open access

Vol 86, No 1 (2018)
GUIDELINES
Published online: 2018-02-28
Submitted: 2017-09-12
Accepted: 2018-01-26
Get Citation

Consensus statement on a screening programme for the detection of early lung cancer in Poland

Witold Rzyman, Joanna Didkowska, Robert Dziedzic, Tomasz Grodzki, Tadeusz Orłowski, Edyta Szurowska, Renata Langfort, Wojciech Biernat, Dariusz Kowalski, Wojciech Dyszkiewicz, Tadeusz Jędrzejczyk, Tomasz Zdrojewski, Sergiusz Nawrocki, Ewa Jassem, Mariusz Adamek
DOI: 10.5603/ARM.2018.0009
·
Pubmed: 29490422
·
Adv Respir Med 2018;86(1):53-74.

open access

Vol 86, No 1 (2018)
GUIDELINES
Published online: 2018-02-28
Submitted: 2017-09-12
Accepted: 2018-01-26

Abstract

Introduction: Lung cancer is the most common cancer in Poland and worldwide, and the leading cause of cancer-related deaths.
Compared to the present day, the annual number of new cases of lung cancer will have increased by approximately 50%, by 2030.
The overall ratio of mortality to incidence totals 0.87 and is among the highest. The five-year survival rate in Poland has recently
achieved 13.4%. In 2015, lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was introduced to routine clinical
practice in the United States following the publication of the largest randomised study, The National Lung Screening Trial. The
implementation of screening programmes in Poland and the rest of Europe also seems unavoidable. Due to the differences, both
in the socioeconomic considerations and healthcare funding, compared to that in the United States, the current approach comes
down to the awaited results of the European randomised study, NELSON.

Material and methods: During the meeting of an expert panel at the “Torakoneptunalia 2016” conference in Jastarnia, Poland,
a decision was made to summarise and publish the current data on LDCT lung cancer screening in the form of recommendations,
or a position statement. The document was prepared by a team composed of a radiologist, thoracic surgeons, pulmonologists,
clinical oncologists, epidemiologists, internists, health prevention specialists and pathologists. It reflects the current body of
knowledge about lung cancer, its diagnosis and treatment, and provides recommendations on early detection of lung cancer using
LDCT. The recommendations address the screening procedure, the requirements for the teams conducting the screening, and the
requirements for radiologists, pathologists and surgeons involved in the diagnosis and treatment of patients.

Results: While awaiting the results of the NELSON study and the European position statement on lung cancer screening methodology,
the multidisciplinary group of experts presents their position, laying grounds for the development of an action plan for
early detection of lung cancer in the upcoming future in Poland.

Conclusions: Primary and secondary prophylaxis are the principal ways to reduce lung cancer mortality. While smoking cessation is a task
of utmost importance, it must be accompanied by an effective screening programme if the outcome of the disease is to be improved.

Abstract

Introduction: Lung cancer is the most common cancer in Poland and worldwide, and the leading cause of cancer-related deaths.
Compared to the present day, the annual number of new cases of lung cancer will have increased by approximately 50%, by 2030.
The overall ratio of mortality to incidence totals 0.87 and is among the highest. The five-year survival rate in Poland has recently
achieved 13.4%. In 2015, lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was introduced to routine clinical
practice in the United States following the publication of the largest randomised study, The National Lung Screening Trial. The
implementation of screening programmes in Poland and the rest of Europe also seems unavoidable. Due to the differences, both
in the socioeconomic considerations and healthcare funding, compared to that in the United States, the current approach comes
down to the awaited results of the European randomised study, NELSON.

Material and methods: During the meeting of an expert panel at the “Torakoneptunalia 2016” conference in Jastarnia, Poland,
a decision was made to summarise and publish the current data on LDCT lung cancer screening in the form of recommendations,
or a position statement. The document was prepared by a team composed of a radiologist, thoracic surgeons, pulmonologists,
clinical oncologists, epidemiologists, internists, health prevention specialists and pathologists. It reflects the current body of
knowledge about lung cancer, its diagnosis and treatment, and provides recommendations on early detection of lung cancer using
LDCT. The recommendations address the screening procedure, the requirements for the teams conducting the screening, and the
requirements for radiologists, pathologists and surgeons involved in the diagnosis and treatment of patients.

Results: While awaiting the results of the NELSON study and the European position statement on lung cancer screening methodology,
the multidisciplinary group of experts presents their position, laying grounds for the development of an action plan for
early detection of lung cancer in the upcoming future in Poland.

