Implementation of lung cancer screening at the national level: Polish example

Perspective on Management of Low-Dose Computed Tomography Findings on Low-Dose Computed Tomography Examinations for Lung Cancer Screening. From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Early Detection and Screening Committee

Lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) carefully implemented has been found to reduce deaths from lung cancer. Optimal management starts with selection of eligibility criteria, counseling of screenees, smoking cessation, selection of the regimen of screening which specifies the imaging protocol, and workup of LDCT findings. Coordination of clinical, radiologic, and interventional teams and ultimately treatment of diagnosed lung cancers under screening determine the benefit of LDCT screening. Ethical considerations of who should be eligible for LDCT screening programs are important to provide the benefit to as many people at risk of lung cancer as possible. Unanticipated diseases identified on LDCT may offer important benefits through early detection of leading global causes of death, such as cardiovascular diseases and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, as the latter may result from conditions such as emphysema and bronchiectasis, which can be identified early on LDCT. This report identifies the key components of the regimen of LDCT screening for lung cancer which include the need for a management system to provide data for continuous updating of the regimen and provides quality assurance assessment of actual screenings. Multidisciplinary clinical management is needed to maximize the benefit of early detection, diagnosis, and treatment of lung cancer. Different regimens have been evolving throughout the world as the resources and needs may be different, for countries with limited resources. Sharing of results, further knowledge, and incorporation of technologic advances will continue to accelerate worldwide improvements in the diagnostic and treatment approaches.

Cost-effectiveness of risk-based low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Switzerland

Throughout Europe, computed tomography (CT) screening for lung cancer is in a phase of clinical implementation or reimbursement evaluation. To efficiently select individuals for screening, the use of lung cancer risk models has been suggested, but their incremental (cost-)effectiveness relative to eligibility based on pack-year criteria has not been thoroughly evaluated for a European setting. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pack-year and risk-based screening (PLCOm2012 model-based) strategies for Switzerland, which aided in informing the recommendations of the Swiss Cancer Screening Committee (CSC). We use the MISCAN (MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis)-Lung model to estimate benefits and harms of screening among individuals born 1940 to 1979 in Switzerland. We evaluate 1512 strategies, differing in the age ranges employed for screening, the screening interval and the strictness of the smoking requirements. We estimate risk-based strategies to be more cost-effective than pack-year-based screening strategies. The most efficient strategy compliant with CSC recommendations is biennial screening for ever-smokers aged 55 to 80 with a 1.6% PLCOm2012 risk. Relative to no screening this strategy is estimated to reduce lung cancer mortality by 11.0%, with estimated costs per Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY) gained of €19 341, and a €1.990 billion 15-year budget impact. Biennial screening ages 55 to 80 for those with 20 pack-years shows a lower mortality reduction (10.5%) and higher cost per QALY gained (€20 869). Despite model uncertainties, our estimates suggest there may be cost-effective screening policies for Switzerland. Risk-based biennial screening ages 55 to 80 for those with ≥1.6% PLCOm2012 risk conforms to CSC recommendations and is estimated to be more efficient than pack-year-based alternatives.

Pricing and cost-saving potential for deep-learning computer-aided lung nodule detection software in CT lung cancer screening

OBJECTIVE

An increasing number of commercial deep learning computer-aided detection (DL-CAD) systems are available but their cost-saving potential is largely unknown. This study aimed to gain insight into appropriate pricing for DL-CAD in different reading modes to be cost-saving and to determine the potentially most cost-effective reading mode for lung cancer screening.

METHODS

In three representative settings, DL-CAD was evaluated as a concurrent, pre-screening, and second reader. Scoping review was performed to estimate radiologist reading time with and without DL-CAD. Hourly cost of radiologist time was collected for the USA (€196), UK (€127), and Poland (€45), and monetary equivalence of saved time was calculated. The minimum number of screening CTs to reach break-even was calculated for one-time investment of €51,616 for DL-CAD.

