In 2011, the U.S. National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) reported a 20% reduction of lung cancer mortality after regular screening by low‐dose computed tomography (LDCT), as compared to X‐ray screening. The introduction of lung cancer screening programs in Europe awaits confirmation of these first findings from European trials that started in parallel with the NLST. The German Lung cancer Screening Intervention (LUSI) is a randomized trial among 4,052 long‐term smokers, 50–69 years of age, recruited from the general population, comparing five annual rounds of LDCT screening (screening arm; n = 2,029 participants) with a control arm (n = 2,023) followed by annual postal questionnaire inquiries. Data on lung cancer incidence and mortality and vital status were collected from hospitals or office‐based physicians, cancer registries, population registers and health offices. Over an average observation time of 8.8 years after randomization, the hazard ratio for lung cancer mortality was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.46–1.19; p = 0.21) among men and women combined. Modeling by sex, however showed a statistically significant reduction in lung cancer mortality among women (HR = 0.31 [95% CI: 0.10–0.96], p = 0.04), but not among men (HR = 0.94 [95% CI: 0.54–1.61], p = 0.81) screened by LDCT (pheterogeneity = 0.09). Findings from LUSI are in line with those from other trials, including NLST, that suggest a stronger reduction of lung cancer mortality after LDCT screening among women as compared to men. This heterogeneity could be the result of different relative counts of lung tumor subtypes occurring in men and women.

The indicated performance indicators fit into the range observed in comparable trials. The study continues finalizing the second screening round and for the first participants even the last screening round. The unresolved issue of the precise amount of side effects and the high early recall rate precludes currently the recommendation of MSCT as screening tool for lung cancer.

Introduction:The German Lung Cancer Screening Intervention Trial (LUSI) is one of the European randomized trials investigating the efficacy of low-dose multislice computed tomography (MSCT) as a screening tool for lung cancer. In the evaluation of the first (prevalence) screening round, we observed exceptionally high early recall rates, which made the routine application of MSCT screening questionable. Because screening may behave differently in subsequent (incidence) screening rounds, we analyzed (a) basic characteristics for the annual rounds 2 to 4, which have now also been completed, and (b) the first 3 years with complete follow-up since time of randomization. Methods: Data material was the data record of LUSI after the fourth screening round and the 3-year follow-up had been completed. Basic characteristics of screening, e.g., early recall rate, detection rate, and interval cancers as well of proportion of advanced cancers, were descriptively evaluated and, if informative, group differences were tested for statistical significance. Results: Early recall rates were significantly lower in the subsequent screening rounds than in the first one if the MSCT information from the previous screening rounds was available. Detection and biopsy rates were approximately 1% or lower, ratio of benign:malignant biopsies: 1:1.6 to 1:3. Conclusion: Our recent data may not only settle one concern regarding high recall rates in routine MSCT screening but also indicate that screening must be strictly organized to be effective. Performance indicators are similar to those in mammography screening. Nevertheless, possible consequences for the participants (diagnostic workup of suspicious findings, biopsies) are more invasive than in mammography screening.

We did not see a tendency to increased smoking among participants of the intervention arm or the entire study. The decline of smoking prevalence among the attendees of the counseling might be due to self-selection. Since the issue of effectiveness of smoking cessation counseling is important, further research with randomization into offering counseling or no intervention should be taken into consideration.

