Reduced preparation increases participation in CTC. Lower attendance and higher DR of CTC as compared with FIT are key factors for the optimization of its role in population screening of CRC.

CTC can be detected in two-thirds and CTM in more than half of patients with advanced NSCLC at diagnosis. Reasons underlying lack of CTC and CTM in some advanced lung cancers deserve further investigations.

CT colonography (CTC) is a minimally invasive radiological investigation of the colon. Robust evidence indicates that CTC is safe, well tolerated and highly accurate for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and large polyps, which are the targets of screening. Randomized controlled trials were carried out in Europe to evaluate CTC as the primary test for population screening of CRC in comparison with faecal immunochemical test (FIT), sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Main outcomes were participation rate and detection rate. Participation rate for screening CTC was in the range of 25-34%, whereas the detection rate of CTC for CRC and advanced adenoma was in the range of 5.1-6.1%. Participation for CTC screening was lower than that for FIT, similar to that for sigmoidoscopy and higher than that for colonoscopy. The detection rate of CTC was higher than that of one FIT round, similar to that of sigmoidoscopy and lower than that of colonoscopy. However, owing to the higher participation rate in CTC screening with respect to colonoscopy screening, the detection rates per invitee of CTC and colonoscopy would be comparable. These results justify consideration of CTC in organized screening programmes for CRC. However, assessment of other factors such as polyp size threshold for colonoscopy referral, management of extracolonic findings and, most importantly, the forthcoming results of cost-effectiveness analyses are crucial to define the role of CTC in primary screening.

surgery for colonic masses of indeterminate nature. Four subjects refused further examinations. CTC correctly identified 2 colonic masses and 20 polyps. PPV for masses or polyps greater than 9 mm was of 87.5%. Per-lesion and per-segment PPV were, respectively, 83.3% and 83.3% for polyps greater or equal to 10 mm, and 77.8% and 85.7% for polyps of 6-9 mm. CONCLUSION: In the context of a screening program for CRC based on FOBT, CTC shows high per-segment and per-lesion PPV for colonic masses and polyps greater than 9 mm. Therefore, CTC has the potential to become a useful technique for evaluation of the non visualized part of the colon after incomplete colonoscopy.

efficacy of computer-aided Detection as a second reader for 6-9-mm lesions at cT colonography: Multicenter Prospective Trial 1 Purpose:To assess the effect of computer-aided detection (CAD) as a second reader on the sensitivity and specificity of computed tomographic (CT) colonography in detecting 6-9-mm colorectal cancer (CRC) lesions. Materials and Methods:Individuals with clinical indications for colonoscopy-either for symptoms or as part of participating in a surveillance program or CRC screening-were prospectively enrolled at one of 10 academic centers between July 2007 and May 2009. Institutional review board approval was obtained at each clinical site, and all participants provided written informed consent. All participants underwent CT colonography and colonoscopy on the same day. Experienced readers interpreted the CT colonography images unassisted and then reviewed all colorectal lesion-like structures pinpointed by the CAD algorithm. Segmental unblinding of CT colonoscopy findings at colonoscopy was utilized. The sensitivity and specificity of unassisted and CAD-assisted reading in identifying individuals with 6-9-mm lesions were calculated and compared by means of pairwise analysis. Results:A total of 618 participants (mean age, 57.9 years; 54.5% male) were included in the final analysis. Of these participants, 464 (75.1%) had no lesions 6 mm or larger, and 52 (8.4%) had 6-9-mm lesions. The sensitivity of CT colonography with unassisted reading and that with CADassisted reading in identifying individuals with 6-9-mm lesions was 65.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50.9%, 78.0%) and 76.9% (95% CI: 63.2%, 87.5%; P = .016), respectively. No significant change in specificity was observed: The specificity of CT colonography with unassisted and that with CAD-assisted reading was 91.8% (95% CI: 88.9%, 94.1%) and 90.9% (95% CI: 88.0%, 93.4%; P = .063), respectively. Evaluation of CAD candidates required an additional 1.6 minutes (25th-75th percentile: 1.0 minute to 3.4 minutes). Conclusion:The addition of CAD to reading performed by experienced readers resulted in a significant benefit in the detection of 6-9-mm polyps at CT colonography in this cohort.q RSNA, 2012 Supplemental material: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup /suppl