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.
MRI-Based AI Radiomics Model Offers 'Robust' Prediction of Perineural Invasion in Prostate Cancer
July 26th 2024A model that combines MRI-based deep learning radiomics and clinical factors demonstrated an 84.8 percent ROC AUC and a 92.6 percent precision-recall AUC for predicting perineural invasion in prostate cancer cases.
Breast MRI Study Examines Common Factors with False Negatives and False Positives
July 24th 2024The absence of ipsilateral breast hypervascularity is three times more likely to be associated with false-negative findings on breast MRI and non-mass enhancement lesions have a 4.5-fold likelihood of being linked to false-positive results, according to new research.
Can Polyenergetic Reconstruction Help Resolve Streak Artifacts in Photon Counting CT?
July 22nd 2024New research looking at photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT) demonstrated significantly reduced variation and tracheal air density attenuation with polyenergetic reconstruction in contrast to monoenergetic reconstruction on chest CT.