for lung cancer screening in a high-risk population (SUMMIT): a prospective, longitudinal cohort study

BACKGROUND

Low-dose CT screening reduces lung cancer mortality. In advance of planned national lung cancer screening programmes, research is needed to inform policies regarding implementation. We aimed to assess the implementation of low-dose CT for lung cancer screening in a high-risk population and to validate a multicancer early detection blood test.

METHODS

In this prospective, longitudinal cohort study, individuals aged 55-77 years recorded as current smokers in their primary care records at any point within the past 20 years were identified from 329 primary care practices in London (UK) and invited for a lung health check via postal letter. Individuals meeting the 2013 United States Preventive Services Taskforce criteria (current or former smokers within the past 15 years with at least 30 pack-year smoking histories) or having a Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian 2012 model 6-year risk of 1·3% or greater, and not currently receiving treatment for an active cancer (except adjuvant hormonal therapy), were eligible for the study. These individuals underwent lung cancer screening via non-contrast, thin collimation low-dose CT. In this analysis, we report the results of the baseline round of low-dose CT screening. Key primary endpoints were those associated with examining the performance of a lung cancer screening service. Outcome measures were analysed on a per-participant level using descriptive frequencies. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03934866.

FINDINGS

Between April 8, 2019, and May 14, 2021, 12 773 participants were recruited and analysed. 7353 (57·6%) of 12 773 participants were male and 5420 (42·4%) were female, and 10 665 (83·5%) participants were White. 261 (2·0%) of 12 773 participants were diagnosed with lung cancer (including 163 [1·3%] participants with screen-detected lung cancer and 98 [0·8%] with delayed screen-detected lung cancer [ie, after a 3-month or 6-month nodule follow-up CT]) and 276 (2·2%) participants were diagnosed with any intrathoracic malignancy after a positive baseline screen. 207 (79·3%) of 261 individuals with prevalent screen-detected lung cancer were diagnosed at stage I or II and surgical resection was the primary treatment modality in 201 (77·0%) of 261 individuals. Including cases where multiple resections were done in the same participant (eg, for synchronous primaries), 28 (11·6%) of 241 surgical resections were benign, and there was one (0·4%) death within 90 days of surgery. At 12 months, the episode sensitivity of our low-dose CT screening protocol for detecting lung cancer was 97·0% (95% CI 95·0-99·1; 261 of 269 participants). The specificity was 95·2% (94·8-95·6; 11 905 of 12 504 participants), with a false-positive rate of 4·8% (4·4-5·2).

INTERPRETATION

Large-scale lung cancer screening is effective and can be delivered efficiently to an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse population.

FUNDING

GRAIL.

The feasibility and cost-effectiveness of implementing mobile low-dose computed tomography with an AI-based diagnostic system in underserved populations

BACKGROUND

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) significantly increases early detection rates of lung cancer and reduces lung cancer-related mortality by 20%. However, many significant screening barriers remain. This study conduct an initial feasibility and cost-effectiveness analysis of a community-based program that used a mobile low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scan unit and discuss the operational challenges faced during its implementation.

METHODS

This study was conducted in rural areas in Fujian Province, China from July 2022 to August 2022. Individuals aged 40 years and above who had not previously undergone LDCT and who were socioeconomically marginalized were included. Participants received a LDCT program from a multidisciplinary research team. Physicians analyzed the images with the assistance of artificial intelligence "InferRead CT Lung Research" and completed structured reports on their impressions. The primary evaluation indicators for mobile LDCT screening effectiveness were the lung cancer detection rate and diagnosis rate, while the main evaluation indicators for cost-effective analysis were the cost-effective ratio and early detection cost index.

RESULTS

A total of 10,159 individuals participated in this study. The detection rates of suspected lung cancer cases and confirmed cases were 1.06% (n = 108) and 0.7% (n = 71), respectively. The cost of lung cancer screening (LCS) was ¥1,203,504 (US$188,847.71), the average cost per screening was ¥118.47 (US$18.65), and the cost effective ratios for the detection of suspected lung cancer and confirmed lung cancer were ¥11,143.56 (US$1,753.29) and ¥16,950.76 (US$2,669.94), respectively. The early detection cost indices for suspected lung cancer were 0.09 and 0.13 for confirmed lung cancer, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This LDCT with artificial intelligence model for LCS holds economic promise for reducing health disparities in underserved areas and promote larger populations in similar low-income country.

