Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up

Screening for lung cancer using thin-slice low-dose computed tomography in southwestern China: a population-based real-world study

OBJECTIVES

Lung cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors threatening human life and health. At present, low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for the high-risk population to achieve early diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer has become the first choice recommended by many authoritative international medical organizations. To further optimize the lung cancer screening method, we conducted a real-world study of LDCT lung cancer screening in a large sample of a healthy physical examination population, comparing differences in lung nodules and lung cancer detection between thin and thick-slice LDCT scanning.

METHODS

A total of 29 296 subjects who underwent low-dose thick-slice CT scanning (5 mm thickness) from January 2015 to December 2015 and 28 058 subjects who underwent low-dose thin-slice CT scanning (1 mm thickness) from January 2018 to December 2018 in West China Hospital were included. The positive detection rate, detection rate of lung cancer, pathological stage of lung cancer, and mortality rate of lung cancer were analyzed and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The positive rate of LDCT screening in the thin-slice scanning group was significantly higher than that in the thick-slice scanning group (20.1% vs. 14.4%, p < 0.001). In addition, the lung cancer detection rate in the thin-slice LDCT screening positive group was significantly higher than that in the thick-slice scanning group (78.0% vs. 52.9%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The screening positive rate of low-dose thin-slice CT scanning is higher and more early-stage lung cancer (IA1 stage) can be detected in the screen-positive group.

Strong association between reduction of late-stage cancers and reduction of cancer-specific mortality in meta-regression of randomized screening trials across multiple cancer types

BACKGROUND

Late-stage cancer incidence has been proposed as an early surrogate for mortality in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cancer screening; however, its validity has not been systematically evaluated across screening RCTs of different cancers.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-regression analysis of cancer screening RCTs that reported both late-stage cancer incidence and cancer mortality. Based on a systematic literature review, we included 33 RCTs of screening programs targeting seven cancer types, including lung (n = 12), colorectal (n = 8), breast (n = 5), and prostate (n = 4), among others. We regressed the relative reduction of cancer mortality on the relative reduction of late-stage cancer incidence, inversely weighted for each RCT by the variance of estimated mortality reduction.

RESULTS

Across cancer types, the relative reduction of late-stage cancer incidence was linearly associated with the relative reduction of cancer mortality. Specifically, we observed this association for lung (R2 = 0.79 and 0.996 in three recent large trials), breast (R2 = 0.94), prostate (R2 = 0.98), and colorectal cancer (R2 = 0.75 for stage III/IV cancers and 0.93 for stage IV cancers). Trials with a 20% or greater reduction in late-stage cancers were more likely to achieve a significant reduction in cancer mortality. Our results also showed that no reduction of late-stage cancer incidence was associated with no or minimal reduction in cancer mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-regression of historical screening RCTs showed a strong linear association between reductions in late-stage cancer incidence and cancer mortality.

Salivary metabolomic biomarkers for non-invasive lung cancer detection

Identifying novel biomarkers for early detection of lung cancer is crucial. Non-invasively available saliva is an ideal biofluid for biomarker exploration; however, the rationale underlying biomarker detection from organs distal to the oral cavity in saliva requires clarification. Therefore, we analyzed metabolomic profiles of cancer tissues compared with those of adjacent non-cancerous tissues, as well as plasma and saliva samples collected from patients with lung cancer (n = 109 pairs). Additionally, we analyzed plasma and saliva samples collected from control participants (n = 83 and 71, respectively). Capillary electrophoresis-mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry were performed to comprehensively quantify hydrophilic metabolites. Paired tissues were compared, revealing 53 significantly different metabolites. Plasma and saliva showed 44 and 40 significantly different metabolites, respectively, between patients and controls. Of these, 12 metabolites exhibited significant differences in all three comparisons and primarily belonged to the polyamine and amino acid pathways; N1-acetylspermidine exhibited the highest discrimination ability. A combination of 12 salivary metabolites was evaluated using a machine learning method to differentiate patients with lung cancer from controls. Salivary data were randomly split into training and validation datasets. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.744 for cross-validation using training data and 0.792 for validation data. This model exhibited a higher discrimination ability for N1-acetylspermidine than that for other metabolites. The probability of lung cancer calculated using this model was independent of most patient characteristics. These results suggest that consistently different salivary biomarkers in both plasma and lung tissues might facilitate non-invasive lung cancer screening.

A Survey on Artificial Intelligence in Pulmonary Imaging

Over the last decade, deep learning (DL) has contributed a paradigm shift in computer vision and image recognition creating widespread opportunities of using artificial intelligence in research as well as industrial applications. DL has been extensively studied in medical imaging applications, including those related to pulmonary diseases. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, lung cancer, pneumonia, and, more recently, COVID-19 are common lung diseases affecting nearly 7.4% of world population. Pulmonary imaging has been widely investigated toward improving our understanding of disease etiologies and early diagnosis and assessment of disease progression and clinical outcomes. DL has been broadly applied to solve various pulmonary image processing challenges including classification, recognition, registration, and segmentation. This paper presents a survey of pulmonary diseases, roles of imaging in translational and clinical pulmonary research, and applications of different DL architectures and methods in pulmonary imaging with emphasis on DL-based segmentation of major pulmonary anatomies such as lung volumes, lung lobes, pulmonary vessels, and airways as well as thoracic musculoskeletal anatomies related to pulmonary diseases.

Historical Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening

Lung cancer represents a large burden on society with a staggering incidence and mortality rate that has steadily increased until recently. The impetus to design an effective screening program for the deadliest cancer in the United States and worldwide began in 1950. It has taken more than 50 years of numerous clinical trials and continued persistence to arrive at the development of modern-day screening program. As the program continues to grow, it is important for clinicians to understand its evolution, track outcomes, and continually assess the impact and bias of screening on the medical, social, and economic systems.

