Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT
The purpose of this study was to prospectively determine the frequency and spectrum of incidental findings (IFs) and their clinical implications in a high risk population for lung cancer undergoing low-dose multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) screening for lung cancer. Scans of 1,929 participan...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European radiology 2007-06, Vol.17 (6), p.1474-1482 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1482 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1474 |
container_title | European radiology |
container_volume | 17 |
creator | van de Wiel, J C M Wang, Y Xu, D M van der Zaag-Loonen, H J van der Jagt, E J van Klaveren, R J Oudkerk, M |
description | The purpose of this study was to prospectively determine the frequency and spectrum of incidental findings (IFs) and their clinical implications in a high risk population for lung cancer undergoing low-dose multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) screening for lung cancer. Scans of 1,929 participants were evaluated for lung lesions and IFs by two radiologists. IFs were categorised as not clinically relevant or possibly clinically relevant. Findings were considered possibly clinically relevant if they could require further evaluation or could have substantial clinical implications. All possibly clinically relevant IFs were reviewed by a third radiologist, who determined its clinical relevance. Of all 1,929 participants, 1,410 (73%) had not clinically relevant IFs and 163 (8%) had possibly clinically relevant IFs of which 129 (79%) were indeed considered clinically relevant. Additional imaging was performed mainly by ultrasound (112 of 118, 96%). All but one lesion were concluded to be benign, mostly cysts (n = 115, 80%). Only 21 (1%) participants had findings with clinical implications. In one participant a malignancy was found, yet without any clinical benefit since no curative treatment was possible. Based on our results, we advise against systematically searching for and reporting of IFs in lung cancer screening studies using low-dose MDCT. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00330-006-0532-7 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70482076</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3127408647</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-2e2192f6fe8e2649c6caac6fcb40809d70c3f3def4a09cc19e59e0ac59b31293</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkUGLFDEQhYMo7uzqD_AiAUH00FrpZDqdo467KgyzB-ce0unKTJZMek3SiH_DX2yaGRA8VfF476uCR8grBh8YgPyYATiHBqBrYM3bRj4hKybqwqAXT8kKFO8bqZS4Itc5PwCAYkI-J1dMttCJtluRPzs8BLTFDAHpgBGdL3RyNKNJ9ujjgbopUR-tHzEWE6jzcaxyrhotR6Rf5mKPzWcMB28iDXNNWBMtJpptQowLoiRfk-92t9sf97v3dM6LGKZfzThlpKc5lEov9Yt6arN_QZ45EzK-vMwbsr-73W--Ndv7r983n7aN5YqXpsWWqdZ1DntsO6FsZ42xnbODgB7UKMFyx0d0woCylilcKwRj12rgrFX8hrw9Yx_T9HPGXPTJZ4shmIjTnLUE0bcgu2p885_xYZpTrK_pCpL1WidkdbGzy6Yp54ROPyZ_Mum3ZqCXtvS5LV3b0ktbesm8vpDn4YTjv8SlHv4Xh-GRLQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3127408647</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink (Online service)</source><creator>van de Wiel, J C M ; Wang, Y ; Xu, D M ; van der Zaag-Loonen, H J ; van der Jagt, E J ; van Klaveren, R J ; Oudkerk, M</creator><creatorcontrib>van de Wiel, J C M ; Wang, Y ; Xu, D M ; van der Zaag-Loonen, H J ; van der Jagt, E J ; van Klaveren, R J ; Oudkerk, M ; NELSON study group ; on behalf of the NELSON study group</creatorcontrib><description>The purpose of this study was to prospectively determine the frequency and spectrum of incidental findings (IFs) and their clinical implications in a high risk population for lung cancer undergoing low-dose multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) screening for lung cancer. Scans of 1,929 participants were evaluated for lung lesions and IFs by two radiologists. IFs were categorised as not clinically relevant or possibly clinically relevant. Findings were considered possibly clinically relevant if they could require further evaluation or could have substantial clinical implications. All possibly clinically relevant IFs were reviewed by a third radiologist, who determined its clinical relevance. Of all 1,929 participants, 1,410 (73%) had not clinically relevant IFs and 163 (8%) had possibly clinically relevant IFs of which 129 (79%) were indeed considered clinically relevant. Additional imaging was performed mainly by ultrasound (112 of 118, 96%). All but one lesion were concluded to be benign, mostly cysts (n = 115, 80%). Only 21 (1%) participants had findings with clinical implications. In one participant a malignancy was found, yet without any clinical benefit since no curative treatment was possible. Based on our results, we advise against systematically searching for and reporting of IFs in lung cancer screening studies using low-dose MDCT.