Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 7/2013

01-07-2013 | Computed Tomography

Optimisation of volume-doubling time cutoff for fast-growing lung nodules in CT lung cancer screening reduces false-positive referrals

Authors: Marjolein A. Heuvelmans, Matthijs Oudkerk, Geertruida H. de Bock, Harry J. de Koning, Xueqian Xie, Peter M. A. van Ooijen, Marcel J. W. Greuter, Pim A. de Jong, Harry J. M. Groen, Rozemarijn Vliegenthart

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 7/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To retrospectively investigate whether optimisation of volume-doubling time (VDT) cutoff for fast-growing nodules in lung cancer screening can reduce false-positive referrals.

Methods

Screening participants of the NELSON study underwent low-dose CT. For indeterminate nodules (volume 50–500 mm3), follow-up CT was performed 3 months after baseline. A negative baseline screen resulted in a regular second-round examination 1 year later. Subjects referred to a pulmonologist because of a fast-growing (VDT <400 days) solid nodule in the baseline or regular second round were included in this study. Histology was the reference for diagnosis, or stability on subsequent CTs, confirming benignity. Mean follow-up of non-resected nodules was 4.4 years. Optimisation of the false-positive rate was evaluated at maintained sensitivity for lung cancer diagnosis with VDT <400 days as reference.

Results

Sixty-eight fast-growing nodules were included; 40 % were malignant. The optimal VDT cutoff for the 3-month follow-up CT after baseline was 232 days. This cutoff reduced false-positive referrals by 33 % (20 versus 30). For the regular second round, VDTs varied more among malignant nodules, precluding lowering of the VDT cutoff of 400 days.

Conclusion

All malignant fast-growing lung nodules referred after the 3-month follow-up CT in the baseline lung cancer screening round had VDT ≤232 days. Lowering the VDT cutoff may reduce false-positive referrals.

