Screening for Lung Cancer: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

Chest

Volumn 153, Issue 4, 2018, Pages 954-985

  Mazzone, Peter J ^a   Silvestri, Gerard A ^b   Patel, Sheena ^c   Kanne, Jeffrey P ^d   Kinsinger, Linda S ^e   Wiener, Renda Soylemez ^f,g   Soo Hoo, Guy ^h   Detterbeck, Frank C ⁱ  

^a LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^c CHEST   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^e VHA National Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention   (United States)

^f VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^g BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^h VA GREATER LOS ANGELES HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

ⁱ YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

evidence based medicine; guidelines; lung cancer

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONSENSUS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; LOW ENERGY RADIATION; LUNG CANCER; MEDICAL EXPERT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT COUNSELING; PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIATION DOSE; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SHARED DECISION MAKING; SMOKING CESSATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; AGED; BIOPSY; CIGARETTE SMOKING; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; LUNG TUMOR; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; PROCEDURES; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

AGED; BIOPSY; CIGARETTE SMOKING; CONSENSUS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; RADIATION DOSAGE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AS TOPIC; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 85042611547     PISSN: 00123692     EISSN: 19313543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2018.01.016     Document Type: Article

References (149)

1. Detterbeck, F.C., Mazzone, P.J., Naidich, D.P., Bach, P.B., Screening for lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 143:5 Suppl (2013), e78S–e92S.
2. Higgins J, Altman D, Sterne J. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org. 2011. Accessed August 10, 2017.
3. Sterne, J.A., Hernán, M.A., Reeves, B.C., et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ, 355, 2016, i4919.
4. Diekemper, R.L., Ireland, B.K., Merz, L.R., Development of the Documentation and Appraisal Review Tool for systematic reviews. World J Meta-Anal 3:3 (2015), 142–150.
5. Review Manager (RevMan), version 5.2. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Center: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2014.
6. Higgins J, Altman D, Sterne J. Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org. 2011. Accessed August 10, 2017.
7. Balshem, H., Helfand, M., Schünemann, H.J., et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 64:4 (2011), 401–406.
8. Diekemper, R.L., Patel, S., Mette, S.A., Ornelas, J., Ouellette, D.R., Casey, K.R., Making the GRADE: CHEST updates its methodology. Chest 153:3 (2018), 756–759.
9. Andrews, J., Guyatt, G., Oxman, A.D., et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 66:7 (2013), 719–725.
10. Lewis, S.Z., Diekemper, R., Ornelas, J., Casey, K.R., Methodologies for the development of CHEST guidelines and expert panel reports. Chest 146:1 (2014), 182–192.
11. Jaeschke, R., The GRADE Working Group. Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive. BMJ 337 (2008), 327–330.
12. Aberle, D.R., Adams, A.M., Berg, C.D., et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365:5 (2011), 395–409.
13. Patz, E.F., Greco, E., Gatsonis, C., Pinsky, P., Kramer, B.S., Aberle, D.R., Lung cancer incidence and mortality in National Lung Screening Trial participants who underwent low-dose CT prevalence screening: a retrospective cohort analysis of a randomised, multicentre, diagnostic screening trial. Lancet Oncology 17:5 (2016), 590–599.
14. Blanchon, T., Bréchot, J.M., Grenier, P.A., et al. Baseline results of the Depiscan study: a French randomized pilot trial of lung cancer screening comparing low dose CT scan (LDCT) and chest X-ray (CXR). Lung Cancer 58:1 (2007), 50–58.
15. Infante, M., Cavuto, S., Lutman, F.R., et al. Long-term follow-up results of the DANTE trial, a randomized study of lung cancer screening with spiral computed tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 191:10 (2015), 1166–1175.
16. Infante, M., Cavuto, S., Lutman, F.R., et al. A randomized study of lung cancer screening with spiral computed tomography: three-year results from the DANTE trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 180:5 (2009), 445–453.
