Screening for bronchogenic carcinoma

Modality of Lung Cancer Treatment in an Unselected Population

The modality of lung cancer treatment was retrospectively evaluated in an unselected population. All the lung cancer cases diagnosed among the residents in a Local Sanitary Unit of Lombardy during four years (1974–1979), were identified. The clinical records of the 235 collected patients were reviewed and on this basis the anatomical extent of disease was retrospectively classified in stages according to the TNM of UICC (1978). The relative frequency of clinical stages resulted 29 % for stage I, 17 % II, 20 % III and 32 % IV. Only 57 % of all the subjects had been treated; 11 % by resection, 22 % by radiotherapy and 24 % by chemotherapy. For the stages I and II the operability rates were 35 % and 26 % respectively, while the resectability rates were 29 % and 17 %. An objective reason of exclusion from surgery was found in no more than a quarter of stage I and II lung cancers, while the remaining (40 %) had probably been excluded from exploration owing to a subjective prognostic evaluation. If compared with similar reports from other countries, these data show a striking defect in the choice of curative treatment for a high proportion of the examined cases.

Screening for lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To examine evidence on benefits and harms of screening average to high-risk adults for lung cancer using chest radiology (CXR), sputum cytology (SC) and low-dose computed tomography (LDCT).

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted to provide up to date evidence for Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) lung cancer screening guidelines. Four databases were searched to March 31, 2015 along with utilizing a previous Cochrane review search. Randomized trials reporting benefits were included; any design was included for harms. Meta-analyses were performed if possible. PROSPERO #CRD42014009984.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies were included. For lung cancer mortality there was no benefit of CXR screening, with or without SC. Pooled results from three small trials comparing LDCT to usual care found no significant benefits for lung cancer mortality. One large high quality trial showed statistically significant reductions of 20% in lung cancer mortality over a follow-up of 6.5years, for LDCT compared with CXR. LDCT screening was associated with: overdiagnosis of 10.99-25.83%; 11.18 deaths and 52.03 patients with major complications per 1000 undergoing invasive follow-up procedures; median estimate for false positives of 25.53% for baseline/once-only screening and 23.28% for multiple rounds; and 9.74 and 5.28 individuals per 1000 screened, with benign conditions underwent minor and major invasive follow-up procedures.

CONCLUSION

The evidence does not support CXR screening with or without sputum cytology for lung cancer. High quality evidence showed that in selected high-risk individuals, LDCT screening significantly reduced lung cancer mortality and all-cause mortality. However, for its implementation at a population level, the current evidence warrants the development of standardized practices for screening with LDCT and follow-up invasive testing to maximize accuracy and reduce potential associated harms.

Screening for lung cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original review published in The Cochrane Library in 1999 and updated in 2004 and 2010. Population-based screening for lung cancer has not been adopted in the majority of countries. However it is not clear whether sputum examinations, chest radiography or newer methods such as computed tomography (CT) are effective in reducing mortality from lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether screening for lung cancer, using regular sputum examinations, chest radiography or CT scanning of the chest, reduces lung cancer mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to 2012), PREMEDLINE and EMBASE (to 2012) and bibliographies. We handsearched the journal Lung Cancer (to 2000) and contacted experts in the field to identify published and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled trials of screening for lung cancer using sputum examinations, chest radiography or chest CT.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed an intention-to-screen analysis. Where there was significant statistical heterogeneity, we reported risk ratios (RRs) using the random-effects model. For other outcomes we used the fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine trials in the review (eight randomised controlled studies and one controlled trial) with a total of 453,965 subjects. In one large study that included both smokers and non-smokers comparing annual chest x-ray screening with usual care there was no reduction in lung cancer mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.07). In a meta-analysis of studies comparing different frequencies of chest x-ray screening, frequent screening with chest x-rays was associated with an 11% relative increase in mortality from lung cancer compared with less frequent screening (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.23); however several of the trials included in this meta-analysis had potential methodological weaknesses. We observed a non-statistically significant trend to reduced mortality from lung cancer when screening with chest x-ray and sputum cytology was compared with chest x-ray alone (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.03). There was one large methodologically rigorous trial in high-risk smokers and ex-smokers (those aged 55 to 74 years with ≥ 30 pack-years of smoking and who quit ≤ 15 years prior to entry if ex-smokers) comparing annual low-dose CT screening with annual chest x-ray screening; in this study the relative risk of death from lung cancer was significantly reduced in the low-dose CT group (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.92).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence does not support screening for lung cancer with chest radiography or sputum cytology. Annual low-dose CT screening is associated with a reduction in lung cancer mortality in high-risk smokers but further data are required on the cost effectiveness of screening and the relative harms and benefits of screening across a range of different risk groups and settings.

Screening for lung cancer

BACKGROUND

While population based screening for lung cancer has not been adopted by most countries, it is not clear whether sputum examinations, chest radiography or newer methods such as computed tomography are effective in reducing mortality from lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether screening for lung cancer using regular sputum examinations or chest radiography or CT chest reduces lung cancer mortality.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic databases (the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE and EMBASE; 1966 to July 2000) ), bibliographies, hand searching of a journal and discussion with experts were used to identify published and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled trials of screening for lung cancer using sputum examinations, chest radiography or CT chest.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Intention to screen analysis was performed. Where there was significant statistical heterogeneity relative risks were reported using the random effects model, but for other outcomes the fixed effect model was used.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven trials were included (6 randomised controlled studies and 1 non-randomised controlled trial) with a total of 245,610 subjects. There were no studies with an unscreened control group. Frequent screening with chest x-rays was associated with an 11% relative increase in mortality from lung cancer compared with less frequent screening (RR 1.11, CI: 1.00-1.23). A non statistically significant trend was observed to reduced mortality from lung cancer when screening with chest x-ray and sputum cytology was compared with chest x-ray alone (RR 0.88, CI:0.74-1.03). Several of the included studies had potential methodological weaknesses. There were no controlled studies of spiral CT.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence does not support screening for lung cancer with chest radiography or sputum cytology. Frequent chest x-ray screening might be harmful. Further, methodologically rigorous trials are required.

