Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 3/2018

01-03-2018 | Computed Tomography

Baseline and annual repeat rounds of screening: implications for optimal regimens of screening

Authors: Claudia I. Henschke, Mary Salvatore, Matthew Cham, Charles A. Powell, Larry DiFabrizio, Raja Flores, Andrew Kaufman, Corey Eber, Rowena Yip, David F. Yankelevitz, International Early Lung Cancer Action Program Investigators

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 3/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

Differences in results of baseline and subsequent annual repeat rounds provide important information for optimising the regimen of screening.

Methods

A prospective cohort study of 65,374 was reviewed to examine the frequency/percentages of the largest noncalcified nodule (NCN), lung cancer cell types and Kaplan–Meier (K-M) survival rates, separately for baseline and annual rounds.

Results

Of 65,374 baseline screenings, NCNs were identified in 28,279 (43.3%); lung cancer in 737 (1.1%). Of 74,482 annual repeat screenings, new NCNs were identified in 4959 (7%); lung cancer in 179 (0.24%). Only adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in subsolid NCNs. Percentages of lung cancers by cell type were significantly different (p < 0.0001) in the baseline round compared with annual rounds, reflecting length bias, as were the ratios, reflecting lead times. Long-term K-M survival rate was 100% for typical carcinoids and for adenocarcinomas manifesting as subsolid NCNs; 85% (95% CI 81–89%) for adenocarcinoma, 74% (95% CI 63–85%) for squamous cell, 48% (95% CI 34–62%) for small cell. The rank ordering by lead time was the same as the rank ordering by survival rates.

Conclusions

The significant differences in the frequency of NCNs and frequency and aggressiveness of diagnosed cancers in baseline and annual repeat need to be recognised for an optimal regimen of screening.