17. Infante, M., Lutman, F.R., Cavuto, S., et al. Lung cancer screening with spiral CT: baseline results of the randomized DANTE trial. Lung Cancer 59:3 (2008), 355–363.
18. Wille, M.M., Dirksen, A., Ashraf, H., et al. Results of the randomized Danish Lung Cancer screening trial with focus on high-risk profiling. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 193:5 (2016), 542–551.
19. Petersen, R.H., Hansen, H.J., Dirksen, A., Pedersen, J.H., Lung cancer screening and video-assisted thoracic surgery. J Thorac Oncol 7:6 (2012), 1026–1031.
20. Saghir, Z., Dirksen, A., Ashraf, H., et al. CT screening for lung cancer brings forward early disease. The randomised Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial: status after five annual screening rounds with low-dose CT. Thorax 67:4 (2012), 296–301.
21. Pedersen, J.H., Ashraf, H., Dirksen, A., et al. The Danish randomized lung cancer CT screening trial—overall design and results of the prevalence round. J Thorac Oncol 4:5 (2009), 608–614.
22. Horeweg, N., van der Aalst, C.M., Vliegenthart, R., et al. Volumetric computed tomography screening for lung cancer: three rounds of the NELSON trial. Eur Respir J 42:6 (2013), 1659–1667.
23. Yousaf-Khan, U., van der Aalst, C., de Jong, P.A., et al. Risk stratification based on screening history: the NELSON lung cancer screening study. Thorax 72:9 (2017), 819–824.
24. Paci, E., Puliti, D., Lopes Pegna, A., et al. Mortality, survival and incidence rates in the ITALUNG randomised lung cancer screening trial. Thorax 72:9 (2017), 825–831.
25. Pegna, A.L., Picozzi, G., Falaschi, F., et al. Four-year results of low-dose CT screening and nodule management in the ITALUNG Trial. J Thorac Oncol 8:7 (2013), 866–875.
26. Lopes Pegna, A., Picozzi, G., Mascalchi, M., et al. Design, recruitment and baseline results of the ITALUNG trial for lung cancer screening with low-dose CT. Lung Cancer 64:1 (2009), 34–40.
27. Pastorino, U., Rossi, M., Rosato, V., et al. Annual or biennial CT screening versus observation in heavy smokers: 5-year results of the MILD trial. Eur J Cancer Prev 21:3 (2012), 308–315.
28. Pastorino, U., Marchiano, A., Sverzellati, N., et al. A less intensive screening modality, such as CT every 2 years instead of annual CT, is not harmful for heavy smokers. J Thorac Oncol., 6(6 suppl 2), 2011, S518.
29. Sverzellati, N., Silva, M., Calareso, G., et al. Low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening: comparison of performance between annual and biennial screen. Eur Radiol 26:11 (2016), 3821–3829.
30. Becker, N., Motsch, E., Gross, M.L., et al. Randomized study on early detection of lung cancer with MSCT in Germany: results of the first 3 years of follow-up after randomization. J Thorac Oncol 10:6 (2015), 890–896.
31. Becker, N., Motsch, E., Gross, M.L., et al. Randomized study on early detection of lung cancer with MSCT in Germany: study design and results of the first screening round. JCancer Res Clin Oncol 138:9 (2012), 1475–1486.
32. Field, J.K., Duffy, S.W., Baldwin, D.R., et al. UK Lung Cancer RCT Pilot Screening Trial: baseline findings from the screening arm provide evidence for the potential implementation of lung cancer screening. Thorax 71:2 (2016), 161–170.
33. Field, J.K., Duffy, S.W., Baldwin, D.R., et al. The UK Lung Cancer Screening Trial: a pilot randomised controlled trial of low-dose computed tomography screening for the early detection of lung cancer. Health Technol Assess 20:40 (2016), 1–146.
34. Field, J.K., Devaraj, A., Baldwin, D.R., et al. UK Lung Cancer Screening trial (UKLS): prevalence data at baseline. Lung Cancer 83 (2014), S24–S25.