Quality assurance in lung cancer screening

The effectiveness of screening programmes is critically dependent on the accuracy of the screening test. Where this relies on clinical expertise, there is an imperative to assure that the level of expertise meets expected standards. In cancer screening involving images, the focus is on the reader. Auditing of results is fraught with difficulty because of the time taken to accumulate enough data with confirmed outcomes to identify underperformance before any harm is done. Late recognition can lead to the need for reanalysis and recall of screening participants with loss of confidence in the programme. External quality assurance (EQA) is a method that enables clinical expertise to be tested rapidly by using test datasets with confirmed clinical outcome. In the UK, the breast cancer screening programme has had EQA in place for over 30 years. This article describes the development of the first EQA process in lung cancer screening, using the experience gained from running the breast cancer EQA, and the proposed future developments.

Protocol for a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis for risk factors for lung cancer in individuals with lung nodules identified by low-dose CT screening

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, lung cancer (LC) is the second most frequent cancer and the leading cause of cancer related mortality. Low-dose CT (LDCT) screening reduced LC mortality by 20-24% in randomised trials of high-risk populations. A significant proportion of those screened have nodules detected that are found to be benign. Consequently, many individuals receive extra imaging and/or unnecessary procedures, which can have a negative physical and psychological impact, as well as placing a financial burden on health systems. Therefore, there is a need to identify individuals who need no interval CT between screening rounds.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The aim of this study is to identify risk factors predictive of LC, which are known at the time of the scan, in patients with LDCT screen-detected lung nodules. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases will be searched and articles that are on cohorts or mention cohorts of screenees with nodules will be identified. A data extraction framework will ensure consistent extraction across studies. Individual participant data (IPD) will be collected to perform a one-stage IPD meta-analysis using hierarchical univariate models. Clustering will be accounted for by having separate intercept terms for each cohort. Where IPD is not available, the effects of risk factors will be extracted from publications, if possible. Effects from IPD cohorts and aggregate data will be reported and compared. The PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool) will be used for assessment of quality of the studies.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was not required as this study is a secondary analysis. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at relevant conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022309515.

Lung Cancer Screening Program Quality Indicators-Review and Recommendations: An International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Delphi Process Study

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer screening (LCS) using low-dose-computed tomography reduces lung cancer mortality in high-risk individuals. Evaluating and monitoring LCS programs are important to ensure and improve quality, efficiency, and participant outcomes. There is no agreement on LCS quality indicators (QIs).

METHODS

Twenty multidisciplinary members of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer used a Delphi process to develop consensus QIs. They considered 50 QIs during information/discussion sessions and two anonymous voting rounds. In total, 80% or more voting agree or strongly agree on a five-point Likert scale determined consensus.

RESULTS

Twenty essential and six desirable QIs were identified in 10 of 11 LCS pathway domain categories (ENTRY: Proportion eligible who got screened; SMOKING_CESSATION: Proportion of current-smoking individuals offered cessation interventions; IMAGING: Proportion screened requiring clinical diagnostic assessment, scan results distribution, proportion scans requiring early follow-up, proportion baseline or regular scans with actionable additional findings; ADHERENCE to: Annual or regular scans, early interim scans, clinical diagnostic assessment; DIAGNOSTIC: Proportion suspicious-for-lung-cancer scans receiving clinical investigation, undergoing invasive diagnostic procedures; OUTCOMES: Cancer detection rate, stage distribution, interval cancer rate; HARMS: Number and proportion of serious complications after invasive procedures, non-lung cancer diagnoses after invasive procedures or surgery, 30-day mortality after invasive procedure; TREATMENT: Proportion early-stage cancers receiving treatment with curative intent; WAIT_TIMES: Suspicious-for-lung-cancer scan to definitive diagnosis, to curative-intent treatment for individuals with early-stage disease, scan completion to reporting results to primary care provider and participant; EQUITY: Race, sex, and socioeconomic differences in adherence to regular screens, early-stage cancer treatment, offer of smoking cessation interventions, clinical investigation of suspicious-for-lung-cancer screens).

CONCLUSIONS

A review among panel members provided recommended LCS QIs that should be considered in the development of LCS initiatives.

