» Articles » PMID: 31125735

Insights for Management of Ground-Glass Opacities From the National Lung Screening Trial

Overview
Journal J Thorac Oncol
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2019 May 25
PMID 31125735
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: In the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), screen-detected cancers that would not have been identified by the Lung Computed Tomographic Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) nodule management guidelines were frequently ground-glass opacities (GGOs). Lung-RADS suggests that GGOs with diameter less than 20 mm return for annual screening, and GGOs greater than or equal to 20 mm receive 6-month follow-up. We examined whether this 20-mm threshold gives consistent management of GGOs compared with solid nodules.

Methods: First, we calculated diameter-specific malignancy probabilities for GGOs and solid nodules in the NLST. Using the solid-nodule malignancy risks as benchmarks, we suggested risk-based management categories for GGOs based on their probability of malignancy. Second, we compared lung-cancer mortality between GGOs and solid nodules in the same risk-based category.

Results: Using the Lung-RADS v1.0 classifications, malignancy probability is higher for GGOs than solid nodules within the same category. A risk-based classification of GGOs would assign annual screening for GGOs 4 to 5 mm (0.4% malignancy risk); 6-month follow-up for GGOs 6 to 7 mm (1.1%), 8 to 14 mm (3.0%), and 15 to 19 mm (5.2%); and 3-month follow-up for greater than or equal to 20 mm (10.9%). This reclassification would have assigned similarly fatal cancers to 3-month follow-up (hazard ratio = 2.0 for lung-cancer death in GGOs versus solid-nodule cancers, 95% confidence interval: 0.4-8.7), but for 6-month follow-up, mortality was lower in GGO cancers (hazard ratio = 0.18, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.67).

Conclusions: If Lung-RADS categories for GGOs were based on malignancy probability, then 6- to 19-mm GGOs would receive 6-month follow-up and greater than or equal to 20-mm GGOs would receive 3-month follow-up. Such risk-based management for GGOs could improve the sensitivity of Lung-RADS, especially for large GGO cancers. However, small GGO cancers were less aggressive than their solid-nodule counterparts.

Citing Articles

Complications of synchronous microwave ablation and biopsy versus microwave ablation alone for pulmonary sub-solid nodules: a retrospective, large sample, case-control study.

Cao P, Wei Z, Xue G, Wang N, Li Z, Hu Y Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2024; 14(10):7218-7228.

PMID: 39429568 PMC: 11485351. DOI: 10.21037/qims-24-906.


Bibliometric and visualized analysis of reporting and data systems from 2000 to 2022: research situation, global trends, and hotspots.

Wang Y, Zhang M, Sang L, Li Z, Wang X, Yang Z Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2024; 14(3):2280-2295.

PMID: 38545042 PMC: 10963830. DOI: 10.21037/qims-23-1283.


Application of clinical and CT imaging features in the evaluation of disease progression in patients with COVID-19.

Wu G, Zhu Y, Qiu X, Yuan X, Mi X, Zhou R BMC Pulm Med. 2023; 23(1):329.

PMID: 37674193 PMC: 10481600. DOI: 10.1186/s12890-023-02613-2.


Invasiveness assessment by artificial intelligence against intraoperative frozen section for pulmonary nodules ≤ 3 cm.

Zhao Z, Yu Y, Lin Z, Ma D, Lin Y, Hu J J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2023; 149(10):7759-7765.

PMID: 37016100 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-023-04713-2.


Letter to the Editor: Indeterminate pulmonary subsolid nodules in patients with no history of cancer.

Ufuk F Diagn Interv Radiol. 2023; 29(3):361.

PMID: 36994882 PMC: 10679612. DOI: 10.4274/dir.2022.221590.


References
1.
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

2.
Pinsky P, Gierada D, Black W, Munden R, Nath H, Aberle D . Performance of Lung-RADS in the National Lung Screening Trial: a retrospective assessment. Ann Intern Med. 2015; 162(7):485-91. PMC: 4705835. DOI: 10.7326/M14-2086. View

3.
Han D, Heuvelmans M, Vliegenthart R, Rook M, Dorrius M, de Jonge G . Influence of lung nodule margin on volume- and diameter-based reader variability in CT lung cancer screening. Br J Radiol. 2017; 91(1090):20170405. PMC: 6350488. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170405. View

4.
McWilliams A, Tammemagi M, Mayo J, Roberts H, Liu G, Soghrati K . Probability of cancer in pulmonary nodules detected on first screening CT. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369(10):910-9. PMC: 3951177. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1214726. View

5.
Shin K, Lee K, Yi C, Chung M, Shin M, Choi Y . Subcentimeter lung nodules stable for 2 years at LDCT: long-term follow-up using volumetry. Respirology. 2014; 19(6):921-8. DOI: 10.1111/resp.12337. View