35. Gohagan, J., Marcus, P., Fagerstrom, R., Pinsky, P., Kramer, B., Prorok, P., Baseline findings of a randomized feasibility trial of lung cancer screening with spiral CT scan vs chest radiograph: the Lung Screening Study of the National Cancer Institute. Chest 126:1 (2004), 114–121.
36. Gohagan, J.K., Marcus, P.M., Fagerstrom, R.M., et al. Final results of the Lung Screening Study, a randomized feasibility study of spiral CT versus chest X-ray screening for lung cancer. Lung Cancer 47:1 (2005), 9–15.
37. Bastarrika, G., Garcia-Velloso, M.J., Lozano, M.D., et al. Early lung cancer detection using spiral computed tomography and positron emission tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 171:12 (2005), 1378–1383.
38. Callol, L., Roig, F., Cuevas, A., et al. Low-dose CT: a useful and accessible tool for the early diagnosis of lung cancer in selected populations. Lung Cancer 56:2 (2007), 217–221.
39. Diederich, S., Thomas, M., Semik, M., et al. Screening for early lung cancer with low-dose spiral computed tomography: results of annual follow-up examinations in asymptomatic smokers. Eur Radiol 14:4 (2004), 691–702.
40. Henschke, C.I., Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Cancer 89:suppl 11 (2000), 2474–2482.
41. Henschke, C.I., McCauley, D.I., Yankelevitz, D.F., et al. Early lung cancer action project: a summary of the findings on baseline screening. Oncologist 6:2 (2001), 147–152.
42. Henschke, C.I., McCauley, D.I., Yankelevitz, D.F., et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 354:9173 (1999), 99–105.
43. Henschke, C.I., Naidich, D.P., Yankelevitz, D.F., et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: initial findings on repeat screenings. Cancer 92:1 (2001), 153–159.
44. MacRedmond, R., McVey, G., Lee, M., et al. Screening for lung cancer using low dose CT scanning: results of 2 year follow up. Thorax 61:1 (2006), 54–56.
45. Menezes, R.J., Roberts, H.C., Paul, N.S., et al. Lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography in at-risk individuals: the Toronto experience. Lung Cancer 67:2 (2010), 177–183.
46. Novello, S., Fava, C., Borasio, P., et al. Three-year findings of an early lung cancer detection feasibility study with low-dose spiral computed tomography in heavy smokers. Ann Oncol 16:10 (2005), 1662–1666.
47. Pastorino, U., Bellomi, M., Landoni, C., et al. Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year results. Lancet 362:9384 (2003), 593–597.
48. Picozzi, G., Paci, E., Lopez Pegna, A., et al. Screening of lung cancer with low dose spiral CT: results of a three year pilot study and design of the randomised controlled trial “Italung-CT”. Radiol Med 109:1-2 (2005), 17–26.
49. Sobue, T., Moriyama, N., Kaneko, M., et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose helical computed tomography: anti-lung cancer association project. J Clin Oncol 20:4 (2002), 911–920.
50. Swensen, S.J., Jett, J.R., Hartman, T.E., et al. Lung cancer screening with CT: Mayo Clinic experience 1. Radiology 226:3 (2003), 756–761.
51. Veronesi, G., Bellomi, M., Mulshine, J.L., et al. Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography: a non-invasive diagnostic protocol for baseline lung nodules. Lung Cancer 61:3 (2008), 340–349.
52. Wilson, D.O., Weissfeld, J.L., Fuhrman, C.R., et al. The Pittsburgh Lung Screening Study (PLuSS): outcomes within 3 years of a first computed tomography scan. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 178:9 (2008), 956–961.
53. Pinsky, P.F., Church, T.R., Izmirlian, G., Kramer, B.S., The National Lung Screening Trial: results stratified by demographics, smoking history, and lung cancer histology. Cancer 119:22 (2013), 3976–3983.
54. Horeweg, N., van der Aalst, C.M., Thunnissen, E., et al. Characteristics of lung cancers detected by computer tomography screening in the randomized NELSON Trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 187:8 (2013), 848–854.
