"skipMainNavigation"
Search
Quick Search in Journals
Quick Search anywhere
Advanced Search
Radiology
Menu
Previous
Next
Thoracic Imaging

Screening for Early Lung Cancer with Low-Dose Spiral CT: Prevalence in 817 Asymptomatic Smokers

Published Online:Mar 1 2002https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2223010490

Abstract

PURPOSE: To present prevalence screening data from a nonrandomized screening trial by using low-dose computed tomography (CT) and a simple algorithm based on the size and attenuation of detected nodules to guide diagnostic work-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight hundred seventeen asymptomatic volunteers (age range, 40–78 years; median age, 53 years; median tobacco consumption, 45 pack-years) underwent spiral low-dose CT of the chest without contrast material enhancement. We regarded all noncalcified pulmonary nodules greater than 10 mm in diameter as potentially malignant and recommended histologic examination or follow-up after 3, 6, 12, and 24 months to exclude growth. For noncalcified pulmonary nodules of 10 mm or smaller, repeat low-dose CT was recommended to exclude growth.

RESULTS: In 43% (350 of 817) of individuals, 858 noncalcified pulmonary nodules were found. Thirty-two nodules in 29 subjects were larger than 10 mm. Biopsy of 15 lesions revealed lung cancer in 12 lesions in 11 subjects (prevalence for all ages, 1.3% [11 of 817 subjects]; >50 years of age, 2.1% [11 of 519 subjects]; >60 years of age, 3.9% [eight of 206 subjects]), with a high proportion of early tumor stages (seven tumors, stage I; two, stage II; and three, stage III); three lesions were benign. In 17 nodules larger than 10 mm, follow-up with low-dose CT for a minimum of 24 months did not demonstrate growth.

CONCLUSION: Lung cancer screening with low-dose CT demonstrated a prevalence of asymptomatic cancers in 1.3% of a smoking population, including a high proportion of early tumor stages and a 20% (three of 15) rate of invasive procedures for benign lesions.

