Volume doubling time of lung cancers detected in a chest radiograph mass screening program: Comparison with CT screening

Kanashiki, Maki; Tomizawa, Takuji; Yamaguchi, Iwao; Kurishima, Koichi; Hizawa, Nobuyuki; Ishikawa, Hiroichi; Kagohashi, Katsunori; Satoh, Hiroaki

doi:10.3892/ol.2012.780

Cited by 42 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, in a recently reported series of CXR detected lung cancers from Japan, Kanashiki et al reached a similar conclusion. The authors studied 209 lung cancers detected in a CXR screening program between 2006 and 2009.…”

Section: Overdiagnosis and The Mayo Lung Projectsupporting

confidence: 58%

Chest X‐ray screening for lung cancer: Overdiagnosis, endpoints, and randomized population trials

Strauss

Dominioni

2013

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Publication of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) generated excitement by concluding that CT screening reduces lung cancer mortality when compared to chest X-ray (CXR) screening. In contrast, CXR screening has long been considered to be ineffective. This is because randomized population trials (RPTs) have failed to demonstrate significant mortality reductions in populations randomized to CXR screening. While these studies demonstrate that CXR screening is associated with significant survival advantages, these advantages have been widely interpreted as spurious, due to the inference that CXR screening leads to substantial lung cancer overdiagnosis. Indeed, the reality of the overdiagnosis hypothesis is the only alternative to the conclusion that CXR screening was effective in these trials and that survival more accurately reflected the benefit of CXR screening than mortality. Mortality comparisons would be biased if randomization fails to create comparison groups with an equal probability of mortality from the target cancer. The objective of this manuscript is to review existing RPTs on CXR screening for lung cancer, and to analyze which endpoint most accurately reflects screening efficacy. We conclude that the evidence supports that CXR screening is superior to no screening, and the magnitude of overdiagnosis is minimal in the context of CXR screening.

show abstract

Section: Overdiagnosis and The Mayo Lung Projectsupporting

confidence: 58%

Chest X‐ray screening for lung cancer: Overdiagnosis, endpoints, and randomized population trials

Strauss

Dominioni

2013

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fourth, we have adopted a counter-factual viewpoint, stratified by pathology and stage, and compared our cohort with age-and sexmatched referents to estimate the loss-of-QALE. While the conventional method estimating lead time from VDT may account for lead-time bias, the variations for different pathologies and stages of lung cancer are usually large [22,23], and it is difficult to validate the estimation except under a natural experiment, or when there is no medical intervention. Our approach of counting the loss-of-QALE directly adjusts for the difference in sex and ages at diagnosis within each specific pathology and stage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lead time denotes the period by which the disease diagnosed by screening advances routine diagnosis of the disease. The conventional method estimates lead time from volume doubling time (VDT), which could be influenced by different pathologies and stages of lung cancer [22,23]. While natural VDT for each specific type of lung cancer can only be measured without medical intervention, it is generally difficult to ensure the representativeness and accuracy of measured samples.…”

Section: Estimating the Loss-of-qale To Adjust For Lead-time Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of implementing computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Taiwan

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3,7,8 Tumor VDT helps to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions 21 and is thought to provide a useful index of lung cancer aggressiveness. 3,7,8 Tumor VDT helps to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions 21 and is thought to provide a useful index of lung cancer aggressiveness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations: Effect on Volume Doubling Time of Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients

Nakamura

Inage

Tobita

et al. 2014

Journal of Thoracic Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Volume doubling time of lung cancers detected in a chest radiograph mass screening program: Comparison with CT screening

Cited by 42 publications

References 21 publications

Chest X‐ray screening for lung cancer: Overdiagnosis, endpoints, and randomized population trials

Chest X‐ray screening for lung cancer: Overdiagnosis, endpoints, and randomized population trials

Cost-effectiveness of implementing computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Taiwan

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations: Effect on Volume Doubling Time of Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About