Pilot study of lung cancer screening for survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) treatment increases the risk of lung cancer. Most HL survivors are not eligible for lung cancer screening (LCS) programs developed for the general population, and the utility of these programs has not been tested in HL survivors. We ran a LCS pilot in HL survivors to describe screening uptake, participant characteristics, impact of a decision aid and screen findings. HL survivors treated ≥5 years ago with mustine/procarbazine and/or thoracic radiation, were identified from a follow-up database and invited to participate. Participants underwent a low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reported using protocols validated for the general population. Two hundred and eighteen individuals were invited, 123 were eligible, 102 were screened (58% response rate): 58% female, median age 52 years, median 22 years since HL treatment; 91.4% were deemed to have made an informed decision; participation was not influenced by age, sex, years since treatment or deprivation. Only three of 35 ever-smokers met criteria for LCS through the program aimed at the general population. Baseline LDCT results were: 90 (88.2%) negative, ten (9.8%) indeterminate, two (2.0%) positive. Two 3-month surveillance scans were positive. Of four positive scans, two patients were diagnosed with small-cell lung cancer; one underwent curative surgery. Coronary artery calcification was detected in 36.3%, and clinically significant incidental findings in 2.9%. LDCT protocols validated in ever-smokers can detect asymptomatic early-stage lung cancers in HL survivors. This finding, together with screening uptake and low false positive rates, supports further research to implement LCS for HL survivors (clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: NCT04986189.).

Retrospective evaluation of plasma protein tumour markers for early lung cancer detection

BACKGROUND

Blood-based biomarkers might help lung cancer diagnosis. A panel of serum tumour markers (TM) has been validated for hospital referrals due to clinical suspicion of lung cancer. We have compared plasma from a cohort enriched for early-stage lung cancer, including controls from a healthy population cohort.

METHODS

TM assays for CEA, CYFRA 21-1, CA15.3, ProGRP and SCC were run on a Roche Elecsys 2010 Immunoassay Analyser for a retrospective, nested case-control cohort from the Liverpool Lung Project. The primary endpoints were the sensitivity and specificity of a pre-defined TM panel using published thresholds.

RESULTS

Except for ProGRP, TM levels were significantly higher in cases and ROC AUC values demonstrated significant discriminant power. Accuracy and levels were higher for late-stage cancers, except for ProGRP which was highest in stage 1 cancers. Although providing similar sensitivity (82.4% vs 88.5%), TMs performed worse for specificity (39.3% vs 82%) and overall (Youden's Index 0.22 vs 0.77) and this was not improved by threshold optimisation or binary logistic regression.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the TMs were associated with lung cancer status and discriminatory with a high sensitivity when combined, performance was compromised in early-stage disease, which casts some doubt on utility in the screening setting.

Lung cancer screening: where do we stand?

Lung cancer screening (LCS) programmes have emerged over recent years around the world. LCS programmes present differences in delivery, inclusion criteria and resource allocation. On a national scale, only a few LCS programmes have been fully established, but more are anticipated to follow. Evidence has shown that, in combination with a low-dose chest computed tomography scan, smoking cessation should be offered as part of a LCS programme for improved patient outcomes. Promising tools in LCS include further refined risk prediction models, the use of biomarkers, artificial intelligence and radiomics. However, these tools require further study and clinical validation is required prior to routine implementation.

Sub-lobar resections for peripheral non-small cell lung cancer measuring ≤ 2 cm: Insights from recent clinical trials

The findings of two well conducted trials that randomised 1803 patients with a peripheral non-small cell lung cancer measuring ≤ 2 cm to a lobar to sub-lobar resection have established the latter as a new standard of care. It is important for non-surgical oncologists to appreciate the details of study design and outcomes of both studies, given the possible impact they have for considerations of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for operable patients with early-stage NSCLC. Differences in overall survival between the study populations highlight the impact of confounding factors like smoking history and comorbidities on reported outcomes. For example, despite low post-operative mortality rates in both trials, the 5-year disease-free survival rate in the CALGB 140503 trial was only approximately 60 % with either surgical procedure. Both phase III trials required guideline recommended nodal staging, which does not reflect real world surgical practice, and which may limit the generalisability of the reported findings to local institutional outcomes. Furthermore, the emergence of other malignancies was recorded in 15-18 % of study patients during follow-up, and patients who underwent sub-lobar resections had a better long-term survival associated with a higher likelihood of undergoing additional curative treatments. These findings from the JCOG0802 and the CALGB 140503 will encourage more interest in enrolling patients into ongoing trials comparing surgical resection with SABR.

