Exposure to Low Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening and Risk of Cancer: Secondary Analysis of Trial Data and Risk-benefit Analysis

Overview

Journal BMJ

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2017 Feb 10

PMID 28179230

Citations 116

Authors

Cristiano Rampinelli

Paolo De Marco

Daniela Origgi

Patrick Maisonneuve

Monica Casiraghi

Giulia Veronesi

Lorenzo Spaggiari

Massimo Bellomi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

To estimate the cumulative radiation exposure and lifetime attributable risk of cancer incidence associated with lung cancer screening using annual low dose computed tomography (CT). Secondary analysis of data from a lung cancer screening trial and risk-benefit analysis. 10 year, non-randomised, single centre, low dose CT, lung cancer screening trial (COSMOS study) which took place in Milan, Italy in 2004-15 (enrolment in 2004-05). Secondary analysis took place in 2015-16. High risk asymptomatic smokers aged 50 and older, who were current or former smokers (≥20 pack years), and had no history of cancer in the previous five years. Cumulative radiation exposure from low dose CT and positron emission tomography (PET) CT scans, calculated by dosimetry software; and lifetime attributable risk of cancer incidence, calculated from the (BEIR VII) report. Over 10 years, 5203 participants (3439 men, 1764 women) underwent 42 228 low dose CT and 635 PET CT scans. The median cumulative effective dose at the 10th year of screening was 9.3 mSv for men and 13.0 mSv for women. According to participants' age and sex, the lifetime attributable risk of lung cancer and major cancers after 10 years of CT screening ranged from 5.5 to 1.4 per 10 000 people screened, and from 8.1 to 2.6 per 10 000 people screened, respectively. In women aged 50-54, the lifetime attributable risk of lung cancer and major cancers was about fourfold and threefold higher than for men aged 65 and older, respectively. The numbers of lung cancer and major cancer cases induced by 10 years of screening in our cohort were 1.5 and 2.4, respectively, which corresponded to an additional risk of induced major cancers of 0.05% (2.4/5203). 259 lung cancers were diagnosed in 10 years of screening; one radiation induced major cancer would be expected for every 108 (259/2.4) lung cancers detected through screening. Radiation exposure and cancer risk from low dose CT screening for lung cancer, even if non-negligible, can be considered acceptable in light of the substantial mortality reduction associated with screening.

Citing Articles

Tumor localization strategies of multicancer early detection tests: a quantitative assessment.

Tyson C, Li K, Cao X, OBrien J, Fishman E, ODonnell E JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2025; 9(2).

PMID: 39854284 PMC: 11897890. DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkaf011.

Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of risk model-based and risk factor-based low-dose computed tomography screening strategies for lung cancer: a systematic review.

Liu Y, Geng Q, Lin X, Feng C, Qiao Y, Zhang S BMC Cancer. 2024; 24(1):1567.

PMID: 39710662 PMC: 11665239. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-13356-6.

Interpretable machine learning model for digital lung cancer prescreening in Chinese populations with missing data.

Zhang S, Wang Q, Hu X, Zhang B, Sun S, Yuan Y NPJ Digit Med. 2024; 7(1):327.

PMID: 39562681 PMC: 11576743. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-024-01309-z.

Development and validation of a tumor marker-based model for the prediction of lung cancer: an analysis of a multicenter retrospective study in Shanghai, China.

Hu S, Guo Q, Ye J, Ma H, Zhang M, Wang Y Front Oncol. 2024; 14:1427170.

PMID: 39544305 PMC: 11562644. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1427170.

Current Evidence for a Lung Cancer Screening Program.

Guerreiro T, Aguiar P, Araujo A Port J Public Health. 2024; 42(2):133-158.

PMID: 39469231 PMC: 11498919. DOI: 10.1159/000538434.

