Prediction of true positive lung cancers in individuals with abnormal suspicious chest radiographs: a prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial study.
ABSTRACT Chest radiographs are routinely employed in clinical practice. Radiographic findings that are abnormal suspicious (AS) for lung cancer occur commonly. The majority of AS radiographic abnormalities are not cancer. This study identifies predictors of true positive (TP) AS and presents models for estimating the probability of lung cancer.
This is a prospective cohort study nested in the randomized National Cancer Institute's Prostate Lung Colorectal Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO). First-time AS screens in the screening arm of the PLCO were studied. Associations between nonradiographic and radiographic factors, and TP AS were evaluated by multiple logistic regression.
The PLCO intervention arm had 77,465 individuals, of whom 12,314 were AS and of these 232 (1.9%) had lung cancer (were TP). Important independent predictors of TP were older age, lower education, greater pack years and duration smoking history, body mass index <30, family history of lung cancer, lung nodule, lung mass, unilateral mediastinal or hilar lymphadenopathy, lung infiltrate, and upper/middle chest AS location. The model including these variables had a receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC) of 86.4%. This model excluding the smoking variables had an ROC AUC of 77.1% and excluding all nonradiographic variables had an ROC AUC of 73.3% (p < 0.0001 for all these model differences). Smoking and nonsmoking nonradiographic variables significantly added to prediction.
This study identifies important nonradiographic and radiographic predictors of lung cancer, and presents an accurate model for estimating the probability of lung cancer in individuals with suspicious radiographs. These findings may be of value for screening, research, and patient and clinician decision-making.
SourceAvailable from: William G Hocking[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Lung cancer is the major cause of cancer mortality. One of the aims of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO) was to determine if annual screening chest radiographs reduce lung cancer mortality. We enrolled 154,900 individuals, aged 55-74 years; 77,445 were randomized to the intervention arm and received an annual chest radiograph for 3 or 4 years. Participants with a positive screen underwent diagnostic evaluation under guidance of their primary physician. Methods of diagnosis or exclusion of cancer, interval from screen to diagnosis, and factors predicting diagnostic testing were evaluated. One or more positive screens occurred in 17% of participants. Positive screens resulted in biopsy in 3%, with 54% positive for cancer. Biopsy likelihood was associated with a mass, smoking, age, and family history of lung cancer. Diagnostic testing stopped after a chest radiograph or computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging in over half. After a second or subsequent positive screen, evaluation stopped after comparison to prior radiographs in over half. Of 308 screen-detected cancers, the diagnosis was established by thoracotomy/thoracoscopy in 47.7%, needle biopsy in 27.6%, bronchoscopy in 20.1% and mediastinoscopy in 2.9%. Eighty-four percent of screen-detected lung cancers were diagnosed within 6 months. Diagnostic evaluations following a positive screen were conducted in a timely fashion. Lung cancer was diagnosed by tissue biopsy or cytology in all cases. Lung cancer was excluded during evaluation of positive screening examinations by clinical or radiographic evaluation in all but 1.4% who required a tissue biopsy.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 08/2013; 82(2). DOI:10.1016/j.lungcan.2013.07.017 · 3.74 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There are an increased number of pulmonary nodules discovered on CT scan images in part due to those performed for lung cancer screening. Risk stratification and patient involvement is critical in determining management ranging from interval imaging to invasive biopsy or surgery. A definitive diagnosis requires tissue biopsy. The choice of a particular biopsy technique depends on the risks/benefits of the procedure, the diagnostic yield and local expertise. This review will focus on the evaluation and management of pulmonary nodules based on the Fleischner Society and American College of Chest Physician guidelines. There have been recent changes to both societies’ recommendations for incidental detection of solid and subsolid nodules, risk stratification, imaging, minimally invasive diagnostic techniques and definitive surgical options.Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine 08/2014; DOI:10.1586/17476348.2014.948855
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The objective of this article is to update previous evidence-based recommendations for evaluation and management of individuals with solid pulmonary nodules and to generate new recommendations for those with nonsolid nodules. We updated prior literature reviews, synthesized evidence, and formulated recommendations by using the methods described in the "Methodology for Development of Guidelines for Lung Cancer" in the American College of Chest Physicians Lung Cancer Guidelines, 3rd ed. We formulated recommendations for evaluating solid pulmonary nodules that measure > 8 mm in diameter, solid nodules that measure ≤ 8 mm in diameter, and subsolid nodules. The recommendations stress the value of assessing the probability of malignancy, the utility of imaging tests, the need to weigh the benefits and harms of different management strategies (nonsurgical biopsy, surgical resection, and surveillance with chest CT imaging), and the importance of eliciting patient preferences. Individuals with pulmonary nodules should be evaluated and managed by estimating the probability of malignancy, performing imaging tests to better characterize the lesions, evaluating the risks associated with various management alternatives, and eliciting their preferences for management.Chest 05/2013; 143(5 Suppl):e93S-e120S. DOI:10.1378/chest.12-2351 · 7.13 Impact Factor