Screening for lung cancer

The Regimen of Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: Lessons Learned Over 25 Years From the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program

We learned many unanticipated and valuable lessons since we started planning our study of low-dose computed tomography (CT) screening for lung cancer in 1991. The publication of the baseline results of the Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP) in Lancet 1999 showed that CT screening could identify a high proportion of early, curable lung cancers. This stimulated large national screening studies to be quickly started. The ELCAP design, which provided evidence about screening in the context of a clinical program, was able to rapidly expand to a 12-institution study in New York State (NY-ELCAP) and to many international institutions (International-ELCAP), ultimately working with 82 institutions, all using the common I-ELCAP protocol. This expansion was possible because the investigators had developed the ELCAP Management System for screening, capturing data and CT images, and providing for quality assurance. This advanced registry and its rapid accumulation of data and images allowed continual assessment and updating of the regimen of screening as advances in knowledge and new technology emerged. For example, in the initial ELCAP study, introduction of helical CT scanners had allowed imaging of the entire lungs in a single breath, but the images were obtained in 10 mm increments resulting in about 30 images per person. Today, images are obtained in submillimeter slice thickness, resulting in around 700 images per person, which are viewed on high-resolution monitors. The regimen provides the imaging acquisition parameters, imaging interpretation, definition of positive result, and the recommendations for further workup, which now include identification of emphysema and coronary artery calcifications. Continual updating is critical to maximize the benefit of screening and to minimize potential harms. Insights were gained about the natural history of lung cancers, identification and management of nodule subtypes, increased understanding of nodule imaging and pathologic features, and measurement variability inherent in CT scanners. The registry also provides the foundation for assessment of new statistical techniques, including artificial intelligence, and integration of effective genomic and blood-based biomarkers, as they are developed.

Neural network ensemble-based computer-aided diagnosis for differentiation of lung nodules on CT images: clinical evaluation

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a neural network ensemble-based computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) scheme for classifying lung nodules on thin-section computed tomography (CT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-two CT images that depicted 19 malignant nodules and 13 benign nodules were used. One of three possible classifications (probably benign, uncertain, and probably malignant) for each nodule was determined by using a neural network ensemble-based CAD scheme. The images were presented to three senior radiologists (each with more than 10 years of thoracic radiology experience) who were asked to determine the classification for each nodule blindly. The radiologists made their diagnostic decisions solely based on images and excluded any external data. The performance of the CAD scheme and of the radiologists was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and agreement analysis.

RESULTS

Areas under the ROC curve (Az values) for the CAD scheme and the radiologist group were 0.79 and 0.82, respectively, and the partial areas under the ROC curves at a range of sensitivity values greater than or equal to 90% were 0.051 and 0.020 (P = .203), respectively. The weighted Kappa coefficients between the CAD scheme and each radiologist were 0.657, 0.431, and 0.606, respectively. For the diagnosis of the 11 small nodules (with diameters not greater than 10 mm), areas under the ROC curves of the CAD scheme and the radiologist group were 0.915 and 0.683 (P = .227), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic performance of the neural network ensemble-based CAD scheme is similar to that of senior radiologists for classifying lung nodules on thin-section CT. Furthermore, the CAD scheme has certain advantages in diagnosing small lung nodules.

Evaluation of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) software for the detection of lung nodules on multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT): JAFROC study for the improvement in radiologists' diagnostic accuracy

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) software for the detection of lung nodules on multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) in terms of improvement in radiologists' diagnostic accuracy in detecting lung nodules, using jackknife free-response receiver-operating characteristic (JAFROC) analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-one patients (6 without and 15 with lung nodules) were selected randomly from 120 consecutive thoracic computed tomographic examinations. The gold standard for the presence or absence of nodules in the observer study was determined by consensus of two radiologists. Six expert radiologists participated in a free-response receiver operating characteristic study for the detection of lung nodules on MDCT, in which cases were interpreted first without and then with the output of CAD software. Radiologists were asked to indicate the locations of lung nodule candidates on the monitor with their confidence ratings for the presence of lung nodules.

RESULTS

The performance of the CAD software indicated that the sensitivity in detecting lung nodules was 71.4%, with 0.95 false-positive results per case. When radiologists used the CAD software, the average sensitivity improved from 39.5% to 81.0%, with an increase in the average number of false-positive results from 0.14 to 0.89 per case. The average figure-of-merit values for the six radiologists were 0.390 without and 0.845 with the output of the CAD software, and there was a statistically significant difference (P < .0001) using the JAFROC analysis.

