Overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening: Why modelling is essential

Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Volumn 69, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 1035-1039

  Ten Haaf, Kevin ^a   De Koning, Harry J ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVERSE EFFECTS; AGE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COMPUTER SIMULATION; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MASS SCREENING; RADIATION EXPOSURE; STANDARDS; STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

AGE FACTORS; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL OVERUSE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84947025942     PISSN: 0143005X     EISSN: 14702738     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jech-2014-204079     Document Type: Note

References (27)

1. Ruano-Ravina A, Heleno B, Fernández-Villar A. Lung cancer screening with low-dose CT (LDCT), or when a public health intervention is beyond the patient's benefit. J Epidemiol Community Health 2015;69:99-100.
2. Moyer VA. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:330-8.
3. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Proposed Decision Memo for Screening for Lung Cancer with Low Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) (CAG-00439N). 2014. http://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-proposed-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=274 (accessed 20 Nov 2014).
4. Carter JL, Coletti RJ, Harris RP. Quantifying and monitoring overdiagnosis in cancer screening: a systematic review of methods. BMJ 2015;350.
5. Habbema JDF, Wilt TJ, Etzioni R, et al. Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines models in the development of clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med 2014;161:812-18.
6. Patz EF Jr., Pinsky P, Gatsonis C, et al. Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA Intern Med 2014;174:269-74.
7. de Koning HJ, Meza R, Plevritis SK, et al. Benefits and Harms of computed tomography lung cancer screening strategies: a comparative modeling study for the U.S. preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:311-20.
8. Etzioni R, Gulati R, Mallinger L, et al. Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening. Ann Intern Med 2013;158:831-8.
9. de Gelder R, Heijnsdijk EAM, van Ravesteyn NT, et al. Interpreting overdiagnosis estimates in population-based mammography screening. Epidemiol Rev 2011;33:111-21.
10. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 2011;365:395-409.
11. Pinsky PF, Church TR, Izmirlian G, et al. The national lung screening trial: results stratified by demographics, smoking history, and lung cancer histology. Cancer 2013;119:3976-83.
12. Oken MM, Hocking WG, Kvale PA, et al. Screening by chest radiograph and lung cancer mortality: the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian (PLCO) randomized trial. JAMA 2011;306:1865-73.
13. ten Haaf K, van Rosmalen J, de Koning HJ. Lung cancer detectability by test, histology, stage, and gender: estimates from the NLST and the PLCO trials. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2015;24:154-61.
14. Black WC, Gareen IF, Soneji SS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of CT screening in the national lung screening trial. N Engl J Med 2014;371: 1793-802.
15. Kovalchik SA, Tammemagi M, Berg CD, et al. Targeting of low-dose CT screening according to the risk of lung-cancer death. N Engl J Med 2013;369:245-54.
16. Tammemägi MC, Katki HA, Hocking WG, et al. Selection criteria for lung-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2013;368:728-36.
17. Rosenberg MA, Feuer EJ, Yu B, et al. Chapter 3: cohort life tables by smoking status, removing lung cancer as a cause of death. Risk Anal 2012;32: S25-38.
18. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Baseline characteristics of participants in the randomized national lung screening trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:1771-9.
19. Meza R, Hazelton W, Colditz G, et al. Analysis of lung cancer incidence in the nurses' health and the health professionals' follow-up studies using a multistage carcinogenesis model. Cancer Causes Control 2008;19:317-28.
20. Hazelton WD, Luebeck EG, Heidenreich WF, et al. Analysis of a historical cohort of Chinese tin miners with arsenic, radon, cigarette smoke, and pipe smoke exposures using the biologically based two-stage clonal expansion model. Radiat Res 2001;156:78-94.
21. Meza R, ten Haaf K, Kong CY, et al. Comparative analysis of 5 lung cancer natural history and screening models that reproduce outcomes of the NLST and PLCO trials. Cancer 2014;120:1713-24.
22. van Ballegooijen M, Rutter CM, Knudsen AB, et al. Clarifying differences in natural history between models of screening. Med Decis Making 2011;31:540-9.
23. Pinsky PF, Gierada DS, Hocking W, et al. National lung screening trial findings by age: medicare-eligible versus under-65 population National lung screening trial findings by age. Ann Intern Med 2014;161:627-33.
24. McMahon PM, Meza R, Plevritis SK, et al. Comparing benefits from many possible computed tomography lung cancer screening programs: extrapolating from the national lung screening trial using comparative modeling. PLoS ONE 2014;9: e99978.
25. Jeon J, Meza R, Krapcho M, et al. Chapter 5: actual and counterfactual smoking prevalence rates in the U.S. population via microsimulation. Risk Anal 2012;32:S51-68.
26. Holford TR, Levy DT, McKay LA, et al. Patterns of birth Cohort-specific smoking histories, 1965-2009. Am J Prev Med 2014;46:e31-7.
27. Kramer BS, Elmore JG. Projecting the benefits and harms of mammography using statistical models: proof or proofiness? J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;107.