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.

Recent Videos
New Mammography Studies Assess Image-Based AI Risk Models and Breast Arterial Calcification Detection
Can Deep Learning Provide a CT-Less Alternative for Attenuation Compensation with SPECT MPI?
Employing AI in Detecting Subdural Hematomas on Head CTs: An Interview with Jeremy Heit, MD, PhD
Pertinent Insights into the Imaging of Patients with Marfan Syndrome
What New Brain MRI Research Reveals About Cannabis Use and Working Memory Tasks
Current and Emerging Legislative Priorities for Radiology in 2025
How Will the New FDA Guidance Affect AI Software in Radiology?: An Interview with Nina Kottler, MD, Part 2
A Closer Look at the New Appropriate Use Criteria for Brain PET: An Interview with Phillip Kuo, MD, Part 2
How Will the New FDA Guidance Affect AI Software in Radiology?: An Interview with Nina Kottler, MD, Part 1
A Closer Look at the New Appropriate Use Criteria for Brain PET: An Interview with Phillip Kuo, MD, Part 1
Related Content
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.