» Articles » PMID: 40046247

Six-year Performance of Risk-based Selection for Lung Cancer Screening in the Manchester Lung Health Check Cohort

Overview
Journal BMJ Oncol
Specialty Oncology
Date 2025 Mar 6
PMID 40046247
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: Risk prediction models are used to determine eligibility for targeted lung cancer screening. However, prospective data regarding model performance in this setting are limited. Here we report the performance of the PLCO risk model, which calculates 6 year lung cancer risk, in a cohort invited for lung cancer screening in a socioeconomically deprived area.

Methods And Analysis: Calibration (expected/observed (E/O) lung cancer diagnoses over 6 years) and discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of PLCO and other models was performed in Manchester Lung Health Check (M-LHC) participants, where PLCO ≥1.51% was used prospectively to determine screening eligibility. Lung cancers diagnosed by any route were captured within 6 years of risk assessment, for both screened and non-screened participants. Performance of a range of models was evaluated.

Results: Out of 2541 attendees, 56% were high-risk (n=1430/2541) and offered screening; 44% were low-risk (n=1111/2541) and not screened. Over 6 years, 7.3% (n=105/1430) and 0.9% (n=10/1111) were diagnosed with lung cancer in the high and low-risk cohorts, respectively (p<0.0001). Risk was underestimated in both high-risk, screened (E/O 0.68 (0.57-0.82)) and low-risk, unscreened groups (E/O 0.61 (0.33-1.14)). Most other models also underestimated risk.

Conclusion: Risk-based eligibility using PLCO successfully classified most eventual lung cancer cases in the high-risk, screened group. Prediction models generally underestimated risk in this socioeconomically deprived cohort, irrespective of screening status. The effect of screening on increasing the probability of lung cancer diagnosis should be considered when interpreting measures of prediction model performance.

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.
Crosbie P, Gabe R, Simmonds I, Kennedy M, Rogerson S, Ahmed N . Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST): protocol for a randomised controlled trial to evaluate invitation to community-based low-dose CT screening for lung cancer versus usual care in a targeted population at risk. BMJ Open. 2020; 10(9):e037075. PMC: 7485242. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037075. View

3.
Moyer V . Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160(5):330-8. DOI: 10.7326/M13-2771. View

4.
Collins G, Reitsma J, Altman D, Moons K . Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. BMJ. 2015; 350:g7594. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g7594. View

5.
Krist A, Davidson K, Mangione C, Barry M, Cabana M, Caughey A . Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2021; 325(10):962-970. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.1117. View