Comparing Benefits from Many Possible Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Programs: Extrapolating from the National Lung Screening Trial Using Comparative Modeling

Background: The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that in current and former smokers aged 55 to 74 years, with at least 30 pack-years of cigarette smoking history and who had quit smoking no more than 15 years ago, 3 annual computed tomography (CT) screens reduced lung cancer-specific mortality by 20% relative to 3 annual chest X-ray screens. We compared the benefits achievable with 576 lung cancer screening programs that varied CT screen number and frequency, ages of screening, and eligibility based on smoking. Methods and Findings: We used five independent microsimulation models with lung cancer natural history parameters previously calibrated to the NLST to simulate life histories of the US cohort born in 1950 under all 576 programs. ‘Efficient’ (within model) programs prevented the greatest number of lung cancer deaths, compared to no screening, for a given number of CT screens. Among 120 ‘consensus efficient’ (identified as efficient across models) programs, the average starting age was 55 years, the stopping age was 80 or 85 years, the average minimum pack-years was 27, and the maximum years since quitting was 20. Among consensus efficient programs, 11% to 40% of the cohort was screened, and 153 to 846 lung cancer deaths were averted per 100,000 people. In all models, annual screening based on age and smoking eligibility in NLST was not efficient; continuing screening to age 80 or 85 years was more efficient. Conclusions: Consensus results from five models identified a set of efficient screening programs that include annual CT lung cancer screening using criteria like NLST eligibility but extended to older ages. Guidelines for screening should also consider harms of screening and individual patient characteristics

Comparing benefits from many possible computed tomography lung cancer screening programs: Extrapolating from the National Lung Screening Trial using comparative modeling

Background: The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that in current and former smokers aged 55 to 74 years, with at least 30 pack-years of cigarette smoking history and who had quit smoking no more than 15 years ago, 3 annual computed tomography (CT) screens reduced lung cancer-specific mortality by 20% relative to 3 annual chest X-ray screens. We compared the benefits achievable with 576 lung cancer screening programs that varied CT screen number and frequency, ages of screening, and eligibility based on smoking. Methods and Findings: We used five independent microsimulation models with lung cancer natural history parameters previously calibrated to the NLST to simulate life histories of the US cohort born in 1950 under all 576 programs. 'Efficient' (within model) programs prevented the greatest number of lung cancer deaths, compared to no screening, for a given number of CT screens. Among 120 'consensus efficient' (identified as efficient across models) programs, the average starting age was 55 years, the stopping age was 80 or 85 years, the average minimum pack-years was 27, and the maximum years since quitting was 20. Among consensus efficient programs, 11% to 40% of the cohort was screened, and 153 to 846 lung cancer deaths were averted per 100,000 people. In all models, annual screening based on age and smoking eligibility in NLST was not efficient; continuing screening to age 80 or 85 years was more efficient. Conclusions: Consensus results from five models identified a set of efficient screening programs that include annual CT lung cancer screening using criteria like NLST eligibility but extended to older ages. Guidelines for screening should also consider harms of screening and individual patient characteristics

Sibling number and prevalence of allergic disorders in pregnant Japanese women: baseline data from the Kyushu Okinawa Maternal and Child Health Study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although an inverse relationship between number of siblings and likelihood of allergic disorders has been shown in many epidemiological studies, the biological mechanism underlying this phenomenon has not yet been identified. There is no epidemiological research regarding the sibling effect on allergic disorders in Japanese adults. The current cross-sectional study examined the relationship between number of siblings and prevalence of allergic disorders among adult women in Japan.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Subjects were 1745 pregnant women. This study was based on questionnaire data. The definitions of wheeze and asthma were based on criteria from the European Community Respiratory Health Survey whereas those of eczema and rhinoconjunctivitis were based on criteria from the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood. Adjustment was made for age, region of residence, pack-years of smoking, secondhand smoke exposure at home and at work, family history of asthma, atopic eczema, and allergic rhinitis, household income, and education.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The prevalence values of wheeze, asthma, eczema, and rhinoconjunctivitis in the past 12 months were 10.4%, 5.5%, 13.0%, and 25.9%, respectively. A significant inverse exposure-response relationship was observed between the number of older siblings and rhinoconjunctivitis, but not wheeze, asthma, or eczema (<it>P </it>for trend = 0.03); however, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for having 2 or more older siblings was not significant although the adjusted OR for having 1 older sibling was statistically significant (adjusted OR = 0.71 [95% CI: 0.56-0.91]). Number of total siblings and number of younger siblings were not related to wheeze, asthma, eczema, or rhinoconjunctivitis.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study found a significant inverse relationship between the number of older siblings and the prevalence of rhinoconjunctivitis among pregnant Japanese women. Our findings are likely to support the intrauterine programming hypothesis; however, we could not rule out the hygiene hypothesis.</p