RESULTS

Mean reading time was 162 (95% CI: 111-212) seconds per case without DL-CAD, which decreased by 77 (95% CI: 47-107) and 104 (95% CI: 71-136) seconds for DL-CAD as concurrent and pre-screening reader, respectively, and increased by 33-41 s for DL-CAD as second reader. This translates into €1.0-4.3 per-case cost for concurrent reading and €0.8-5.7 for pre-screening reading in the USA, UK, and Poland. To achieve break-even with a one-time investment, the minimum number of CT scans was 12,300-53,600 for concurrent reader, and 9400-65,000 for pre-screening reader in the three countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Given current pricing, DL-CAD must be priced substantially below €6 in a pay-per-case setting or used in a high-workload environment to reach break-even in lung cancer screening. DL-CAD as pre-screening reader shows the largest potential to be cost-saving.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Deep-learning computer-aided lung nodule detection (DL-CAD) software must be priced substantially below 6 euro in a pay-per-case setting or must be used in high-workload environments with one-time investment in order to achieve break-even. DL-CAD as a pre-screening reader has the greatest cost savings potential.

KEY POINTS

• DL-CAD must be substantially below €6 in a pay-per-case setting to reach break-even. • DL-CAD must be used in a high-workload screening environment to achieve break-even. • DL-CAD as a pre-screening reader shows the largest potential to be cost-saving.

Why is the screening rate in lung cancer still low? A seven-country analysis of the factors affecting adoption

Strong evidence of lung cancer screening's effectiveness in mortality reduction, as demonstrated in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) in the US and the Dutch-Belgian Randomized Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NELSON), has prompted countries to implement formal lung cancer screening programs. However, adoption rates remain largely low. This study aims to understand how lung cancer screening programs are currently performing. It also identifies the barriers and enablers contributing to adoption of lung cancer screening across 10 case study countries: Canada, China, Croatia, Japan, Poland, South Korea and the United States. Adoption rates vary significantly across studied countries. We find five main factors impacting adoption: (1) political prioritization of lung cancer (2) financial incentives/cost sharing and hidden ancillary costs (3) infrastructure to support provision of screening services (4) awareness around lung cancer screening and risk factors and (5) cultural views and stigma around lung cancer. Although these factors have application across the countries, the weighting of each factor on driving or hindering adoption varies by country. The five areas set out by this research should be factored into policy making and implementation to maximize effectiveness and outreach of lung cancer screening programs.

Predictors of Long-Term Survival of Thoracoscopic Lobectomy for Stage IA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Large Retrospective Cohort Study

The standard of care for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is anatomical lung resection with lymphadenectomy. This multicenter, retrospective, cohort study aimed to identify predictors of 5-year survival in patients after thoracoscopic lobectomy for stage IA NSCLC. The study included 1249 patients who underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy for stage IA NSCLC between 17 April 2007, and December 28, 2016. The 5-year survival rate equaled 77.7%. In the multivariate analysis, higher age (OR, 1.025, 95% CI: 1.002 to 1.048; p = 0.032), male sex (OR, 1.410, 95% CI: 1.109 to 1.793; p = 0.005), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 1.346, 95% CI: 1.005 to 1.803; p = 0.046), prolonged postoperative air leak (OR, 2.060, 95% CI: 1.424 to 2.980; p < 0.001) and higher pathological stage (OR, 1.271, 95% CI: 1.048 to 1.541; p = 0.015) were related to the increased risk of death within 5 years after surgery. Lobe-specific mediastinal lymph node dissection (OR, 0.725, 95% CI: 0.548 to 0.959; p = 0.024) was related to the decreased risk of death within 5 years after surgery. These findings provide valuable insights for clinical practice and may contribute to improving the quality of treatment of early-stage NSCLC.

See Lung Cancer with an AI

A lot has happened in the field of lung cancer screening in recent months. The ongoing discussion and documentation published by the scientific community and policymakers are of great importance to the entire European community and perhaps beyond. Lung cancer is the main worldwide killer. Low-dose computed tomography-based screening, together with smoking cessation, is the only tool to fight lung cancer, as it has already been proven in the United States of America but also European randomized controlled trials. Screening requires a lot of well-organized specialized work, but it can be supported by artificial intelligence (AI). Here we discuss whether and how to use AI for patients, radiologists, pulmonologists, thoracic surgeons, and all hospital staff supporting screening process benefits.