CONCLUSION

The CAD software for the detection of lung nodules on MDCT has the potential to assist radiologists by increasing their accuracy.

CT screening for lung cancer: update 2007

Screening is the pursuit of the early diagnosis of cancer before symptoms occur. The purpose of early diagnosis is to provide early treatment, which potentially prevents death from the cancer. The usefulness of screening depends on how early the cancer can be diagnosed and how many deaths can be prevented by early treatment as compared with later symptom-prompted diagnosis and treatment. The goal of the Early Lung Cancer Action Project investigators was to develop an efficient methodology that would provide an ever-accumulating, continually updated body of evidence for evaluation of emerging new technologies for screening for cancer. This methodology recognizes that screening is a sequential process that starts with the pursuit of the early diagnosis of cancer followed by early treatment. It also recognizes that diagnostic research is fundamentally different from treatment research. To fully understand the current discussions on the evidence for lung cancer screening, key definitions are provided, including the differentiation between the first, baseline round of screening and all subsequent rounds of repeat screening and baseline and repeat cancers and their distribution by cell type. These definitions are critical in analyzing the results of various screening reports as they are not used by all. To provide optimal screening, a regimen for the diagnostic workup must be specified starting with the definition of the initial test, its positive result, and the workup for a positive result leading to a diagnosis of cancer. Assessment of diagnostic performance does not require a control group, but does require confirmation of the diagnosis. For assessment of the effectiveness of early treatment, a comparison group is needed. The comparison group may be formed by randomly assigning people with screen-diagnosed lung cancer to immediate or delayed treatment, as has been done for prostate cancer. This provides a direct assessment of any potential overdiagnosis of the cancer resulting from screening. Alternatively, a quasiexperimental control group can be used consisting of participants diagnosed with the cancer who have refused or delayed their treatment even though they are candidates for it.

The Role of CT Screening for Lung Cancer

A person who is at high-risk for lung cancer and asymptomatic, and who is interested in potentially being screened should be fully apprized of the implications of screening and of the treatment that may result. In light of this, it is reasonable for the individual to choose to be screened by a multidisciplinary medical team with experience in performing such screenings, using a well-defined CT regimen of screening, and having appropriate quality assurance procedures in place.

Recent progress in computer-aided diagnosis of lung nodules on thin-section CT

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) provides a computer output as a "second opinion" in order to assist radiologists in the diagnosis of various diseases on medical images. Currently, a significant research effort is being devoted to the detection and characterization of lung nodules in thin-section computed tomography (CT) images, which represents one of the newest directions of CAD development in thoracic imaging. We describe in this article the current status of the development and evaluation of CAD schemes for the detection and characterization of lung nodules in thin-section CT. We also review a number of observer performance studies in which it was attempted to assess the potential clinical usefulness of CAD schemes for nodule detection and characterization in thin-section CT. Whereas current CAD schemes for nodule characterization have achieved high performance levels and would be able to improve radiologists' performance in the characterization of nodules in thin-section CT, current schemes for nodule detection appear to report many false positives, and, therefore, significant efforts are needed in order further to improve the performance levels of current CAD schemes for nodule detection in thin-section CT.

Computer-aided diagnosis for the detection and classification of lung cancers on chest radiographs ROC analysis of radiologists' performance

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study is to investigate the effect of a computer-aided diagnostic (CAD) scheme on radiologist performance in the detection of lung cancers on chest radiographs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We combined two independent CAD schemes for the detection and classification of lung nodules into one new CAD scheme by use of a database of 150 chest images, including 108 cases with solitary pulmonary nodules and 42 cases without nodules. For the observer study, we selected 48 chest images, including 24 lung cancers, 12 benign nodules, and 12 cases without nodules, from the database to investigate radiologist performance in the detection of lung cancers. Nine radiologists participated in a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) study in which cases were interpreted first without and then with computer output, which indicated locations of possible lung nodules, together with a five-color scale illustrating the computer-estimated likelihood of malignancy of the detected nodules.

RESULTS

Performance of the CAD scheme indicated that sensitivity in detecting lung nodules was 80.6%, with 1.2 false-positive results per image, and sensitivity and specificity for classification of nodules by use of the same database for training and testing the CAD scheme were 87.7% and 66.7%, respectively. Average area under the ROC curve value for detection of lung cancers improved significantly (P = .008) from without (0.724) to with CAD (0.778).