[Statement Paper on the Implementation of a National Organized Program in Germany for the Early Detection of Lung Cancer in Risk Populations Using Low-dose CT Screening Including Management of Screening Findings]

The process of implementing early detection of lung cancer with low-dose CT (LDCT) in Germany has gained significant momentum in recent years. It is expected that the ordinance of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection (BMUV) on early detection of lung cancer, which has been commented on by the professional societies, will come into effect by the end of 2023. Based on this regulation, the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) will set up a program for early lung cancer detection with LDCT in the near future. In this position paper, the specialist societies involved in lung cancer screening present concrete cornerstones for a uniform, structured and quality-assured early detection program for lung cancer in Germany to make a constructive contribution to this process.

[Statement paper on the implementation of a national organized program in Germany for the early detection of lung cancer in risk populations using low-dose CT screening including management of screening findings]

The process of implementing early detection of lung cancer with low-dose CT (LDCT) in Germany has gained significant momentum in recent years. It is expected that the ordinance of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection (BMUV) on the early detection of lung cancer, which has been commented on by the professional societies, will come into effect by the end of 2023. Based on this regulation, the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) will set up a program for early lung cancer detection with LDCT in the near future. In this position paper, the specialist societies involved in lung cancer screening present key points for a uniform, structured and quality-assured early detection program for lung cancer in Germany to make a constructive contribution to this process. CITATION FORMAT: · Vogel-Claussen J, Blum TG, Andreas S et al. Position paper on the implementation of a nationally organized program in Germany for the early detection of lung cancer in high-risk populations using low-dose CT screening including the management of screening findings requiring further workup. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; 196: DOI 10.1055/a-2178-2846.

[Statement paper on the implementation of a national organized program in Germany for the early detection of lung cancer in risk populations using low-dose CT screening including management of screening findings]

The process of implementing early detection of lung cancer with low-dose CT (LDCT) in Germany has gained significant momentum in recent years. It is expected that the ordinance of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection (BMUV) on early detection of lung cancer, which has been commented on by the professional societies, will come into effect by the end of 2023. Based on this regulation, the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) will set up a program for early lung cancer detection with LDCT in the near future. In this position paper, the specialist societies involved in lung cancer screening present concrete cornerstones for a uniform, structured and quality-assured early detection program for lung cancer in Germany to make a constructive contribution to this process.

An analysis of long-term survival after pneumonectomy for lung cancer: A retrospective study of 20 years

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of pneumonectomy for lung cancer in the UK is continuing to decline in the era of minimally invasive thoracic surgery totalling approximately 3.5% of lung cancer resections annually. Literature is lacking for long-term survival of pneumonectomies. This study updates our previous results. Between 1998 and 2008, 206 patients underwent pneumonectomy compared to 98 patients between 2009 and 2018.

METHODS

From January 1998 until December 2018, 304 patients underwent pneumonectomy. This was a retrospective study; data was analysed for age, gender, laterality, histology and time period.

RESULTS

Operative mortality was 4.3% overall which was lower than the national average of 5.8%. In the last five years, there were no in-hospital, operative or 30-day mortality. During this period, 90-day mortality was 9.2%. Left-sided pneumonectomies had significantly better overall survival (3.00 vs. 2.03 years; p = 0.0015), squamous cell carcinoma (3.23 vs. 1.54 years; p = 0.00012) as well as those aged less than 70 (2.79 vs. 2.13 years; p = 0.011). There was no significant difference in survival between gender (p = 0.48). Intervention from 1998 to 2008 had significantly greater survival compared to the latter 10 years (2.68 vs. 2.46 years; p = 0.031). The Cox model shows that laterality, age, histology and time period remain significant with multivariate testing. No patient survived after 16 years.

DISCUSSION

Our updated retrospective study has built on our previous results by reinforcing the success of pneumonectomies. The incidence of pneumonectomies is likely to decrease with the deployment of nation-wide lung cancer screening in the UK due to earlier detection.

A spectroscopic liquid biopsy for the earlier detection of multiple cancer types

BACKGROUND

A rapid, low-cost blood test that can be applied to reliably detect multiple different cancer types would be transformational.