Screening for lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of screening for lung cancer with chest radiography, sputum cytology or spiral CT has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether screening for lung cancer using regular sputum examinations or chest radiography or CT chest reduces lung cancer mortality.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic databases, bibliographies, hand searching of a journal and discussion with experts were used to identify published and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled trials of screening for lung cancer using sputum examinations, chest radiography or CT chest.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Intention to screen analysis was performed. Where there was significant statistical heterogeneity relative risks were reported using the random effect model, but for other outcomes the fixed effect model was used.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven trials were included (6 randomised controlled studies and 1 non-randomised controlled trial) with a total of 245,610 subjects. There were no studies with an unscreened control group. Frequent screening with chest x-rays was associated with an 11% relative increase in mortality from lung cancer compared with less frequent screening (RR 1.11, CI: 1.00-1.23). A non statistically significant trend was observed to reduced mortality from lung cancer when screening with chest x-ray and sputum cytology was compared with chest x-ray alone (RR 0.88, CI:0.74-1.03). Several of the included studies had potential methodological weaknesses. There were no controlled studies of spiral CT.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence does not support screening for lung cancer with chest radiography or sputum cytology. Frequent chest x-ray screening might be harmful. Further, methodologically rigorous trials are required.

Screening for lung cancer

Lung cancer incidence is increasing. Survivability has increased over the last few years particularly in certain subsets and has also been shown to increase with early detection. Chest X-ray and sputum cytology have been the mainstays of screening programs. Although survival is increased, overall mortality rates seem unchanged except in certain subsets. Whether the addition of serum markers or use of monoclonal antibodies, automated cytological, and computer-aided techniques will show decrease in mortality remains to be documented. We recommend yearly chest X-rays, sputum cytology in high-risk patients, i.e., age greater than 65, greater than 20 year history smoking, other significant carcinogenic exposure. Serum markers, monoclonal antibodies, and advanced, automated cytology methods are yet to be tested and therefore should be considered in clinical trials only.

Current staging of lung cancer: an overview of current and newer approaches

The purpose of this chapter is to update some of the current approaches to the pretreatment assessment of patients with lung cancer. We will place emphasis on both standard staging and newer techniques. Because of their clinical relevancy, small-cell (SCLC) and non-small-cell (NSCLC) lung cancers have been divided to emphasize the special needs and approaches to each.

Comparative studies of computerized tomography and mediastinoscopy for the staging of bronchogenic carcinoma

The accuracy of mediastinal computerized tomographic scans for the staging of bronchogenic carcinoma varies between institutions. In the present study, the sensitivity rate was 57 percent, the specificity rate 69 percent, and the overall accuracy rate 64 percent, all of which were generally lower than rates reported in the recent literature. Different scanning equipment, diagnostic criteria, and patient populations may all contribute to this variance. The data in this report suggest that tumor histologic type and location also influenced the accuracy of computerized tomography. On the basis of this study and review of the literature, it is recommended that any given institution assess the accuracy of its own computerized tomographic mediastinal scans before substituting scanning for mediastinoscopy in the preoperative staging of bronchogenic carcinoma.

The costs and effects of screening for cancer among asbestos-exposed workers

Several million workers previously exposed to asbestos are at risk each year for developing asbestosis or cancer as a result of this exposure. We have reviewed the data on the general effectiveness of screening for the two most common cancers found in these workers (lung cancer and colo-rectal cancer) and have compared the relative benefits expected from screening workers for colon or lung cancer 10, 15, 20 or 25 yr after their initial exposure. Although lung cancer is common, there is little evidence at present that screening for this disease is effective in reducing mortality. Colon cancer is less common, there is more evidence that screening is effective, and the relatively high risk of dying from this disease in asbestos workers makes screening useful. The cost per additional year of life extended by screening is only a few hundreds of dollars, making colon cancer screening programs for asbestos workers considerably more cost-effective than most other screening programs. We conclude that occupational safety agencies should consider implementing screening programs for colon cancer in workers exposed to asbestos over 10 yr ago.

[Bronchus cancer - surgery]

Of 9,000 patients with bronchus carcinoma observed during 1958-1980, 3.041 (33%) underwent resection. Although in principle the standard operations are lobectomy for the peripheral and bilobectomy or pneumonectomy for the central carcinoma, parenchyma-saving operations such as clamping or segmental resection or main bronchus resection are justified under certain conditions; however, here all regional lymph nodes have to be removed again. We consider the surgical indication of small-celled carcinoma like any other form of bronchus carcinoma. For stage I, the 5-year survival chance is 40% - 50%, for all stages only 20%. Extended resections including pericardium, large vessels, thoracic wall, trachea, upper thoracic aperture, are justified especially in symptomatic cases, although the 5-year survival rate is less than 10% in these cases.

Occult carcinomas of the lung

In 1974, we reported 26 patients with roentgenographically occult lung carcinomas. In 13 (50%) of them, the tumor was localized and treated by resection while the disease was still early (Stage I). These patients have done well, and the median survival has reached 8 years. We have added 21 patients to the series since our last report. Localization was by fiberoptic bronchoscopy in all 21. Fourteen of these patients had Stage I disease and were treated by resection. Of a total of 27 patients with early disease treated by resection, none has had recurrence after follow-up extending from 2 months to 20 years. However, in 21 of the entire 47 patients (45%) a second carcinoma developed, 15 (71%) of which were second lung carcinomas.