在全国肺癌筛查登记中,阳性筛查比在全国肺癌筛查试验中更有可能。

Tina D Tailor, Roee Gutman, Na An, Richard M Hoffman, Caroline Chiles, Ruth C Carlos, JoRean D Sicks, Ilana F Gareen
{"title":"在全国肺癌筛查登记中,阳性筛查比在全国肺癌筛查试验中更有可能。","authors":"Tina D Tailor, Roee Gutman, Na An, Richard M Hoffman, Caroline Chiles, Ruth C Carlos, JoRean D Sicks, Ilana F Gareen","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2025.02.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose chest CT (LDCT) is recommended for high-risk populations, little is known about how clinical screening compares with research trials. We compared Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) scores between a nationally screened population from the ACR's LCS Registry (LCSR) and the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included baseline LDCT examinations from the LCSR and NLST. Patient characteristics (age, gender, smoking status, pack-years, and body mass index) were obtained. NLST LDCT results were recoded to Lung-RADS version 1.1. A multivariable multinomial logistic model was used to examine variations in Lung-RADS scores by screening group (LCSR versus NLST) and patient characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 686,011 and 26,432 participants from the LCSR and NLST, respectively, were included. Compared with the NLST, the LCSR population was older (mean age [SD]: 64.0 [5.4] versus 61.4 [5.0] years); P < .001) and included more female patients (47.9% versus 40.9%; P < .001), and its patients were more likely to be currently smoking (61.5% versus 48.1%; P < .001). After adjusting for age, gender, smoking history, and body mass index, the LCSR population was more significantly likely to have higher Lung-RADS scores than the NLST (adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence interval > 1 for Lung-RADS scores 2, 3, 4A, 4B, 4X relative to Lung-RADS 1).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lung-RADS scores in clinical LCS are higher than in the NLST, even after adjusting for known confounders such as age and smoking. This would imply higher rates of follow-up testing after LCS and potentially higher cancer rates in the clinically screened population than the NLST.</p>","PeriodicalId":73968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Positive Screens Are More Likely in a National Lung Cancer Screening Registry Than the National Lung Screening Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Tina D Tailor, Roee Gutman, Na An, Richard M Hoffman, Caroline Chiles, Ruth C Carlos, JoRean D Sicks, Ilana F Gareen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jacr.2025.02.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose chest CT (LDCT) is recommended for high-risk populations, little is known about how clinical screening compares with research trials. We compared Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) scores between a nationally screened population from the ACR's LCS Registry (LCSR) and the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included baseline LDCT examinations from the LCSR and NLST. Patient characteristics (age, gender, smoking status, pack-years, and body mass index) were obtained. NLST LDCT results were recoded to Lung-RADS version 1.1. A multivariable multinomial logistic model was used to examine variations in Lung-RADS scores by screening group (LCSR versus NLST) and patient characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 686,011 and 26,432 participants from the LCSR and NLST, respectively, were included. Compared with the NLST, the LCSR population was older (mean age [SD]: 64.0 [5.4] versus 61.4 [5.0] years); P < .001) and included more female patients (47.9% versus 40.9%; P < .001), and its patients were more likely to be currently smoking (61.5% versus 48.1%; P < .001). After adjusting for age, gender, smoking history, and body mass index, the LCSR population was more significantly likely to have higher Lung-RADS scores than the NLST (adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence interval > 1 for Lung-RADS scores 2, 3, 4A, 4B, 4X relative to Lung-RADS 1).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lung-RADS scores in clinical LCS are higher than in the NLST, even after adjusting for known confounders such as age and smoking. This would imply higher rates of follow-up testing after LCS and potentially higher cancer rates in the clinically screened population than the NLST.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73968,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.02.012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.02.012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:虽然推荐高危人群使用低剂量胸部CT (LDCT)进行肺癌筛查(LCS),但人们对临床筛查与研究试验的对比知之甚少。我们比较了美国放射学会(ACR) LCS登记处(LCSR)和国家肺筛查试验(NLST)的全国筛查人群的肺- rads评分。方法:本回顾性研究包括LCSR和NLST的基线LDCT检查。获得患者特征(年龄、性别、吸烟状况、包龄和体重指数(BMI))。NLST LDCT结果被重新编码到Lung-RADS 1.1版本。使用多变量多项逻辑模型来检查筛查组(LCSR vs NLST)和患者特征在肺- rads评分中的变化。结果:LCSR和NLST分别纳入了686,011和26,432名参与者。与NLST相比,LCSR人群年龄更大(平均年龄(SD): 64.0(5.4)对61.4(5.0)岁),肺- rads评分为2,3,4a, 4B, 4X,相对于肺- rads 1)。结论:临床LCS的肺- rads评分高于NLST,即使在调整了年龄和吸烟等已知混杂因素后也是如此。这意味着LCS后的随访率更高,临床筛查人群的癌症发病率可能高于NLST。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Positive Screens Are More Likely in a National Lung Cancer Screening Registry Than the National Lung Screening Trial.

Purpose: Although lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose chest CT (LDCT) is recommended for high-risk populations, little is known about how clinical screening compares with research trials. We compared Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) scores between a nationally screened population from the ACR's LCS Registry (LCSR) and the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST).

Methods: This retrospective study included baseline LDCT examinations from the LCSR and NLST. Patient characteristics (age, gender, smoking status, pack-years, and body mass index) were obtained. NLST LDCT results were recoded to Lung-RADS version 1.1. A multivariable multinomial logistic model was used to examine variations in Lung-RADS scores by screening group (LCSR versus NLST) and patient characteristics.

Results: In all, 686,011 and 26,432 participants from the LCSR and NLST, respectively, were included. Compared with the NLST, the LCSR population was older (mean age [SD]: 64.0 [5.4] versus 61.4 [5.0] years); P < .001) and included more female patients (47.9% versus 40.9%; P < .001), and its patients were more likely to be currently smoking (61.5% versus 48.1%; P < .001). After adjusting for age, gender, smoking history, and body mass index, the LCSR population was more significantly likely to have higher Lung-RADS scores than the NLST (adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence interval > 1 for Lung-RADS scores 2, 3, 4A, 4B, 4X relative to Lung-RADS 1).

Conclusions: Lung-RADS scores in clinical LCS are higher than in the NLST, even after adjusting for known confounders such as age and smoking. This would imply higher rates of follow-up testing after LCS and potentially higher cancer rates in the clinically screened population than the NLST.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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