CONCLUSION

This type of CAD scheme, which includes two functions, namely detection and classification, can improve radiologist accuracy in the diagnosis of lung cancer.

Stereo CT image compositing methods for lung nodule detection and characterization

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Stereographic display has been proposed as a possible method of improving performance in reading computed tomographic (CT) examinations acquired for lung cancer screening. Optimizing such displays is important given the large volume of image data that must be evaluated for each of these examinations. This study is designed to explore certain tradeoffs between rendering methods designed for the stereo display of CT images.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Stereo CT image compositing methods, including distance-weighted averaging, distance-weighted maximum intensity projection (MIP), and conventional MIP, were applied to lung CT images and compared for lung nodule detection and characterization.

RESULTS

Using the Jonckheere test indicated a statistically significant (P < .01) increase in contrast among the three compositing methods. Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test showed significant differences in contrast between distance-weighted averaging and conventional MIP (P < .01) and between averaging and distance-weighted MIP (P < .05), but not between distance-weighted MIP and conventional MIP (P > .05). Conventional MIP compositing provided the highest image contrast, but produced ambiguities in local geometric detail and texture, whereas averaging resulted in the lowest contrast, but preserved geometric detail. Distance-weighted MIP partially recovered geometric information, which was lost in images composited by means of conventional MIP.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that distance-weighted MIP may be a better choice for nodule detection in stereo lung CT images for its high local contrast and partial preservation of geometric information, whereas compositing by means of distance-weighted averaging is preferable for nodule characterization. The relative clinical value of these compositing methods needs to be evaluated further.

CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Past and Ongoing Studies

It has been widely recognized that the oft-quoted randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of lung cancer screening by chest radiography--studies that were interpreted as showing no benefit--were seriously flawed. We begin by describing the shortcomings of these trials and presenting an analysis of the problems typically encountered in performing RCTs in this area. Screening for lung cancer using computed tomography (CT) has shown that CT offers great superiority over chest radiography in diagnosing small lung cancers in the three studies that performed both CT and chest radiography on all patients. The Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP), showed that false-positive results can be kept reasonably low and are much less common on repeat screening, and that CT screening can be managed with no notable excess of percutaneous or surgical biopsies when following a well-defined regimen of screening. This regimen details the parameters of the initial CT, the definition of a positive result, and the subsequent work-up of positive results. Following the updated International (I)-ELCAP protocol, it has been further found that (1) the frequency of positive results is low: 15% for the baseline cycle of screening and 6% for the subsequent cycles. (2) The frequency of screen-diagnoses as compared with all diagnoses is 97% or higher. (3) The relative frequency of presurgical Stage I is well over 80%; the median diameter of the screen-diagnosed cases on repeat screening is 8 mm (versus 15 mm at baseline screening). (4) A high percentage of the screen-diagnosed cases were genuine cancers which led to death if not treated. (5) The estimated 8-year cure rate for resected baseline screen-diagnosed lung cancers without evidence of lymph node metastases is 95% and for resected annual repeat cancers is 98%. (6) CT screening appears to be highly cost-effective. These preliminary results of CT screening suggests that the cure rate of screen-diagnosed lung cancer, using the I-ELCAP regimen of screening, may be over 70% as compared with that of usual care of 10% and that of chest radiographic screening of 20%.

Population screening for lung cancer

The feasibility of diagnosing small stage 1 lung cancers using low-dose chest computed tomography in asymptomatic at-risk individuals has been demonstrated in multiple studies. However, it has yet to be proved that the introduction of a chest computed tomography screening programme would do more good than harm at an acceptable cost.

