Controversies and challenges in lung cancer screening

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Seminars in oncology Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2022.07.002
Ravindra Rampariag , Igor Chernyavskiy , Mohammad Al-Ajam , Jun-Chieh J. Tsay
{"title":"Controversies and challenges in lung cancer screening","authors":"Ravindra Rampariag ,&nbsp;Igor Chernyavskiy ,&nbsp;Mohammad Al-Ajam ,&nbsp;Jun-Chieh J. Tsay","doi":"10.1053/j.seminoncol.2022.07.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Two large randomized controlled trials have shown mortality benefit from lung cancer screening (LCS) in high-risk groups. Updated guidelines by the United State Preventative Service Task Force in 2020 will allow for inclusion of more patients who are at high risk of developing lung cancer and benefit from screening. As medical clinics and lung cancer screening programs around the country continue to work on perfecting the LCS workflow, it is important to understand some controversial issues surrounding LCS that should be addressed. In this article, we identify some of these issues, including false positive rates of low-dose CT, over-diagnosis, cost expenditure, LCS disparities in minorities, and utility of biomarkers. We hope to provide clarity, potential solutions, and future directions on how to address these controversies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21750,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in oncology","volume":"49 3","pages":"Pages 191-197"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0093775422000562/pdfft?md5=7490a688638850a3721d3503cf457ed0&pid=1-s2.0-S0093775422000562-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0093775422000562","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Two large randomized controlled trials have shown mortality benefit from lung cancer screening (LCS) in high-risk groups. Updated guidelines by the United State Preventative Service Task Force in 2020 will allow for inclusion of more patients who are at high risk of developing lung cancer and benefit from screening. As medical clinics and lung cancer screening programs around the country continue to work on perfecting the LCS workflow, it is important to understand some controversial issues surrounding LCS that should be addressed. In this article, we identify some of these issues, including false positive rates of low-dose CT, over-diagnosis, cost expenditure, LCS disparities in minorities, and utility of biomarkers. We hope to provide clarity, potential solutions, and future directions on how to address these controversies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肺癌筛查的争议与挑战
两项大型随机对照试验显示,高风险人群肺癌筛查(LCS)可降低死亡率。美国预防服务工作组(United states preventive Service Task Force)在2020年更新的指南将允许纳入更多患肺癌高风险并从筛查中受益的患者。随着全国各地的医疗诊所和肺癌筛查项目继续致力于完善LCS工作流程,了解一些围绕LCS应该解决的有争议的问题是很重要的。在本文中,我们确定了其中的一些问题,包括低剂量CT的假阳性率、过度诊断、成本支出、少数群体的LCS差异以及生物标志物的使用。我们希望就如何解决这些争议提供清晰、潜在的解决方案和未来的方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Seminars in oncology
Seminars in oncology 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
104 days
期刊介绍: Seminars in Oncology brings you current, authoritative, and practical reviews of developments in the etiology, diagnosis and management of cancer. Each issue examines topics of clinical importance, with an emphasis on providing both the basic knowledge needed to better understand a topic as well as evidence-based opinions from leaders in the field. Seminars in Oncology also seeks to be a venue for sharing a diversity of opinions including those that might be considered "outside the box". We welcome a healthy and respectful exchange of opinions and urge you to approach us with your insights as well as suggestions of topics that you deem worthy of coverage. By helping the reader understand the basic biology and the therapy of cancer as they learn the nuances from experts, all in a journal that encourages the exchange of ideas we aim to help move the treatment of cancer forward.
期刊最新文献
The likelihood of being helped or harmed obtained from clinical trial results for cancer therapy: Can it really help? Chemotherapy plus immunotherapy as first line combination in older patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gender-Based Differences in the Efficacy of Anti-EGFR/BRAF/MEK Targeted Therapy in Patients with BRAF-Mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Adenocarcinoma on retrorectal cystic hamartoma: An illustrative image for a very rare diagnosis. Deciphering the US Regulatory Framework: Comparison Between Oncology Biosimilars and Reference Biologics.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1