55. Tanner, N.T., Gebregziabher, M., Hughes Halbert, C., Payne, E., Egede, L.E., Silvestri, G.A., Racial differences in outcomes within the National Lung Screening Trial. Implications for widespread implementation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 192:2 (2015), 200–208.
56. Pinsky, P.F., Gierada, D.S., Hocking, W., Patz, E.F., Kramer, B.S., National Lung Screening Trial findings by age: Medicare-eligible versus under-65 population. Ann Intern Med 161:9 (2014), 627–633.
57. Kovalchik, S.A., Tammemagi, M., Berg, C.D., et al. Targeting of low-dose CT screening according to the risk of lung-cancer death. N Engl J Med 369:3 (2013), 245–254.
58. Young, R.P., Duan, F., Chiles, C., et al. Airflow limitation and histology shift in the National Lung Screening Trial. The NLST-ACRIN cohort substudy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 192:9 (2015), 1060–1067.
59. Harris, R.P., Sheridan, S.L., Lewis, C.L., et al. The harms of screening: a proposed taxonomy and application to lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med 174:2 (2014), 281–285.
60. Kinsinger, L.S., Anderson, C., Kim, J., et al. Implementation of lung cancer screening in the Veterans Health Administration. JAMA Intern Med 177:3 (2017), 399–406.
61. Rzyman, W., Jelitto-Gorska, M., Dziedzic, R., et al. Diagnostic work-up and surgery in participants of the Gdansk lung cancer screening programme: the incidence of surgery for non-malignant conditions. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 17:6 (2013), 969–973.
62. van den Bergh, K.A., Essink-Bot, M.L., Borsboom, G.J., Scholten, E.T., van Klaveren, R.J., de Koning, H.J., Long-term effects of lung cancer computed tomography screening on health-related quality of life: the NELSON trial. Eur Respir J 38:1 (2011), 154–161.
63. Gareen, I.F., Duan, F., Greco, E.M., et al. Impact of lung cancer screening results on participant health-related quality of life and state anxiety in the National Lung Screening Trial. Cancer 120:21 (2014), 3401–3409.
64. Brain, K., Lifford, K.J., Carter, B., et al. Long-term psychosocial outcomes of low-dose CT screening: results of the UK Lung Cancer Screening randomised controlled trial. Thorax 71:11 (2016), 996–1005.
65. Howard, D.H., Richards, T.B., Bach, P.B., Kegler, M.C., Berg, C.J., Comorbidities, smoking status, and life expectancy among individuals eligible for lung cancer screening. Cancer 121:24 (2015), 4341–4347.
66. Patz, E.F., Pinsky, P., Gatsonis, C., et al. Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA Intern Med 174:2 (2014), 269–274.
67. Kakinuma, R., Noguchi, M., Ashizawa, K., et al. Natural history of pulmonary subsolid nodules: a prospective multicenter study. J Thorac Oncol 11:7 (2016), 1012–1028.
68. Kobayashi, Y., Fukui, T., Ito, S., et al. How long should small lung lesions of ground-glass opacity be followed?. J Thorac Oncol 8:3 (2013), 309–314.
69. Sawanda, S., Yamashita, N., Sugimoto, R., Ueno, T., Yamashita, M., Long-term outcomes of patients with ground-glass opacities detected using CT scanning. Chest 151:2 (2017), 308–315.
70. Son, J.Y., Lee, H.Y., Lee, K.S., et al. Quantitative CT analysis of pulmonary ground-glass opacity nodules for the distinction of invasive adenocarcinoma from pre-invasive or minimally invasive adenocarcinoma. PLoS ONE, 9(8), 2014, e104066.
71. Raymakers, A.J.N., Mayo, J., Lam, S., FitzGerald, J.M., Whitehurst, D.G.T., Lynd, L.D., Cost-effectiveness analyses of lung cancer screening strategies using low-dose computed tomography: a systematic review. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 14:4 (2016), 409–418.