Background: Lung cancer screening may provide a favorable opportunity for a spirometry examination, to diagnose participants with undiagnosed lung function impairments, or to improve targeting of computed tomography (CT) screening intensity in view of expected net benefit.Methods: Spirometry was performed in the CT screening arm (n=2,029) of the German Lung Cancer Screening Intervention Study (LUSI)-a trial examining the effects of annual CT screening on lung cancer mortality, in 50-69-year-old long-term smokers. Participants were classified as having chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; FEV 1 /FVC <0.7), preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm; FEV 1 /FVC ≥0.7and FEV 1 % predicted <80%), or normal spirometry. Descriptive statistics were used to examine associations of COPD or PRISm with respiratory symptoms, and self-reported medical diagnoses of respiratory and other morbidities. Logistic regression and proportional hazards regression were used to examine associations of COPD and PRISm, as well as their self-reported medical diagnoses, with risks of lung cancer and all-cause mortality.Results: A total of 1,987 screening arm participants (98%) provided interpretable spirometry measurements; of these, 34.3% had spirometric patterns consistent with either COPD (18.6%) or PRISm (15.7%). Two thirds of participants with COPD or PRISm were asymptomatic, and only 23% reported a previous medical diagnosis concordant with COPD. Participants reporting a diagnosis tended to be more often current and heavier smokers, and more often had respiratory symptoms, cardiovascular comorbidities, or more severe lung function impairments. Independently of smoking history, moderate-to-severe (GOLD 2-4) COPD (OR =2.14; 95% CI: 1.54-2.98), and PRISm (OR =2.68; 95% CI: 1.61-4.40), were associated with increased lung cancer risk. Lung cancer patients with PRISm less frequently had adenocarcinomas, and more often squamous cell or small cell tumors, compared to those with normal spirometry (n=45), and both PRISm and COPD were associated with more advanced lung cancer tumor stage for screen-detected cancers.PRISm and COPD, depending on GOLD stage, were also associated with about 2-to 4-fold increases in risk of overall mortality, which to 87 percent had causes other than lung cancer.Conclusions: About one third of smokers eligible for lung cancer screening in Germany have COPD or PRISm. As these conditions were associated with detection of lung cancer, spirometry may help identify populations at high risk for death of lung cancer or other causes, and who might particularly benefit from CT screening.

IMPORTANCE Malignancy prediction models based on participant-related characteristics and imaging parameters from low-dose computed tomography (CT) may improve decision-making regarding nodule management and diagnosis in lung cancer screening. OBJECTIVE To externally validate 5 malignancy prediction models that were developed in screening settings, compared with 3 models that were developed in clinical settings, in terms of discrimination and absolute risk calibration among participants in the German Lung Cancer Screening Intervention trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this population-based diagnostic study, malignancy probabilities were estimated by applying 8 prediction models to data from 1159 participants in the intervention arm of the Lung Cancer Screening Intervention trial, a randomized clinical trial conducted from October 23, 2007, to April 30, 2016, with ongoing follow-up. This analysis considers end points up to 1 year after individuals' last screening visit. Inclusion criteria for participants were at least 1 noncalcified pulmonary nodule detected on any of 5 annual screening visits, receiving a lung cancer diagnosis within the active screening phase of the Lung Cancer Screening Intervention trial, and an unequivocal identification of the malignant nodules. Data analysis was performed from

No abstract

Background: Tumor-associated autoantibodies are considered promising markers for early lung cancer detection; so far, however, their capacity to detect cancer has been tested mostly in a clinical context, but not in population screening settings. This study evaluates the early detection accuracy, in terms of sensitivity and specificity, of EarlyCDT ® -Lung-a test panel of seven tumor-associated autoantibodies optimized for lung cancer detection-using blood samples originally collected as part of the German Lung Cancer Screening Intervention Trial.Methods: The EarlyCDT ® -Lung test was performed for all participants with lung cancer detected via lowdose computed tomography and with available blood samples taken at detection, and for 180 retrospectively selected cancer-free participants at the end of follow-up: 90 randomly selected from among all cancerfree participants (baseline controls) and 90 randomly selected from among cancer-free participants with suspicious imaging findings (suspicious nodules controls). Sensitivity and specificity of lung cancer detection were estimated in the case group and the two control groups, respectively.Results: In the case group, the test panel showed a sensitivity of only 13.0% (95% CI: 4.9-26.3%).Specificity was estimated at 88.9% (95% CI: 80.5-94.5%) in the baseline control group, and 91.1% (95% CI: 83.2-96.1%) among controls presenting CT-detected nodules. Conclusions:The test panel showed insufficient sensitivity for detecting lung cancer at an equally early stage as with low-dose computed tomography screening.