• AI
  • Molecular Imaging
  • CT
  • X-Ray
  • Ultrasound
  • MRI
  • Facility Management
  • Mammography

Report from RSNA: Lung screening trial participants suffer without effective follow-up

Article

The lack of an effective, detailed workup algorithm for positive results in multicenter lung cancer screening trials results in a lower cancer yield from invasive procedures and later diagnoses for participants, according to a new study presented at the RSNA meeting.

The lack of an effective, detailed workup algorithm for positive results in multicenter lung cancer screening trials results in a lower cancer yield from invasive procedures and later diagnoses for participants, according to a new study presented at the RSNA meeting.

During a scientific session on Wednesday afternoon, Dr. David Yankelevitz, investigator in the New York Early Lung Cancer Action Program (NY-ELCAP), compared

workup algorithms and results for the New York trial and the Lung Screening Study (LSS), the pilot study of the National Lung Cancer Screening Study.

In NY-ELCAP, with 6295 participants at risk for lung cancer, a very detailed algorithm was used following diagnosis with CT. In contrast, the LSS, which randomized patients to CT or x-ray, did not specify an algorithm as organizers determined that they could not dictate medical practice. Yankelevitz's study analyzed results for 1586 participants in the LSS's CT-arm.

Participants in the two studies were at similar risk for lung cancer, had the same initial baseline test, and had an annual repeat test.

In the NY-ELCAP, 92% of invasive procedures resulted in cancer detection on baseline and also 92% positive at the time of the annual repeat exam. By comparison, in LSS participants, 57% of invasive procedures turned up cancer at baseline and 44% on annual repeat.

At baseline in both studies, cancers were detected at larger sizes, as expected.

However, the size of cancers detected at annual repeat differed markedly, as 55% were smaller than 10 mm in the NY-ELCAP study, whereas only 13% were smaller than 10 mm for LSS.

Researchers also noted that the percent of cancers detected at stage 1 was higher in the New York study relative to the LSS.

Outcomes were better in the NY-ELCAP study most likely due to differences in the workup algorithms, according to Yankelevitz, a professor of radiology at Weill Cornell Medical College.

"This study shows the benefit of workup algorithms in screening protocols. Screening is not just about the initial test, it includes the baseline screening test all the way through diagnostics, including pathology," he said in an interview with Diagnostic Imaging after the session.

Related Videos
Improving the Quality of Breast MRI Acquisition and Processing
Can Fiber Optic RealShape (FORS) Technology Provide a Viable Alternative to X-Rays for Aortic Procedures?
Does Initial CCTA Provide the Best Assessment of Stable Chest Pain?
Making the Case for Intravascular Ultrasound Use in Peripheral Vascular Interventions
Can Diffusion Microstructural Imaging Provide Insights into Long Covid Beyond Conventional MRI?
Assessing the Impact of Radiology Workforce Shortages in Rural Communities
Emerging MRI and PET Research Reveals Link Between Visceral Abdominal Fat and Early Signs of Alzheimer’s Disease
Reimbursement Challenges in Radiology: An Interview with Richard Heller, MD
Nina Kottler, MD, MS
The Executive Order on AI: Promising Development for Radiology or ‘HIPAA for AI’?
Related Content
© 2024 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.