Lung cancer screening

Randomised controlled trials, including the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) and the NELSON trial, have shown reduced mortality with lung cancer screening with low-dose CT compared with chest radiography or no screening. Although research has provided clarity on key issues of lung cancer screening, uncertainty remains about aspects that might be critical to optimise clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. This Review brings together current evidence on lung cancer screening, including an overview of clinical trials, considerations regarding the identification of individuals who benefit from lung cancer screening, management of screen-detected findings, smoking cessation interventions, cost-effectiveness, the role of artificial intelligence and biomarkers, and current challenges, solutions, and opportunities surrounding the implementation of lung cancer screening programmes from an international perspective. Further research into risk models for patient selection, personalised screening intervals, novel biomarkers, integrated cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessments, smoking cessation interventions, and artificial intelligence for lung nodule detection and risk stratification are key opportunities to increase the efficiency of lung cancer screening and ensure equity of access.

Assessment of Calcium Score Cutoff Point for Clinically Significant Aortic Stenosis on Lung Cancer Screening Program Low-Dose Computed Tomography-A Cross-Sectional Analysis

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is predominantly applied in lung cancer screening programs. Tobacco smoking is the main risk factor for developing lung cancer but is also common for cardiovascular diseases, including aortic stenosis (AS). Consequently, an increased prevalence of cardiovascular diseases is expected in lung cancer screenees. Therefore, initial aortic valve calcification evaluation should be additionally performed on LDCT. The aim of this study was to estimate a calcium score (CS) cutoff point for clinically significant AS diagnosis based on LDCT, confirmed by echocardiographic examination. The study included 6631 heavy smokers who participated in a lung cancer screening program (MOLTEST BIS). LDCTs were performed on all individuals and were additionally assessed for aortic valve calcification with the use of CS according to the Agatston method. Patients with CS ≥ 900 were referred for echocardiography to confirm the diagnosis of AS and to evaluate its severity. Of 6631 individuals, 54 met the inclusion criteria and underwent echocardiography for confirmation and assessment of AS. Based on that data, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of CS were plotted, and cutoff points for clinically significant AS diagnosis were established: A CS of 1758 for at least moderate AS had 85.71% (CI 65.36-95.02%) sensitivity and 75.76% (CI 58.98-87.17%) specificity; a CS of 2665 for severe AS had 87.5% (CI 73.89-94.54%) sensitivity and 76.92% (CI 49.74-91.82%) specificity. This is the first study to assess possible CS cutoff points for diagnosing clinically significant AS detected by LDCT in lung cancer screening participants. LDCT with CS assessment could enable early detection of patients with clinically significant AS and therefore identify patients who require appropriate treatment.

Qualitative Findings From a Survey on Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Lung Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

To reveal successes and potential limitations of the lung cancer screening program, we conducted a survey that included both quantitative and open-ended questions to measure patient experiences and satisfaction with screening.

METHODS

We report on the five open-ended items related to barriers to returning for screening, experience with other cancer prevention screenings, positive and negative experiences, and suggestions for improving future appointments. The open-ended responses were analyzed using constant comparison method and inductive content analysis.

RESULTS

Respondents (182 patients, 86% response rate for open-ended questions) provided generally positive comments about their lung cancer screening experience. Negative comments were related to desire for more information about results, long wait times for results, and billing issues. Suggestions for improvements included: scheduling on-line appointments and text or email reminders, lower costs, and responding to uncertainty about eligibility criteria.

CONCLUSION

Findings provide insights about patient experiences and satisfaction with lung cancer screening which is important given low uptake. Ongoing patient-centered feedback may improve the lung cancer screening experience and increase follow-up screening rates.

Lung Cancer Screening in Greece: A Modelling Study to Estimate the Impact on Lung Cancer Life Years

(1) Background: Lung cancer causes a substantial epidemiological burden in Greece. Yet, no formal national lung cancer screening program has been introduced to date. This study modeled the impact on lung cancer life years (LCLY) of a hypothetical scenario of comprehensive screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) of the high-risk population in Greece, as defined by the US Preventive Services Taskforce, would be screened and linked to care (SLTC) for lung cancer versus the current scenario of background (opportunistic) screening only; (2) Methods: A stochastic model was built to monitor a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 high-risk men and women as they transitioned between health states (without cancer, with cancer, alive, dead) over 5 years. Transition probabilities were based on clinical expert opinion. Cancer cases, cancer-related deaths, and LCLYs lost were modeled in current and hypothetical scenarios. The difference in outcomes between the two scenarios was calculated. 150 iterations of simulation scenarios were conducted for 100,000 persons; (3) Results: Increasing SLTC to a hypothetical 100% of eligible high-risk people in Greece leads to a statistically significant reduction in deaths and in total years lost due to lung cancer, when compared with the current SLTC paradigm. Over 5 years, the model predicted a difference of 339 deaths and 944 lost years between the hypothetical and current scenario. More specifically, the hypothetical scenario led to fewer deaths (−24.56%, p < 0.001) and fewer life years lost (−31.01%, p < 0.001). It also led to a shift to lower-stage cancers at the time of diagnosis; (4) Conclusions: Our study suggests that applying a 100% screening strategy amongst high-risk adults aged 50−80, would result in additional averted deaths and LCLYs gained over 5 years in Greece.

