Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Sep:171:61-64.
doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2022.07.017. Epub 2022 Jul 25.

Explaining differences in the frequency of lung cancer detection between the National Lung Screening Trial and community-based screening in Manchester, UK

Affiliations

Explaining differences in the frequency of lung cancer detection between the National Lung Screening Trial and community-based screening in Manchester, UK

Hilary A Robbins et al. Lung Cancer. 2022 Sep.

Abstract

Background: The frequency of lung cancer detection in the Manchester Lung Health Checks (MLHCs), a community-based screening service, was higher than in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) over two screening rounds. We aimed to identify the potential reasons for this difference.

Methods: We analyzed individual-level data from NLST and MLHCs, restricting to MLHCs participants who met NLST eligibility criteria. We calculated 'detection ratios' comparing the frequency of lung cancer detection in MLHCs vs NLST, first after excluding NLST participants ineligible by MLHC eligibility criteria (6-year lung cancer risk ≥ 1.51 %), and then after standardization to remove the influence of different distributions of baseline lung cancer risk.

Results: Among the 1,079 MLHCs participants who met NLST eligibility criteria, 4.7% were diagnosed with lung cancer over two screening rounds compared with 1.7% in NLST, giving an initial detection ratio of 2.6 (95%CI 2.2-3.0). This was reduced to 2.2 (95%CI 1.3-2.3) after imposing the MLHCs eligibility criterion on NLST, and further to 1.6 (95%CI 1.2-2.1) after removing the influence of different risk distributions. In stratified analyses, the standardized detection ratio was particularly elevated in individuals who were older, living in areas of high socioeconomic disadvantage, or had an FEV/FVC ratio less than 60.

Conclusions: The 2.6-fold higher lung cancer detection in the community-based MLHCs vs NLST is partly explained by differences in eligibility criteria and baseline risk distributions. The residual 60% increase may relate to higher detection in certain risk groups, including older participants, those with more obstructive lung disease, and those living in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest

HAR, HZ, MJ, MBL, HB, RL, EJC, RB, AS, DGE: none.

PAJC: consultancy and share options, Everest Detection.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Distributions of lung cancer risk in the Manchester Lung Health Checks (MLHCs) compared with the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). Footnote: Lung cancer risk at baseline was calculated by the PLCOm2012 model which predicts risk over a 6-year time horizon [7]. The mean risk among MLHCs participants who met the NLST eligibility criteria (red line) was 4.0%, and the mean risk among NLST participants who met the MLHCs eligibility criteria (orange line) was 5.7%.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Aberle DR, Adams AM, et al., Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening, N. Engl. J. Med 365(5) (2011) 395–409. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1102873. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. de Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, de Jong PA, Scholten ET, Nackaerts K, Heuvelmans MA, Lammers J-W, Weenink C, Yousaf-Khan U, Horeweg N, van ‘t Westeinde S, Prokop M, Mali WP, Mohamed Hoesein FAA, van Ooijen PMA, Aerts JGJV, den Bakker MA, Thunnissen E, Verschakelen J, Vliegenthart R, Walter JE, ten Haaf K, Groen HJM, Oudkerk M, Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Volume CT Screening in a Randomized Trial, N. Engl. J. Med 382 (6) (2020) 503–513. - PubMed
    1. Crosbie PA, Balata H, Evison M, Atack M, Bayliss-Brideaux V, Colligan D, Duerden R, Eaglesfield J, Edwards T, Elton P, Foster J, Greaves M, Hayler G, Higgins C, Howells J, Irion K, Karunaratne D, Kelly J, King Z, Manson S, Mellor S, Miller D, Myerscough A, Newton T, O’Leary M, Pearson R, Pickford J, Sawyer R, Screaton NJ, Sharman A, Simmons M, Smith E, Taylor B, Taylor S, Walsham A, Watts A, Whittaker J, Yarnell L, Threlfall A, Barber PV, Tonge J, Booton R, Implementing lung cancer screening: baseline results from a community-based “Lung Health Check” pilot in deprived areas of Manchester, Thorax 74 (4) (2019) 405–409. - PubMed
    1. Crosbie PA, Balata H, Evison M, Atack M, Bayliss-Brideaux V, Colligan D, Duerden R, Eaglesfield J, Edwards T, Elton P, Foster J, Greaves M, Hayler G, Higgins C, Howells J, Irion K, Karunaratne D, Kelly J, King Z, Lyons J, Manson S, Mellor S, Miller D, Myerscough A, Newton T, O’Leary M, Pearson R, Pickford J, Sawyer R, Screaton NJ, Sharman A, Simmons M, Smith E, Taylor B, Taylor S, Walsham A, Watts A, Whittaker J, Yarnell L, Threlfall A, Barber PV, Tonge J, Booton R, Second round results from the Manchester “Lung Health Check” community-based targeted lung cancer screening pilot, Thorax 74 (7) (2019) 700–704. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tammemägi MC, Katki HA, Hocking WG, Church TR, Caporaso N, Kvale PA, Chaturvedi AK, Silvestri GA, Riley TL, Commins J, Berg CD, Selection criteria for lung-cancer screening, N. Engl. J. Med 368 (8) (2013) 728–736. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types