METHODS

In this large-scale discovery study (n = 2092 patients) we applied the Dxcover® Cancer Liquid Biopsy to examine eight different cancers. The test uses Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and machine-learning algorithms to detect cancer.

RESULTS

Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) values were calculated for eight cancer types versus symptomatic non-cancer controls: brain (0.90), breast (0.76), colorectal (0.91), kidney (0.91), lung (0.91), ovarian (0.86), pancreatic (0.84) and prostate (0.86). We assessed the test performance when all eight cancer types were pooled to classify 'any cancer' against non-cancer patients. The cancer versus asymptomatic non-cancer classification detected 64% of Stage I cancers when specificity was 99% (overall sensitivity 57%). When tuned for higher sensitivity, this model identified 99% of Stage I cancers (with specificity 59%).

CONCLUSIONS

This spectroscopic blood test can effectively detect early-stage disease and can be fine-tuned to maximise either sensitivity or specificity depending on the requirements from different healthcare systems and cancer diagnostic pathways. This low-cost strategy could facilitate the requisite earlier diagnosis, when cancer treatment can be more effective, or less toxic.

STATEMENT OF TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

The earlier diagnosis of cancer is of paramount importance to improve patient survival. Current liquid biopsies are mainly focused on single tumour-derived biomarkers, which limits test sensitivity, especially for early-stage cancers that do not shed enough genetic material. This pan-omic liquid biopsy analyses the full complement of tumour and immune-derived markers present within blood derivatives and could facilitate the earlier detection of multiple cancer types. There is a low barrier to integrating this blood test into existing diagnostic pathways since the technology is rapid, simple to use, only minute sample volumes are required, and sample preparation is minimal. In addition, the spectroscopic liquid biopsy described in this study has the potential to be combined with other orthogonal tests, such as cell-free DNA, which could provide an efficient route to diagnosis. Cancer treatment can be more effective when given earlier, and this low-cost strategy has the potential to improve patient prognosis.

Invasive Procedures Associated With Lung Cancer Screening in Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

The harm associated with imaging abnormalities related to lung cancer screening (LCS) is not well documented, especially outside the clinical trial and academic setting.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the frequency of invasive procedures and complications associated with a community based LCS program, including procedures for false-positive and benign, but clinically important, incidental findings?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective study of an LCS program at a nonuniversity teaching hospital from 2016 through 2019 to identify invasive procedures prompted by LCS results, including their indication and complications.

RESULTS

Among 2,003 LCS participants, 58 patients (2.9%) received a diagnosis of lung cancer and 71 patients (3.5%) received a diagnosis of any malignancy. Invasive procedures were performed 160 times in 103 participants (5.1%), including 1.7% of those without malignancy. Eight invasive procedures (0.4% of participants), including four surgeries (12% of diagnostic lung resections), were performed for false-positive lung nodules. Only 1% of Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System category 4A nodules that proved benign were subject to an invasive procedure. Among those without malignancy, an invasive procedure was performed in eight participants for extrapulmonary false-positive findings (0.4%) and in 19 participants (0.9%) to evaluate incidental findings considered benign but clinically important. Procedures for the latter indication resulted in treatment, change in management, or diagnosis in 79% of individuals. Invasive procedures in those without malignancy resulted in three complications (0.15%). Seventy nonsurgical procedures (6% complication rate) and 48 thoracic surgeries (4% major complication rate) were performed in those with malignancy.

INTERPRETATION

The use of invasive procedures to resolve false-positive findings was uncommon in the clinical practice of a nonuniversity LCS program that adhered to a nodule management algorithm and used a multidisciplinary approach. Incidental findings considered benign but clinically important resulted in invasive procedure rates that were similar to those for false-positive findings and frequently had clinical value.

Developing a pan-European technical standard for a comprehensive high-quality lung cancer computed tomography screening programme: an ERS technical standard

BACKGROUND

Screening for lung cancer with low radiation dose computed tomography (LDCT) has a strong evidence base. The European Council adopted a recommendation in November 2022 that lung cancer screening (LCS) be implemented using a stepwise approach. The imperative now is to ensure that implementation follows an evidence-based process that delivers clinical and cost-effectiveness. This European Respiratory Society (ERS) Task Force was formed to provide a technical standard for a high-quality LCS programme.

METHOD

A collaborative group was convened to include members of multiple European societies. Topics were identified during a scoping review and a systematic review of the literature was conducted. Full text was provided to members of the group for each topic. The final document was approved by all members and the ERS Scientific Advisory Committee.