Are Wellness Visits a Possible and Effective Cure for the Increasing Cancer Burden in Poland? Example of Women's Preventive Services in the U.S

Background: Cancer is one of the leading causes of death among Polish women in general, and first in women aged 25−64. Contributing to this cancer burden are modifiable behavioral risk factors, including low utilization of cancer screenings. Poland has an urgent need for new systemic solutions that will decrease cancer burden in the female Polish population. This study examined the United States’ implementation of preventive wellness visits as a viable solution for implementation in Poland. Methods: Health insurance claims data for nearly three million women in five states of the U.S. were examined to identify use of mammograms, colorectal cancer screening, and lung cancer screening. Three subgroups of the cohort were assessed for the probability of receipt of screening associated with type of healthcare visit history (women with wellness visits—W; with wellness visits and related preventive services and screenings—W+P; and control group—C). All multiple comparisons were significant (alpha = 0.05) at p < 0.0001, except comparison between subgroups (W vs. P+W) for lung cancer screening. Results: Breast and colorectal cancer screenings had substantially higher participation after W and W+P in comparison with C; moreover, a slight increase after W or P+W was seen for lung cancer as well. Conclusions: Results indicate that wellness visits are an effective tool for increasing cancer screening among women in the U.S. Introduction of a similar solution in Poland could potentially help produce higher screening rates, address cancer prevention needs (not only for secondary cancer prevention), and lower cancer burden.

Low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening: Clinical evidence and implementation research

Lung cancer causes more deaths than breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer combined. Nevertheless, population-based lung cancer screening is still not considered standard practice in most countries worldwide. Early lung cancer detection leads to better survival outcomes: patients diagnosed with stage 1A lung cancer have a >75% 5-year survival rate, compared to <5% at stage 4. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) thorax imaging for the secondary prevention of lung cancer has been studied at length, and has been shown to significantly reduce lung cancer mortality in high-risk populations. The US National Lung Screening Trial reported a 20% overall reduction in lung cancer mortality when comparing LDCT to chest X-ray, and the Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek (NELSON) trial more recently reported a 24% reduction when comparing LDCT to no screening. Hence, the focus has now shifted to implementation research. Consequently, the 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN consortium based in five European countries, has set up a large-scale multicenter implementation trial. Successful implementation of and accessibility to LDCT lung cancer screening are dependent on many factors, not limited to population selection, recruitment strategy, computed tomography screening frequency, lung-nodule management, participant compliance, and cost effectiveness. This review provides an overview of current evidence for LDCT lung cancer screening, and draws attention to major factors that need to be addressed to successfully implement standardized, effective, and accessible screening throughout Europe. Evidence shows that through the appropriate use of risk-prediction models and a more personalized approach to screening, efficacy could be improved. Furthermore, extending the screening interval for low-risk individuals to reduce costs and associated harms is a possibility, and through the use of volumetric-based measurement and follow-up, false positive results can be greatly reduced. Finally, smoking cessation programs could be a valuable addition to screening programs and artificial intelligence could offer a solution to the added workload pressures radiologists are facing.

Lung Cancer Screening: New Perspective and Challenges in Europe

Simple Summary

Screening for lung cancer in a high-risk population has been shown to be beneficial, with reduced mortality in large randomised trials. However, the general implementation of screening is not evident and many factors have to be considered. In this paper, we will review the current status of screening for lung cancer in Europe and the many hurdles that have to be overcome. Multidisciplinary cooperation between all specialists dealing with lung cancer is required to obtain the best outcome. Hopefully, Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan will incorporate screening for lung cancer to allow general implementation by similar programmes in every European Member State. This will also provide an opportunity for further, large-scale studies to refine the inclusion of specific risk populations, diagnosis and management of screen-detected nodules.