CT screening for lung cancer

The Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP) recently demonstrated that earlier diagnosis of lung cancer can be achieved with CT, and these results have led to considerable demand for CT screening. The advisability of screening seems obvious, as screening has been shown to provide for lung cancer treatment at a relatively early stage, leading to a better chance to avert death from lung cancer than when treatment is prompted by symptoms and/or signs. There are, however, countervailing ideas that CT lung cancer screening has not yet been demonstrated to 'save lives.' Further, it has been stated that CT screening has a notable problem of "overdiagnosis," meaning that screening finds lesions that are not life threatening, leading to unnecessary surgery. These concerns have led to the argument that assessing 'lives saved,' as well as the effects of overdiagnosis, can only be achieved with a randomized, controlled trial comparing CT screening with no screening, using a mortality endpoint. To this end, the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) has been funded. This randomized, controlled trial is the most expensive screening study ever proposed. It compares CT screening with chest X-ray screening, and its designers envision that it will provide an answer about the benefit of CT screening, or lack thereof, in about 10 years. We do not question the value of the randomized design of 'treatment' trials for comparing competing interventions (treatments), but we have serious concerns about the use of randomization in the evaluation of a diagnostic test, such as CT. We feel that randomization is not necessary for evaluating a diagnostic test and may generate misleading results. Rather, we feel that the desired information is how often and how early is the disease diagnosed using that test. The purpose of this article is to raise the general level of concern about the underpinnings of such randomized 'screening' trials, and to convey some of the evidence that led to our pessimism about the NLST.

Computed tomography screening for lung cancer

The development of CT technology reopened the lung cancer screening debate. Computed tomography screening for lung cancer certainly meets all the criteria required for an appropriate screening test. First and perhaps most importantly, the disease for which the screening is being performed should have a significant prevalence in the population being studied and be a significant health risk for those afflicted with it. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in both men and women, and one of the most lethal of all cancers.

Early lung cancer action project: annual screening using single-slice helical CT

The advent of helical CT imaging held promise for the early diagnosis, and thereby, for enhanced curability of lung cancer--a highly fatal disease. In 1993, the Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP) was initiated and experimentally screened a cohort of 1,000 high-risk persons. Here we summarize the results of the baseline and annual repeat CT screening of these 1,000 subjects. CT-based screening (compared to traditional radiology) was clearly shown to enhance the detection of lung cancer at earlier and more curable stages. A discussion follows of the meaning of the results and possible future screening protocols.

CT screening for lung cancer: coping with nihilistic recommendations

The practicing radiologist today is well persuaded that earlier diagnosis of lung cancer can be achieved with traditional-type radiography and especially with modern computed tomography. The practitioner also is confident that intervention in the context of earlier diagnosis is more effective in preventing death due to this otherwise fatal disease. The practitioner is thus inclined to consider such screening in a high-risk person with suitably long life expectancy, especially when asked to provide it. On the other hand, the practitioner is aware of official recommendations against lung cancer screening, said to be based on demonstrated lack of effectiveness of traditional radiographic screening. Some researchers have expressed concerns about screening-associated "overdiagnosis." Given this dilemma, the critically thinking practitioner is concerned to understand the foundation of the official nihilism in evidence and reasoning, as she or he suspects that something may be seriously wrong in this. This article is an attempt to help such a practitioner in this effort--an effort that in the end is rewarded by the comforting realization that the nihilistic recommendations and hesitation-provoking cautions are founded on pseudoevidence and specious reasoning.

Economic decision analysis model of screening for lung cancer

The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential clinical and economic implications of an annual lung cancer screening programme based on helical computed tomography (CT). A decision analysis model was created using combined data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry public-use database and published results from the Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP). We found that under optimal conditions in a high risk cohort of patients between 60 and 74 years of age, annual lung cancer screening over a period of 5 years appears to be cost effective at approximately $19000 per life year saved. A sensitivity analysis of the model to account for a 1-year decrease in survival benefit and changes in assumptions for incidence rate and costs generated cost effectiveness estimates ranging from approximately $10800 to $62000 per life year saved. Based on the assumptions embedded in this model, annual screening of high risk elderly patients for lung cancer may be cost effective under optimal conditions, but longer term data are needed to confirm if this will be borne out in practice.

Early lung cancer action project: a summary of the findings on baseline screening

PURPOSE

The Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP) is designed to evaluate baseline and annual repeat screening by low radiation dose computed tomography (low-dose CT) in persons at high-risk for lung cancer.

METHODS

Since starting in 1993, the ELCAP has enrolled 1,000 asymptomatic persons, 60 years of age or older, with at least 10 pack-years (1 pack per day for 10 years, or 2 packs per day for 5 years) of cigarette smoking, no prior cancer, and medically fit to undergo thoracic surgery. After a structured interview and informed consent, baseline chest radiographs and low-dose CT were obtained on each subject. The diagnostic work-up of screen-detected noncalcified pulmonary nodules (NCN) was guided by ELCAP recommendations which included short-term high-resolution CT follow-up for the smallest nodules. Baseline

RESULTS

On low-dose CT at baseline compared to chest radiography, NCN were detected three times as commonly (23% versus 7%), malignancies four times as commonly (2.7% versus 0.7%), and stage I malignancies six times as commonly (2.3% versus 0.4%). Of the 27 CT-detected cancers, 96% (26/27) were resectable; 85% (23/27) were stage I, and 83% (19 of the 23 stage I) were not seen on chest radiography. Following the ELCAP recommendations, biopsies were performed on 28 of the 233 subjects with NCN; 27 had a malignant and one a benign NCN. Another three individuals underwent biopsy outside of the ELCAP recommendations; all had benign NCNS: No one had thoracotomy for a benign nodule.