72. ten Haaf, K., Tammemägi, M.C., Bondy, S.J., et al. Performance and cost-effectiveness of computed tomography lung cancer screening scenarios in a population-based setting: a microsimulation modeling analysis in Ontario, Canada. PLOS Med, 14(2), 2017, e1002225.
73. Black, W.C., Gareen, I.F., Soneji, S.S., et al. Cost-effectiveness of CT screening in the National Lung Screening Trial. N Engl J Med 371:19 (2014), 1793–1802.
74. Priola, A.M., Priola, S.M., Giaj-Levra, M., et al. Clinical implications and added costs of incidental findings in an early detection study of lung cancer by using low-dose spiral computed tomography. Clinical Lung Cancer 14:2 (2013), 139–148.
75. Kucharczyk, M.J., Menezes, R.J., McGregor, A., Paul, N.S., Roberts, H.C., Assessing the impact of incidental findings in a lung cancer screening study by using low-dose computed tomography. Can Assoc Radiol J 62:2 (2011), 141–145.
76. Aberle, D.R., Berg, C.D., Black, W.C., et al. The National Lung Screening Trial: overview and study design. Radiology 258:1 (2011), 243–253.
77. Frank, L., Christodoulou, E., Kazerooni, E.A., Radiation risk of lung cancer screening. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 34:6 (2013), 738–747.
78. Bach, P.B., Mirkin, J.N., Oliver, T.K., et al. Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA 307:22 (2012), 2418–2429.
79. McCunney, R.J., Li, J., Radiation risks in lung cancer screening programs. Chest 145:3 (2014), 618–624.
80. Kong, C.Y., Lee, J.M., McMahon, P.M., et al. Using radiation risk models in cancer screening simulations: important assumptions and effects on outcome projections. Radiology 262:3 (2012), 977–984.
81. Berrington de Gonzalez, A., Kim, K.P., Berg, C.D., Low-dose lung computed tomography screening before age 55: estimates of the mortality reduction required to outweigh the radiation-induced cancer risk. J Med Screen 15:3 (2008), 153–158.
82. Mazzone, P., Powell, C.A., Arenberg, D., et al. Components necessary for high-quality lung cancer screening: American College of Chest Physicians and American Thoracic Society Policy Statement. Chest 147:2 (2015), 295–303.
83. Wiener, R.S., Gould, M.K., Arenberg, D.A., et al. An official American Thoracic Society/American College of Chest Physicians policy statement: implementation of low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening programs in clinical practice. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 192:7 (2015), 881–891.
84. Tammemagi, M.C., Katki, H.A., Hocking, W.G., et al. Selection criteria for lung-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 368:8 (2013), 728–736.
85. Tammemagi, M.C., Church, T.R., Hocking, W.G., et al. Evaluation of the lung cancer risks at which to screen ever- and never-smokers: screening rules applied to the PLCO and NLST cohorts. PLoS Med, 11(12), 2014, e1001764.
86. Katki, H.A., Kovalchik, S.A., Berg, C.D., Cheung, L.C., Chaturvedi, A.K., Development and validation of risk models to select ever-smokers for CT lung cancer screening. JAMA 315:21 (2016), 2300–2311.
87. Balekian, A.A., Tanner, N.T., Fisher, J.M., Silvestri, G.A., Gould, M.K., Factors associated with a positive baseline screening exam result in the National Lung Screening Trial. Ann Am Thorac Soc 13:9 (2016), 1568–1574.
88. Wiener, R.S., Schwartz, L.M., Woloshin, S., Welch, H.G., Population-based risk for complications after transthoracic needle lung biopsy of a pulmonary nodule: an analysis of discharge records. Ann Intern Med 155:3 (2011), 137–144.
89. Brunelli, A., Kim, A.W., Berger, K.I., Addrizzo-Harris, D.J., Physiologic evaluation of the patient with lung cancer being considered for resectional surgery: diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 143:suppl 5 (2013), e166S–e190S.
90. Berry, M.F., Yang, C.J., Hartwig, M.G., et al. Impact of pulmonary function measurements on long-term survival after lobectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 100:1 (2015), 271–276.