Update on Lung Cancer Screening Guideline

Lung cancer screening has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality and is recommended for individuals meeting age and smoking history criteria. Despite the expansion of lung cancer screening guidelines in 2021, racial/ethnic and sex disparities persist. High-risk racial minorities and women are more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer at younger ages and have lower smoking histories when compared with White and male counterparts, resulting in higher rates of ineligibility for screening. Risk prediction models, biomarkers, and deep learning may help refine the selection of individuals who would benefit from screening.

Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT: What We Have Learned in Two Decades of ITALUNG and What Is Yet to Be Addressed

The ITALUNG trial started in 2004 and compared lung cancer (LC) and other-causes mortality in 55-69 years-aged smokers and ex-smokers who were randomized to four annual chest low-dose CT (LDCT) or usual care. ITALUNG showed a lower LC and cardiovascular mortality in the screened subjects after 13 years of follow-up, especially in women, and produced many ancillary studies. They included recruitment results of a population-based mimicking approach, development of software for computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) and lung nodules volumetry, LDCT assessment of pulmonary emphysema and coronary artery calcifications (CAC) and their relevance to long-term mortality, results of a smoking-cessation intervention, assessment of the radiations dose associated with screening LDCT, and the results of biomarkers assays. Moreover, ITALUNG data indicated that screen-detected LCs are mostly already present at baseline LDCT, can present as lung cancer associated with cystic airspaces, and can be multiple. However, several issues of LC screening are still unaddressed. They include the annual vs. biennial pace of LDCT, choice between opportunistic or population-based recruitment. and between uni or multi-centre screening, implementation of CAD-assisted reading, containment of false positive and negative LDCT results, incorporation of emphysema. and CAC quantification in models of personalized LC and mortality risk, validation of ultra-LDCT acquisitions, optimization of the smoking-cessation intervention. and prospective validation of the biomarkers.

Initial low-dose computed tomography screening results and summary of participant characteristics: based on the latest Chinese guideline

Background

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has been promoted as a promising screening strategy for early detection of lung cancer. China released the latest lung cancer screening guideline in 2021. The compliance of the individuals who received LDCT for lung cancer screening with the guideline is unknown yet. It is necessary to summarize the distribution of guideline-defined lung cancer-related risk factors in the Chinese population so as to inform the selection of target population for the future lung cancer screening.

Methods

A single-center, cross-sectional study design was adopted. All participants were individuals who underwent LDCT at a tertiary teaching hospital in Hunan, China, between 1 January and 31 December 2021. LDCT results were derived along with guideline-based characteristics for descriptive analysis.

Results

A total of 5,486 participants were included. Over one-quarter (1,426, 26.0%) of the participants who received screening did not meet the guideline-defined high-risk population, even among non-smokers (36.4%). Most of the participants (4,622, 84.3%) were found to have lung nodules, while no clinical intervention was required basically. The detection rate of positive nodules varied from 46.8% to 71.2% when using different cut-off values for positive nodules. Among non-smoking women, ground glass opacity appeared to be more significantly common compared with non-smoking men (26.7% vs. 21.8%).

Conclusion

Over one-quarter of individuals who received LDCT screening did not meet the guideline-defined high-risk populations. Appropriate cut-off values for positive nodules need to be continuously explored. More precise and localized criteria for high-risk individuals are needed, especially for non-smoking women.

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.

[Low-dose Spiral Computed Tomography in Lung Cancer Screening]

Lung cancer is one of the malignant tumors with the highest morbidity and mortality in the world. The low early diagnosis rate and poor prognosis of patients have caused serious social burden. Regular screening of high-risk population by low-dose spiral computed tomography (LDCT) can significantly improve the early diagnosis rate of lung cancer and bring new opportunities for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. In recent years, LDCT lung cancer screening programs have been carried out in many countries around the world and achieved good results, but there are still some controversies in the selection of screening subjects, screening frequency, cost effectiveness and other aspects. In this paper, the key factors of LDCT lung cancer screening, screening effect, pulmonary nodule management and artificial intelligence contribution to the development of LDCT will be reviewed, and the application progress of LDCT in lung cancer screening will be discussed.
.

Impact of CT screening in lung cancer: Scientific evidence and literature review

The treatment of lung cancer has improved significantly in recent years however, lung cancer remains as a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Lung cancer screening has been explored, over the past several decades, as a means of reducing lung cancer mortality, to identify asymptomatic disease when it is potentially curable. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) established that low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scans of the chest can be instrumental in reducing lung cancer mortality but the criteria for screening implemented in this trial may not be equitably sensitive across racial and sex subpopulations. Furthermore, the high false detection rate reported in this trial has raised concerns regarding overdiagnosis with LDCT alone. The aim of this review is to summarize the history of lung cancer screening trials, limitations of lung cancer screening, the impact of alternative risk prediction models in reducing disparities, and the use of biomarkers in conjunction with imaging to improve diagnostic authenticity.

Association of Computed Tomographic Screening Promotion With Lung Cancer Overdiagnosis Among Asian Women

IMPORTANCE

As smoking continues to decline in many developed countries, the proportion of lung cancers in nonsmokers will rise. This shift may create substantial pressure to further expand lung cancer screening to lower-risk groups.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association of lung cancer incidence with the promotion of screening in a largely nonsmoking population.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This population-based ecological cohort study of stage-specific lung cancer incidence used the Taiwan Cancer Registry to identify women diagnosed with lung cancer from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2018. Smoking prevalence among Taiwanese women has been less than 5% since 1980. Data were analyzed from February 13, 2020, to November 10, 2021.

