Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Cancer Causes & Control 9/2017

01-09-2017 | Original paper

Evaluating the impact of varied compliance to lung cancer screening recommendations using a microsimulation model

Authors: Summer S. Han, S. Ayca Erdogan, Iakovos Toumazis, Ann Leung, Sylvia K. Plevritis

Published in: Cancer Causes & Control | Issue 9/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The US preventive services task force (USPSTF) recently recommended that individuals aged 55–80 with heavy smoking history be annually screened by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT), thereby extending the stopping age from 74 to 80 compared to the national lung screening trial (NLST) entry criterion. This decision was made partly with model-based analyses from cancer intervention and surveillance modeling network (CISNET), which assumed perfect compliance to screening.

Methods

As part of CISNET, we developed a microsimulation model for lung cancer (LC) screening and calibrated and validated it using data from NLST and the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial (PLCO), respectively. We evaluated population-level outcomes of the lifetime screening program recommended by the USPSTF by varying screening compliance levels.

Results

Validation using PLCO shows that our model reproduces observed PLCO outcomes, predicting 884 LC cases [Expected(E)/Observed(O) = 0.99; CI 0.92–1.06] and 563 LC deaths (E/O = 0.94 CI 0.87–1.03) in the screening arm that has an average compliance rate of 87.9% over four annual screening rounds. We predict that perfect compliance to the USPSTF recommendation saves 501 LC deaths per 100,000 persons in the 1950 U.S. birth cohort; however, assuming that compliance behaviors extrapolated and varied from PLCO reduces the number of LC deaths avoided to 258, 230, and 175 as the average compliance rate over 26 annual screening rounds changes from 100 to 46, 39, and 29%, respectively.