Key Points

Lung cancer aggressiveness varies considerably by cell type and nodule consistency.
Kaplan–Meier survival rates varied by cell type between 100% and 48%.
The percentages of lung cancers by cell type in screening rounds reflect screening biases.
Rank ordering by cell type survival is consistent with that by lead times.
Empirical evidence provides critical information for the regimen of screening.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hutchinson G, Shapiro S (1968) Lead time gained by diagnostic screening for breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 41:665–681 Hutchinson G, Shapiro S (1968) Lead time gained by diagnostic screening for breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 41:665–681
2.
go back to reference Morrison AS (1982) The effects of early treatment, lead time and length bias on the mortality experienced by cases detected by screening. Int J Epidemiol 11:261–267CrossRefPubMed Morrison AS (1982) The effects of early treatment, lead time and length bias on the mortality experienced by cases detected by screening. Int J Epidemiol 11:261–267CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Miller AB, International Union against Cancer, UICC Project on Evaluation of Screening for Cancer (1991) Cancer screening: a report of the workshop to update conclusions on screening for cancer of sites previously considered and to evaluate some new sites, held at Selwyn College, Cambridge, UK, April 2–5, 1990. Cambridge University Press, New York xvi Miller AB, International Union against Cancer, UICC Project on Evaluation of Screening for Cancer (1991) Cancer screening: a report of the workshop to update conclusions on screening for cancer of sites previously considered and to evaluate some new sites, held at Selwyn College, Cambridge, UK, April 2–5, 1990. Cambridge University Press, New York xvi
4.
go back to reference Flehinger BJ, Kimmel M, Melamed MR (1992) The effect of surgical treatment on survival from early lung cancer. Implications Screen Chest 101:1013–1018PubMed Flehinger BJ, Kimmel M, Melamed MR (1992) The effect of surgical treatment on survival from early lung cancer. Implications Screen Chest 101:1013–1018PubMed
5.
go back to reference Morrison AS (1992) Screening in chronic disease, 2nd edn. Monographs in epidemiology and biostatistics. Oxford University Press, New York xiv Morrison AS (1992) Screening in chronic disease, 2nd edn. Monographs in epidemiology and biostatistics. Oxford University Press, New York xiv
7.
go back to reference Draisma G, van Rosmalen J (2013) A note on the catch-up time method for estimating lead or sojourn time in prostate cancer screening. Stat Med 32:3332–3341CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Draisma G, van Rosmalen J (2013) A note on the catch-up time method for estimating lead or sojourn time in prostate cancer screening. Stat Med 32:3332–3341CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Prevost TC, Launoy G, Duffy SW, Chen HH (1998) Estimating sensitivity and sojourn time in screening for colorectal cancer: a comparison of statistical approaches. Am J Epidemiol 148:609–619CrossRefPubMed Prevost TC, Launoy G, Duffy SW, Chen HH (1998) Estimating sensitivity and sojourn time in screening for colorectal cancer: a comparison of statistical approaches. Am J Epidemiol 148:609–619CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Henschke C, Yankelevitz D, Smith J, Miettinen O, ELCAP Group (2002) Screening for lung cancer: the early lung cancer action approach. Lung Cancer 35:143–148CrossRefPubMed Henschke C, Yankelevitz D, Smith J, Miettinen O, ELCAP Group (2002) Screening for lung cancer: the early lung cancer action approach. Lung Cancer 35:143–148CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Henschke C, Yankelevitz D, Mirtcheva R, McGuinness G, McCauley D, Miettinen O (2002) CT screening for lung cancer: frequency and significance of part-solid and nonsolid nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:1053–1057CrossRefPubMed Henschke C, Yankelevitz D, Mirtcheva R, McGuinness G, McCauley D, Miettinen O (2002) CT screening for lung cancer: frequency and significance of part-solid and nonsolid nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:1053–1057CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Yankelevitz DF, Yip R, Smith JP et al (2015) CT screening for lung cancer: nonsolid nodules in baseline and annual repeat rounds. Radiology 277:555–564CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yankelevitz DF, Yip R, Smith JP et al (2015) CT screening for lung cancer: nonsolid nodules in baseline and annual repeat rounds. Radiology 277:555–564CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Henschke CI, Yip R, Smith JP et al (2016) CT screening for lung cancer: part-solid nodules in baseline and annual repeat rounds. AJR Am J Roentgenol 207:1176–1184CrossRefPubMed Henschke CI, Yip R, Smith JP et al (2016) CT screening for lung cancer: part-solid nodules in baseline and annual repeat rounds. AJR Am J Roentgenol 207:1176–1184CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Yip R, Yankelevitz DF, Hu M et al (2016) Lung cancer deaths in the National Lung Screening Trial attributed to nonsolid nodules. Radiology 281:589–596CrossRefPubMed Yip R, Yankelevitz DF, Hu M et al (2016) Lung cancer deaths in the National Lung Screening Trial attributed to nonsolid nodules. Radiology 281:589–596CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Yip R, Wolf A, Tam K et al (2016) Outcomes of lung cancers manifesting as nonsolid nodules. Lung Cancer 97:35–42CrossRefPubMed Yip R, Wolf A, Tam K et al (2016) Outcomes of lung cancers manifesting as nonsolid nodules. Lung Cancer 97:35–42CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference NY-ELCAP Investigators (2007) CT screening for lung cancer: diagnoses resulting from the New York Early Lung Cancer Action Project. Radiology 243:239–249CrossRef NY-ELCAP Investigators (2007) CT screening for lung cancer: diagnoses resulting from the New York Early Lung Cancer Action Project. Radiology 243:239–249CrossRef
18.
go back to reference International Early Lung Cancer Action Program I, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF et al (2006) Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N Engl J Med 355:1763–1771CrossRef International Early Lung Cancer Action Program I, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF et al (2006) Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N Engl J Med 355:1763–1771CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Travis WD, Brambilla E, Noguchi M et al (2011) International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society: international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma: executive summary. Proc Am Thorac Soc 8:381–385CrossRefPubMed Travis WD, Brambilla E, Noguchi M et al (2011) International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society: international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma: executive summary. Proc Am Thorac Soc 8:381–385CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Travis W, Brambilla E, Burke A, Marx A, Nicholson A (2015) WHO classification of tumours of the lung, pleura, thymus and heart, 4th edn. WHO classification of tumours, vol 7. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon Travis W, Brambilla E, Burke A, Marx A, Nicholson A (2015) WHO classification of tumours of the lung, pleura, thymus and heart, 4th edn. WHO classification of tumours, vol 7. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon
