Screening for lung cancer with digital chest radiography: Sensitivity and number of secondary work-up CT examinations

Radiology

Volumn 255, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 629-637

  De Hoop, Bartjan ^a   Schaefer Prokop, Cornelia ^c,d   Gietema, Hester A ^a,c   De Jong, Pim A ^a   Van Ginneken, Bram ^b   Van Klaveren, Rob J ^e   Prokop, Mathias ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^c MEANDER MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SIZE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LABORATORY TEST; LUNG CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

AGED; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77951482511     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.09091308     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Flehinger BJ, Melamed MR. Current status of screening for lung cancer. Chest Surg Clin N Am 1994;4(1):1-15.
2. Hennigs SP, Garmer M, Jaeger HJ, et al. Digital chest radiography with a large-area flat-panel silicon X-ray detector: clinical comparison with conventional radiography. Eur Radiol 2001;11(9):1688-1696. (Pubitemid 32821378)
3. Fink C, Hallscheidt PJ, Noeldge G, et al. Clinical comparative study with a large-area amorphous silicon flat-panel detector: image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178(2):481-486. (Pubitemid 34098064)
4. Garmer M, Hennigs SP, Jäger HJ, et al. Digital radiography versus conventional radiography in chest imaging: diagnostic performance of a large-area silicon flat-panel detector in a clinical CT-controlled study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174(1):75-80. (Pubitemid 30030213)
5. Redlich U, Hoeschen C, Effenberger O, et al. Comparison of four digital and one conventional radiographic image systems for the chest in a patient study with subsequent system optimization [in German]. Rofo 2005;177(2):272-278.
6. Xu DM, Gietema H, de Koning H, et al. Nodule management protocol of the NELSON randomised lung cancer screening trial. Lung Cancer 2006;54(2):177-184. (Pubitemid 44802721)
7. van Iersel CA, de Koning HJ, Draisma G, et al. Risk-based selection from the general population in a screening trial: selection criteria, recruitment and power for the Dutch-Belgian randomised lung cancer multi-slice CT screening trial (NELSON). Int J Cancer 2007;120(4):868-874. (Pubitemid 46175408)
8. Rabe KF, Hurd S, Anzueto A, et al. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: GOLD executive summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007;176(6):532-555. (Pubitemid 47403272)
9. Stahl M, Aach T, Dippel S. Digital radiography enhancement by nonlinear multiscale processing. Med Phys 2000;27(1):56-65. (Pubitemid 30051911)
10. Biesheuvel CJ, Vergouwe Y, Oudega R, Hoes AW, Grobbee DE, Moons KG. Advantages of the nested case-control design in diagnostic research. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008;8:48.
11. Swensson RG. Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images. Med Phys 1996;23(10):1709-1725.
12. Zheng B, Chakraborty DP, Rockette HE, Maitz GS, Gur D. A comparison of two data analyses from two observer performance studies using Jackknife ROC and JAFROC. Med Phys 2005;32(4):1031-1034. (Pubitemid 40586788)
13. Chakraborty DP, Berbaum KS. Observer studies involving detection and localization: modeling, analysis, and validation. Med Phys 2004;31(8):2313-2330.
14. van Klaveren RJ, Oudkerk M, Prokop M, et al. Management of lung nodules detected by volume CT scanning. N Engl J Med 2009;361(23):2221-2229.
15. National Lung Cancer Screening Trial. http://www.nci.nih.gov/nlst. 2008. Accessed July 2, 2009.
16. Awai K, Murao K, Ozawa A, et al. Pulmonary nodules at chest CT: effect of computer-aided diagnosis on radiologists' detection performance. Radiology 2004;230(2):347-352. (Pubitemid 38133790)
17. Sone S, Li F, Yang ZG, et al. Characteristics of small lung cancers invisible on conventional chest radiography and detected by population based screening using spiral CT. Br J Radiol 2000;73(866):137-145. (Pubitemid 30179220)
18. Quekel LG, Kessels AG, Goei R, van Engelshoven JM. Detection of lung cancer on the chest radiograph: a study on observer performance. Eur J Radiol 2001;39(2):111-116. (Pubitemid 32755929)
19. Potchen EJ, Cooper TG, Sierra AE, et al. Measuring performance in chest radiography. Radiology 2000;217(2):456-459.
20. Gavelli G, Giampalma E. Sensitivity and specificity of chest X-ray screening for lung cancer: review article. Cancer 2000;89(11 suppl):2453-2456.
21. Li F, Arimura H, Suzuki K, et al. Computer-aided detection of peripheral lung cancers missed at CT: ROC analyses without and with localization. Radiology 2005;237(2):684-690. (Pubitemid 41507913)
22. Toyoda Y, Nakayama T, Kusunoki Y, Iso H, Suzuki T. Sensitivity and specificity of lung cancer screening using chest low-dose computed tomography. Br J Cancer 2008;98(10):1602-1607. (Pubitemid 351684681)
23. Monnier-Cholley L, Carrat F, Cholley BP, Tubiana JM, Arrivé L. Detection of lung cancer on radiographs: receiver operating characteristic analyses of radiologists', pulmonologists', and anesthesiologists' performance. Radiology 2004;233(3):799-805.
24. Samei E, Flynn MJ, Eyler WR. Detection of subtle lung nodules: relative influence of quantum and anatomic noise on chest radiographs. Radiology 1999;213(3):727-734.
25. Egglin TK, Feinstein AR. Context bias. A problem in diagnostic radiology. JAMA 1996;276(21):1752-1755.