References

Brenner D . Radiation risks potentially associated with low-dose CT screening of adult smokers for lung cancer. Radiology. 2004; 231(2):440-5. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2312030880. View

Tubiana M . Dose-effect relationship and estimation of the carcinogenic effects of low doses of ionizing radiation: the joint report of the Académie des Sciences (Paris) and of the Académie Nationale de Médecine. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005; 63(2):317-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.06.013. View

van de Wiel J, Wang Y, Xu D, van der Zaag-Loonen H, van der Jagt E, van Klaveren R . Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT. Eur Radiol. 2007; 17(6):1474-82. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-006-0532-7. View

Veronesi G, Bellomi M, Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Maisonneuve P, Scanagatta P . Role of positron emission tomography scanning in the management of lung nodules detected at baseline computed tomography screening. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007; 84(3):959-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.04.058. View

. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007; 37(2-4):1-332. DOI: 10.1016/j.icrp.2007.10.003. View

Veronesi G, Bellomi M, Mulshine J, Pelosi G, Scanagatta P, Paganelli G . Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography: a non-invasive diagnostic protocol for baseline lung nodules. Lung Cancer. 2008; 61(3):340-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.01.001. View

Scott B . Low-dose radiation risk extrapolation fallacy associated with the linear-no-threshold model. Hum Exp Toxicol. 2008; 27(2):163-8. DOI: 10.1177/0960327107083410. View

Mettler Jr F, Huda W, Yoshizumi T, Mahesh M . Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology. 2008; 248(1):254-63. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2481071451. View

ICRP . Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals. Addendum 3 to ICRP Publication 53. ICRP Publication 106. Approved by the Commission in October 2007. Ann ICRP. 2009; 38(1-2):1-197. DOI: 10.1016/j.icrp.2008.08.003. View

10.

McCollough C, Christner J, Kofler J . How effective is effective dose as a predictor of radiation risk?. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 194(4):890-6. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.4179. View

11.

Aberle D, Adams A, Berg C, Black W, Clapp J, Fagerstrom R . Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365(5):395-409. PMC: 4356534. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1102873. View

12.

Maisonneuve P, Bagnardi V, Bellomi M, Spaggiari L, Pelosi G, Rampinelli C . Lung cancer risk prediction to select smokers for screening CT--a model based on the Italian COSMOS trial. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2011; 4(11):1778-89. DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-11-0026. View

13.

Rampinelli C, Preda L, Maniglio M, Sirica L, Travaini L, Veronesi G . Extrapulmonary malignancies detected at lung cancer screening. Radiology. 2011; 261(1):293-9. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11102231. View

14.

Mascalchi M, Mazzoni L, Falchini M, Belli G, Picozzi G, Merlini V . Dose exposure in the ITALUNG trial of lung cancer screening with low-dose CT. Br J Radiol. 2011; 85(1016):1134-9. PMC: 3587091. DOI: 10.1259/bjr/20711289. View

15.

Larke F, Kruger R, Cagnon C, Flynn M, McNitt-Gray M, Wu X . Estimated radiation dose associated with low-dose chest CT of average-size participants in the National Lung Screening Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197(5):1165-9. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.6533. View

16.

Yamada Y, Jinzaki M, Tanami Y, Shiomi E, Sugiura H, Abe T . Model-based iterative reconstruction technique for ultralow-dose computed tomography of the lung: a pilot study. Invest Radiol. 2012; 47(8):482-9. DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3182562a89. View

17.

Hendee W, OConnor M . Radiation risks of medical imaging: separating fact from fantasy. Radiology. 2012; 264(2):312-21. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12112678. View

18.

Brenner D, Hall E . Cancer risks from CT scans: now we have data, what next?. Radiology. 2012; 265(2):330-1. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12121248. View

19.

Hendee W . Policy statement of the International Organization for Medical Physics. Radiology. 2013; 267(2):326-7. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13130567. View

20.

McCunney R, Li J . Radiation risks in lung cancer screening programs: a comparison with nuclear industry workers and atomic bomb survivors. Chest. 2014; 145(3):618-24. DOI: 10.1378/chest.13-1420. View