91. Eguchi, T., Bains, S., Lee, M.C., et al. Impact of increasing age on cause-specific mortality and morbidity in patients with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: a competing risks analysis. J Clin Oncol 35:3 (2017), 281–290.
92. de Koning, H.J., Meza, R., Plevritis, S.K., et al. Benefits and harms of CT lung cancer screening strategies. A comparative modeling study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 160:5 (2014), 311–320.
93. de Koning, H., Meza, R., Plevritis, S., et al. Benefits and Harms of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Programs for High-Risk Populations. AHRQ Publication No. 13-05196-EF-2. 2013, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.
94. McMahon, P.M., Meza, R., Plevritis, S.K., 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, 9(6), 2014, e99978.
95. Meza, R., ten Haaf, K., Kong, C.Y., et al. Comparative analysis of 5 lung cancer natural history and screening models that reproduce outcomes of the NLST and PLCO trials. Cancer 120:11 (2014), 1713–1724.
96. Moyer, V.A., U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 160:5 (2014), 330–338.
97. Pinsky, P.F., Kramer, B.S., Lung cancer risk and demographic characteristics of current 20-29 pack-year smokers: implications for screening. J Natl Cancer Inst, 107(11), 2015.
98. ten Haaf, K., de Koning, H.J., Should never-smokers at increased risk for lung cancer be screened?. J Thorac Oncol 10:9 (2015), 1285–1291.
99. Tanner, N.T., Dai, L., Bade, B.C., Gebregziabher, M., Silvestri, G.A., Assessing the generalizability of the National Lung Screening Trial: comparison of patients with stage 1 disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 196:5 (2017), 602–608.
100. Ades, A.E., Biswas, M., Welton, N.J., Hamilton, W., Symptom lead time distribution in lung cancer: natural history and prospects for early diagnosis. Int J Epidemiol 43:6 (2014), 1865–1873.
101. Walter, F.M., Rubin, G., Bankhead, C., et al. Symptoms and other factors associated with time to diagnosis and stage of lung cancer: a prospective cohort study. Br J Cancer 112 Suppl 1 (2015), S6–13.
102. Sozzi, G., Boeri, M., Rossi, M., et al. Clinical utility of a plasma-based miRNA signature classifier within computed tomography lung cancer screening: a correlative MILD trial study. J Clin Oncol 32:8 (2014), 768–773.
103. Han, S.S., Ten Haaf, K., Hazelton, W.D., et al. The impact of overdiagnosis on the selection of efficient lung cancer screening strategies. Int J Cancer 140:11 (2017), 2436–2443.
104. Pinsky, P.F., Gierada, D.S., Black, W., et al. Performance of Lung-RADS in the National Lung Screening Trial: a retrospective assessment. Ann Intern Med 162:7 (2015), 485–491.
105. Henschke, C.I., Yip, R., Yankelevitz, D.F., Smith, J.P., Definition of a positive test result in computed tomography screening for lung cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 158:4 (2013), 246–252.
106. Church, T.R., Black, W.C., Aberle, D.R., et al. Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. N Engl J Med 368:21 (2013), 1980–1991.
107. Swensen, S.J., Jett, J.R., Sloan, J.A., et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose spiral computed tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 165:4 (2002), 508–513.
108. Wildstein, K.A., Faustini, Y., Yip, R., Henschke, C.I., Ostroff, J.S., Longitudinal predictors of adherence to annual follow-up in a lung cancer screening programme. J Med Screen 18:3 (2011), 154–159.
109. Limmer, K., LoBiondo-Wood, G., Dains, J., Predictors of cervical cancer screening adherence in the United States: a systematic review. J Adv Pract Oncol 5:1 (2014), 31–41.
110. Deroche, C.B., McDermott, S.W., Mann, J.R., Hardin, J.W., Colorectal cancer screening adherence in selected disabilities over 10 years. Am J Prev Med 52:6 (2017), 735–741.
111. Khaliq, W., Landis, R., Wright, S.M., Improving breast cancer screening adherence among hospitalized women. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 26:10 (2017), 1094–1098.
