4.0 Review

Lung Cancer Screening by Low-Dose Computed Tomography Part 1: Expected Benefits, Possible Harms, and Criteria for Eligibility and Population Targeting

Publisher

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/a-1290-7926

Keywords

lung neoplasms; radiation risks; overdiagnosis; false-positive findings; eligibility criteria; screening

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Screening with LDCT can reduce lung cancer mortality by approximately 20%, but the risk of over-diagnosis may increase rapidly with age, particularly above 75. Below 50, the incidence of lung cancer may be too low for screening to provide a positive balance of benefits to harms and financial costs.
Background Trials in the USA and Europe have convincingly demonstrated the efficacy of screening by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) as a means to lower lung cancer mortality, but also document potential harms related to radiation, psychosocial stress, and invasive examinations triggered by false-positive screening tests and overdiagnosis. To ensure that benefits (lung cancer deaths averted; life years gained) outweigh the risk of harm, lung cancer screening should be targeted exclusively to individuals who have an elevated risk of lung cancer, plus sufficient residual life expectancy. Methods and Conclusions Overall, randomized screening trials show an approximate 20 % reduction in lung cancer mortality by LDCT screening. In view of declining residual life expectancy, especially among continuing long-term smokers, risk of being over-diagnosed is likely to increase rapidly above the age of 75. In contrast, before age 50, the incidence of LC may be generally too low for screening to provide a positive balance of benefits to harms and financial costs. Concise criteria as used in the NLST or NELSON trials may provide a basic guideline for screening eligibility. An alternative would be the use of risk prediction models based on smoking history, sex, and age as a continuous risk factor. Compared to concise criteria, such models have been found to identify a 10 % to 20 % larger number of LC patients for an equivalent number of individuals to be screened, and additionally may help provide security that screening participants will all have a highenough LC risk to balance out harm potentially caused by radiation or false-positive screening tests.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available