RESULTS

Topics were identified representing key components of a screening programme. The actions on findings from the LDCT were not included as they are addressed by separate international guidelines (nodule management and clinical management of lung cancer) and by a linked ERS Task Force (incidental findings). Other than smoking cessation, other interventions that are not part of the core screening process were not included (e.g. pulmonary function measurement). 56 statements were produced and areas for further research identified.

CONCLUSIONS

This European collaborative group has produced a technical standard that is a timely contribution to implementation of LCS. It will serve as a standard that can be used, as recommended by the European Council, to ensure a high-quality and effective programme.

Important steps towards a big change for lung health: a joint approach by the European Respiratory Society, the European Society of Radiology and their partners to facilitate implementation of the European Union's new recommendations on lung cancer screening

Enormous progress has been made on the epic journey towards implementation of lung cancer screening in Europe. A breakthrough for lung health has been achieved with the EU proposal for a Council recommendation on cancer screening. https://bit.ly/3J4O0Jb.

Important parameters for cost-effective implementation of lung cancer screening

It is now widely accepted that lung cancer screening through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) results in fewer diagnoses at a late stage, and decreased lung cancer mortality. Whilst reducing deaths from lung cancer is an essential prerequisite, this must be balanced against the considerable economic costs accumulated in screening. Multiple health economic models have shown substantial variation in cost per Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY), partly driven by the healthcare costs in the country concerned and partly by other modifiable programme components. Recent modelling using UK costs and a targeted approach suggest that most scenarios are within the willingness to pay threshold for the UK. However, identifying the most clinically and cost-effective programme is a priority to minimise the total financial impact. Programme components that influence cost-effectiveness include the method of selection of the eligible population, the participation rate, the interval between rounds of screening, the method of pulmonary nodule management, and the approach to clinical work up. Future research will clarify if a personalised approach to screening, using baseline and subsequent risk to define screening intervals is more cost-effective. The burden of LDCT screening on the medical infrastructure and workforce has to be quantified and carefully managed during implementation.

Lung cancer screening

Randomised controlled trials, including the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) and the NELSON trial, have shown reduced mortality with lung cancer screening with low-dose CT compared with chest radiography or no screening. Although research has provided clarity on key issues of lung cancer screening, uncertainty remains about aspects that might be critical to optimise clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. This Review brings together current evidence on lung cancer screening, including an overview of clinical trials, considerations regarding the identification of individuals who benefit from lung cancer screening, management of screen-detected findings, smoking cessation interventions, cost-effectiveness, the role of artificial intelligence and biomarkers, and current challenges, solutions, and opportunities surrounding the implementation of lung cancer screening programmes from an international perspective. Further research into risk models for patient selection, personalised screening intervals, novel biomarkers, integrated cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessments, smoking cessation interventions, and artificial intelligence for lung nodule detection and risk stratification are key opportunities to increase the efficiency of lung cancer screening and ensure equity of access.

Lung nodules: sorting the wheat from the chaff

Pulmonary nodules are a common finding on CT scans of the chest. In the United Kingdom, management should follow British Thoracic Society Guidelines, which were published in 2015. This review covers key aspects of nodule management also looks at new and emerging evidence since then.

Updated cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening for Australia, capturing differences in the health economic impact of NELSON and NLST outcomes

BACKGROUND

A national, lung cancer screening programme is under consideration in Australia, and we assessed cost-effectiveness using updated data and assumptions.

METHODS

We estimated the cost-effectiveness of lung screening by applying screening parameters and outcomes from either the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) or the NEderlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (NELSON) to Australian data on lung cancer risk, mortality, health-system costs, and smoking trends using a deterministic, multi-cohort model. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

The ICER for lung screening compared to usual care in the NELSON-based scenario was AU$39,250 (95% CI $18,150-108,300) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY); lower than the NLST-based estimate (ICER = $76,300, 95% CI $41,750-236,500). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, lung screening was cost-effective in 15%/60% of NELSON-like simulations, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,000/$50,000 per QALY, respectively, compared to 0.5%/6.7% for the NLST. ICERs were most sensitive to assumptions regarding the screening-related lung cancer mortality benefit and duration of benefit over time. The cost of screening had a larger impact on ICERs than the cost of treatment, even after quadrupling the 2006-2016 healthcare costs of stage IV lung cancer.