112. Swensen, S.J., Silverstein, M.D., Ilstrup, D.M., Schleck, C.D., Edell, E.S., The probability of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules. Application to small radiologically indeterminate nodules. Arch Intern Med 157:8 (1997), 849–855.
113. Herder, G.J., van Tinteren, H., Golding, R.P., et al. Clinical prediction model to characterize pulmonary nodules: validation and added value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Chest 128:4 (2005), 2490–2496.
114. Gould, M.K., Ananth, L., Barnett, P.G., A clinical model to estimate the pretest probability of lung cancer in patients with solitary pulmonary nodules. Chest 131:2 (2007), 383–388.
115. McWilliams, A., Tammemagi, M.C., Mayo, J.R., et al. Probability of cancer in pulmonary nodules detected on first screening CT. N Engl J Med 369:10 (2013), 910–919.
116. Patz, E.F. Jr., Pinsky, P., Gatsonis, C., et al. Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA Intern Med 174:2 (2014), 269–274.
117. Gould, M.K., Donington, J., Lynch, W., et al. Evaluation of individuals with pulmonary nodules: when is it lung cancer? Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 143:suppl 5 (2013), e93S–e120S.
118. MacMahon, H., Naidich, D.P., Goo, J.M., et al. Guidelines for management of incidental pulmonary nodules detected on CT images: from the Fleischner Society 2017. Radiology 284:1 (2017), 228–243.
119. Tukey, M.H., Clark, J.A., Bolton, R., et al. Readiness for implementation of lung cancer screening. A national survey of Veterans Affairs pulmonologists. Ann Am Thorac Soc 13:10 (2016), 1794–1801.
120. Simmons, J., Gould, M.K., Iaccarino, J., Slatore, C.G., Wiener, R.S., Systems-level resources for pulmonary nodule evaluation in the United States: a national survey. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 193:9 (2016), 1063–1065.
121. Zeliadt, S.B., Heffner, J.L., Sayre, G., et al. Attitudes and perceptions about smoking cessation in the context of lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med 175:9 (2015), 1530–1537.
122. Ashraf, H., Saghir, Z., Dirksen, A., et al. Smoking habits in the randomised Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial with low-dose CT: final results after a 5-year screening programme. Thorax 69:6 (2014), 574–579.
123. van der Aalst, C.M., van den Bergh, K.A., Willemsen, M.C., de Koning, H.J., van Klaveren, R.J., Lung cancer screening and smoking abstinence: 2 year follow-up data from the Dutch-Belgian randomised controlled lung cancer screening trial. Thorax 65:7 (2010), 600–605.
124. Brain, K., Carter, B., Lifford, K.J., et al. Impact of low-dose CT screening on smoking cessation among high-risk participants in the UK Lung Cancer Screening Trial. Thorax 72:10 (2017), 912–918.
125. Slatore, C.G., Baumann, C., Pappas, M., Humphrey, L.L., Smoking behaviors among patients receiving computed tomography for lung cancer screening. Systematic review in support of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Am Thorac Soc 11:4 (2014), 619–627.
126. Verbiest, M., Brakema, E., van der Kleij, R., et al. National guidelines for smoking cessation in primary care: a literature review and evidence analysis. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med, 27(1), 2017, 2.
127. Fiore, M.C., Jaén, C.R., Baker, T.B., Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update. Clinical Practice Guideline. US Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Services., 2008.
128. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Decision Memo for Screening for Lung Cancer with Low Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) (CAG-00439N). https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=274. Accessed August 17, 2017.
129. Mazzone, P.J., Tenenbaum, A., Seeley, M., et al. Impact of a lung cancer screening counseling and shared decision-making visit. Chest 151:3 (2017), 572–578.
130. Lau, Y.K., Caverly, T.J., Cao, P., et al. Evaluation of a personalized, web-based decision aid for lung cancer screening. Am J Prev Med 49:6 (2015), e125–e1129.