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0938-7994</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1084</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00330-006-0532-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17206426</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany: Springer Nature B.V</publisher><subject>Aged ; Cancer screening ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Computed tomography ; Female ; Humans ; Incidental Findings ; Lesions ; Lung cancer ; Lung Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Male ; Malignancy ; Mass Screening - methods ; Medical screening ; Middle Aged ; Multicenter Studies as Topic ; Netherlands ; Population studies ; Prospective Studies ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Searching ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods ; Ultrasonography</subject><ispartof>European radiology, 2007-06, Vol.17 (6), p.1474-1482</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2007.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-2e2192f6fe8e2649c6caac6fcb40809d70c3f3def4a09cc19e59e0ac59b31293</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-2e2192f6fe8e2649c6caac6fcb40809d70c3f3def4a09cc19e59e0ac59b31293</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17206426$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>van de Wiel, J C M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, D M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Zaag-Loonen, H J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Jagt, E J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Klaveren, R J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oudkerk, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>NELSON study group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the NELSON study group</creatorcontrib><title>Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT</title><title>European radiology</title><addtitle>Eur Radiol</addtitle><description>The purpose of this study was to prospectively determine the frequency and spectrum of incidental findings (IFs) and their clinical implications in a high risk population for lung cancer undergoing low-dose multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) screening for lung cancer. Scans of 1,929 participants were evaluated for lung lesions and IFs by two radiologists. IFs were categorised as not clinically relevant or possibly clinically relevant. Findings were considered possibly clinically relevant if they could require further evaluation or could have substantial clinical implications. All possibly clinically relevant IFs were reviewed by a third radiologist, who determined its clinical relevance. Of all 1,929 participants, 1,410 (73%) had not clinically relevant IFs and 163 (8%) had possibly clinically relevant IFs of which 129 (79%) were indeed considered clinically relevant. Additional imaging was performed mainly by ultrasound (112 of 118, 96%). All but one lesion were concluded to be benign, mostly cysts (n = 115, 80%). Only 21 (1%) participants had findings with clinical implications. In one participant a malignancy was found, yet without any clinical benefit since no curative treatment was possible. Based on our results, we advise against systematically searching for and reporting of IFs in lung cancer screening studies using low-dose MDCT.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cancer screening</subject><subject>Chi-Square Distribution</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incidental Findings</subject><subject>Lesions</subject><subject>Lung cancer</subject><subject>Lung Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Malignancy</subject><subject>Mass Screening - methods</subject><subject>Medical screening</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Multicenter Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Netherlands</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Searching</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><subject>Ultrasonography</subject><issn>0938-7994</issn><issn>1432-1084</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkUGLFDEQhYMo7uzqD_AiAUH00FrpZDqdo467KgyzB-ce0unKTJZMek3SiH_DX2yaGRA8VfF476uCR8grBh8YgPyYATiHBqBrYM3bRj4hKybqwqAXT8kKFO8bqZS4Itc5PwCAYkI-J1dMttCJtluRPzs8BLTFDAHpgBGdL3RyNKNJ9ujjgbopUR-tHzEWE6jzcaxyrhotR6Rf5mKPzWcMB28iDXNNWBMtJpptQowLoiRfk-92t9sf97v3dM6LGKZfzThlpKc5lEov9Yt6arN_QZ45EzK-vMwbsr-73W--Ndv7r983n7aN5YqXpsWWqdZ1DntsO6FsZ42xnbODgB7UKMFyx0d0woCylilcKwRj12rgrFX8hrw9Yx_T9HPGXPTJZ4shmIjTnLUE0bcgu2p885_xYZpTrK_pCpL1WidkdbGzy6Yp54ROPyZ_Mum3ZqCXtvS5LV3b0ktbesm8vpDn4YTjv8SlHv4Xh-GRLQ</recordid><startdate>20070601</startdate><enddate>20070601</enddate><creator>van de Wiel, J C M</creator><creator>Wang, Y</creator><creator>Xu, D M</creator><creator>van der Zaag-Loonen, H J</creator><creator>van der Jagt, E J</creator><creator>van Klaveren, R J</creator><creator>Oudkerk, M</creator><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070601</creationdate><title>Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT</title><author>van de Wiel, J C M ; Wang, Y ; Xu, D M ; van der Zaag-Loonen, H J ; van der Jagt, E J ; van Klaveren, R J ; Oudkerk, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-2e2192f6fe8e2649c6caac6fcb40809d70c3f3def4a09cc19e59e0ac59b31293</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cancer screening</topic><topic>Chi-Square Distribution</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incidental Findings</topic><topic>Lesions</topic><topic>Lung cancer</topic><topic>Lung Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Malignancy</topic><topic>Mass Screening - methods</topic><topic>Medical screening</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Multicenter Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Netherlands</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Searching</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><topic>Ultrasonography</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>van de Wiel, J C M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, D M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Zaag-Loonen, H J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Jagt, E J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Klaveren, R J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oudkerk, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>NELSON study group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the NELSON study group</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>van de Wiel, J C M</au><au>Wang, Y</au><au>Xu, D M</au><au>van der Zaag-Loonen, H J</au><au>van der Jagt, E J</au><au>van Klaveren, R J</au><au>Oudkerk, M</au><aucorp>NELSON study group</aucorp><aucorp>on behalf of the NELSON study group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT</atitle><jtitle>European radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur Radiol</addtitle><date>2007-06-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1474</spage><epage>1482</epage><pages>1474-1482</pages><issn>0938-7994</issn><eissn>1432-1084</eissn><abstract>The purpose of this study was to prospectively determine the frequency and spectrum of incidental findings (IFs) and their clinical implications in a high risk population for lung cancer undergoing low-dose multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) screening for lung cancer. Scans of 1,929 participants were evaluated for lung lesions and IFs by two radiologists. IFs were categorised as not clinically relevant or possibly clinically relevant. Findings were considered possibly clinically relevant if they could require further evaluation or could have substantial clinical implications. All possibly clinically relevant IFs were reviewed by a third radiologist, who determined its clinical relevance. Of all 1,929 participants, 1,410 (73%) had not clinically relevant IFs and 163 (8%) had possibly clinically relevant IFs of which 129 (79%) were indeed considered clinically relevant. Additional imaging was performed mainly by ultrasound (112 of 118, 96%). All but one lesion were concluded to be benign, mostly cysts (n = 115, 80%). Only 21 (1%) participants had findings with clinical implications. In one participant a malignancy was found, yet without any clinical benefit since no curative treatment was possible. Based on our results, we advise against systematically searching for and reporting of IFs in lung cancer screening studies using low-dose MDCT.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pub>Springer Nature B.V</pub><pmid>17206426</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00330-006-0532-7</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0938-7994 |
ispartof | European radiology, 2007-06, Vol.17 (6), p.1474-1482 |
issn | 0938-7994 1432-1084 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70482076 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink (Online service) |
subjects | Aged Cancer screening Chi-Square Distribution Computed tomography Female Humans Incidental Findings Lesions Lung cancer Lung Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Male Malignancy Mass Screening - methods Medical screening Middle Aged Multicenter Studies as Topic Netherlands Population studies Prospective Studies Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Searching Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods Ultrasonography |
title | Neglectable benefit of searching for incidental findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON) using low-dose multidetector CT |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T20%3A36%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Neglectable%20benefit%20of%20searching%20for%20incidental%20findings%20in%20the%20Dutch-Belgian%20lung%20cancer%20screening%20trial%20(NELSON)%20using%20low-dose%20multidetector%20CT&rft.jtitle=European%20radiology&rft.au=van%20de%20Wiel,%20J%20C%20M&rft.aucorp=NELSON%20study%20group&rft.date=2007-06-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1474&rft.epage=1482&rft.pages=1474-1482&rft.issn=0938-7994&rft.eissn=1432-1084&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00330-006-0532-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3127408647%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3127408647&rft_id=info:pmid/17206426&rfr_iscdi=true |