© RSNA, 2002

References

  • 1 In: Murray CJL, Lopez AD, eds. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases, injuries, and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1996.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Shopland DR, Eyre HJ, Pechacek TF. Smoking-attributable cancer mortality in 1991: is lung cancer now the leading cause of death among smokers in the United States? J Natl Cancer Inst 1991; 83:1142-1148.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3 American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 1998 Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society, ; 1-36.
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Mountain CF. Revisions in the International system for staging lung cancer. Chest 1997; 111:1710-1717.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 5 van Reens MTM, Brutel de la Riviere A, Elbers HRJ, van den Bosch JMM. Prognostic assessment of 2361 patients who underwent pulmonary resection for non-small cell lung cancer, stage I, II, and IIIA. Chest 2000; 117:374-379.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Patz EF, Jr, Rossi S, Harpole DH, Jr, Herndon JE, Goodman PC. Correlation of tumor size and survival in patients with stage IA non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 2000; 117:1568-1571.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Frost JK, Ball WC, Levin M, et al. Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Johns Hopkins study. Am Rev Resp Dis 1984; 130:549-554.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Fontana RS, Sanderson DR, Taylor WF, et al. Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Mayo Clinic Study. Am Rev Resp Dis 1984; 130:561-565.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Melamed MR, Flehinger BJ, Zaman MB, Heelan RT, Perchick WA, Martini N. Screening for early lung cancer: results of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering study in New York. Chest 1984; 86:44-53.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Kubik A, Polak J. Lung cancer detection: results of a randomized prospective study in Czechoslovakia. Cancer 1986; 57:2428-2437.
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Eddy DM. Screening for lung cancer. Ann Int Med 1989; 111:232-237.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Fontana RS, Sanderson DR, Woolner LB, et al. Screening for lung cancer: a critique of the Mayo Lung Project. Cancer 1991; 67(suppl):1155-1164.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Strauss GM, Gleason RE, Sugarbaker DJ. Screening for lung cancer. Another look; a different view. Chest 1997; 111:754-768.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Muhm JR, Brown LR, Crowe JK. Detection of pulmonary nodules by computed tomography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1977; 128:267-270.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Lund G, Heilo A. Computed tomography of pulmonary metastases. Acta Radiol 1982; 23:617-620.
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Costello P, Anderson W, Blum D. Pulmonary nodule: evaluation with spiral volumetric CT. Radiology 1991; 179:875-876.
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Remy-Jardin M, Remy J, Giraud F, Marquette CH. Pulmonary nodules: detection with thick-section spiral CT versus conventional CT. Radiology 1993; 187:513-520.
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Nishizawa K, Maruyama T, Takayama M, Okada M, Hachiya J, Furuya Y. Determinations of organ doses and effective dose equivalents from computed tomographic examination. Br J Radiol 1991; 64:20-28.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Geleijns J, van Unnik JG, Zoetelief J, Zweers D, Broerse JJ. Comparison of two methods for assessing patient dose from computed tomography. Br J Radiol 1994; 67:360-365.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Shrimpton PC, Wall BF. The increasing importance of x-ray computed tomography as a source of medical exposure. Radiat Prot Dosim 1995; 57:413-415.
    Google Scholar
  • 21 van Unnik JG, Broerse JJ, Geleijns J, Jansen JTM, Zoetelief J, Zweers D. Survey of CT techniques and absorbed dose in various Dutch hospitals. Br J Radiol 1997; 70:367-371.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Faulkner K, Moores BM. Radiation dose and somatic risk from computed tomography. Acta Radiol 1987; 28:483-488.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 23 International Commission on Radiological Protection. 1990 Recommendations, Publication 60 Oxford, England: Pergamon Press, 1991.
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Gartenschläger M, Schweden F, Gast K, et al. Pulmonary nodules: detection with low-dose versus conventional-dose spiral CT. Eur Radiol 1996; 8:609-914.
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Rusinek H, Naidich DP, McGuiness G, et al. Pulmonary nodule detection: low-dose versus conventional CT. Radiology 1998; 209:243-249.
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Diederich S, Lenzen H, Windmann R, et al. Low-dose CT of pulmonary nodules: experimental and clinical studies. Radiology 1999; 213:289-298.
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Bankoff MS, McEniff NJ, Bhadelia RA, Garcia-Moliner M, Daly BDT. Prevalence of pathologically proven intrapulmonary lymph nodes and their appearance on CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167:629-630.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Munden RF, Pugatch RD, Liptay MJ, Sugarbaker DJ, Le LU. Small pulmonary lesions detected at CT: clinical importance. Radiology 1997; 202:105-110.
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Diederich S, Lenzen H, Eameri M, Roos N, Peters PE. Screening for small asymptomatic bronchogenic carcinoma with low-dose spiral CT of the chest. Eur Radiol 1997; 7:S143.
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Sone S, Takashima S, Li F, et al. Mass screening for lung cancer with mobile spiral computed tomography scanner. Lancet 1998; 351:1242-1245.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lenzen H, Roos N, Diederich S, Meier N. Dosimetry for low-dose computed tomography of the chest. Radiologe 1996; 36:483-488. [German].
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Churg A. Tumors of the lung. In: Thurlbeck WM, eds. Pathology of the lung. Stuttgart, Germany: Thieme, 1988.
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Mountain CF, Dresler CM. Regional lymph node classification for lung cancer staging. Chest 1997; 111:1718-1723.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Jackson CL, Huber JF. Correlated applied anatomy of the bronchial tree and lungs with a system of nomenclature. Dis Chest 1943; 9:319-326.
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 1999; 354:99-105.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Henschke CI, Miettinen OS, Yankelevitz DF, Libby DM, Smith JP. Radiographic screening for cancer: proposed paradigm for requisite research. Clin Imaging 1994; 18:6-20.
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Sone S, Li F, Yang ZG, et al. Results of three-year mass screening programme for lung cancer using mobile low-dose spiral computed tomography scanner. Br J Cancer 2001; 84:25-32.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Kaneko M, Eguchi K, Ohmatsu H, et al. Peripheral lung cancer: screening and detection with low-dose spiral-CT versus radiography. Radiology 1996; 201:798-802.
    Google Scholar
  • 39 Okamoto N. Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening in Japan. Cancer 2000; 89:2489-2493.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Porter JC, Spiro SG. Detection of early lung cancer. Thorax 2000; 55:S56-S62.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Yankelevitz DF, Gupta R, Zhao B, Henschke CI. Small pulmonary nodules: evaluation with repeat CT—preliminary experience. Radiology 1999; 212:561-566.
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Swensen SJ, Viggiano RW, Midthun DE, et al. Lung nodule enhancement at CT: multicenter study. Radiology 2000; 214:73-80.
    Google Scholar
  • 43 Coleman RE. PET in lung cancer. J Nucl Med 1999; 44:814-820.
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Marcus PM, Bergstrahl EJ, Fagerstrom M, et al. Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:1308-1316.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Black WC. Overdiagnosis: an underrecognized cause of confusion and harm in cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 92:1280-1282.
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Patz EF, Jr, Goodman PC, Bepler G. Screening for lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2000; 343:1627-1633.
    MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Wormanns D, Fiebich M, Saidi M, Diederich S, Heindel W. Clinical experience with a computer-aided diagnosis system for automatic detection of pulmonary nodules at spiral CT of the chest. Proc SPIE 2001; 4319:144-149.
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Eibel R, Tuerk T, Kulinna C, Brüning RD, Reiser MF. Evaluation of pulmonary nodules with multislice CT: comparison of routine axial slices with STS-MIPs and MPRs in three planes. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:S166.
    Google Scholar

Article History

Published in print: Mar 2002