EXPOSURES

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer, initiated during the early 2000s.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Change in stage-specific lung cancer incidence. An effective cancer screening program will not only increase the incidence of early-stage cancer but also decrease the incidence of cancer presenting at a late stage.

RESULTS

A total of 57 898 women were diagnosed with lung cancer in a population of approximately 12 million Taiwanese women. After the introduction of LDCT screening, the incidence of early-stage (stages 0-I) lung cancer in women increased more than 6-fold, from 2.3 to 14.4 per 100 000 population (absolute difference, 12.1 [95% CI, 11.3-12.8]) from 2004 to 2018. There was no change, however, in the incidence of late-stage (stages II-IV) lung cancer, from 18.7 to 19.3 per 100 000 (absolute difference, 0.6 [95% CI, -0.5 to 1.7]). Because the additional 12.1 per 100 000 early-stage cancers were not accompanied by a concomitant decline in late-stage cancers, virtually all the additional cancers detected represent overdiagnosis. Despite stable mortality, 5-year survival more than doubled from 2004 to 2013, from 18% to 40%, which is arguably the highest lung cancer survival rate in the world.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This population-based ecological cohort study found that low-dose computed tomographic screening of mostly nonsmoking Asian women was associated with considerable lung cancer overdiagnosis. Five-year survival is biased by the increased LDCT detection of indolent early-stage lung cancers. Unless randomized trials can demonstrate some value to low-risk groups, LDCT screening should remain targeted only to heavy smokers.

Lung cancer mortality reduction by LDCT screening: UKLS randomised trial results and international meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The NLST reported a significant 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality with three annual low-dose CT (LDCT) screens and the Dutch-Belgian NELSON trial indicates a similar reduction. We present the results of the UKLS trial.

METHODS

From October 2011 to February 2013, we randomly allocated 4 055 participants to either a single invitation to screening with LDCT or to no screening (usual care). Eligible participants (aged 50-75) had a risk score (LLPv2) ≥ 4.5% of developing lung cancer over five years. Data were collected on lung cancer cases to 31 December 2019 and deaths to 29 February 2020 through linkage to national registries. The primary outcome was mortality due to lung cancer. We included our results in a random-effects meta-analysis to provide a synthesis of the latest randomised trial evidence.

FINDINGS

1 987 participants in the intervention and 1 981 in the usual care arms were followed for a median of 7.3 years (IQR 7.1-7.6), 86 cancers were diagnosed in the LDCT arm and 75 in the control arm. 30 lung cancer deaths were reported in the screening arm, 46 in the control arm, (relative rate 0.65 [95% CI 0.41-1.02]; p=0.062). The meta-analysis indicated a significant reduction in lung cancer mortality with a pooled overall relative rate of 0.84 (95% CI 0.76-0.92) from nine eligible trials.

INTERPRETATION

The UKLS trial of single LDCT indicates a reduction of lung cancer death of similar magnitude to the NELSON and NLST trials and was included in a meta-analysis of nine randomised trials which provides unequivocal support for lung cancer screening in identified risk groups.

FUNDING

NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme; NIHR Policy Research programme; Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation.

Real-World Lung Cancer CT Screening Performance, Smoking Behavior, and Adherence to Recommendations: Lung-RADS Category and Smoking Status Predict Adherence

BACKGROUND. Low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening (LCS) has been shown to decrease mortality in persons with a significant smoking history. However, adherence in real-world LCS programs is significantly lower than in randomized controlled trials. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to assess real-world LDCT LCS performance and factors predictive of adherence to LCS recommendations. METHODS. We retrospectively identified all persons who underwent at least two LCS examinations from 2014 to 2019. Patient demographics, smoking history and behavior changes, Lung-RADS category, PPV, NPV, and adherence to screening recommendations were recorded. Predictors of adherence were assessed via univariate comparisons and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS. A total of 260 persons returned for follow-up LDCT (57.7% had two, 34.2% had three, 7.7% had four, and 0.4% had five LDCT examinations). A total of 43 of 260 (16.5%) had positive (Lung-RADS category 3 or above) scans, of which 27 of 260 persons (10.3%) were graded as Lung-RADS category 3, eight of 260 (3.1%) were category 4A, six of 260 (2.3%) were category 4B, and two of 260 (0.8%) were category 4X. Cancer was diagnosed in four of the 260 (three with lung cancer and one with metastatic melanoma). A total of 143 of 260 (55.0%) persons were current smokers at baseline and 121 of 260 (46.5%) were current smokers at the last round of LCS. LCS had sensitivity of 100.0%, specificity of 84.8%, PPV of 9.3%, and NPV of 100%. Overall adherence was 43.0% but increased progressively with higher Lung-RADS category (Lung-RADS 1: 33.2%; Lung-RADS 2: 46.3%; Lung-RADS 3: 53.8%; Lung-RADS 4A: 77.8%; Lung-RADS 4B: 83.3%; Lung-RADS 4X: 100%; p < .001). was also higher in former versus current smokers (50.0% vs 36.2%; p < .001). Being a former smoker and having a nodule that is Lung-RADS category 3 or greater were the only significant independent predictors of adherence. CONCLUSION. Our real-world LCS program showed very high sensitivity and NPV, but moderate specificity and very low PPV. Adherence to LCS recommendations increased with former versus current smokers and in those with positive (Lung-RADS categories 3, 4A, 4B, or 4X) LCS examinations. Adherence was less than 50.0% in current smokers and persons with negative (Lung-RADS categories 1 or 2) LCS examinations. CLINICAL IMPACT. Our results offer a road map for targeted performance improvement by focusing on LCS subjects less likely to remain in the program, such as persons with negative LCS examinations and persons who continue to smoke, potentially improving LCS cost effectiveness and maximizing its societal benefits.

Overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening

There have been hundreds of publications about overdiagnosis during the past decade describing concern regarding its potential for harms in lung cancer screening. However, the definition and frequency with which it occurs in screening trials remains unclear. This lack of clarity stems from its current definition which is not based on a clinical grounds but instead on an epidemiologic definition that depends on the cause of death. Thus, with the current definition an overdiagnosed cancer can only be diagnosed if the person does not die from the cancer, regardless of whether or not the cancer is aggressive or the treatment successful. Using a definition based on epidemiology rather than the clinical presentation is highly unusual. Furthermore, the frequency of overdiagnosis has also been a cause of great confusion. Prior to the results from the National Lung Screening trial (NLST), concerns were expressed that virtually all CT screen detected cancers would be overdiagnosed, yet the extended follow-up study of the National Lung Screening Trial shows that in essence there were virtually no overdiagnosis. Even more confusing is that it was previously suspected that there was a high rate of overdiagnosis when using chest radiographic screening and therefore as CT is a more sensitive imaging test and finds cancers even earlier, it would be presumed that the overdiagnosis rate for CT would be even be higher. A proposed change in the definition would focus more on the clinical manifestation of the cancer as to its aggressiveness as this can be diagnosed while the patient is alive. Using a definition that is based on clinical features, a cancer that manifests as a nonsolid nodule would be considered overdiagnosed if instead of being recognized as relatively indolent was instead thought to be an aggressive cancer. The concept of overtreatment arises if this nonaggressive cancer were treated aggressively.

Cancer-Specific Mortality, All-Cause Mortality, and Overdiagnosis in Lung Cancer Screening Trials: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Benefit of lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in reducing lung cancer-specific and all-cause mortality is unclear. We undertook a meta-analysis to assess its associations with outcomes.

METHODS

We searched the literature and previous systematic reviews to identify randomized controlled trials comparing LDCT screening with usual care or chest radiography. We performed meta-analysis using a random effects model. The primary outcomes were lung cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and the cumulative incidence ratio of lung cancer between screened and unscreened groups as a measure of overdiagnosis.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis was based on 8 trials with 90,475 patients that had a low risk of bias. There was a significant reduction in lung cancer-specific mortality with LDCT screening (relative risk = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.89); the estimated absolute risk reduction was 0.4% (number needed to screen = 250). The reduction in all-cause mortality was not statistically significant (relative risk = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-1.01), but the absolute reduction was consistent with that for lung cancer-specific mortality (0.34%; number needed to screen = 294). In the studies with the longest duration of follow-up, the incidence of lung cancer was 25% higher in the screened group, corresponding to a 20% rate of overdiagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showing a significant reduction in lung cancer-specific mortality, albeit with a tradeoff of likely overdiagnosis, supports recommendations to screen individuals at elevated risk for lung cancer with LDCT.

[Progress of Lung Cancer Screening with Low Dose Helical Computed Tomography]

Lung cancer which represents characteristics of a heavy disease burden, a large proportion of advanced lung cancer and a low five-year survival rate is a threat to human health. It is essential to implement population-based lung cancer screening to improve early detection and early treatment. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that screening with low dose helical computed tomography (LDCT) may decrease lung cancer mortality, which brings hope for the early diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. In recent years, great progresses have been made on research of lung cancer screening with LDCT. However, whether LDCT could be applied to large population-based lung cancer screening projects is still under debate. In this paper, we review the recent progresses on history of lung cancer screening with LDCT, selection of high-risk individuals, management of pulmonary nodules, performance of screening, acceptance of LDCT and cost-effectiveness.
.

Prognostic selection and long-term survival analysis to assess overdiagnosis risk in lung cancer screening randomized trials

OBJECTIVES

Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography randomized screening trials varies from 0 to 67%. The National Lung Screening Trial (extended follow-up) and ITALUNG (Italian Lung Cancer Screening Trial) have reported cumulative incidence estimates at long-term follow-up showing low or no overdiagnosis. The Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial attributed the high overdiagnosis estimate to a likely selection for risk of the active arm. Here, we applied a method already used in benefit and overdiagnosis assessments to compute the long-term survival rates in the ITALUNG arms in order to confirm incidence-excess method assessment.

METHODS

Subjects in the active arm were invited for four screening rounds, while controls were in usual care. Follow-up was extended to 11.3 years. Kaplan-Meyer 5- and 10-year survivals of "resected and early" (stage I or II and resected) and "unresected or late" (stage III or IV or not resected or unclassified) lung cancer cases were compared between arms.

RESULTS

The updated ITALUNG control arm cumulative incidence rate was lower than in the active arm, but this was not statistically significant (RR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.67-1.18). A compensatory drop of late cases was observed after baseline screening. The proportion of "resected and early" cases was 38% and 19%, in the active and control arms, respectively. The 10-year survival rates were 64% and 60% in the active and control arms, respectively (p = 0.689). The five-year survival rates for "unresected or late" cases were 10% and 7% in the active and control arms, respectively (p = 0.679).

CONCLUSIONS

This long-term survival analysis, by prognostic categories, concluded against the long-term risk of overdiagnosis and contributed to revealing how screening works.