21.
go back to reference Vazquez M, Carter D, Brambilla E et al (2009) Solitary and multiple resected adenocarcinomas after CT screening for lung cancer: histopathologic features and their prognostic implications. Lung Cancer 64:148–154CrossRefPubMed Vazquez M, Carter D, Brambilla E et al (2009) Solitary and multiple resected adenocarcinomas after CT screening for lung cancer: histopathologic features and their prognostic implications. Lung Cancer 64:148–154CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Yankelevitz D, Reeves A, Kostis WJ, Zhao B, Henschke C (2000) Determination of malignancy in small pulmonary noules based on volumetrically determined growth rates: preliminary results. Radiology 217:251–256CrossRefPubMed Yankelevitz D, Reeves A, Kostis WJ, Zhao B, Henschke C (2000) Determination of malignancy in small pulmonary noules based on volumetrically determined growth rates: preliminary results. Radiology 217:251–256CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Hasegawa M, Sone S, Takashima S et al (2000) Growth rate of small lung cancers detected on mass CT screening. Br J Radiol 73:1252–1259CrossRefPubMed Hasegawa M, Sone S, Takashima S et al (2000) Growth rate of small lung cancers detected on mass CT screening. Br J Radiol 73:1252–1259CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Detterbeck FC, Gibson CJ (2008) Turning gray: the natural history of lung cancer over time. J Thorac Oncol 3:781–792CrossRefPubMed Detterbeck FC, Gibson CJ (2008) Turning gray: the natural history of lung cancer over time. J Thorac Oncol 3:781–792CrossRefPubMed
25.
26.
go back to reference Yanagawa M, Tanaka Y, Leung AN et al (2014) Prognostic importance of volumetric measurements in stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Radiology 272:557–567CrossRefPubMed Yanagawa M, Tanaka Y, Leung AN et al (2014) Prognostic importance of volumetric measurements in stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Radiology 272:557–567CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Carter D, Vazquez M, Flieder DB et al (2007) Comparison of pathologic findings of baseline and annual repeat cancers diagnosed on CT screening. Lung Cancer 56:193–199CrossRefPubMed Carter D, Vazquez M, Flieder DB et al (2007) Comparison of pathologic findings of baseline and annual repeat cancers diagnosed on CT screening. Lung Cancer 56:193–199CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Henschke C, McCauley D, Yankelevitz D et al (1999) Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 354:99–105CrossRefPubMed Henschke C, McCauley D, Yankelevitz D et al (1999) Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 354:99–105CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Henschke C, Yankelevitz D, Naidich D et al (2004) CT screening for lung cancer: suspiciousness of nodules according to size on baseline scans. Radiology 231:164–168CrossRefPubMed Henschke C, Yankelevitz D, Naidich D et al (2004) CT screening for lung cancer: suspiciousness of nodules according to size on baseline scans. Radiology 231:164–168CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Henschke C, Yip R, Yankelevitz DF, Smith JP (2013) Definition of a positive test result in computed tomography screening for lung cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 158:246–252CrossRefPubMed Henschke C, Yip R, Yankelevitz DF, Smith JP (2013) Definition of a positive test result in computed tomography screening for lung cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 158:246–252CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Moyer VA, US Preventive Services Task Force (2014) Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 160:330–338PubMed Moyer VA, US Preventive Services Task Force (2014) Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 160:330–338PubMed
34.
go back to reference Yip R, Henschke C, Yankelevitz D, Boffetta P, Smith J, The International Early Lung Cancer Investigators (2015) The impact of the regimen of screening on lung cancer cure: a comparison of I-ELCAP and NLST. Eur J Cancer Prev 24:201–208CrossRefPubMed Yip R, Henschke C, Yankelevitz D, Boffetta P, Smith J, The International Early Lung Cancer Investigators (2015) The impact of the regimen of screening on lung cancer cure: a comparison of I-ELCAP and NLST. Eur J Cancer Prev 24:201–208CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Aberle D, Adams A, Berg C et al (2011) Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365:395–409CrossRefPubMed Aberle D, Adams A, Berg C et al (2011) Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365:395–409CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Horeweg N, van der Aalst CM, Thunnissen E et al (2013) Characteristics of lung cancers detected by computer tomography screening in the randomized NELSON trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 187:848–854CrossRefPubMed Horeweg N, van der Aalst CM, Thunnissen E et al (2013) Characteristics of lung cancers detected by computer tomography screening in the randomized NELSON trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 187:848–854CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Field JK, Duffy SW, Baldwin DR et al (2016) UK lung cancer RCT pilot screening trial: baseline findings from the screening arm provide evidence for the potential implementation of lung cancer screening. Thorax 71:161–170CrossRefPubMed Field JK, Duffy SW, Baldwin DR et al (2016) UK lung cancer RCT pilot screening trial: baseline findings from the screening arm provide evidence for the potential implementation of lung cancer screening. Thorax 71:161–170CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Baseline and annual repeat rounds of screening: implications for optimal regimens of screening
Authors
Claudia I. Henschke
Mary Salvatore
Matthew Cham
Charles A. Powell
Larry DiFabrizio
Raja Flores
Andrew Kaufman
Corey Eber
Rowena Yip
David F. Yankelevitz
International Early Lung Cancer Action Program Investigators
Publication date
01-03-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5029-z

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

European Radiology 3/2018 Go to the issue