CONCLUSION

Baseline CT screening for lung cancer provides for detecting the disease at earlier and presumably more commonly curable stages in a cost-effective manner.

Early lung cancer action project: initial findings on repeat screenings

BACKGROUND

The Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP) was designed to evaluate the usefulness of annual computed tomography (CT) screening for lung carcinoma. With the baseline results having been reported previously, the focus of the current study was on the early results of the repeat screenings.

METHODS

A cohort of 1000 high-risk individuals was recruited for baseline and annual repeat CT screening. At last follow-up, a total of 1184 annual repeat screenings had been performed. A positive result from the screening test was defined as newly detected, one to six noncalcified pulmonary nodules with interim growth. The diagnostic workup of the individuals was guided by recommendations supplied by the ELCAP investigators to the collaborating clinicians.

RESULTS

Of the 1184 repeat CT screenings, the test result was positive in 30 (2.5%). In 2 of these 30 cases, the individual died (of an unrelated cause) before diagnostic workup and the nodule(s) resolved in another 12 individuals. In the remaining 16 individuals, the absence of further growth was documented by repeat CT in 8 individuals and further growth was documented in the remaining 8 individuals. All eight individuals with further nodular growth underwent biopsy and malignancy was diagnosed in seven. Six of these seven malignancies were nonsmall cell carcinomas (five of which were Stage IA and one of which was Stage IIIA) and the one small cell carcinoma was found to be of limited stage. The median size dimension of these malignancies was 8 mm. In another two subjects, symptoms prompted the interim diagnosis of lung carcinoma. Neither of these malignancies was nodule-associated but rather were endobronchial; one was a Stage IIB nonsmall cell carcinoma and the other was a small cell carcinoma of limited stage.

CONCLUSIONS

False-positive screening test results are uncommon and usually manageable without biopsy; compared with no screening, such screenings permit diagnosis at substantially earlier and thus more curable stages. Annual repetition of CT screening is sufficient to minimize symptom-prompted interim diagnoses of nodule-associated malignancies.

Potential cost-effectiveness of one-time screening for lung cancer (LC) in a high risk cohort

The development of low-dose helical computed-tomography (CT) scanning to detect nodules as small as a few mm has sparked renewed interest in lung cancer (LC) screening. The objective of this study was to assess the potential health effects and cost-effectiveness of a one-time low-dose helical CT scan to screen for LC. We created a decision analysis model using baseline results from the Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP); Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry public-use database; screening program costs estimated from 1999 Medicare reimbursement rates; and annual costs of managing cancer and non-cancer patients from Riley et al. (1995) [Med Care 1995;33(8):828-841] and Taplin et al. (1995) [J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87(6):417-26]. The main outcome measures included years of life, cost estimates of baseline diagnostic screening and follow up, and cost-effectiveness of screening. We found that in a very high-risk cohort (LC prevalence of 2.7%) of patients between 60 and 74 years of age, a one-time screen appears to be cost-effective at $5940 per life year saved. In a lower risk general population of smokers (LC prevalence of 0.7%), a one-time screen appears to be cost-effective at $23100 per life year. Even when a lead-time bias of 1 year is incorporated into the model for a low risk population, the cost-effectiveness is estimated at $58183 per life year. Based on the assumptions embedded in this model, one-time screening of elderly high-risk patients for LC appears to be cost-effective.

CT screening for lung cancer

Recommendations against screening for lung cancer were based on the lack of a reduction in mortality of the screened group as compared with the control group in randomized control trials. These results were interpreted as showing that early detection of lung cancer as a result of screening did not decrease the mortality rate compared with detection after presentation of symptoms for the populations being screened. Evidence, however, shows that earlier-stage intervention leads to substantially higher rates of survival. Screening, therefore, is an effective means to prevent deaths from this otherwise fatal disease. This article discusses the evidence of both CT and chest radiograph screening.