Current Controversies in Cardiothoracic Imaging: Low-dose Computerized Tomographic Overdiagnosis of Lung Cancer is Substantial; Its Consequences are Underappreciated-Point

Lung cancer seems an ideal screening candidate because of its frequency and lethality, its well-known risk factors, and because it can often be identified at a curable stage with noninvasive procedures. The lethality of clinically diagnosed lung cancers rendered the possibility of material overdiagnosis (OD) (by means of screening) implausible in the judgment of experienced clinicians. Increased experience with lung cancer screening trials, which showed an excess of cases in screened versus control cohorts, led to broader acceptance of its existence. The magnitude of OD and the appropriate methodology for its assessment are disputed. Overdiagnosed individuals experience substantial surgical mortality and their loss of pulmonary reserve leads, in many, to a material reduction in the duration and quality of life. To estimate the scale of computerized tomographic OD, taken as the excess of screen-identified cases versus unscreened controls, we pooled the long-term findings in the 3 reporting European trials comprising 10,675 subjects. There were 263 detected lung cancers in the low-dose, computerized tomographic-screened versus 153 in controls, a 42% excess.

High Aldehyde Dehydrogenase Levels Are Detectable in the Serum of Patients with Lung Cancer and May Be Exploited as Screening Biomarkers

Objectives

Since early detection improves overall survival in lung cancer, identification of screening biomarkers for patients at risk represents an area of intense investigation. Tumor liberated protein (TLP) has been previously described as a tumor-associated antigen (complex) present in the sera from lung cancer patients. Here, we set out to identify the nature of TLP to develop this as a potential biomarker for lung cancer screening.

Materials and Methods

Beginning from the peptide epitope RTNKEASI previously identified from the TLP complex, we produced a rabbit anti-RTNKEASI serum and evaluated it in the lung cancer cell line A549 by means of immunoblot and peptide completion assay (PCA). The TLP sequence identification was conducted by mass spectrometry. The detected protein was, then, analyzed in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and benign lung pathologies and healthy donors, by ELISA.

Results

The anti-RTNKEASI antiserum detected and immunoprecipitated a 55 kDa protein band in the lysate of A549 cells identified as aldehyde dehydrogenase isoform 1A1, revealing the molecular nature of at least one component of the previously described TLP complex. Next, we screened blood samples from a non-tumor cohort of 26 patients and 45 NSCLC patients with different disease stages for the presence of ALDH1A1 and global ALDH. This analysis indicated that serum positivity was highly restricted to patients with NSCLC (ALDH p < 0.001; ALDH1A1 p=0.028). Interestingly, the global ALDH test resulted positive in more NSCLC samples compared to the ALDH1A1 test, suggesting that other ALDH isoforms might add to the sensitivity of the assay.

Conclusion

Our data indicate that ALDH levels are elevated in the sera of NSCLC patients, even with early stage disease, and may thus be evaluated as part of a marker panel for non-invasive detection of NSCLC.

Fibulin-3 as biomarker of malignant mesothelioma

Many malignant diseases are associated with past asbestos exposure; the most lethal and strictly related to previous fiber exposure being malignant mesothelioma (MM). Effective preventive protocols may include sensitive and specific biomarkers. The role of Fb-3 has been recently investigated for MM early detection, but its role is still under debate. After an independent search for scientific literature, nine studies were included for a systematic review. Human Fb-3 levels seem to be able to separate healthy people with previous exposure to asbestiform fibers from MM patients. Fb-3 blood levels can distinguish MM effusions from other malignant and benign effusions. Furthers investigations on more significant groups of patients are desirable to validate and assess the validity of combining Fb-3 with other biomarkers.

Low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of lung cancer frequently occurs in its later stages. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) could detect lung cancer early.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of LDCT lung cancer screening in high-risk populations.

DATA SOURCES

Bibliographic sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library.

METHODS

Clinical effectiveness - a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LDCT screening programmes with usual care (no screening) or other imaging screening programmes [such as chest X-ray (CXR)] was conducted. Bibliographic sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library. Meta-analyses, including network meta-analyses, were performed. Cost-effectiveness - an independent economic model employing discrete event simulation and using a natural history model calibrated to results from a large RCT was developed. There were 12 different population eligibility criteria and four intervention frequencies [(1) single screen, (2) triple screen, (3) annual screening and (4) biennial screening] and a no-screening control arm.

RESULTS

Clinical effectiveness - 12 RCTs were included, four of which currently contribute evidence on mortality. Meta-analysis of these demonstrated that LDCT, with ≤ 9.80 years of follow-up, was associated with a non-statistically significant decrease in lung cancer mortality (pooled relative risk 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 1.19). The findings also showed that LDCT screening demonstrated a non-statistically significant increase in all-cause mortality. Given the considerable heterogeneity detected between studies for both outcomes, the results should be treated with caution. Network meta-analysis, including six RCTs, was performed to assess the relative clinical effectiveness of LDCT, CXR and usual care. The results showed that LDCT was ranked as the best screening strategy in terms of lung cancer mortality reduction. CXR had a 99.7% probability of being the worst intervention and usual care was ranked second. Cost-effectiveness - screening programmes are predicted to be more effective than no screening, reduce lung cancer mortality and result in more lung cancer diagnoses. Screening programmes also increase costs. Screening for lung cancer is unlikely to be cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), but may be cost-effective at a threshold of £30,000/QALY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for a single screen in smokers aged 60-75 years with at least a 3% risk of lung cancer is £28,169 per QALY. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted. Screening was only cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000/QALY in only a minority of analyses.

LIMITATIONS

Clinical effectiveness - the largest of the included RCTs compared LDCT with CXR screening rather than no screening. Cost-effectiveness - a representative cost to the NHS of lung cancer has not been recently estimated according to key variables such as stage at diagnosis. Certain costs associated with running a screening programme have not been included.

CONCLUSIONS

LDCT screening may be clinically effective in reducing lung cancer mortality, but there is considerable uncertainty. There is evidence that a single round of screening could be considered cost-effective at conventional thresholds, but there is significant uncertainty about the effect on costs and the magnitude of benefits.