Abstract

Randomized-controlled trials have shown clear evidence that lung cancer screening with low-dose CT in a high-risk population of current or former smokers can significantly reduce lung-cancer-specific mortality by an inversion of stage distribution at diagnosis. This paper will review areas in which there is good or emerging evidence and areas which still require investment, research or represent implementation challenges. The implementation of population-based lung cancer screening in Europe is variable and fragmented. A number of European countries seem be on the verge of implementing lung cancer screening, mainly through the implementation of studies or trials. The cost and capacity of CT scanners and radiologists are considered to be the main hurdles for future implementation. Actions by the European Commission, related to its published Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan and the proposal to update recommendations on cancer screening, could be an incentive to help speed up its implementation.

European lung cancer screening: valuable trial evidence for optimal practice implementation

Lung cancer screening (LCS) by low-dose computed tomography is a strategy for secondary prevention of lung cancer. In the last two decades, LCS trials showed several options to practice secondary prevention in association with primary prevention, however, the translation from trial to practice is everything but simple. In 2020, the European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society published their joint statement paper on LCS. This commentary aims to provide the readership with detailed description about hurdles and potential solutions that could be encountered in the practice of LCS.

Implementing lung cancer screening in Europe: taking a systems approach

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in Europe. Screening by means of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) can shift detection to an earlier stage and reduce lung cancer mortality in high-risk individuals. However, to date, Poland, Croatia, Italy, and Romania are the only European countries to commit to large-scale implementation of targeted LDCT screening. Using a health systems approach, this article evaluates key factors needed to enable the successful implementation of screening programs across Europe. Recent literature on LDCT screening was reviewed for 10 countries (Belgium, Croatia, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and United Kingdom) and complemented by 17 semistructured interviews with local experts. Research findings were mapped against a health systems framework adapted for lung cancer screening. The European policy landscape is highly variable, but potential barriers to implementation are similar across countries and consistent with those reported for other cancer screening programs. While consistent quality and safety of screening must be ensured across all screening centers, system factors are also important. These include appropriate data infrastructure, targeted recruitment methods that ensure equity in participation, sufficient capacity and workforce training, full integration of screening with multidisciplinary care pathways, and smoking cessation programs. Stigma and underlying perceptions of lung cancer as a self-inflicted condition are also important considerations. Building on decades of implementation research, governments now have a unique opportunity to establish effective, efficient, and equitable lung cancer screening programs adapted to their health systems, curbing the impact of lung cancer on their populations.

Advances in Diagnostic Bronchoscopy

The increase in incidental discovery of pulmonary nodules has led to more urgent requirement of tissue diagnosis. The peripheral pulmonary nodules are especially challenging for clinicians. There are various modalities for diagnosis and tissue sampling of pulmonary lesions, but most of these modalities have their own limitations. This has led to the development of many advanced technical modalities, which have empowered pulmonologists to reach the periphery of the lung safely and effectively. These techniques include thin/ultrathin bronchoscopes, radial probe endobronchial ultrasound (RP-EBUS), and navigation bronchoscopy—including virtual navigation bronchoscopy (VNB) and electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB). Recently, newer technologies—including robotic-assisted bronchoscopy (RAB), cone-beam CT (CBCT), and augmented fluoroscopy (AF)—have been introduced to aid in the navigation to peripheral pulmonary nodules. Technological advances will also enable more precise tissue sampling of smaller peripheral lung nodules for local ablative and other therapies of peripheral lung cancers in the future. However, we still need to overcome the CT-to-body divergence, among other limitations. In this review, our aim is to summarize the recent advances in diagnostic bronchoscopy technology.

Contemporary issues in the implementation of lung cancer screening

Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography can reduce death from lung cancer by 20-24% in high-risk smokers. National lung cancer screening programmes have been implemented in the USA and Korea and are being implemented in Europe, Canada and other countries. Lung cancer screening is a process, not a test. It requires an organised programmatic approach to replicate the lung cancer mortality reduction and safety of pivotal clinical trials. Cost-effectiveness of a screening programme is strongly influenced by screening sensitivity and specificity, age to stop screening, integration of smoking cessation intervention for current smokers, screening uptake, nodule management and treatment costs. Appropriate management of screen-detected lung nodules has significant implications for healthcare resource utilisation and minimising harm from radiation exposure related to imaging studies, invasive procedures and clinically significant distress. This review focuses on selected contemporary issues in the path to implement a cost-effective lung cancer screening at the population level. The future impact of emerging technologies such as deep learning and biomarkers are also discussed.

