Computed tomographic screening for lung cancer

Airflow limitation and survival after surgery for non-small cell lung cancer: Results from a systematic review and lung cancer screening trial (NLST-ACRIN sub-study)

OBJECTIVE

Lung cancer remains the single greatest cause of cancer mortality where surgery for early stage non-small cell lung cancer achieves the greatest survival. While there is growing optimism for better outcomes with screening using annual computed tomography, the impact of co-existing airflow limitation on survival remains unknown. To compare survival in non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing surgery stratified according to the presence or absence of pre-surgery airflow limitation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We undertook a systematic literature search of non-screen lung cancer that encompassed studies reported between January 1946 and January 2017. Full-text articles were identified following eligibility scoring, with data extracted and analysed using a standardised analytical method (PRISMA). The results of this systematic review in non-screen lung cancers were compared to real-world results from a lung cancer screening cohort (N = 10,054), where outcomes following surgery could be compared after stratification according to pre-surgery airflow limitation.

RESULTS

In the systematic review, 6899 subjects were included from 10 studies; 7 were retrospective, 3 were prospective. Overall survival was 950 (44%) in 2144 people with COPD and 2597 (55%) from 4755 controls (unadjusted P value <0.001). However, the overall meta-analysed random effects odds ratio for overall survival (N = 10) and 5-year survival (N = 4) comparing those with and without COPD was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.84-1.00) and 0.99 (95% CI = 0.79-1.24) respectively. There were no signs of significant heterogeneity (I² = 19.1%, P = 0.27) nor publication bias as assessed by funnel plot and Egger's test (P = 0.19). In the lung cancer screening sub-study of 10,054 screening participants we found no difference in 5-year survival in those with and without airflow limitation (84% and 81% respectively, P = 0.64).

CONCLUSION

Survival after surgery for non-small cell lung cancer is comparable between those with and without spirometry evidence of airflow limitation. This finding was replicated in lung cancer diagnosed during screening.

Reduced Expiratory Flow Rate among Heavy Smokers Increases Lung Cancer Risk. Results from the National Lung Screening Trial-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cohort

RATIONALE

Although epidemiological studies consistently show that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer, debate exists as to whether there is a linear relationship between the severity of airflow limitation and lung cancer risk.

OBJECTIVES

We examined this in a large, prospective study of older heavy smokers from the American College of Radiology Imaging Network subcohort of the National Lung Screening Trial (ACRIN). Airflow limitation was defined by prebronchodilator spirometry subgrouped according to Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) grades 1-4.

METHODS

In the National Lung Screening Trial-ACRIN cohort of 18,473 screening participants, 6,436 had airflow limitation (35%) and 12,037 (65%) had no airflow limitation. From these groups, 758 lung cancer cases were prospectively identified. Participants with airflow limitation were stratified according to GOLD groups 1 (n = 1,607), 2 (n = 3,528), 3 (n = 1,083), and 4 (n = 211). Lung cancer incidence at study end (mean follow-up, 6.4 yr) was compared between the GOLD groups and those with no airflow limitation (referent group).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Compared with those with no airflow limitation, where lung cancer incidence was 3.78/1,000 person years, incidence rates increased in a simple linear relationship: GOLD 1 (6.27/1,000 person yr); GOLD 2 (7.86/1,000 person yr); GOLD 3 (10.71/1,000 person yr); and GOLD 4 (13.25/1,000 person yr). All relationships were significant versus the reference group at a P value of 0.0001 or less.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large prospective study of high-risk cigarette smokers, we report a strong linear relationship between increasing severity of airflow limitation and risk of lung cancer.

Airflow Limitation and Histology Shift in the National Lung Screening Trial. The NLST-ACRIN Cohort Substudy

RATIONALE

Annual computed tomography (CT) is now widely recommended for lung cancer screening in the United States, although concerns remain regarding the potential harms, including those from overdiagnosis.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of airflow limitation on overdiagnosis by comparing lung cancer incidence, histology, and stage shift in a subgroup of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST).

METHODS

In an NLST subgroup (n = 18,714), screening participants were randomized to annual computed tomography (CT, n = 9,357) or chest radiograph (n = 9,357) screening and monitored for a mean of 6.1 years. After baseline prebronchodilator spirometry, to identify the presence of airflow limitation, 18,475 subjects (99%) were assigned as having chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or no COPD. Lung cancer prevalence, incidence, histology, and stage shift were compared after stratification by COPD.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

For screening participants with spirometric COPD (n = 6,436), there was a twofold increase in lung cancer incidence (incident rate ratio, 2.15; P < 0.001) and, when compared according to screening arm, no excess lung cancers and comparable histology. Compared with chest radiography, there was also a trend favoring reduced late-stage and increased early-stage cancers in the CT arm (P = 0.054). For those with normal baseline spirometry (n = 12,039), we found an excess of lung cancers during screening in the CT arm, almost exclusively early-stage adenocarcinoma-related cancers (histology shift and overdiagnosis). After correction for these excess cancers, stage shift was marginal (P = 0.077).