DISCUSSION

Lung screening could be cost-effective in Australia, contingent on translating trial-like lung cancer mortality benefits to the clinic.

Early Diagnosis and Lung Cancer Screening

Lung cancer remains the most significant cause of cancer death, accounting for about 20% of all cancer-related mortality. A significant reason for this is delayed diagnosis, either due to lack of symptoms in early-stage disease or presentation with non-specific symptoms common with a broad range of alternative diagnoses. More is needed in terms of increasing public awareness, providing adequate healthcare professional education and implementing clinical pathways that improve the earlier diagnosis of symptomatic lung cancer. Low-dose computed tomography screening of high-risk, asymptomatic populations has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality, with focus now shifting towards how best to implement lung cancer screening on a wider scale in a safe, efficient and cost-effective manner. For maximum benefit, efforts must be made to optimise uptake, especially among high-risk populations with significant socioeconomic deprivation, as well as successfully incorporate tobacco-dependency treatment. Quality assured programme management will be critical to minimising screening-related harms and adequately managing incidental findings. By undertaking the above, there can be optimism that lung cancer outcomes can be improved significantly in the near future.

Lung Cancer Screening: New Perspective and Challenges in Europe

Simple Summary

Screening for lung cancer in a high-risk population has been shown to be beneficial, with reduced mortality in large randomised trials. However, the general implementation of screening is not evident and many factors have to be considered. In this paper, we will review the current status of screening for lung cancer in Europe and the many hurdles that have to be overcome. Multidisciplinary cooperation between all specialists dealing with lung cancer is required to obtain the best outcome. Hopefully, Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan will incorporate screening for lung cancer to allow general implementation by similar programmes in every European Member State. This will also provide an opportunity for further, large-scale studies to refine the inclusion of specific risk populations, diagnosis and management of screen-detected nodules.

Abstract

Randomized-controlled trials have shown clear evidence that lung cancer screening with low-dose CT in a high-risk population of current or former smokers can significantly reduce lung-cancer-specific mortality by an inversion of stage distribution at diagnosis. This paper will review areas in which there is good or emerging evidence and areas which still require investment, research or represent implementation challenges. The implementation of population-based lung cancer screening in Europe is variable and fragmented. A number of European countries seem be on the verge of implementing lung cancer screening, mainly through the implementation of studies or trials. The cost and capacity of CT scanners and radiologists are considered to be the main hurdles for future implementation. Actions by the European Commission, related to its published Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan and the proposal to update recommendations on cancer screening, could be an incentive to help speed up its implementation.

Earlier diagnosis of lung cancer

The purpose of this article is to review options for more rapid diagnosis of lung cancer at an earlier stage, thereby improving survival. These options include screening, allowing general practitioners to refer patients directly to low-dose computed tomography scan instead of a chest X-ray and the abolition of the "visitation filter", i.e. hospital doctors' ability to reject referrals from general practitioners without prior discussion with the referring doctor.

Procedural complications associated with invasive diagnostic procedures after lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography

INTRODUCTION

Although the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) has proven low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is effective for lung cancer screening, little is known about complication rates from invasive diagnostic procedures (IDPs) after LDCT in real-world settings. In this study, we used the real-world data from a large clinical research network to estimate the complication rates associated with IDPs after LDCT.

METHODS

Using 2014-2021 electronic health records and claims data from the OneFlorida clinical research network, we identified case individuals who underwent an IDP (i.e., cytology or needle biopsy, bronchoscopy, thoracic surgery, and other surgery) within 12 months of their first LDCT. We matched each case with one control individual who underwent an LDCT but without any IDPs. We calculated 3-month incremental complication rates as the difference in the complication rate between the case and control groups by IDP and complication severity.

RESULTS

Among 7,041 individuals who underwent an LDCT, 301 (4.3%) subsequently had an IDP within 12 months following the LDCT. The overall 3-month incremental complication rate was 16.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.9% - 23.1%), higher than that reported in the NLST (9.4%). The overall incremental complication rate was 5.6% (95% CI: 1.9% - 9.6%) for major, 8.6% (95% CI: 3.1% - 14.1%) for intermediate, and 13.2% (95% CI: 8.1% - 18.5%) for minor complications.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important to ensure adherence to clinical guidelines for nodule management and downstream work-up to minimize potential harms from screening.

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.