Strategies in lung cancer detection. Achieving early identification in patients at high risk

Our plain-English summary of Strategies in lung cancer detection. Achieving early identification in patients at high risk, by J.J. Bechtel, T.L. Petty (Postgraduate Medicine, 2003).

The study

• Authors: J.J. Bechtel, T.L. Petty
• Journal: Postgraduate Medicine
• Published: 2003;114(2):20-6
• Type of article: Review
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

Screening can be crucial for timely identification of lung cancer and thus for early treatment and a favorable prognosis. This conclusion is true particularly for persons at high risk for lung cancer, including those exposed to asbestos or silicon dust. In this article, Drs Bechtel and Petty discuss the types of screening procedures available, their cost, and the approaches and timing that are most beneficial to the public as a whole.

In plain English

This article was a narrative overview, part of a journal symposium, in which the authors discussed lung cancer screening methods (spiral CT scans and sputum cytology), their cost, and their timing for people at high risk. It was not a study of asbestos. Asbestos was mentioned twice, in the preview and among groups with additional lung cancer risk, with no fiber types or exposure levels given. The authors summarized their own earlier work in Grand Junction, Colorado. In a series of 51 patients whose cancers were found by sputum testing, 46 tumors (printed as 88%) were stage 0 or stage I. Among patients treated with surgery or radiation therapy, the 5-year survival rate was 55%. In a questionnaire study, 88 high-risk patients with reduced lung function agreed to testing. Within a year, four prevalent and two incident cancers (6.8%) were found. The authors presented a cost comparison that they called theoretical. They noted that the techniques often lack sensitivity and specificity and that controlled trials are needed. The authors concluded that screening or casefinding should begin immediately in high-risk groups.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Narrative review and commentary (symposium article) on lung cancer screening, drawing on published studies, the authors' own earlier work, personal communications and a theoretical cost model
• Who was studied: No study population of its own. The article discusses screening of people at high risk for lung cancer and draws partly on the authors' patient series and questionnaire study in Grand Junction, Colorado.
• Exposure: Asbestos was mentioned twice. The preview refers to persons exposed to asbestos or silicon dust as being at high risk. The main text lists asbestos workers among groups with additional lung cancer risk, alongside persons exposed to silicon dust and patients previously treated for lung cancer. No fiber types, products, jobs or doses were described. The main risk factors discussed were heavy smoking and airflow obstruction.
• Main results:
  • In the authors' earlier Grand Junction series of 51 patients whose radiographically occult lung cancers were found by sputum cytology, 46 tumors (printed as 88%) were stage 0 (in situ) or stage I. Of these, 27 were amenable to surgical cure.
  • In late follow-up of that series, patients who underwent either surgery or radiation therapy had a 5-year survival rate of 55%.
  • In the authors' ongoing Grand Junction questionnaire study, 1,296 questionnaires identified 430 high-risk patients. Of these, 126 had an FEV1 below 70% of predicted, and 88 agreed to sputum cytology and chest CT. Within a year, four prevalent and two incident cancers (6.8%) were found in three men and three women aged 62 to 82 years.
  • In that questionnaire study, all of the cancers were treated, and the survival rate so far was 100%.
  • In a theoretical model of 200 high-risk patients screened over 5 years, the authors estimated 10 cancers, of which 8 would be curable with screening. Without screening, they estimated that only 2 would be treatable for cure and 1 would be cured.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that, on the basis of available data, casefinding or screening should be done immediately in groups at high risk for lung cancer, although controlled clinical trials are needed.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The authors stated that the new screening techniques are not perfect and in many instances lack both sensitivity and specificity.
  • The authors stated that their cost figures are theoretical and based on numerous assumptions.
  • The authors stated that controlled clinical trials are needed to answer remaining questions about screening.

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Lung cancer.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Lung Cancer, Prognosis.

Related studies

• Yield of Low-Dose Computerized Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer in High-Risk Workers: The Case of 7189 US Nuclear Weapons Workers — S.B. Markowitz, A. Manowitz, et al. (2018)
• Screening for lung cancer in a high-risk group: but I still haven't found what I'm looking for — G.A. Silvestri (2007)
• Variations in lung cancer risk among smokers — P.B. Bach, M.W. Kattan, et al. (2003)
• Lung cancer risk in past asbestos workers a few decades after exposure cessation and prospects for screening — G. Mastrangelo, G. Marangi, et al. (2016)
• Early detection of interstitial lung disease in asbestos exposed non-smoking workers by mid-expiratory flow rate and high resolution computed tomography — Z. Dujić, J. Tocilj, et al. (1991)
• Occupational carcinogenesis. High-risk industrial groups: identification, education, and surveillance. Tyler Asbestos Workers Program — S.D. Greenberg, G.A. Hurst, et al. (1976)

Browse more research in Postgraduate Medicine, or return to medical research.