Personality traits and cancer survival: a Danish cohort study

We conducted a population-based prospective cohort study in Denmark to investigate associations between the personality traits and cancer survival. Between 1976 and 1977, 1020 residents of the Copenhagen County completed a questionnaire eliciting information on personality traits and various health habits. The personality traits extraversion and neuroticism were measured using the short form of the Eysenck Personality Inventory. Follow-up in the Danish Cancer Registry for 1976–2002 revealed 189 incidents of primary cancer and follow-up for death from the date of the cancer diagnosis until 2005 revealed 82 deaths from all-cause in this group. A Cox proportional-hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) of death from all-cause according to extraversion and neuroticism adjusting for potential confounding factors. A significant association was found between neuroticism and risk of death (HR, 2.3 (95% CI=1.1–4.7); Linear trend P=0.04) but not between extraversion and risk of death (HR, 0.9 (0.4–1.7); Linear trend P=0.34). Similar results were found when using cancer-related death. Stratification by gender revealed a strong positive association between neuroticism and the risk of death among women (Linear trend P=0.03). This study showed that neuroticism is positively associated with cancer survival. Further research on neuroticism and cancer survival is needed

Recommendations for Implementing Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose Computed Tomography in Europe.

Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was demonstrated in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) to reduce mortality from the disease. European mortality data has recently become available from the Nelson randomised controlled trial, which confirmed lung cancer mortality reductions by 26% in men and 39-61% in women. Recent studies in Europe and the USA also showed positive results in screening workers exposed to asbestos. All European experts attending the "Initiative for European Lung Screening (IELS)"-a large international group of physicians and other experts concerned with lung cancer-agreed that LDCT-LCS should be implemented in Europe. However, the economic impact of LDCT-LCS and guidelines for its effective and safe implementation still need to be formulated. To this purpose, the IELS was asked to prepare recommendations to implement LCS and examine outstanding issues. A subgroup carried out a comprehensive literature review on LDCT-LCS and presented findings at a meeting held in Milan in November 2018. The present recommendations reflect that consensus was reached

Recommendations for implementing lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in Europe

Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was demonstrated in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) to reduce mortality from the disease. European mortality data has recently become available from the Nelson randomised controlled trial, which confirmed lung cancer mortality reductions by 26% in men and 39–61% in women. Recent studies in Europe and the USA also showed positive results in screening workers exposed to asbestos. All European experts attending the “Initiative for European Lung Screening (IELS)”—a large international group of physicians and other experts concerned with lung cancer—agreed that LDCT-LCS should be implemented in Europe. However, the economic impact of LDCT-LCS and guidelines for its effective and safe implementation still need to be formulated. To this purpose, the IELS was asked to prepare recommendations to implement LCS and examine outstanding issues. A subgroup carried out a comprehensive literature review on LDCT-LCS and presented findings at a meeting held in Milan in November 2018. The present recommendations reflect that consensus was reached

Patient, tumor, and healthcare factors associated with regional variability in lung cancer survival: a Spanish high‑resolution population‑based study

Purpose The third most frequently diagnosed cancer in Europe in 2018 was lung cancer; it is also the leading cause of cancer death in Europe. We studied patient and tumor characteristics, and patterns of healthcare provision explaining regional variability in lung cancer survival in southern Spain. Methods A population-based cohort study included all 1196 incident first invasive primary lung cancer (C33–C34 according to ICD-10) cases diagnosed between 2010 and 2011 with follow-up until April 2015. Data were drawn from local population-based cancer registries and patients’ hospital medical records from all public and private hospitals from two regions in southern Spain. Results There was evidence of regional differences in lung cancer late diagnosis (58% stage IV in Granada vs. 65% in Huelva, p value < 0.001). Among patients with stage I, only 67% received surgery compared with 0.6% of patients with stage IV. Patients treated with a combination of radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgery had a 2-year mortality risk reduction of 94% compared with patients who did not receive any treatment (excess mortality risk 0.06; 95% CI 0.02–0.16). Geographical differences in survival were observed between the two regions: 35% vs. 26% at 1-year since diagnosis. Conclusions The observed geographic differences in survival between regions are due in part to the late cancer diagnosis which determines the use of less effective therapeutic options. Results from our study justify the need for promoting lung cancer early detection strategies and the harmonization of the best practice in lung cancer management and treatment.Maria Jose Sanchez Perez is supported by the Andalusian Department of Health: Research, Development, and Innovation Office project grant PI-0152/2017. Miguel Angel Luque-Fernandez is supported by the Spanish National Institute of Health, Carlos III Miguel Servet I Investigator Award (CP17/00206)