RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Volumetric lung cancer screening reduces unnecessary low-dose computed tomography scans: results from a single-centre prospective trial on 4,119 subjects
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.04.09.21255050
DO 10.1101/2021.04.09.21255050
A1 Gianluca Milanese
A1 Federica Sabia
A1 Roberta Eufrasia Ledda
A1 Stefano Sestini
A1 Alfonso Vittorio Marchianò
A1 Nicola Sverzellati
A1 Ugo Pastorino
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/04/13/2021.04.09.21255050.abstract
AB Purpose To compare low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) outcome and volume-doubling time (VDT) derived from measured volume (MV) and estimated volume (EV) of pulmonary nodules (PN) detected in a single-centre lung cancer screening trial.Materials and Methods MV, EV and VDT were obtained for prevalent pulmonary nodules detected at the baseline round of the bioMILD trial. LDCT outcome (based on bioMILD thresholds) and VDT categories were simulated on a PN- and a screenees-based analysis. Weighted Cohen’s kappa test was used to assess the agreement between diagnostic categories as per MV and EV.Results 1,583 screenees displayed 2,715 pulmonary nodules. On a PN-based analysis 40.1% PNs would have been included in different LDCT categories if measured by MV or EV. Agreement between MV and EV was moderate (κ = 0.49) and fair (κ = 0.37) for LDCT outcome and VDT categories, respectively.On a screenees-based analysis, 46% pulmonary nodules would have been included in different LDCT categories if measured by MV or EV. Agreement between MV and EV was moderate (κ = 0.52) and fair (κ = 0.34) for LDCT outcome and VDT categories, respectively.Conclusions Within a simulated lung cancer screening based on recommendation by estimated volumetry, the number of LDCT performed for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules would be higher as compared to the prospective volumetric management.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02247453Funding StatementThe BioMILD trial was supported by grants from the Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC 5xmille IG 12162, IG 11991, and IG 18812), the Italian Ministry of Health (RF 2010-2306232, and 2010-2310201), the National Cancer Institute (EDRN UO1 CA166905), and Gensignia Life Science. The sponsors had no role in conducting and interpreting the study.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The bioMILD trial (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02247453) was approved by Institutional Review Board and Ethics Committee on 2011/06/15 (Prot. INT 21/11). Full names and affiliations of the Ethics Committee are listed below: 1. Mrs Mariangela Armiraglio (Nurse) - Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori of Milan 2. Dr. Lucio Ascani (Doctor of Pharmacy) - Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori of Milan 3. Prof. Gianfranco Canti (Pharmacologist) - University of Milan 4. Dr. Francesca Crippa Floriani (Volunteer) - Scientific Committee of Fondazione Floriani 5. Mr. Paolo Fontana (Theologist and expert in Bioethics) - Pontifical Gregorian University of Rome 6. Dr. Marina Garassino (Oncologist) - Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori of Milan 7. Prof. Marco A. Pierotti - Scientific Director of the Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori of Milan 8. Dr. Roberto Satolli (Expert in Bioethics, President) - President of "Agenzia di giornalismo ed editoria scientifica Zadig" 9. Dr. Valter Torri (Biostatistitian) - Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research 10. Dr. Rita Vetere (Volunteer) - Committee of "Salute Donna" (non profit organization)All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData will not be made available.