FUTURE WORK

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness estimates should be updated with the anticipated results from several ongoing RCTs [particularly the NEderlands Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (NELSON) screening trial].

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016048530.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Do we know enough about the effect of low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer on survival to act? A systematic review, meta-analysis and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of lung cancer frequently occurs in its later stages. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) could detect lung cancer early.

METHODS

Our objective was to estimate the effect of LDCT lung cancer screening on mortality in high-risk populations. A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LDCT screening programmes with usual care (no screening) or other imaging screening programme (such as chest X-ray (CXR)) was conducted. RCTs of CXR screening were additionally included in the network meta-analysis. Bibliographic sources including MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched to January 2017. All key review steps were done by two persons. Quality assessment used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were included. More will provide data in the future. Meta-analysis demonstrated that LDCT screening with up to 9.80 years of follow-up was associated with a statistically non-significant decrease in lung cancer mortality (pooled relative risk (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.19; p = 0.62). There was a statistically non-significant increase in all-cause mortality. Given the considerable heterogeneity for both outcomes, the results should be treated with caution.Network meta-analysis including the four original RCTs plus two further RCTs assessed the relative effectiveness of LDCT, CXR and usual care. The results showed that in terms of lung cancer mortality reduction LDCT was ranked as the best screening strategy, CXR screening as the worst strategy and usual care intermediate.

CONCLUSIONS

LDCT screening may be effective in reducing lung cancer mortality but there is considerable uncertainty: the largest of the RCTs compared LDCT with CXR screening rather than no screening; there is imprecision of the estimates; and there is important heterogeneity between the included study results. The uncertainty about the effect on all-cause mortality is even greater. Maturing trials may resolve the uncertainty.

Review of radiological screening programmes for breast, lung and pancreatic malignancy

The premise of medical screening is to identify clinically occult disease, facilitating intervention at an early stage with the intention of improving prognosis. Identifying solid organ malignancy before nodal or distal metastases have occurred unanimously offers the best chance of successful radical treatment, thus there is clearly a potential significant mortality benefit for successful oncological screening programmes. However, the negative consequences of screening have to be considered, particularly the impact of intervening in asymptomatic populations. Diagnostic radiology has an invaluable ability to non-invasively detect disease and has developed an essential role in several oncological screening programmes with new programmes emerging. These include the established mammography screening programme for breast carcinoma, the emerging CT screening programme for lung carcinoma and a new proposed radiological screening programme for pancreatic carcinoma. Results from published randomized controlled trials analysing the benefits of radiological screening have been convoluted and conflicting. Cancer screening remains a widely contested topic and it is a challenge for both radiologist and clinician to assess the risks and benefits at both a population and individual patient level. In this article, we discuss radiological screening and analyse the current literature on these programmes, with evaluation of recently published studies and ongoing trials.

How asymptomatic are early cancer patients of five organs based on registry data in Japan

BACKGROUND

One reason for the low cancer screening rate in Japan is that people are not concerned about cancer if they do not have symptoms.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively analyzed 18,405 cancer patients using hospital-based cancer registry data collected between 2007 and 2013 at the 13 hospitals of Shimane Prefecture, Japan. The symptomatic rates of five cancers (stomach, colorectal, lung, breast, and cervix) at each stage and the time of early diagnosis were investigated. The early detection rates of symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals were investigated.

RESULTS

The percentages of symptomatic cases tended to increase with progressive stages. The odds ratio (OR) of stage IV compared with that of stage I was 12.23 for stomach, 7.21 for colorectal, 16.91 for lung, 10.30 for breast, and 51.62 for cervical cancer. The proportions of early symptomatic cases at the time of diagnosis were low. Compared with the percentage of early symptomatic cases of stomach cancer of 25.5%, the percentage of lung cancer was the lowest, at 8.2% (OR 0.26), and the percentage of breast cancer was the highest, at 30.2% (OR 1.26). The percentages of early symptomatic cases of colorectal and cervical cancer were 18.9% (OR 0.68) and 19.9% (OR 0.73), respectively. The early detection rates of the asymptomatic and symptomatic groups were 77.6 and 36.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Cancer registry data indicate that early cancers are asymptomatic, and once symptoms appear, treatment may not be effective. Policy makers should inform people of the necessity of cancer screening before they have symptoms.

Non-invasive early detection of malignant pulmonary nodules by FISH-based sputum test

BACKGROUND

Early detection decreases lung cancer mortality. The Target-FISH Lung Cancer Detection (LCD) Test is a non-invasive test designed to detect chromosomal changes (deletion or amplification) via Fluorescence in situ Hybridization (FISH) in sputum specimens from persons suspected of having lung cancer. We evaluated the performance of the LCD test in patients with highly suspicious pulmonary nodules who were scheduled for a biopsy procedure.

METHODS

Induced sputum was collected from patients who were scheduled for biopsy of a solitary pulmonary nodule (0.8-3 cm) in one of 6 tertiary medical centers in the US and Israel. The lung cancer detection (LCD) Test combined sputum cytology and Target-FISH analysis on the same target cells and the results were compared to the pathology. Participants with non-surgical negative biopsy results were followed for 2 years to determine their final diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of the 173 participants who were evaluated, 112 were available for analysis. Overall, the LCD test had a sensitivity of 85.5% (95% CI, 76.1-92.3), specificity of 69% (95% CI, 49.2-84.7) and an accuracy of 81.3% (95% CI, 72.8-88). The positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) were 88.8% and 62.5%, respectively. The LCD test was positive in 9 of 11 lung cancer patients who had an initial negative biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of patients with highly suspicious lung nodules, the LCD test is a non-invasive option with good sensitivity and a high positive predictive value. A positive LCD test reinforces the need to aggressively pursue a definitive diagnosis of suspicious nodules.

