4.6 Article

The American Association for Thoracic Surgery guidelines for lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography scans for lung cancer survivors and other high-risk groups

Journal

JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
Volume 144, Issue 1, Pages 33-38

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.05.060

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Toshiba
  2. Oncimmune
  3. Metabolomx
  4. Astellas Canada
  5. Axela/Exceed
  6. Eli Lilly
  7. National Institute for Health Research [09/61/01, 07/82/01] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in North America. Low-dose computed tomography screening can reduce lung cancer-specific mortality by 20%. Method: The American Association for Thoracic Surgery created a multispecialty task force to create screening guidelines for groups at high risk of developing lung cancer and survivors of previous lung cancer. Results: The American Association for Thoracic Surgery guidelines call for annual lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography screening for North Americans from age 55 to 79 years with a 30 pack-year history of smoking. Long-term lung cancer survivors should have annual low-dose computed tomography to detect second primary lung cancer until the age of 79 years. Annual low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening should be offered starting at age 50 years with a 20 pack-year history if there is an additional cumulative risk of developing lung cancer of 5% or greater over the following 5 years. Lung cancer screening requires participation by a subspecialty-qualified team. The American Association for Thoracic Surgery will continue engagement with other specialty societies to refine future screening guidelines. Conclusions: The American Association for Thoracic Surgery provides specific guidelines for lung cancer screening in North America. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012;144:33-8)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available