Article

Long-term effects of lung cancer computed tomography screening on health-related quality of life: the NELSON trial.

Dept of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
European Respiratory Journal (Impact Factor: 7.13). 12/2010; 38(1):154-61. DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00123410
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The long-term effects of lung cancer computed tomography (CT) screening on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) have not yet been investigated. In the Dutch-Belgian Randomised Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NELSON trial), 1,466 participants received questionnaires before randomisation (T0), 2 months after baseline screening (screen group only; T1) and at 2-yr follow-up (T2). HRQoL was measured as generic HRQoL (12-item short-form questionnaire and EuroQoL questionnaire), anxiety (Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory) and lung cancer-specific distress (impact of event scale (IES)). Repeated measures of ANOVA were used to analyse differences between the screen and control groups, and between indeterminate (requiring a follow-up CT) and negative screening result groups. At T0 and T2 there were no significant differences in HRQoL scores over time between the screen and control groups, or between the indeterminate or negative second-round screening result group. There was a temporary increase in IES scores after an indeterminate baseline result (T0: mean 4.0 (95% CI 2.8-5.3); T1: mean 7.8 (95% CI 6.5-9.0); T2: mean 4.5 (95% CI 3.3-5.8)). At 2-yr follow-up, the HRQoL of screened subjects was similar to that of control subjects, the unfavourable short-term effects of an indeterminate baseline screening result had resolved and an indeterminate result at the second screening round had no impact on HRQoL.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
91 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is now widely recommended for adults who are current or former heavy smokers. It is important to evaluate the impact of screening on patient-centered outcomes. Among current and former smokers eligible for lung cancer screening, we sought to determine the consequences of screening with LDCT, and subsequent results, on patient-centered outcomes such as quality of life, distress, and anxiety.
    Journal of thoracic oncology: official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer 06/2014; 9(7). DOI:10.1097/JTO.0000000000000210 · 4.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Screening for lung cancer with low dose computed tomography can reduce mortality from the disease by 20% in high risk smokers. This review covers the state of the art knowledge on several aspects of implementing a screening program. The most important are to identify people who are at high enough risk to warrant screening and the appropriate management of lung nodules found at screening. An accurate risk prediction model is more efficient than age and pack years of smoking alone at identifying those who will develop lung cancer and die from the disease. Algorithms are available for assessing people who screen positive to determine who needs additional imaging or invasive investigations. Concerns about low dose computed tomography screening include false positive results, overdiagnosis, radiation exposure, and costs. Further work is needed to define the frequency and duration of screening and to refine risk prediction models so that they can be used to assess the risk of lung cancer in special populations. Another important area is the use of computer vision software tools to facilitate high throughput interpretation of low dose computed tomography images so that costs can be reduced and the consistency of scan interpretation can be improved. Sufficient data are available to support the implementation of screening programs at the population level in stages that can be expanded when found to perform well to improve the outcome of patients with lung cancer.
    BMJ Clinical Research 05/2014; 348:g2253. DOI:10.1136/bmj.g2253 · 14.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To measure the psychosocial consequences in the Danish lung cancer screening trial (DLCST) and compare those between the computed tomography (CT) group and the control group. This study was a single centre randomised controlled trial with five annual screening rounds. Healthy current or former heavy smokers aged 50-70 years (men and women) were randomised 1:1 to a CT group and a control group. Heavy smokers were defined by having smoked ≥20 pack years and former smokers by being abstinent ≤10 years. Both groups were invited annually to the screening clinic to complete the validated lung-cancer-specific questionnaire consequences of screening lung cancer (COS-LC). The CT group was also offered a low dose CT scan of the lungs. The COS-LC measures nine scales with psychosocial properties: Anxiety, Behaviour, Dejection, Negative impact on sleep, Self-blame, Focus on Airway Symptoms, Stigmatisation, Introvert, and Harm of Smoking. 4104 participants were randomised to the DLCST and the COS-LC completion rates for the CT group and the control group were 95.5% and 73.6%, respectively. There was a significant increase in negative psychosocial consequences from baseline through rounds 2-5 for both the CT group and the control group (mean increase >0, p<.0001 for 3 of 4 possible scales). During rounds 2-5 the control group experienced significantly more negative psychosocial consequences in seven of nine scales compared with the CT group (mean Δ score >0 and p<.033). Lung cancer CT-screening trials induced more negative psychosocial reactions in both the CT group and the control group compared with the baseline psychosocial profile. The CT group experienced less negative psychosocial consequences compared with the control group, which might be explained by reassurance among those with normal screening results. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00496977. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 11/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.11.003 · 3.14 Impact Factor