Lung cancer risk in non-smoking females with a familial history of cancer: a multi-center prospective cohort study in China

Predictive performance of risk prediction models for lung cancer incidence in Western and Asian countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Numerous prediction models have been developed to identify high-risk individuals for lung cancer screening, with the aim of improving early detection and survival rates. However, no comprehensive review or meta-analysis has assessed the performance of these models across different sociocultural contexts. Therefore, this review systematically examines the performance of lung cancer risk prediction models in Western and Asian populations. PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception through January 2023. Studies published in English that proposed a validated model on human populations with well-defined predictive performances were included. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts, and the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used to assess study quality. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed, and a 95% confidence interval (CI) for model performance was reported. Between-study heterogeneity was adjusted for using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Honkman test. A total of 54 studies were included, with 42 from Western countries and 12 from Asian countries. Most Western studies focused on ever-smokers (19/42; 45.2%) and the general population (17/42; 40.5%), and only two Asian studies developed models exclusively for never-smokers. Across both Western and Asian prediction models, the three most consistently included risk factors were age, sex, and family cancer history. In 45.2% (19/42) of Western and 50.0% (6/12) of Asian studies, models incorporated both traditional risk factors and biomarkers. In addition, 14.8% (8/54) of the studies directly compared biomarker-based models with those incorporating only traditional risk factors, demonstrating improved discrimination. Machine-learning algorithms were applied in eight Western models and two Asian models. External validation of PLCOM2012 (AUC = 0.748; 95% CI: 0.719-0.777) outperformed other prediction models, such as Bach (AUC = 0.710; 95% CI: 0.674-0.745) and Spitz models (AUC = 0.698; 95% CI: 0.640-0.755). Despite showing promising results, the majority of Asian risk models in our study lack external validation. Our review also highlights a significant gap in prediction models for never-smokers. Future research should focus on externally validating existing Asian models or incorporating relevant Asian risk factors into widely used Western models (PLCOM2012) to better account for unique risk profiles and lung cancer progression patterns in Asian populations.

Association between family history with lung cancer incidence and mortality risk in the Asia Cohort Consortium

Family history of lung cancer (FHLC) has been widely studied but most prospective cohort studies have primarily been conducted in non-Asian countries. We assessed the association between FHLC with risk of lung cancer (LC) incidence and mortality in a population of East Asian individuals. A total of 478,354 participants from 11 population-based cohorts in the Asia Cohort Consortium were included. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 7,785 LC incident cases were identified. FHLC (any LC subtype) was associated with an increased risk of LC incidence (HR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.30-1.63). The positive association was observed in men and women (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.26-1.66 in men; HR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.22-1.79 in women), and in both never-smokers and ever-smokers (HR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.18-1.73 in never-smokers; HR = 1.46, 95% CI =1.27-1.67 in ever-smokers). FHLC was associated with an increased risk of lung adenocarcinoma (HR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.36-1. 94), squamous cell carcinoma (HR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.46-2.44), and other non-small cell LC (HR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.02-3.68). However, we found no evidence of significant effect modification by sex, smoking status, and ethnic groups. In conclusion, FHLC was associated with increased risk of LC incidence and mortality, and the associations remained consistent regardless of sex, smoking status and ethnic groups among the East Asian population.

Risk-Adapted Starting Age of Personalized Lung Cancer Screening: A Population-Based, Prospective Cohort Study in China

BACKGROUND

The current one-size-fits-all screening strategy for lung cancer is not suitable for personalized screening.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the risk-adapted starting age of lung cancer screening with comprehensive consideration of risk factors?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The National Lung Cancer Screening program, a multicenter, population-based, prospective cohort study, was analyzed. Information on risk factor exposure was collected during the baseline risk assessment. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the association between risk factors and lung cancer incidence. Age-specific 10-year cumulative risk was calculated to determine the age at which individuals with various risk factors reached the equivalent risk level as individuals aged ≥ 50 years with active tobacco use and a ≥ 20 pack-year smoking history.

RESULTS

Of the 1,031,911 participants enrolled in this study, 3,908 demonstrated lung cancer after a median follow-up of 3.8 years. We identified seven risk factors for lung cancer, including pack-years of smoking, secondhand smoke exposure, family history of lung cancer in first-degree relatives, history of respiratory diseases, occupational hazardous exposure, BMI, and diabetes. The 10-year cumulative risk of lung cancer for people aged ≥ 50 years with active tobacco use and a ≥ 20 pack-year smoking history was 1.37%, which was treated as the risk threshold for screening. Individuals who never smoked and those with active tobacco use and a < 30-pack-year history of smoking reached the equivalent risk level 1 to 14 years later compared with the starting age of 50 years. Men with active tobacco use, a ≥ 30-pack-year history of smoking, and concurrent respiratory diseases or diabetes should be screened 1 year earlier at the age of 49 years.

INTERPRETATION

The personalized risk-adapted starting ages for lung cancer screening, based on the principle of equal management of equal risk, can served as an optimized screening strategy to identify high-risk individuals.

Uptake of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in China: A multi-centre population-based study

Background

Optimal uptake rates of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scans are essential for lung cancer screening (LCS) to confer mortality benefits. We aimed to outline the process model of the LCS programme in China, identify the high-risk individuals with low uptake based on a prospective multi-centre population-based cohort, and further explore associated structural characteristics.

Methods

A total of 221,955 individuals at high-risk for lung cancer from the National Lung Cancer Screening cohort were included. The logistic regression model was performed to identify the individual characteristics associated with the uptake of LCS, defined as whether the high-risk individual undertook LDCT scans in designated hospitals within six months following the initial risk assessment. The linear regression model was adopted to explore the structural characteristics associated with the uptake rates in 186 communities.

Findings

The overall uptake rate was 33·0%. The uptake rate was negatively correlated with the incidence of advanced-stage lung cancer (Pearson's coefficient -0·88, p-value 0·0007). Multivariable regression models found that lower uptake rates were associated with males (OR 0·88, 95%CI 0·85-0·91), current smokers (OR 0·93, 95%CI 0·90-0·96), individuals with depressive symptoms (OR 0·92, 95%CI 0·90-0·94), and the structural characteristics, including longer structural delays in initiating LDCT scans (30-90 days vs. ≤14 days: β -7·17, 95%CI -12·76∼ -1·57; >90 days vs. ≤14 days: β -13·69, 95%CI -24·61∼ -2·76), no media-assisted publicity (β -6·43, 95%CI -11·26∼ -1·60), and no navigation assistance (β -5·48, 95%CI -10·52∼ -0·44).

Interpretation

Multifaceted interventions are recommended, which focus on poor-uptake individuals and integrate the 'assessment-to-timely-screening' approach to minimise structural delays, media publicity, and a navigation assistance along the centralised screening pathway.

Funding

Ministry of Finance and National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China.