Overdiagnosis in imaging

Overdiagnosis, more than an error regarding the diagnosis, is an error regarding the prognosis. We cannot know what consequences some lesions that we detect by imaging would have on our patients' lives if they were left untreated. As long as it is not possible for imaging techniques to differentiate between lesions that will have an indolent course from those that will have an aggressive course, there will be overdiagnosis. Advanced imaging techniques, radiomics, and radiogenomics, together with artificial intelligence, promise advances in this sense. In the meantime, it is important that radiologists be careful to ensure that only strictly necessary imaging tests are done. Moreover, we need to participate, together with patients, in making multidisciplinary decisions about diagnosis and clinical management. Finally, of course, we need to continue to contribute to the technological and scientific advance of our profession, so that we can continue to improve the diagnosis and early detection of abnormalities, especially those that require treatment.

Screening for early stage lung cancer and its correlation with lung nodule detection

Currently, the most effective way of reducing lung cancer mortality is early diagnosis of lung cancer. The National Lung Screening Trial has proved the efficacy of lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography to reduce lung cancer mortality. However, many questions remain surrounding lung cancer screening implementation, among which include how to select the optimal risk population, the personalized screening interval based different levels of risk, methods to improve diagnostic discrimination between malignant and benign disease in detected lung nodules, and the roles of biomolecular markers in stratifying risk and in guiding the management of indeterminate nodules. This review concentrates on the latest developments of lung cancer screening and provides an overview of the main unanswered questions on lung nodule detection.

Early Detection and Chemoprevention of Lung Cancer

Despite advances in targeted treatments, lung cancer remains a common and deadly malignancy, in part owing to its typical late presentation. Recent developments in lung cancer screening and ongoing efforts aimed at early detection, treatment, and prevention are promising areas to impact the mortality from lung cancer. In the past several years, lung cancer screening with low-dose chest computed tomography (CT) was shown to have mortality benefit, and lung cancer screening programs have been implemented in some clinical settings. Biomarkers for screening, diagnosis, and monitoring of response to therapy are under development. Prevention efforts aimed at smoking cessation are as crucial as ever, and there have been encouraging findings in recent clinical trials of lung cancer chemoprevention. Here we review advancements in the field of lung cancer prevention and early malignancy and discuss future directions that we believe will result in a reduction in the mortality from lung cancer.

Disaggregating the mortality reductions due to cancer screening: model-based estimates from population-based data

The mortality impact in cancer screening trials and population programs is usually expressed as a single hazard ratio or percentage reduction. This measure ignores the number/spacing of rounds of screening, and the location in follow-up time of the averted deaths vis-a-vis the first and last screens. If screening works as intended, hazard ratios are a strong function of the two Lexis time-dimensions. We show how the number and timing of the rounds of screening can be included in a model that specifies what each round of screening accomplishes. We show how this model can be used to disaggregate the observed reductions (i.e., make them time-and screening-history specific), and to project the impact of other regimens. We use data on breast cancer screening to illustrate this model, which we had already described in technical terms in a statistical journal. Using the numbers of invitations different cohorts received, we fitted the model to the age- and follow-up-year-specific numbers of breast cancer deaths in Funen, Denmark. From November 1993 onwards, women aged 50-69 in Funen were invited to mammography screening every two years, while those in comparison regions were not. Under the proportional hazards model, the overall fitted hazard ratio was 0.82 (average reduction 18%). Using a (non-proportional-hazards) model that included the timing information, the fitted reductions ranged from 0 to 30%, being largest in those Lexis cells that had received the greatest number of invitations and where sufficient time had elapsed for the impacts to manifest. The reductions produced by cancer screening have been underestimated by inattention to their timing. By including the determinants of the hazard ratios in a regression-type model, the proposed approach provides a way to disaggregate the mortality reductions and project the reductions produced by other regimes/durations.

Overdiagnosis: An Understudied Issue in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance

Overdiagnosis, the detection of clinically insignificant disease that would not otherwise impact the patient's lifespan, is a phenomenon that has been described in several solid tumors, such as prostate, breast, thyroid, and lung cancers. Population-based efforts to reduce hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) mortality in cirrhosis patients by screening and early detection may result in the overdiagnosis of HCC. One of the harms of overdiagnosis is subsequent overtreatment, which can result in increased costs, as well as physical side effects, psychological harms, and poorer quality of life. In this review, the authors explore the potential for overdiagnosis in HCC.

Lung cancer screening

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lung cancer screening with low-dose chest computed tomography is now recommended for high-risk individuals by the US Preventive Services Task Force. This recommendation was informed by several randomized controlled trials, the largest of which, the National Lung Screening Trial, demonstrated a 20% relative reduction in lung cancer mortality with annual low-dose chest computed tomography compared with chest radiography.

RECENT FINDINGS

The benefit of lung cancer screening must be balanced against potential harms, including a high false-positive rate with consequent further evaluative studies and invasive testing. It is critical that harms be minimized as screening generalizes to the broad community. Informed decision making between providers and patients should include individualized risk assessment, a discussion of both potential benefit and harm, and tobacco treatment. Given the multiple components required for high quality, screening should ideally occur in the context of a multidisciplinary program.

SUMMARY

We are in the early days of lung cancer screening, still with much to learn. Ongoing studies are necessary to refine the definition of a positive screen and develop better methods of distinguishing between true positive and false-positive results. Novel approaches, including the development of multicomponent lung cancer biomarkers, will likely inform and improve our future screening practice.