131. Crothers, K., Kross, E.K., Reisch, L.M., et al. Patients’ attitudes regarding lung cancer screening and decision aids. A survey and focus group study. Ann Am Thorac Soc 13:11 (2016), 1992–2001.
132. Housten AJ, Lowenstein LM, Leal VB, Volk RJ. Responsiveness of a brief measure of lung cancer screening knowledge [published online ahead of print December 14, 2016]. J Cancer Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-016-1153-8.
133. Volk, R.J., Linder, S.K., Leal, V.B., et al. Feasibility of a patient decision aid about lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography. Prev Med 62 (2014), 60–63.
134. Fintelmann, F.J., Bernheim, A., Digumarthy, S.R., et al. The 10 pillars of lung cancer screening: rationale and logistics of a lung cancer screening program. Radiographics 35:7 (2015), 1893–1908.
135. Gould, M.K., Sakoda, L.C., Ritzwoller, D.P., et al. Monitoring lung cancer screening use and outcomes at four cancer research network sites. Ann Am Thorac Soc 14:12 (2017), 1827–1835.
136. Gesthalter, Y.B., Koppelman, E., Bolton, R., et al. Evaluations of implementation at early-adopting lung cancer screening programs: lessons learned. Chest 152:1 (2017), 70–80.
137. Volk, R.J., Foxhall, L.E., Readiness of primary care clinicians to implement lung cancer screening programs. Prev Med Rep 2 (2015), 717–719.
138. Iaccarino, J.M., Clark, J., Bolton, R., et al. A national survey of pulmonologists’ views on low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. Ann Am Thorac Soc 12:11 (2015), 1667–1675.
139. Triplette, M., Kross, E.K., Mann, B.A., et al. An assessment of primary care and pulmonary provider perspectives on lung cancer screening. Ann Am Thorac Soc 15:1 (2018), 69–75.
140. Kazerooni, E.A., Austin, J.H., Black, W.C., et al. ACR-STR practice parameter for the performance and reporting of lung cancer screening thoracic computed tomography (CT): 2014 (Resolution 4). J Thorac Imaging 29:5 (2014), 310–316.
141. Morgan, L., Choi, H., Reid, M., Khawaja, A., Mazzone, P.J., Frequency of incidental findings and subsequent evaluation in low-dose computed tomographic scans for lung cancer screening. Ann Am Thorac Soc 14:9 (2017), 1450–1456.
142. van de Wiel, J.C., Wang, Y., Xu, D.M., et al. Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT. Eur Radiol 17:6 (2007), 1474–1482.
143. MacRedmond, R., Logan, P.M., Lee, M., Kenny, D., Foley, C., Costello, R.W., Screening for lung cancer using low dose CT scanning. Thorax 59:3 (2004), 237–241.
144. Jacobs, P., Mali, W., Grobbee, D.E., van der Graaf, Y., Prevalence of incidental findings in computed tomographic screening of the chest: a systematic review. J Comput Asst Tomogr 32:2 (2008), 214–221.
145. Godoy, M.C.B., Pereira, H.A.C., Carter, B.W., Wu, C.C., Erasmus, J.J., Incidental findings in lung cancer screening: which ones are relevant?. Semin Roentgenol 52:3 (2017), 156–160.
146. Jemal, A., Fedewa, S.A., Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in the United States—2010 to 2015. JAMA Oncol 3:9 (2017), 1278–1281.
147. Ali, N., Lifford, K.J., Carter, B., et al. Barriers to uptake among high-risk individuals declining participation in lung cancer screening: a mixed methods analysis of the UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) trial. BMJ Open, 5(7), 2015, e008254.
148. Jonnalagadda, S., Bergamo, C., Lin, J.J., et al. Beliefs and attitudes about lung cancer screening among smokers. Lung Cancer 77:3 (2012), 526–531.
149. Quaife, S.L., Marlow, L.A.V., McEwen, A., Janes, S.M., Wardle, J., Attitudes towards lung cancer screening in socioeconomically deprived and heavy smoking communities: informing screening communication. Health Expect 20:4 (2017), 563–573.