CT screening: A trade-off of risks, benefits, and costs

Journal of Clinical Investigation

Volumn 111, Issue 11, 2003, Pages 1612-1619

  Hunink, M G Myriam ^a,b   Gazelle, G Scott ^b,c  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL AORTA ANEURYSM; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LUNG CANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SCREENING; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLORECTAL TUMOR; HEART MUSCLE; HUMAN; LUNG TUMOR; MASS SCREENING; METABOLISM; METHODOLOGY;

CALCIUM;

CALCIUM; CLINICAL TRIALS; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MASS SCREENING; MYOCARDIUM; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 0037804728     PISSN: 00219738     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1172/JCI18842     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Casarella, W.J. 2002. A patient's viewpoint on a current controversy. Radiology. 224:927.
2. Vliegenthart, R., et al. 2002. Coronary calcification detected by electron-beam computed tomography and myocardial infarction. The Rotterdam Coronary Calcification Study. Eur. Heart J. 23:1596-1603.
3. O'Malley, P.G., Taylor, A.J., Jackson, J.L., Doherty, T.M., and Detrano, R.C. 2000. Prognostic value of coronary electron-beam computed tomography for coronary heart disease events in asymptomatic populations. Am. J. Cardiol. 85:945-948.
4. Hopper, K.D., Strollo, D.C., and Mauger, D.T. 2002. Comparison of electron-beam and ungated helical CT in detecting coronary arterial calcification by using a working heart phantom and artificial coronary arteries. Radiology. 222:474-482.
5. Kopp, A.F., et al. 2002. Reproducibility and accuracy of coronary calcium measurements with multi-detector row versus electron-beam CT. Radiology. 225:113-119.
6. Hunold, P., Schmermund, A., Seibel, R.M., Gronemeyer, D.H., and Erbel, R. 2001. Prevalence and clinical significance of accidental findings in electron-beam tomographic scans for coronary artery calcification. Eur. Heart J. 22:1748-1758.
7. Hayden, M., Pignone, M., Phillips, C., and Mulrow, C. 2002. Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann. Intern. Med. 136:161-172.
8. LaRosa, J.C., He, J., and Vupputuri, S. 1999. Effect of statins on risk of coronary disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 282:2340-2346.
9. Wright, J.M., Lee, C.H., and Chambers, G.K. 1999. Systematic review of antihypertensive therapies: does the evidence assist in choosing a first-line drug? CMAJ. 161:25-32.
10. O'Malley, P.G., et al. 1999. Rationale and design of the Prospective Army Coronary Calcium (PACC) Study: utility of electron beam computed tomography as a screening rest for coronary artery disease and as an intervention for risk factor modification among young, asymptomatic, active-duty United States Army Personnel. Am. Heart J. 137:932-941.
11. Arad, Y., Newstein, D., Roth, M., and Guerci, A.D. 2001. Rationale and design of the St. Francis Heart Study: a randomized clinical trial of atorvastatin plus antioxidants in asymptomatic persons with elevated coronary calcification. Control. Clin. Trials. 22:553-572.
12. Rumberger, J.A. 2000. Cost effectiveness of coronary calcification scanning using electron beam tomography in intermediate and high risk asymptomatic individuals. J. Cardiovasc. Risk. 7:113-119.
13. Mahadevia, P.J., et al. 2003. Lung cancer screening with helical computed tomography in older adult smokers: a decision and cost-effectiveness analysis. JAMA. 289:313-322.
14. Chirikos, T.N., Hazelton, T., Tockman, M., and Clark, R. 2002. Screening for lung cancer with CT: a preliminary cost-effectiveness analysis. Chest. 121:1507-1514.
15. Bach, P.B., Kelley, M.J., Tate, R.C., and McCrory, D.C. 2003. Screening for lung cancer: a review of the current literature. Chest. 123(Suppl.):72S-82S.
16. Diederich, S., Wormanns, D., and Heindel, W. 2003. Lung cancer screening with low-dose CT. Eur. J. Radiol. 45:2-7.
17. Marshall, D., Simpson, K.N., Earle, C.C., and Chu, C. 2001. Potential cost-effectiveness of one-time screening for lung cancer (LC) in a high risk cohort. Lung Cancer. 32:227-236.
18. Hunink, M., et al. 2001. Decision making in health and medicine: integrating evidence and values. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom. 245-304.
19. McMahon, P.M., and Gazelle, G.S. 2002. Colorectal cancer screening issues: a role for CT colonography? Abdom. Imaging. 27:235-243.
20. Winawer, S.J., et al. 2000. A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy. National Polyp Study Work Group. N. Engl. J. Med. 342:1766-1772.
21. Pignone, M., Rich, M., Teutsch, S.M., Berg, A.O., and Lohr, K.N. 2002. Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann. Intern. Med. 137:132-141.
22. McMahon, P.M., et al. 2001. Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Radiology. 219:44-50.
23. Sonnenberg, A., Delco, F., and Bauerfeind, P. 1999. Is virtual colonoscopy a cost-effective option to screen for colorectal cancer? Am. J. Gastroenterol. 94:2268-2274.
24. Pignone, M., Saha, S., Hoerger, T., and Mandelblatt, J. 2002. Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann. Intern. Med. 137:96-104.
25. Ashton, H.A., et al. 2002. The Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study (MASS) into the effect of abdominal aortic aneurysm screening on mortality in men: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 360:1531-1539.
26. The UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants. 1998. Mortality results for randomised controlled trial of early elective surgery or ultrasonographic surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms. Lancet. 352:1649-1655.
27. Adriaensen, M.E., Bosch, J.L., Halpern, E.F., Myriam Hunink, M.G., and Gazelle, G.S. 2002. Elective endovascular versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: systematic review of short-term results. Radiology. 224:739-747.
28. Bosch, J.L., et al. 2002. Abdominal aortic aneurysms: cost-effectiveness of elective endovascular and open surgical repair. Radiology. 225:337-344.
29. 2002. Multicentre aneurysm screening study (MASS): cost effectiveness analysis of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms based on four year results from randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 325:1135-1141.
30. Stanley, R.J. 2001. Inherent dangers in radiologic screening. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 177:989-992.
31. Cohen, B.L. 2002. Cancer risk from low-level radiation. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 179:1137-1143.