Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT: a Meta-Analysis

Overview

Journal J Gen Intern Med

Publisher Springer

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2020 Jun 26

PMID 32583338

Citations 50

Authors

Richard M Hoffman

Rami P Atallah

Roger D Struble

Robert G Badgett

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Randomized controlled trials have evaluated the efficacy of low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening on lung cancer (LC) outcomes.

Objective: Meta-analyze LDCT lung cancer screening trials.

Methods: We identified studies by searching PubMed, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov , and reference lists from retrieved publications. We abstracted data on study design features, stage I LC diagnoses, LC and overall mortality, false positive results, harm from invasive diagnostic procedures, overdiagnosis, and significant incidental findings. We assessed study quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We used random-effects models to calculate relative risks and assessed effect modulators with subgroup analyses and meta-regression.

Results: We identified 9 studies that enrolled 96,559 subjects. The risk of bias across studies was judged to be low. Overall, LDCT screening significantly increased the detection of stage I LC, RR = 2.93 (95% CI, 2.16-3.98), I = 19%, and reduced LC mortality, RR = 0.84 (95% CI, 0.75-0.93), I = 0%. The number needed to screen to prevent an LC death was 265. Women had a lower risk of LC death (RR = 0.69, 95% CI, 0.40-1.21) than men (RR = 0.86, 95% CI, 0.66-1.13), p value for interaction = 0.11. LDCT screening did not reduce overall mortality, RR = 0.96 (95% CI, 0.91-1.01), I = 0%. The pooled false positive rate was 8% (95% CI, 4-18); subjects with false positive results had < 1 in 1000 risk of major complications following invasive diagnostic procedures. The most valid estimates for overdiagnosis and significant incidental findings were 8.9% and 7.5%, respectively.

Discussion: LDCT screening significantly reduced LC mortality, though not overall mortality, with women appearing to benefit more than men. The estimated risks for false positive results, screening complications, overdiagnosis, and incidental findings were low. Long-term survival data were available only for North American and European studies limiting generalizability.

Citing Articles

Overall Staging Prediction for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): A Local Pilot Study with Artificial Neural Network Approach.

Cheung E, Kwong V, Ng K, Lui M, Li V, Lee R Cancers (Basel). 2025; 17(3).

PMID: 39941890 PMC: 11816590. DOI: 10.3390/cancers17030523.

Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose CT: A Systematic Review.

Pacheco P, Melo V, Martins C, Ribeiro H Cureus. 2025; 16(12):e75515.

PMID: 39803135 PMC: 11718421. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.75515.

Transforming cancer screening: the potential of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) technologies.

Imai M, Nakamura Y, Yoshino T Int J Clin Oncol. 2025; 30(2):180-193.

PMID: 39799530 PMC: 11785667. DOI: 10.1007/s10147-025-02694-5.

Smoking status, symptom significance and healthcare seeking with lung cancer symptoms in the Danish general population.

Saetre L, Balasubramaniam K, Sondergaard J, Jarbol D NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2025; 35(1):3.

PMID: 39794355 PMC: 11724040. DOI: 10.1038/s41533-025-00412-2.

Precise diagnosis and prognosis assessment of malignant lung nodules: a narrative review.

Wen M, Zheng Q, Ji X, Xin S, Zhou Y, Tian Y J Thorac Dis. 2024; 16(11):7999-8013.

PMID: 39678870 PMC: 11635230. DOI: 10.21037/jtd-24-1058.

References

Stead L, Koilpillai P, Fanshawe T, Lancaster T . Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 3:CD008286. PMC: 10042551. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008286.pub3. View

de Koning H, van der Aalst C, de Jong P, Scholten E, Nackaerts K, Heuvelmans M . Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Volume CT Screening in a Randomized Trial. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382(6):503-513. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1911793. View

Huang K, Wang S, Lu W, Chang Y, Su J, Lu Y . Effects of low-dose computed tomography on lung cancer screening: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis. BMC Pulm Med. 2019; 19(1):126. PMC: 6625016. DOI: 10.1186/s12890-019-0883-x. View

Rota M, Pizzato M, La Vecchia C, Boffetta P . Efficacy of lung cancer screening appears to increase with prolonged intervention: results from the MILD trial and a meta-analysis. Ann Oncol. 2019; 30(7):1040-1043. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdz145. View

Snowsill T, Yang H, Griffin E, Long L, Varley-Campbell J, Coelho H . Low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2018; 22(69):1-276. PMC: 6304730. DOI: 10.3310/hta22690. View

Patnode C, Eder M, Walsh E, Viswanathan M, Lin J . The Use of Rapid Review Methods for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Am J Prev Med. 2017; 54(1S1):S19-S25. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.07.024. View

Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche P, Ioannidis J . The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151(4):W65-94. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136. View

Coureau G, Salmi L, Etard C, Sancho-Garnier H, Sauvaget C, Mathoulin-Pelissier S . Low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer in populations highly exposed to tobacco: A systematic methodological appraisal of published randomised controlled trials. Eur J Cancer. 2016; 61:146-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.04.006. View

Ali M, Miller J, Peirson L, Fitzpatrick-Lewis D, Kenny M, Sherifali D . Screening for lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med. 2016; 89:301-314. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.04.015. View

10.

Riaz I, Badgett R . Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Radiculopathy and Spinal Stenosis. Ann Intern Med. 2016; 164(9):634-5. DOI: 10.7326/L15-0565. View

11.

Cornell J, Mulrow C, Localio R, Stack C, Meibohm A, Guallar E . Random-effects meta-analysis of inconsistent effects: a time for change. Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160(4):267-70. DOI: 10.7326/M13-2886. View

12.

Deeks J, Macaskill P, Irwig L . The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005; 58(9):882-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.016. View

13.

Fritzberg A, Lyster D, DOLPHIN D . Evaluation of formamidine sulfinic acid and other reducing agents for use in the preparation of Tc-99m labeled radiopharmaceuticals. J Nucl Med. 1977; 18(6):553-7. View

14.

Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C . Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997; 315(7109):629-34. PMC: 2127453. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629. View

15.

Rucker G, Schwarzer G, Carpenter J . Arcsine test for publication bias in meta-analyses with binary outcomes. Stat Med. 2007; 27(5):746-63. DOI: 10.1002/sim.2971. View

16.

Guyatt G, Oxman A, Akl E, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J . GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64(4):383-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026. View

17.

Pinto R, Maher C, Ferreira M, Hancock M, Oliveira V, McLachlan A . Epidural corticosteroid injections in the management of sciatica: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2013; 157(12):865-77. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-12-201212180-00564. View

18.

Doroudi M, Pinsky P, Marcus P . Lung Cancer Mortality in the Lung Screening Study Feasibility Trial. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2019; 2(3):pky042. PMC: 6649695. DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pky042. View

19.

Infante M, Cavuto S, Lutman F, Passera E, Chiarenza M, Chiesa G . Long-Term Follow-up Results of the DANTE Trial, a Randomized Study of Lung Cancer Screening with Spiral Computed Tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015; 191(10):1166-75. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201408-1475OC. View

20.

W Wille M, Dirksen A, Ashraf H, Saghir Z, Bach K, Brodersen J . Results of the Randomized Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial with Focus on High-Risk Profiling. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015; 193(5):542-51. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201505-1040OC. View