高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

CT screening for lung cancer: comparison of three baseline screening protocols

文献详情

资源类型:
WOS体系:
Pubmed体系:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA [2]Phoenix Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Phoenix, AZ, USA [3]Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, 1 Gustave Levy Place, New York, NY 10029, USA [4]Department of Diagnostic Ultrasound, Tong Ren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100730, China [5]Clinica Universidad de Navarra, University of Navarra School of Medicine, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: Tomography Spiral computed Lung neoplasms Cancer screening Clinical protocols

摘要:
Purpose Clinical management decisions arising from the baseline round for lung cancer screening are the most challenging, as findings have accumulated over a lifetime and may be of no clinical concern. To minimize unnecessary harms and costs of workup prior to the first, annual repeat screening, workup should be limited to participants with the highest suspicion of lung cancer while still aiming to identify small, early lung cancers. Methods We compared recommendations for immediate, delayed (by 3 or 6 months) workup to assess growth at a malignant rate, and the resulting overall and potential biopsies of three baseline screening protocols: I-ELCAP, the two scenarios of ACR-LungRADS, and the European Consortium. For each protocol, the efficiency ratio (ER) of each recommendation was calculated by dividing the number of participants recommended for that workup by the number of resulting lung cancer diagnoses. The ER for potential biopsies was calculated, assuming that biopsies were performed on all participants recommended for immediate workup as well as those diagnosed with lung cancer after delayed workup. Results For I-ELCAP, ACR-LungRADS Scenario 1, ACR-LungRADS Scenario 2, and the European consortium, the overall ER was 13.9, 18.3, 18.3, and 31.9, respectively, and for potential biopsies, it was 2.2, 8.1, 3.2, and 4.4, respectively. ER for immediate workup was 2.9, 8.6, 3.9, and 5.6, respectively, and for delayed workup was 36.1, 160.3, 57.8, and 111.9, respectively. Conclusions I-ELCAP recommendations had the lowest ER values for overall, immediate, and delayed workup, and for potential biopsies.

基金:
语种:
被引次数:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2018]版:
大类 | 2 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 核医学
最新[2023]版:
大类 | 2 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 核医学
JCR分区:
出版当年[2017]版:
Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
最新[2023]版:
Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2017版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2016版] 出版后一年[2018版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA [2]Phoenix Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Phoenix, AZ, USA [3]Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, 1 Gustave Levy Place, New York, NY 10029, USA
通讯作者:
通讯机构: [1]Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA [2]Phoenix Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Phoenix, AZ, USA [3]Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, 1 Gustave Levy Place, New York, NY 10029, USA
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:21169 今日访问量:0 总访问量:1219 更新日期:2025-01-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:北京市东城区东交民巷1号(100730)