[Lung cancer screening with thoracic X‑ray and CT : Current situation]

CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE

Attempts at the early detection of lung cancer using imaging methods began as far back as the 1950s.

STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS

Several studies attempted to demonstrate a reduction of lung cancer mortality by chest radiography screening but all were unsuccessful.

METHODICAL INNOVATIONS

Even the first small screening studies using computed tomography (CT) could not demonstrate a reduction in lung cancer-specific mortality until in 2011 the results of the largest randomized controlled low-dose CT screening study in the USA (NLST) were published. The NLST results could show a significant 20 % reduction of lung cancer mortality in elderly and heavy smokers using CT.

PERFORMANCE

Confirmation of the NLST results are urgently needed so that the data of the largest European study (NELSON) are eagerly awaited.

ACHIEVEMENTS

Pooled with the data from several smaller European studies these results will provide important information and evidence for the establishment of future CT screening programs in Europe.

PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Randomized controlled trials are the basis of evidence-based medicine; therefore, the positive results of the methodologically very good NLST study cannot be ignored, even if it is the only such study completed so far with highly convincing conclusions. The NLST results clearly demonstrate that positive effects for the health of the population can only be expected if the processes are clearly defined and the quality is assured.

Cancer screening in women living with HIV infection

The number of women living with HIV continues to increase. Thirty years into the AIDS epidemic, we now expect those with access to highly active antiretroviral to survive into their seventh decade of life or beyond. Increasingly, the focus of HIV care is evolving from preventing opportunistic infections and treating AIDS-defining malignancies to strategies that promote longevity. This holistic approach to care includes detection of malignancies that are associated with certain viral infections, with chronic inflammation, and with lifestyle choices. The decision to screen an HIV-infected women for cancer should include an appreciation of the individualized risk of cancer, her life expectancy, and an attempt to balance these concerns with the harms and benefits associated with specific cancer screening tests and their potential outcome. Here, we review cancer screening strategies for women living with HIV/AIDS with a focus on cancers of the lung, breast, cervix, anus, and liver.

Lung Cancer Screening and Its Impact on Surgical Volume

Lung cancer screening has demonstrated a reduction in lung cancer mortality by 20%. Annual low-dose computed tomography examination in high-risk individuals is now recommended by multiple national health care organizations and is covered under Medicare and Medicaid services. The impact of this public health intervention is projected to increase the case load for the thoracic surgery workforce.

Progress and prospects of early detection in lung cancer

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the world. It is broadly divided into small cell (SCLC, approx. 15% cases) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, approx. 85% cases). The main histological subtypes of NSCLC are adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, with the presence of specific DNA mutations allowing further molecular stratification. If identified at an early stage, surgical resection of NSCLC offers a favourable prognosis, with published case series reporting 5-year survival rates of up to 70% for small, localized tumours (stage I). However, most patients (approx. 75%) have advanced disease at the time of diagnosis (stage III/IV) and despite significant developments in the oncological management of late stage lung cancer over recent years, survival remains poor. In 2014, the UK Office for National Statistics reported that patients diagnosed with distant metastatic disease (stage IV) had a 1-year survival rate of just 15-19% compared with 81-85% for stage I.

Perceptions of health risks of cigarette smoking: A new measure reveals widespread misunderstanding

Most Americans recognize that smoking causes serious diseases, yet many Americans continue to smoke. One possible explanation for this paradox is that perhaps Americans do not accurately perceive the extent to which smoking increases the probability of adverse health outcomes. This paper examines the accuracy of Americans' perceptions of the absolute risk, attributable risk, and relative risk of lung cancer, and assesses which of these beliefs drive Americans' smoking behavior. Using data from three national surveys, statistical analyses were performed by comparing means, medians, and distributions, and by employing Generalized Additive Models. Perceptions of relative risk were associated as expected with smoking onset and smoking cessation, whereas perceptions of absolute risk and attributable risk were not. Additionally, the relation of relative risk with smoking status was stronger among people who held their risk perceptions with more certainty. Most current smokers, former smokers, and never-smokers considerably underestimated the relative risk of smoking. If, as this paper suggests, people naturally think about the health consequences of smoking in terms of relative risk, smoking rates might be reduced if public understanding of the relative risks of smoking were more accurate and people held those beliefs with more confidence.

Estimation of the tumor size at cure threshold among aggressive non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs): evidence from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program and the national lung screening trial (NLST)

The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) mortality can be reduced by a program of annual CT screening in high-risk individuals. However, CT screening regimens and adherence vary, potentially impacting the lung cancer mortality benefit. We defined the NSCLC cure threshold as the maximum tumor size at which a given NSCLC would be curable due to early detection. We obtained data from 518,234 NSCLCs documented in the U.S. SEER cancer registry between 1988 and 2012 and 1769 NSCLCs detected in the NLST. We demonstrated mathematically that the distribution function governing the cure threshold for the most aggressive NSCLCs, G(x|Φ = 1), was embedded in the probability function governing detection of SEER-documented NSCLCs. We determined the resulting probability functions governing detection over a range of G(x|Φ = 1) scenarios and compared them with their expected functional forms. We constructed a simulation framework to determine the cure threshold models most consistent with tumor sizes and outcomes documented in SEER and the NLST. Whereas the median tumor size for lethal NSCLCs documented in SEER is 43 mm (males) and 40 mm (females), a simulation model in which the median cure threshold for the most aggressive NSCLCs is 10 mm (males) and 15 mm (females) best fit the SEER and NLST data. The majority of NSCLCs in the NLST were treated at sizes greater than our median cure threshold estimates. New technology is needed to better distinguish and treat the most aggressive NSCLCs when they are small (i.e., 5-15 mm).