Conclusion

The implementation of the USPSTF recommendation is expected to contribute to a reduction in LC deaths, but the magnitude of the reduction will likely be heavily influenced by screening compliance.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Aberle D, Adams A, Berg C et al (2011) Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Eng J Med 365:395CrossRef Aberle D, Adams A, Berg C et al (2011) Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Eng J Med 365:395CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Moyer VA (2014) Screening for lung cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 160:330–338PubMed Moyer VA (2014) Screening for lung cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 160:330–338PubMed
4.
go back to reference de Koning HJ, Meza R, Plevritis SK et al (2014) Benefits and harms of computed tomography lung cancer screening strategies: a comparative modeling study for the US preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 160:311–320CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral de Koning HJ, Meza R, Plevritis SK et al (2014) Benefits and harms of computed tomography lung cancer screening strategies: a comparative modeling study for the US preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 160:311–320CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Meza R, Haaf K, Kong CY et al (2014) Comparative analysis of 5 lung cancer natural history and screening models that reproduce outcomes of the NLST and PLCO trials. Cancer 120:1713–1724CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Meza R, Haaf K, Kong CY et al (2014) Comparative analysis of 5 lung cancer natural history and screening models that reproduce outcomes of the NLST and PLCO trials. Cancer 120:1713–1724CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Meza R, Hazelton WD, Colditz GA, Moolgavkar SH (2008) Analysis of lung cancer incidence in the nurses’ health and the health professionals’ follow-up studies using a multistage carcinogenesis model. Cancer Causes Control 19:317–328CrossRefPubMed Meza R, Hazelton WD, Colditz GA, Moolgavkar SH (2008) Analysis of lung cancer incidence in the nurses’ health and the health professionals’ follow-up studies using a multistage carcinogenesis model. Cancer Causes Control 19:317–328CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Moolgavkar SH, Venzon DJ (1979) Two-event models for carcinogenesis: incidence curves for childhood and adult tumors. Math Biosci 47:55–77CrossRef Moolgavkar SH, Venzon DJ (1979) Two-event models for carcinogenesis: incidence curves for childhood and adult tumors. Math Biosci 47:55–77CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hazelton WD, Luebeck EG, Heidenreich WF, Moolgavkar SH (2009) Analysis of a historical cohort of Chinese tin miners with arsenic, radon, cigarette smoke, and pipe smoke exposures using the biologically based two-stage clonal expansion model. Radiat Res 156:78–94CrossRef Hazelton WD, Luebeck EG, Heidenreich WF, Moolgavkar SH (2009) Analysis of a historical cohort of Chinese tin miners with arsenic, radon, cigarette smoke, and pipe smoke exposures using the biologically based two-stage clonal expansion model. Radiat Res 156:78–94CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Lin RS, Plevritis SK (2012) Comparing the benefits of screening for breast cancer and lung cancer using a novel natural history model. Cancer Causes Control 23:175–185CrossRefPubMed Lin RS, Plevritis SK (2012) Comparing the benefits of screening for breast cancer and lung cancer using a novel natural history model. Cancer Causes Control 23:175–185CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Tan S, Van Oortmarssen GJ, De Koning HJ, Boer R, Habbema JDF (2006) The MISCAN-Fadia continuous tumor growth model for breast cancer. Monogr-Natl Cancer Inst 36:56CrossRef Tan S, Van Oortmarssen GJ, De Koning HJ, Boer R, Habbema JDF (2006) The MISCAN-Fadia continuous tumor growth model for breast cancer. Monogr-Natl Cancer Inst 36:56CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lindell RM, Hartman TE, Swensen SJ et al (2007) Five-year lung cancer screening experience: CT appearance, growth rate, location, and histologic features of 61 lung cancers1. Radiology 242:555–562CrossRefPubMed Lindell RM, Hartman TE, Swensen SJ et al (2007) Five-year lung cancer screening experience: CT appearance, growth rate, location, and histologic features of 61 lung cancers1. Radiology 242:555–562CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference MacMahon H, Austin JH, Gamsu G et al (2005) Guidelines for management of small pulmonary nodules detected on CT scans: a Statement from the Fleischner society1. Radiology 237:395–400CrossRefPubMed MacMahon H, Austin JH, Gamsu G et al (2005) Guidelines for management of small pulmonary nodules detected on CT scans: a Statement from the Fleischner society1. Radiology 237:395–400CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Ginsberg R, Hill L, Eagan R et al (1983) Modern thirty-day operative mortality for surgical resections in lung cancer. J Thor Cardiovasc Surg 86:654 Ginsberg R, Hill L, Eagan R et al (1983) Modern thirty-day operative mortality for surgical resections in lung cancer. J Thor Cardiovasc Surg 86:654
15.
go back to reference Oken MM, Hocking WG, Kvale PA et al (2011) Screening by chest radiograph and lung cancer mortality. JAMA. 306:1865–1873CrossRefPubMed Oken MM, Hocking WG, Kvale PA et al (2011) Screening by chest radiograph and lung cancer mortality. JAMA. 306:1865–1873CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA et al (2001) Validation of the Gail, model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:358–366CrossRefPubMed Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA et al (2001) Validation of the Gail, model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:358–366CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
go back to reference McMahon PM, Meza R, Plevritis SK, et al. (2014) Benefits from lung cancer screening: Extrapolating from the NLST to other designs and participants. PLoS ONE McMahon PM, Meza R, Plevritis SK, et al. (2014) Benefits from lung cancer screening: Extrapolating from the NLST to other designs and participants. PLoS ONE
19.
go back to reference McMahon PM, Kong CY, Bouzan C et al (2011) Cost-effectiveness of CT screening for lung cancer in the US. J Thor Oncol 6:1841CrossRef McMahon PM, Kong CY, Bouzan C et al (2011) Cost-effectiveness of CT screening for lung cancer in the US. J Thor Oncol 6:1841CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Evaluating the impact of varied compliance to lung cancer screening recommendations using a microsimulation model
Authors
Summer S. Han
S. Ayca Erdogan
Iakovos Toumazis
Ann Leung
Sylvia K. Plevritis
Publication date
01-09-2017
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Cancer Causes & Control / Issue 9/2017
Print ISSN: 0957-5243
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7225
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-017-0907-x

Other articles of this Issue 9/2017

Cancer Causes & Control 9/2017 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine