结核病流行国家用于肺癌筛查的低剂量计算机断层扫描:系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 21 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Vikram Damaraju, Juhu Kiran Krushna Karri, Gayathri Gandrakota, Yamini Marimuthu, Adimulam Ganga Ravindra, Rajeev Aravindakshan, Navneet Singh
{"title":"结核病流行国家用于肺癌筛查的低剂量计算机断层扫描:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Vikram Damaraju, Juhu Kiran Krushna Karri, Gayathri Gandrakota, Yamini Marimuthu, Adimulam Ganga Ravindra, Rajeev Aravindakshan, Navneet Singh","doi":"10.1016/j.jtho.2024.11.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lung cancer screening (LCS) using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces mortality. Nevertheless, in high tuberculosis-burden countries (HTBC), there are concerns about high false-positive rates due to persistent lung lesions from prior tuberculosis (TB) infections. This study aims to evaluate the screen-positive rate (SPR) of LDCT screening in HTBC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify studies utilizing LDCT for LCS in HTBC and reported SPR from inception to December 6, 2023. The primary outcome was the SPR, and the secondary outcome was the lung cancer detection rate (LCDR). The summary data was pooled using a random-effects model, and factors influencing the SPR were analyzed using multivariable meta-regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 44 studies with 477,424 individuals (59.3% men) were included in the systematic review. Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) (31%, 14 studies) and National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) criteria (non-calcified nodule ≥ 4 mm; 10 studies) were the most common criteria used for assessing SPR. The pooled SPR and LCDR were 18.36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.6-22.1) and 0.94% (95% confidence interval: 0.75-1.15), respectively. Although SPR was significantly higher with NLST criteria than Lung-RADS criteria (25.6% versus 10.4%, p < 0.0001), the LCDR remained similar (0.91% versus 0.95%, p = 0.92). Studies using NLST criteria had a higher SPR in multivariable meta-regression analysis. Nevertheless, the analysis is limited by significant statistical heterogeneity and publication bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Lung cancer screening by LDCT in HTBC demonstrates comparable SPR and LCDR to regions with lower TB incidence rates. Lung-RADS criteria are preferable to NLST criteria for LCS in HTBC to mitigate false-positive rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":17515,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Thoracic Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":21.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Low Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening in Tuberculosis Endemic Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Vikram Damaraju, Juhu Kiran Krushna Karri, Gayathri Gandrakota, Yamini Marimuthu, Adimulam Ganga Ravindra, Rajeev Aravindakshan, Navneet Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jtho.2024.11.020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lung cancer screening (LCS) using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces mortality. Nevertheless, in high tuberculosis-burden countries (HTBC), there are concerns about high false-positive rates due to persistent lung lesions from prior tuberculosis (TB) infections. This study aims to evaluate the screen-positive rate (SPR) of LDCT screening in HTBC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify studies utilizing LDCT for LCS in HTBC and reported SPR from inception to December 6, 2023. The primary outcome was the SPR, and the secondary outcome was the lung cancer detection rate (LCDR). The summary data was pooled using a random-effects model, and factors influencing the SPR were analyzed using multivariable meta-regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 44 studies with 477,424 individuals (59.3% men) were included in the systematic review. Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) (31%, 14 studies) and National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) criteria (non-calcified nodule ≥ 4 mm; 10 studies) were the most common criteria used for assessing SPR. The pooled SPR and LCDR were 18.36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.6-22.1) and 0.94% (95% confidence interval: 0.75-1.15), respectively. Although SPR was significantly higher with NLST criteria than Lung-RADS criteria (25.6% versus 10.4%, p < 0.0001), the LCDR remained similar (0.91% versus 0.95%, p = 0.92). Studies using NLST criteria had a higher SPR in multivariable meta-regression analysis. Nevertheless, the analysis is limited by significant statistical heterogeneity and publication bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Lung cancer screening by LDCT in HTBC demonstrates comparable SPR and LCDR to regions with lower TB incidence rates. Lung-RADS criteria are preferable to NLST criteria for LCS in HTBC to mitigate false-positive rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17515,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Thoracic Oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":21.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Thoracic Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2024.11.020\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Thoracic Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2024.11.020","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:使用低剂量计算机断层扫描(LDCT)进行肺癌筛查(LCS)可降低死亡率。然而,在结核病负担沉重的国家(HTBC),人们担心由于以前结核病(TB)感染引起的肺部持续病变会导致高假阳性率。本研究旨在评估 HTBC 中 LDCT 筛查的筛查阳性率 (SPR):我们进行了一项系统性回顾和荟萃分析,以确定在 HTBC 中使用 LDCT 进行 LCS 的研究,并报告了从开始到 2023 年 12 月 6 日的 SPR。主要结果是 SPR,次要结果是肺癌检出率(LCDR)。采用随机效应模型对汇总数据进行汇总,并采用多变量元回归分析法对影响SPR的因素进行分析:共有 44 项研究、477424 人(59.3% 为男性)被纳入系统综述。肺-RADS(31%,14 项研究)和 NLST 标准(非钙化结节≥4 毫米;10 项研究)是评估 SPR 最常用的标准。汇总的 SPR 和 LCDR 分别为 18.36%(95% 置信区间 [CI],14.6-22.1)和 0.94%(95% CI,0.75-1.15)。NLST标准的SPR明显高于Lung-RADS标准(25.6% vs 10.4%, p结论:通过 LDCT 进行的 HTBC LCS 显示出与结核病发病率较低地区相当的 SPR 和 LCDR。在 HTBC 的 LCS 中,Lung-RADS 标准优于 NLST 标准,可降低假阳性率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Low Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening in Tuberculosis Endemic Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: Lung cancer screening (LCS) using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces mortality. Nevertheless, in high tuberculosis-burden countries (HTBC), there are concerns about high false-positive rates due to persistent lung lesions from prior tuberculosis (TB) infections. This study aims to evaluate the screen-positive rate (SPR) of LDCT screening in HTBC.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify studies utilizing LDCT for LCS in HTBC and reported SPR from inception to December 6, 2023. The primary outcome was the SPR, and the secondary outcome was the lung cancer detection rate (LCDR). The summary data was pooled using a random-effects model, and factors influencing the SPR were analyzed using multivariable meta-regression analysis.

Results: A total of 44 studies with 477,424 individuals (59.3% men) were included in the systematic review. Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) (31%, 14 studies) and National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) criteria (non-calcified nodule ≥ 4 mm; 10 studies) were the most common criteria used for assessing SPR. The pooled SPR and LCDR were 18.36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.6-22.1) and 0.94% (95% confidence interval: 0.75-1.15), respectively. Although SPR was significantly higher with NLST criteria than Lung-RADS criteria (25.6% versus 10.4%, p < 0.0001), the LCDR remained similar (0.91% versus 0.95%, p = 0.92). Studies using NLST criteria had a higher SPR in multivariable meta-regression analysis. Nevertheless, the analysis is limited by significant statistical heterogeneity and publication bias.

Conclusion: Lung cancer screening by LDCT in HTBC demonstrates comparable SPR and LCDR to regions with lower TB incidence rates. Lung-RADS criteria are preferable to NLST criteria for LCS in HTBC to mitigate false-positive rates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Thoracic Oncology
Journal of Thoracic Oncology 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
36.00
自引率
3.90%
发文量
1406
审稿时长
13 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Thoracic Oncology (JTO), the official journal of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer,is the primary educational and informational publication for topics relevant to the prevention, detection, diagnosis, and treatment of all thoracic malignancies.The readship includes epidemiologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, thoracic surgeons, pulmonologists, radiologists, pathologists, nuclear medicine physicians, and research scientists with a special interest in thoracic oncology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信