A comparative analysis of heterogeneity in lung cancer screening effectiveness in two randomised controlled trials.

Clinical trials demonstrate that screening can reduce lung cancer mortality by over 20%. However, lung cancer screening effectiveness (reduction in lung cancer specific mortality) may vary by personal risk-factors. Here we evaluate heterogeneity in lung cancer screening effectiveness through traditional sub-group analyses, predictive modelling approaches and machine-learning in individual-level data from the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON; 14,808 participants, 12,429 men, 2377 women, 2 persons with an unknown sex) and the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST; 53,405 participants, 31,501 men, 21,904 women).

Impact of recruitment method on informed decision-making in lung cancer screening in the 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN trial.

Objectives: It is relatively unknown how to inform individuals about lung cancer screening to enable informed decision-making (IDM). This study aims to determine the level of IDM across different recruitment methods among participants invited for the 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN trial, the European implementation trial for lung cancer screening.

Methods: A 23-item online questionnaire related to decision-relevant knowledge was sent to 848 Dutch men and women, aged 60-79 years, who were randomised in 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN.

Computed Tomographic Screening Intervals for Patients at Moderate Risk of Lung Cancer.

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends annual computed tomographic (CT) screening for individuals aged 50 to 80 years at high risk of lung cancer. Other countries are issuing similar recommendations, with some opting for biennial screening to reduce the burden of screening. However, it is unknown whether benefits of annual screening can be preserved when adapting the interval to age, sex, and smoking history.

Stage- and histology-specific sensitivity for the detection of lung cancer of the NELSON screening protocol-A modeling study.

The Dutch-Belgian lung cancer (LC) screening trial (Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek [NELSON]) demonstrated low-dose computed tomography (CT) reduces LC mortality by 24% among men. The NELSON protocol differed from previous trials in the eligibility criteria, the use of volume-based nodule management, and increasing screening intervals. The early-stage sensitivity of the protocol is pivotal in determining the optimal screening strategy, such as the interval and age range.

AI integrations with lung cancer screening: Considerations in developing AI in a public health setting.

Lung cancer screening implementation has led to expanded imaging of the chest in older, tobacco-exposed populations. Growing numbers of screening cases are also found to have CT-detectable emphysema or elevated levels of coronary calcium, indicating the presence of coronary artery disease. Early interventions based on these additional findings, especially with coronary calcium, are emerging and follow established protocols.

Paradigm shift in early detection: Lung cancer screening to comprehensive CT screening.

Large-scale lung cancer screening implementation combined with improvements in early detection techniques for three major tobacco-related diseases presents a rare opportunity to markedly improve population health outcomes for millions of people. Chest CT enables routine detection of early lung cancer as well as characterizing coronary calcium and detecting early emphysema in the course of lung cancer screening. Integrated preventive care centered on comprehensive chest CT screening has the potential to bring large benefits across co-morbid diseases with a common etiology.

Targeted lung cancer screening in the age of immunotherapies and targeted therapies - an economic evaluation for Australia.

Background: The cost-effectiveness of different lung cancer screening strategies has been evaluated from an Australian public health system perspective using static models. In addition, the impact of novel therapies, including immunotherapies and targeted therapies, on the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening has not yet been evaluated comprehensively. We evaluated the benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of a targeted national lung screening program in Australia, accounting for the increasing uptake of novel therapies, which informed the lung cancer screening recommendations of the Australian Medical Services Advisory Committee (MSAC).

Medical costs of lung cancer by stage, histology and first-line treatment modality in the Netherlands (2012-2021).

Introduction: Lung cancer is a leading cause of mortality worldwide, with lung cancer treatment presenting a significant financial burden. The treatment landscape has recently shifted, seeing an increase in targeted- and immunotherapies. Such treatments are expensive, but estimates of the medical costs of the lung cancer treatment pathway largely predate their introduction.

Projected effectiveness of lung cancer screening and concurrent smoking cessation support in the Netherlands.

Background: The NELSON trial demonstrated a 24% intention-to-screen reduction in lung cancer mortality from regular screening with low-dose computed tomography. Implementation efforts in Europe are ongoing, but still await country-specific and NELSON-adapted estimates of the benefits and harms of screening.

Methods: We use the MISCAN-Lung microsimulation model, calibrated to individual-level outcomes from the NELSON trial, to estimate the effectiveness under 100% compliance of biennial lung cancer screening with concomitant smoking cessation support for Dutch cohorts 1942-1961.

The Impact of Model Assumptions on Personalized Lung Cancer Screening Recommendations.

Background: Recommendations regarding personalized lung cancer screening are being informed by natural-history modeling. Therefore, understanding how differences in model assumptions affect model-based personalized screening recommendations is essential.

Design: Five Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models were evaluated.

