7 research outputs found

    The NELSON Lung Cancer Screening Trial: Final screening round and follow-up

    Get PDF
    The NELSON trial, is a Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial, to establish whether low-dose CT-scan screening in high-risk subjects for developing lung cancer would lead to a reduction of ≥25% in lung cancer morality. In this thesis the fourth (and final) screening round with a screening interval of 2.5-year was evaluated (Chapter 2 and 3). Furthermore, interim results are presented of this trial regarding to stage shift and shift in treatment (Chapter 4). In the 5th chapter, the generalisability of the NELSON trial was evualated by comparing the baseline characteristics and mortality profile of the NELSON control group participants and eligible non-responders. Finally, the cause of death of the NELSON participant with lung cancer was verified by an expert committee and compared with the official cause of death (Chapter 6)

    PHP48 COST SENSITIVENESS AND PHYSICIAN TREATMENT CHOICES

    Get PDF
    Objectives To explore the relationship between nodule count and lung cancer probability in baseline low-dose CT lung cancer screening. Materials and Methods Included were participants from the NELSON trial with at least one baseline nodule (3392 participants [45% of screen-group], 7258 nodules). We determined nodule count per participant. Malignancy was confirmed by histology. Nodules not diagnosed as screen-detected or interval cancer until the end of the fourth screening round were regarded as benign. We compared lung cancer probability per nodule count category. Results 1746 (51.5%) participants had one nodule, 800 (23.6%) had two nodules, 354 (10.4%) had three nodules, 191 (5.6%) had four nodules, and 301 (8.9%) had > 4 nodules. Lung cancer in a baseline nodule was diagnosed in 134 participants (139 cancers; 4.0%). Median nodule count in participants with only benign nodules was 1 (Inter-quartile range [IQR]: 1–2), and 2 (IQR 1–3) in participants with lung cancer (p = NS). At baseline, malignancy was detected mostly in the largest nodule (64/66 cancers). Lung cancer probability was 62/1746 (3.6%) in case a participant had one nodule, 33/800 (4.1%) for two nodules, 17/354 (4.8%) for three nodules, 12/191 (6.3%) for four nodules and 10/301 (3.3%) for > 4 nodules (p = NS). Conclusion In baseline lung cancer CT screening, half of participants with lung nodules have more than one nodule. Lung cancer probability does not significantly change with the number of nodules. Baseline nodule count will not help to differentiate between benign and malignant nodules. Each nodule found in lung cancer screening should be assessed separately independent of the presence of other nodules

    Relationship between the number of new nodules and lung cancer probability in incidence screening rounds of CT lung cancer screening: The NELSON study

    Get PDF
    Background: New nodules are regularly found after the baseline round of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening. The relationship between a participant's number of new nodules and lung cancer probability is unknown. Methods: Participants of the ongoing Dutch-Belgian Randomized Lung Cancer Screening (NELSON) Trial with (sub)solid nodules detected after baseline and registered as new by the NELSON radiologists were included. The correlation between a participant's new nodule count and the largest new nodule size was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation. To evaluate the new nodule count as predictor for new nodule lung cancer together with largest new nodule size, a multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. Results: In total, 705 participants with 964 new nodules were included. In 48% (336/705) of participants no nodule had been found previously during baseline screening and in 22% (154/705) of participants >1 new nodule was detected (range 1–12 new nodules). Eventually, 9% (65/705) of the participants had lung cancer in a new nodule. In 100% (65/65) of participants with new nodule lung cancer, the lung cancer was the largest or only new nodule at initial detection. The new nodule lung cancer probability did not differ significantly between participants with 1 (10% [56/551], 95%CI 8–13%) or >1 new nodule (6% [9/154], 95%CI 3–11%, P =.116). An increased number of new nodules positively correlated with a participant's largest nodule size (P < 0.001, Spearman's rho 0.177). When adjusted for largest new nodule size, the new nodule count had a significant negative association with lung cancer (odds ratio 0.59, 0.37–0.95, P =.03). Conclusion: A participant's new nodule count alone only has limited association with lung cancer. However, a higher new nodule count correlates with an increased largest new nodule size, while the lung cancer probability remains equivalent, and may improve lung cancer risk prediction by size only

    Baseline characteristics and mortality outcomes of control group participants and eligible non-responders in the NELSON lung cancer screening study

    No full text
    Introduction: Individuals who are younger, have a high socioeconomic background and/or have a healthy lifestyle are more inclined to participate in screening trials. This form of bias may affect the generalizability of study results to the target population. This study aimed to investigate the generalizability of the NELSON lung cancer screening trial to the Dutch population. Methods: People at high risk for developing lung cancer were identified by sending a health questionnaire to 606,409 persons aged 50-74 years, based on population registries. Eligible subjects received an invitation to participate (n = 30,051). 15,822 subjects agreed to participate and were randomized, whereas 15,137 did not respond (so-called eligible nonresponders). Baseline characteristics and mortality profiles were compared between control group participants and eligible nonresponders. Results: Participants had better self-reported health (p = 0.02), were younger, more physically active, higher educated, and more often former smokers compared with eligible nonresponders (all p < 0.001). No differences were seen in self-reported outcomes of pulmonary tests, history of lung cancer, and smoked pack-years. Mortality due to all-causes (p < 0.001) and mortality classification separately was lower among participants. However, the proportion of subjects death due to cancer was higher among participants (62.4% vs. 54.9%). Conclusion: Modest differences in baseline characteristics between participants and eligible nonresponders, led to minor differences in mortality profiles. However, group sizes were large and therefore it seems unlikely that these small differences will influence the generalizability of the NELSON trial. Results of the NELSON trial can roughly be used to predict the effect of population-based lung cancer screening

    Quantification of growth patterns of screen-detected lung cancers: The NELSON study

    No full text
    Objectives Although exponential growth is assumed for lung cancer, this has never been quantified in vivo. Aim of this study was to evaluate and quantify growth patterns of lung cancers detected in the Du

    Scientific Advances in Lung Cancer 2015.

    No full text
    Lung cancer continues to be a major global health problem; the disease is diagnosed in more than 1.6 million new patients each year. However, significant progress is underway in both the prevention and treatment of lung cancer. Lung cancer therapy has now emerged as a "role model" for precision cancer medicine, with several important therapeutic breakthroughs occurring during 2015. These advances have occurred primarily in the immunotherapy field and in treatments directed against tumors harboring specific oncogenic drivers. Our knowledge about molecular mechanisms for oncogene-driven tumors and about resistance to targeted therapies has increased quickly over the past year. As a result, several regulatory approvals of new agents that significantly improve survival and quality of life for patients with lung cancer who have advanced disease have occurred. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer has gathered experts in different areas of lung cancer research and management to summarize the most significant scientific advancements related to prevention and therapy of lung cancer during the past year
    corecore