Implementation of lung cancer screening in Europe: Challenges and potential solutions: Summary of a multidisciplinary roundtable discussion

ESMO Open

Volumn 4, Issue 5, 2019, Pages

  Field, John K ^a   Dekoning, Harry ^b   Oudkerk, Mattijs ^c   Anwar, Sadia ^d   Mulshine, James ^e   Pastorino, Ugo ^f   Eberhardt, Wilfried ^g   Prosch, Helmut ^h  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^e RUSH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (Italy)

^g UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

^h MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

lung cancer mortality; Lung cancer screening; nodule management; patient recruitment; secondary care pathways

Indexed keywords

CIRCULATING TUMOR DNA; MICRORNA;

AGE; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CURRENT SMOKER; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; LONG TERM CARE; LOW ENERGY RADIATION; LUNG CANCER; MEDICAL INFORMATION; NEXT GENERATION SEQUENCING; REVIEW; SECONDARY HEALTH CARE; SOCIOECONOMICS; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 85073630117     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20597029     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/esmoopen-2019-000577     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. The National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Reduced lungcancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 2011;365:395-409.
2. Koning DB, van Aalst CM, Ten Haaf K. Effects of volumetric CT lung cancer screening: Mortality results of the Nelson randomisedcontrolled population based trial WCLC2018. Toronto: IASLC, 2018: 2.
3. Oudkerk M, Devaraj A, Vliegenthart R, et al. European position statement on lung cancer screening. Lancet Oncol 2017;18:e754-66.
4. Ghimire B, Maroni R, Vulkan D, et al. Evaluation of a health service adopting proactive approach to reduce high risk of lung cancer: The Liverpool healthy lung programme. Lung Cancer 2019;134:66-71.
5. NHS-Eng-National-Cancer-Programme. Targeted screening for lung cancer with low radiation dose computed tomography; standard protocol prepared for the targeted lung health checks programme, 2019. Available: Https://www. england. nhs. uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/targeted-lung-health-checks-standard-protocol-v1. pdf [Accessed 16 Apr 2019].
6. Tammemagi CM, Pinsky PF, Caporaso NE, et al. Lung cancer risk prediction: Prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer screening trial models and validation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:1058-68.
7. Cassidy A, Myles JP, van Tongeren M, et al. The LLP risk model: An individual risk prediction model for lung cancer. Br J Cancer 2008;98:270-6.
8. Field JK, Duffy SW, Baldwin DR, 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 2016;20:1-146.
9. USPSTF. Uspstf lung cancer screening 2015, 2015. Available: Http://www. uspr even tive serv ices task force. org/Page/Document/UpdateSummaryFinal/lung-cancer-screening [Accessed 29 May 2018].
10. 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.
11. Richards M. Independent review of national cancer screening programmes in England: Interim report of emerging findings, 2019. Available: Https://www. england. nhs. uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/independent-review-of-cancer-screening-programmes-interimreport. pdf [Accessed 04 Jun 2019].
12. van Klaveren RJ, Oudkerk M, Prokop M, et al. Management of lung nodules detected by volume CT scanning. N Engl J Med 2009;361:2221-9.
13. Heuvelmans MA, Walter JE, Vliegenthart R, et al. Disagreement of diameter and volume measurements for pulmonary nodule size estimation in CT lung cancer screening. Thorax 2018;73:779-81.
14. Walter JE, Heuvelmans MA, Ten Haaf K, et al. Persisting new nodules in incidence rounds of the Nelson CT lung cancer screening study. Thorax 2019;74:247-53.
15. Yousaf-Khan U, van der Aalst C, de Jong PA, et al. Final screening round of the Nelson lung cancer screening trial: The effect of a 2.5-year screening interval. Thorax 2017;72:48-56.
16. Baldwin DR, Duffy SW, Devaraj A, et al. Optimum low dose CT screening interval for lung cancer: The answer from Nelson Thorax 2017;72:6-7.
17. Heuvelmans MA, Oudkerk M. Appropriate screening intervals in low-dose CT lung cancer screening. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2018;7:281-7.
18. Horeweg N, van Rosmalen J, Heuvelmans MA, et al. Lung cancer probability in patients with CT-detected pulmonary nodules: A prespecified analysis of data from the Nelson trial of low-dose CT screening. Lancet Oncol 2014;15:1332-41.
19. Robbins HA, Berg CD, Cheung LC, et al. Identification of candidates for longer lung cancer screening intervals following a negative low-dose computed tomography result. J Natl Cancer Inst 2019;111:996-9.
20. Pastorino U, Sverzellati N, Sestini S, et al. Ten-Year results of the multicentric Italian lung detection trial demonstrate the safety and efficacy of biennial lung cancer screening. Eur J Cancer 2019;118:142-8.
21. Field JK. Discussant. In: De Koning H, ed. Presentation, effects of volume CT lung cancer screening-mortality results of the Nelson randomised-controlled population-based screening trial. IASLC 19th world conference on lung cancer. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: IASLC, 2018.
22. Pastorino U, Silva M, Sestini S, et al. Prolonged lung cancer screening reduced 10-year mortality in the mild trial: New confirmation of lung cancer screening efficacy. Ann Oncol 2019;30:1162-9.
23. Callister MEJ, Baldwin DR, Akram AR, et al. British thoracic Society guidelines for the investigation and management of pulmonary nodules. Thorax 2015;70 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):ii1-54.
24. Pyenson B, Dieguez G. 2016 reflections on the favorable cost-benefit of lung cancer screening. Ann Transl Med 2016;4.
25. Pyenson BS, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Offering lung cancer screening to high-risk Medicare beneficiaries saves lives and is cost-effective: An actuarial analysis. Am Health Drug Benefits 2014;7:272-82.
26. Villanti AC, Jiang Y, Abrams DB, et al. A cost-utility analysis of lung cancer screening and the additional benefits of incorporating smoking cessation interventions. PLoS One 2013;8:e71379.
27. Chu GCW, Lazare K, Sullivan F. Serum and blood based biomarkers for lung cancer screening: A systematic review. BMC Cancer 2018;18:181.
28. Seijo LM, Peled N, Ajona D, et al. Biomarkers in lung cancer screening: Achievements, promises, and challenges. J Thorac Oncol 2019;14:343-57.
29. Amos CI, Brennan PJ, Hung RJ, et al. Integrative analysis of lung cancer etiology and risk, 2018. Available: Http://grantome. com/grant/NIH/U19-CA203654-01A1 [Accessed 12 Mar 2019].
30. Rydzak CE, Armato SG, Avila RS, et al. Quality assurance and quantitative imaging biomarkers in low-dose CT lung cancer screening. Br J Radiol 2018;91:20170401.
31. Sevick-Muraca EM, Frank RA, Giger ML, et al. Moonshot acceleration factor: Medical imaging. Cancer Res 2017;77:5717-20.
32. Field JK, Mulshine JL. IASLC leads the International collaboration on data sharing (IASLC-ELIC-CCTRR) world conference lung cancer 2018.
33. Xia C, Rook M, Pelgrim GJ, et al. Early imaging biomarkers of lung cancer, COPD and coronary artery disease in the general population: Rationale and design of the ImaLife (imaging in lifelines) study. Eur J Epidemiol 2019;18.
34. van Assen M, van Dijk R, Kuijpers D, et al. T1 reactivity as an imaging biomarker in myocardial tissue characterization discriminating normal, ischemic and infarcted myocardium. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2019;35:1319-25.