Pulmonary nodule radiological diagnostic algorithm in lung cancer screening

Publications of the final results of the two largest randomized lung cancer screening (LCS) trials in the United States and Europe confirmed the reduction in the mortality rate associated with the use of screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). Results of these trials led to widespread acceptance of LCS in properly defined high-risk populations, and its implementation in the clinical practice. Many countries started preparation for national LCS and refreshed still open debate about lung nodule management. Detection of lung cancer in the early stage with a reduction of lung cancer mortality requires dedicated programs with optimized protocols, including a specified pulmonary nodule diagnostic algorithm. The screening protocol should be clear with a precise nodule diameter or volume threshold, based on which a positive screen result is defined. The application of risk-prediction models and the introduction of the semiautomated assessment of detected nodules improves screening accuracy and should be applied in LCS protocols as verified tools to aid radiological diagnosis. In this review, we have summarized recent data about the radiological protocols from the most important LCS programs and pulmonary diagnostic algorithms. These protocols should be taken into consideration in the ongoing and planned LCS programs.

Implementation of lung cancer screening: what are the main issues?

Two large-scale RCTs have shown computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening to be efficacious in reducing lung cancer mortality (8–24% in men, 26–59% in women). However, lung cancer screening implicitly means personalised and risk-based approaches. Health care systems’ implementation of personalised screening and prevention is still sparse, and likely to be of variable quality, because of important remaining uncertainties, which have been incompletely addressed or not at all so far. Further optimisation of lung cancer screening programs is expected to reduce harms and maintain or enhance benefit for eligible European citizens, whilst significantly reducing health care costs. Some main uncertainties (e.g., Risk-based eligibility, Risk-based screening intervals, Volume CT screening, Smoking Cessation, Gender and Sex differences, Cost-Effectiveness) are discussed in this review. 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN (acronym for: Towards INdividually tailored INvitations, screening INtervals and INtegrated co-morbidity reducing strategies in lung cancer screening) is the first multi-centred implementation trial on volume CT lung cancer screening amongst 24,000 males and females, at high risk for developing lung cancer, across five European countries, started in January 2020. Through providing answers to the remaining questions with this trial, many EU citizens will swiftly benefit from this high-quality screening technology, others will face less harms than previously anticipated, and health care costs will be substantially reduced. Implementing a new cancer screening programme is a major task, with many stakeholders and many possible facilitators but also barriers and obstacle.

Latest CT technologies in lung cancer screening: protocols and radiation dose reduction

The aim of this review is to provide clinicians and technicians with an overview of the development of CT protocols in lung cancer screening. CT protocols have evolved from pre-fixed settings in early lung cancer screening studies starting in 2004 towards automatic optimized settings in current international guidelines. The acquisition protocols of large lung cancer screening studies and guidelines are summarized. Radiation dose may vary considerably between CT protocols, but has reduced gradually over the years. Ultra-low dose acquisition can be achieved by applying latest dose reduction techniques. The use of low tube current or tin-filter in combination with iterative reconstruction allow to reduce the radiation dose to a submilliSievert level. However, one should be cautious in reducing the radiation dose to ultra-low dose settings since performed studies lacked generalizability. Continuous efforts are made by international radiology organizations to streamline the CT data acquisition and image quality assurance and to keep track of new developments in CT lung cancer screening. Examples like computer-aided diagnosis and radiomic feature extraction are discussed and current limitations are outlined. Deep learning-based solutions in post-processing of CT images are provided. Finally, future perspectives and recommendations are provided for lung cancer screening CT protocols.

Cone-Beam CT Image Guidance With and Without Electromagnetic Navigation Bronchoscopy for Biopsy of Peripheral Pulmonary Lesions

BACKGROUND

Bronchoscopic diagnosis of small peripheral lung lesions suspected of lung cancer remains a challenge. A successful endobronchial diagnosis comprises navigation, confirmation, and tissue acquisition. In all steps, 3-dimensional information is essential. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging can provide computed tomography information and 3-dimensional augmented fluoroscopy imaging. We assessed whether CBCT imaging can improve navigation and diagnosis of peripheral lesions by 2 clinical workflows with a cross-over design: (1) a primary CBCT and radial endobronchial ultrasound mini probe imaging-based approach and (2) a primary electromagnetic navigation (EMN) and radial endobronchial ultrasound mini probe imaging-based approach.