CONCLUSIONS

In the CT arm of the NLST-ACRIN (American College of Radiology Imaging Network) cohort, COPD status was associated with a doubling of lung cancer incidence, no apparent overdiagnosis, and a more favorable stage shift.

Lung cancer screening: identifying the high risk cohort

Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) is a viable screening tool for early lung cancer detection and mortality reduction. In practice, the success of any lung cancer screening programme will depend on successful identification of individuals at high risk in order to maximise the benefit-harm ratio. Risk prediction models incorporating multiple risk factors have been recognised as a method of identifying individuals at high risk of developing lung cancer. Identification of individuals at high risk will facilitate early diagnosis, reduce overall costs and also improve the current poor survival from lung cancer. This review summarises the current methods utilised in identifying high risk cohorts for lung cancer as proposed by the Liverpool Lung Project (LLP) risk model, Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial risk models and the prediction model for lung cancer death using quintiles. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of CT screening and future perspective for selecting high risk individuals is discussed.

Lung cancer screening

The United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in adults of age 55 to 80 years who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and are currently smoking or have quit within the past 15 years. This recommendation is largely based on the findings of the National Lung Screening Trial. Both policy-level and clinical decision-making about LDCT screening must consider the potential benefits of screening (reduced mortality from lung cancer) and possible harms. Effective screening requires an appreciation that screening should be limited to individuals at high risk of death from lung cancer, and that the risk of harm related to false positive findings, overdiagnosis, and unnecessary invasive testing is real. A comprehensive understanding of these aspects of screening will inform appropriate implementation, with the objective that an evidence-based and systematic approach to screening will help to reduce the enormous mortality burden of lung cancer.

Targeting of low-dose CT screening according to the risk of lung-cancer death

BACKGROUND

In the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), screening with low-dose computed tomography (CT) resulted in a 20% reduction in lung-cancer mortality among participants between the ages of 55 and 74 years with a minimum of 30 pack-years of smoking and no more than 15 years since quitting. It is not known whether the benefits and potential harms of such screening vary according to lung-cancer risk.

METHODS

We assessed the variation in efficacy, the number of false positive results, and the number of lung-cancer deaths prevented among 26,604 participants in the NLST who underwent low-dose CT screening, as compared with the 26,554 participants who underwent chest radiography, according to the quintile of 5-year risk of lung-cancer death (ranging from 0.15 to 0.55% in the lowest-risk group [quintile 1] to more than 2.00% in the highest-risk group [quintile 5]).

RESULTS

The number of lung-cancer deaths per 10,000 person-years that were prevented in the CT-screening group, as compared with the radiography group, increased according to risk quintile (0.2 in quintile 1, 3.5 in quintile 2, 5.1 in quintile 3, 11.0 in quintile 4, and 12.0 in quintile 5; P=0.01 for trend). Across risk quintiles, there were significant decreasing trends in the number of participants with false positive results per screening-prevented lung-cancer death (1648 in quintile 1, 181 in quintile 2, 147 in quintile 3, 64 in quintile 4, and 65 in quintile 5). The 60% of participants at highest risk for lung-cancer death (quintiles 3 through 5) accounted for 88% of the screening-prevented lung-cancer deaths and for 64% of participants with false positive results. The 20% of participants at lowest risk (quintile 1) accounted for only 1% of prevented lung-cancer deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening with low-dose CT prevented the greatest number of deaths from lung cancer among participants who were at highest risk and prevented very few deaths among those at lowest risk. These findings provide empirical support for risk-based targeting of smokers for such screening. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute.).

Clinical applications of gene-based risk prediction for lung cancer and the central role of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide and nearly 90% of cases are attributable to smoking. Quitting smoking and early diagnosis of lung cancer, through computed tomographic screening, are the only ways to reduce mortality from lung cancer. Recent epidemiological studies show that risk prediction for lung cancer is optimized by using multivariate risk models that include age, smoking exposure, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), family history of lung cancer, and body mass index. It has also been shown that COPD predates lung cancer in 65-70% of cases, conferring a four- to sixfold greater risk of lung cancer compared to smokers with normal lung function. Genome-wide association studies of smokers have identified a number of genetic variants associated with COPD or lung cancer. In a case-control study, where smokers with normal lungs were compared to smokers who had spirometry-defined COPD or histology confirmed lung cancer, several of these variants were shown to overlap, conferring the same susceptibility or protective effects on both COPD and lung cancer (independent of COPD status). In this perspective article, we show how combining clinical data with genetic variants can help identify heavy smokers at the greatest risk of lung cancer. Using this approach, we found that gene-based risk testing helped engage smokers in risk mitigating activities like quitting smoking and undertaking lung cancer screening. We suggest that such an approach could facilitate the targeted selection of smokers for cost-effective life-saving interventions.