Assessing the impact of increasing lung screening eligibility by relaxing the maximum years-since-quit threshold: A simulation modeling study.

Background: In 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force expanded its lung screening recommendation to include persons aged 50-80 years who had ever smoked and had at least 20 pack-years of exposure and less than 15 years since quitting (YSQ). However, studies have suggested that screening persons who formerly smoked with longer YSQ could be beneficial.

Methods: The authors used two validated lung cancer models to assess the benefits and harms of screening using various YSQ thresholds (10, 15, 20, 25, 30, and no YSQ) and the age at which screening was stopped.

Risk Model-Based Lung Cancer Screening and Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the US.

Importance: The revised 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines for lung cancer screening have been shown to reduce disparities in screening eligibility and performance between African American and White individuals vs the 2013 guidelines. However, potential disparities across other racial and ethnic groups in the US remain unknown. Risk model-based screening may reduce racial and ethnic disparities and improve screening performance, but neither validation of key risk prediction models nor their screening performance has been examined by race and ethnicity.

Cost-effectiveness of risk-based low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Switzerland.

Throughout Europe, computed tomography (CT) screening for lung cancer is in a phase of clinical implementation or reimbursement evaluation. To efficiently select individuals for screening, the use of lung cancer risk models has been suggested, but their incremental (cost-)effectiveness relative to eligibility based on pack-year criteria has not been thoroughly evaluated for a European setting. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pack-year and risk-based screening (PLCOm2012 model-based) strategies for Switzerland, which aided in informing the recommendations of the Swiss Cancer Screening Committee (CSC).

Risk Model-Based Lung Cancer Screening : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Background: In their 2021 lung cancer screening recommendation update, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) evaluated strategies that select people based on their personal lung cancer risk (risk model-based strategies), highlighting the need for further research on the benefits and harms of risk model-based screening.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening by the 2021 USPSTF Guidelines Versus Risk-Based Criteria: The Multiethnic Cohort Study.

Background: In 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) revised its lung cancer screening guidelines to expand screening eligibility. We evaluated screening sensitivities and racial and ethnic disparities under the 2021 USPSTF criteria vs alternative risk-based criteria in a racially and ethnically diverse population.

Methods: In the Multiethnic Cohort, we evaluated the proportion of ever-smoking lung cancer cases eligible for screening (ie, screening sensitivity) under the 2021 USPSTF criteria and under risk-based criteria through the PLCOm2012 model (6-year risk ≥1.

Selection of eligible participants for screening for lung cancer using primary care data.

Unlabelled: Lung cancer screening is effective if offered to people at increased risk of the disease. Currently, direct contact with potential participants is required for evaluating risk. A way to reduce the number of ineligible people contacted might be to apply risk-prediction models directly to digital primary care data, but model performance in this setting is unknown.

Cost-effectiveness Evaluation of the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation for Lung Cancer Screening.

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued its 2021 recommendation on lung cancer screening, which lowered the starting age for screening from 55 to 50 years and the minimum cumulative smoking exposure from 30 to 20 pack-years relative to its 2013 recommendation. Although costs are expected to increase because of the expanded screening eligibility criteria, it is unknown whether the new guidelines for lung cancer screening are cost-effective.

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the 2021 USPSTF recommendation for lung cancer screening compared with the 2013 recommendation and to explore the cost-effectiveness of 6 alternative screening strategies that maintained a minimum cumulative smoking exposure of 20 pack-years and an ending age for screening of 80 years but varied the starting ages for screening (50 or 55 years) and the number of years since smoking cessation (≤15, ≤20, or ≤25).

Modeling Strategies to Optimize Cancer Screening in USPSTF Guideline-Noncompliant Women.

Importance: In 2018, only half of US women obtained all evidence-based cancer screenings. This proportion may have declined during the COVID-19 pandemic because of social distancing, high-risk factors, and fear.

Objective: To evaluate optimal screening strategies in women who obtain some, but not all, US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-recommended cancer screenings.

Personalising lung cancer screening: An overview of risk-stratification opportunities and challenges.

Randomised clinical trials have shown the efficacy of computed tomography lung cancer screening, initiating discussions on whether and how to implement population-based screening programs. Due to smoking behaviour being the primary risk-factor for lung cancer and part of the criteria for determining screening eligibility, lung cancer screening is inherently risk-based. In fact, the selection of high-risk individuals has been shown to be essential in implementing lung cancer screening in a cost-effective manner.

Implementation of lung cancer screening: what are the main issues?

Two large-scale RCTs have shown computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening to be efficacious in reducing lung cancer mortality (8-24% in men, 26-59% in women). However, lung cancer screening implicitly means personalised and risk-based approaches. Health care systems' implementation of personalised screening and prevention is still sparse, and likely to be of variable quality, because of important remaining uncertainties, which have been incompletely addressed or not at all so far.