METHODS

All patients with a peripheral lung lesion biopsy indication were eligible for study inclusion and randomly assigned to study arms. Commercially available equipment was used. The main study goals were to assess CBCT-confirmed navigation success and diagnostic accuracy. Surgery or unambiguous clinical follow-up served as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients with 107 lesions were included. Lesion mean longest axis size in the CBCT arm was 16.6 mm (n=47) and 14.2 mm in the EMN arm (n=40). The primary CBCT approach and primary EMN approach had 76.3% and 52.2% navigation success, respectively. Addition of EMN to the CBCT approach increased navigation success to 89.9%. Addition of CBCT imaging to the EMN approach significantly increased navigation success to 87.5% per lesion. The overall diagnostic accuracy per patient was significantly lower than the navigation success, being 72.4%.

CONCLUSION

CBCT imaging is a valuable addition to navigation bronchoscopy. Although overall navigation success was high, the diagnostic accuracy remains to be improved. Future research should focus on improving the tissue acquisition methodology.

ESR/ERS statement paper on lung cancer screening

In Europe, lung cancer ranks third among the most common cancers, remaining the biggest killer. Since the publication of the first European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society joint white paper on lung cancer screening (LCS) in 2015, many new findings have been published and discussions have increased considerably. Thus, this updated expert opinion represents a narrative, non-systematic review of the evidence from LCS trials and description of the current practice of LCS as well as aspects that have not received adequate attention until now. Reaching out to the potential participants (persons at high risk), optimal communication and shared decision-making will be key starting points. Furthermore, standards for infrastructure, pathways and quality assurance are pivotal, including promoting tobacco cessation, benefits and harms, overdiagnosis, quality, minimum radiation exposure, definition of management of positive screen results and incidental findings linked to respective actions as well as cost-effectiveness. This requires a multidisciplinary team with experts from pulmonology and radiology as well as thoracic oncologists, thoracic surgeons, pathologists, family doctors, patient representatives and others. The ESR and ERS agree that Europe's health systems need to adapt to allow citizens to benefit from organised pathways, rather than unsupervised initiatives, to allow early diagnosis of lung cancer and reduce the mortality rate. Now is the time to set up and conduct demonstration programmes focusing, among other points, on methodology, standardisation, tobacco cessation, education on healthy lifestyle, cost-effectiveness and a central registry.

ESR/ERS statement paper on lung cancer screening

In Europe, lung cancer ranks third among the most common cancers, remaining the biggest killer. Since the publication of the first European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society joint white paper on lung cancer screening (LCS) in 2015, many new findings have been published and discussions have increased considerably. Thus, this updated expert opinion represents a narrative, non-systematic review of the evidence from LCS trials and description of the current practice of LCS as well as aspects that have not received adequate attention until now. Reaching out to the potential participants (persons at high risk), optimal communication and shared decision-making will be key starting points. Furthermore, standards for infrastructure, pathways and quality assurance are pivotal, including promoting tobacco cessation, benefits and harms, overdiagnosis, quality, minimum radiation exposure, definition of management of positive screen results and incidental findings linked to respective actions as well as cost-effectiveness. This requires a multidisciplinary team with experts from pulmonology and radiology as well as thoracic oncologists, thoracic surgeons, pathologists, family doctors, patient representatives and others. The ESR and ERS agree that Europe's health systems need to adapt to allow citizens to benefit from organised pathways, rather than unsupervised initiatives, to allow early diagnosis of lung cancer and reduce the mortality rate. Now is the time to set up and conduct demonstration programmes focusing, among other points, on methodology, standardisation, tobacco cessation, education on healthy lifestyle, cost-effectiveness and a central registry.Key Points• Pulmonologists and radiologists both have key roles in the set up of multidisciplinary LCS teams with experts from many other fields.• Pulmonologists identify people eligible for LCS, reach out to family doctors, share the decision-making process and promote tobacco cessation.• Radiologists ensure appropriate image quality, minimum dose and a standardised reading/reporting algorithm, together with a clear definition of a "positive screen".• Strict algorithms define the exact management of screen-detected nodules and incidental findings.• For LCS to be (cost-)effective, it has to target a population defined by risk prediction models.