Key Points

• Lung nodules are common in CT lung cancer screening, most being benign
• Short-term follow-up CT can identify fast-growing intermediate-size lung nodules
• Most fast-growing nodules on short-term follow-up CT still prove to be benign
• A new volume-doubling time (VDT) cut-off is proposed for lung screening
• The optimised VDT cutoff may decrease false-positive case referrals for lung cancer
Literature
1.
National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Aberle DR, Adams AM et al (2011) Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365:395–409
2.
Infante M, Lutman FR, Cavuto S et al (2008) Lung cancer screening with spiral CT: baseline results of the randomized DANTE trial. Lung Cancer 59:355–363
3.
Lopes Pegna A, Picozzi G, Mascalchi M et al (2009) Design, recruitment and baseline results of the ITALUNG trial for lung cancer screening with low-dose CT. Lung Cancer 64:34–40
4.
Blanchon T, Brechot JM, Grenier PA et al (2007) Baseline results of the Depiscan study: a French randomized pilot trial of lung cancer screening comparing low dose CT scan (LDCT) and chest X-ray (CXR). Lung Cancer 58:50–58
5.
Gohagan JK, Marcus PM, Fagerstrom RM et al (2005) Final results of the lung screening study, a randomized feasibility study of spiral CT versus chest X-ray screening for lung cancer. Lung Cancer 47:9–15
6.
van Klaveren RJ, Oudkerk M, Prokop M et al (2009) Management of lung nodules detected by volume CT scanning. N Engl J Med 361:2221–2229
7.
Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Naidich DP et al (2004) CT screening for lung cancer: suspiciousness of nodules according to size on baseline scans. Radiology 231:164–168
8.
Swensen SJ, Jett JR, Sloan JA et al (2002) Screening for lung cancer with low-dose spiral computed tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 165:508–513PubMedCrossRef
9.
Yankelevitz DF, Reeves AP, Kostis WJ, Zhao B, Henschke CI (2000) Small pulmonary nodules: volumetrically determined growth rates based on CT evaluation. Radiology 217:251–256PubMed
10.
Xu DM, Gietema H, de Koning H et al (2006) Nodule management protocol of the NELSON randomised lung cancer screening trial. Lung Cancer 54:177–184PubMedCrossRef
11.
van Iersel CA, de Koning HJ, Draisma G et al (2007) Risk-based selection from the general population in a screening trial: selection criteria, recruitment and power for the Dutch–Belgian randomised lung cancer multi-slice CT screening trial (NELSON). Int J Cancer 120:868–874PubMedCrossRef
12.
Gietema HA, Schaefer-Prokop CM, Mali WP, Groenewegen G, Prokop M (2007) Pulmonary nodules: interscan variability of semiautomated volume measurements with multisection CT-influence of inspiration level, nodule size, and segmentation performance. Radiology 245:888–894
13.
CBO (2004) Guideline-non-small cell lung cancer: staging and treatment. Van Zuiden Communications BV, Alphen aan de Rijn
14.
Xu DM, van der Zaag-Loonen HJ, Oudkerk M et al (2009) Smooth or attached solid indeterminate nodules detected at baseline CT screening in the NELSON study: cancer risk during 1 year of follow-up. Radiology 250:264–272PubMedCrossRef
15.
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 Society. Radiology 237:395–400
16.
Xu DM, van Klaveren RJ, de Bock GH et al (2008) Limited value of shape, margin and CT density in the discrimination between benign and malignant screen detected solid pulmonary nodules of the NELSON trial. Eur J Radiol 68:347–352PubMedCrossRef
17.
Nietert PJ, Ravenel JG, Leue WM et al (2009) Imprecision in automated volume measurements of pulmonary nodules and its effect on the level of uncertainty in volume doubling time estimation. Chest 135:1580–1587
18.
Ko JP, Berman EJ, Kaur M et al (2012) Pulmonary nodules: growth rate assessment in patients by using serial CT and three-dimensional volumetry. Radiology 262:662–671
19.
Pedersen JH, Ashraf H, Dirksen A et al (2009) The Danish randomized lung cancer CT screening trial—overall design and results of the prevalence round. J Thorac Oncol 4:608–614
20.
Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE (2007) Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med 146:502–510PubMedCrossRef
21.
van den Bergh KA, Essink-Bot ML, Bunge EM et al (2008) Impact of computed tomography screening for lung cancer on participants in a randomized controlled trial (NELSON trial). Cancer 113:396–404PubMedCrossRef
22.
Wilson DO, Ryan A, Fuhrman C et al (2012) Doubling times and CT screen-detected lung cancers in the Pittsburgh lung screening study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 185:85–89
23.
Yankelevitz DF, Kostis WJ, Henschke CI et al (2003) Overdiagnosis in chest radiographic screening for lung carcinoma: frequency. Cancer 97:1271–1275
24.
Revel MP, Merlin A, Peyrard S et al (2006) Software volumetric evaluation of doubling times for differentiating benign versus malignant pulmonary nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:135–142
25.
Winer-Muram HT, Jennings SG, Tarver RD et al (2002) Volumetric growth rate of stage I lung cancer prior to treatment: serial CT scanning. Radiology 223:798–805PubMedCrossRef
26.
Revel MP, Bissery A, Bienvenu M, Aycard L, Lefort C, Frija G (2004) Are two-dimensional CT measurements of small noncalcified pulmonary nodules reliable? Radiology 231:453–458
27.
Mikita K, Saito H, Sakuma Y et al (2012) Growth rate of lung cancer recognized as small solid nodule on initial CT findings. Eur J Radiol 81:e548–e553
Metadata
Title
Optimisation of volume-doubling time cutoff for fast-growing lung nodules in CT lung cancer screening reduces false-positive referrals
Authors
Marjolein A. Heuvelmans
Matthijs Oudkerk
Geertruida H. de Bock
Harry J. de Koning
Xueqian Xie
Peter M. A. van Ooijen
Marcel J. W. Greuter
Pim A. de Jong
Harry J. M. Groen
Rozemarijn Vliegenthart
Publication date
01-07-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 7/2013
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2799-9

Other articles of this Issue 7/2013

European Radiology 7/2013 Go to the issue

Oncology

Gadoxetate-enhanced versus diffusion-weighted MRI for fused Ga-68-DOTANOC PET/MRI in patients with neuroendocrine tumours of the upper abdomen

Vascular-Interventional

Characterisation of carotid plaques with ultrasound elastography: feasibility and correlation with high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging

Computed Tomography

Post-mortem computed tomography compared to forensic autopsy findings: a French experience

Cardiac

Diagnostic accuracy of combined coronary angiography and adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging using 320-detector computed tomography: pilot study

Erratum

Erratum to: Evaluation of liver fat in the presence of iron with MRI using T2* correction: a clinical approach

Interventional

Temporary stent placement with concurrent chemoradiation therapy in patients with unresectable oesophageal carcinoma: is there an optimal time for stent removal?