Conclusions: Primary and secondary prophylaxis are the principal ways to reduce lung cancer mortality. While smoking cessation is a task
of utmost importance, it must be accompanied by an effective screening programme if the outcome of the disease is to be improved.

Get Citation

Keywords

lung cancer screening, early detection, secondary prophylaxis

Supplementary Files (1)
Wytyczne i zalecenia zespołu ekspertów dotyczące wykrywania wczesnego raka płuca w Polsce
Download
279KB
About this article
Title

Consensus statement on a screening programme for the detection of early lung cancer in Poland

Journal

Advances in Respiratory Medicine

Issue

Vol 86, No 1 (2018)

Pages

53-74

Published online

2018-02-28

DOI

10.5603/ARM.2018.0009

Pubmed

29490422

Bibliographic record

Adv Respir Med 2018;86(1):53-74.

Keywords

lung cancer screening
early detection
secondary prophylaxis

Authors

Witold Rzyman
Joanna Didkowska
Robert Dziedzic
Tomasz Grodzki
Tadeusz Orłowski
Edyta Szurowska
Renata Langfort
Wojciech Biernat
Dariusz Kowalski
Wojciech Dyszkiewicz
Tadeusz Jędrzejczyk
Tomasz Zdrojewski
Sergiusz Nawrocki
Ewa Jassem
Mariusz Adamek

References (121)
  1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase, Lyon, Fr Int Agency Res Cancer. 2013; 11. http://globocan.iarc.f. doi:10.1016/j.ucl.2013.01.011 (2013).
  2. Thun MJ, Henley SJ, Burns D, et al. Lung cancer death rates in lifelong nonsmokers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98(10): 691–699.
  3. Couraud S, Souquet PJ, Paris C, et al. French Cooperative Intergroup IFCT. BioCAST/IFCT-1002: epidemiological and molecular features of lung cancer in never-smokers. Eur Respir J. 2015; 45(5): 1403–1414.
  4. Levi F, Lucchini F, Negri E, et al. The end of the tobacco-related lung cancer epidemic in Europe. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003; 95(8): 631–632.
  5. Malvezzi M, Bertuccio P, Rosso T, et al. European cancer mortality predictions for the year 2015: does lung cancer have the highest death rate in EU women? Ann Oncol. 2015; 26(4): 779–786.
  6. Novello S, Barlesi F, Califano R, et al. Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†. Annals of Oncology. 2016; 27(suppl_5): v1–v27.
  7. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015; 65(2): 87–108.
  8. Wojciechowska U, Didkowska J. Nowotwory w Polsce w 2012 roku. Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology. 2013; 63(3): 197–216.
  9. Doll R, Hill AB, DOLL R, et al. Smoking and carcinoma of the lung; preliminary report. Br Med J. 1950; 2(4682): 739–748.
  10. Boyland E, Roe FJ, Gorrod JW. Induction of pulmonary tumours in mice by nitrosonornicotine, a possible constituent of tobacco smoke. Nature. 1964; 202: 1126.
  11. Doll R, Peto R. Cigarette smoking and bronchial carcinoma: dose and time relationships among regular smokers and lifelong non-smokers. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1978; 32(4): 303–313.
  12. Lopez AD, Collishaw NE, Piha T. A descriptive model of the cigarette epidemic in developed countries. Tobacco Control. 1994; 3(3): 242–247.
  13. Didkowska J, Wojciechowska U, Koskinen HL, et al. Future lung cancer incidence in Poland and Finland based on forecasts on hypothetical changes in smoking habits. Acta Oncol. 2011; 50(1): 81–87.
  14. Allemani C, Weir HK, Carreira H, et al. CONCORD Working Group. Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995-2009: analysis of individual data for 25,676,887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2). Lancet. 2015; 385(9972): 977–1010.
  15. DeVita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA. Cancer: principles and practice of oncology collections. Climate Change 2013 ― The Physical Science Basis. 2005: 1–30.
  16. Krzakowski M, Potemski P, Warzocha K, et al. Nowotwory płuca, opłucnej i śródpiersia. Onkol Klin. : 523–571.
  17. Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Akerley W, et al. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 4.2016. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016; 14(3): 255–264.
  18. Sartori G, Cavazza A, Sgambato A, et al. EGFR and K-ras mutations along the spectrum of pulmonary epithelial tumors of the lung and elaboration of a combined clinicopathologic and molecular scoring system to predict clinical responsiveness to EGFR inhibitors. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009; 131(4): 478–489.
  19. Takahashi T, Sonobe M, Kobayashi M, et al. Clinicopathologic features of non-small-cell lung cancer with EML4-ALK fusion gene. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010; 17(3): 889–897.
  20. Slebos RJ, Hruban RH, Dalesio O, et al. Relationship between K-ras oncogene activation and smoking in adenocarcinoma of the human lung. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1991; 83(14): 1024–1027.
  21. Wilson JM, Jungner YG. [Principles and practice of mass screening for disease]. Bol Oficina Sanit Panam. 1968; 65(4): 281–393.
  22. Law MR, Morris JK, Watt HC, et al. The dose-response relationship between cigarette consumption, biochemical markers and risk of lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 1997; 75(11): 1690–1693.
  23. Oken M, Hocking W, Kvale P, et al. Screening by Chest Radiograph and Lung Cancer Mortality. JAMA. 2011; 306(17): 1865–1873.
  24. Kubo T, Lin PJP, Stiller W, et al. Radiation dose reduction in chest CT: a review. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 190(2): 335–343.
  25. Lee JiY, Chung MJ, Yi CA, et al. Ultra-low-dose MDCT of the chest: influence on automated lung nodule detection. Korean J Radiol. 2008; 9(2): 95–101.
  26. Marshall HM, Bowman RV, Yang IA, et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: a review of current status. J Thorac Dis. 2013; 5 Suppl 5: S524–S539.
  27. Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Libby DM, et al. International Early Lung Cancer Action Program Investigators. Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355(17): 1763–1771.
  28. Moyer VA. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160(5): 330–338.
  29. Horeweg N, van der Aalst CM, Thunnissen E, et al. Characteristics of lung cancers detected by computer tomography screening in the randomized NELSON trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013; 187(8): 848–854.
  30. Kauczor HU, Bonomo L, Gaga M, et al. European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Respiratory Society (ERS), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Respiratory Society (ERS). ESR/ERS white paper on lung cancer screening. Eur Radiol. 2015; 25(9): 2519–2531.
  31. Pedersen JH, Rzyman W, Veronesi G, et al. Recommendations from the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) regarding computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Europe. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017; 51(3): 411–420.
  32. Field JK, Duffy SW, Baldwin DR, et al. UK Lung Cancer RCT Pilot Screening Trial: baseline findings from the screening arm provide evidence for the potential implementation of lung cancer screening. Thorax. 2016; 71(2): 161–170.
  33. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365(5): 395–409.
  34. Sverzellati N, Silva M, Calareso G, et al. Low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening: comparison of performance between annual and biennial screen. Eur Radiol. 2016; 26(11): 3821–3829.
  35. Paci E, Puliti D, Lopes Pegna A, et al. the ITALUNG Working Group. Mortality, survival and incidence rates in the ITALUNG randomised lung cancer screening trial. Thorax. 2017; 72(9): 825–831.
  36. Infante M, Cavuto S, Lutman FR, et al. DANTE Study Group. Long-Term Follow-up Results of the DANTE Trial, a Randomized Study of Lung Cancer Screening with Spiral Computed Tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015; 191(10): 1166–1175.
  37. Wille MMW, Dirksen A, Ashraf H, et al. Results of the Randomized Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial with Focus on High-Risk Profiling. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016; 193(5): 542–551.
  38. van Klaveren RJ, Oudkerk M, Prokop M, et al. Management of lung nodules detected by volume CT scanning. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361(23): 2221–2229.
  39. Rzyman W, Jelitto-Gorska M, Dziedzic R, et al. Diagnostic work-up and surgery in participants of the Gdansk lung cancer screening programme: the incidence of surgery for non-malignant conditions. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2013; 17(6): 969–973.
  40. Rzyman W, Dziedzic R, Jelitto-Górska M, et al. Results of an open-access lung cancer screening program with low-dose computed tomography: the Gdańsk experience. Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2015; 125(4): 232–239.
  41. Frauenfelder T, Puhan MA, Lazor R, et al. expert panel. Early detection of lung cancer: a statement from an expert panel of the Swiss university hospitals on lung cancer screening. Respiration. 2014; 87(3): 254–264.
  42. Vansteenkiste J, Crinò L, Dooms C, et al. Panel Members. 2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer: early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer consensus on diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2014; 25(8): 1462–1474.
  43. Baldwin DR, Callister ME. The British Thoracic Society guidelines on the investigation and management of pulmonary nodules. Thorax. 2015; 70 (8): 794–798.
  44. Oudkerk M, Devaraj A, Vliegenthart R, et al. European position statement on lung cancer screening. Lancet Oncol. 2017; 18(12): e754–e766.
  45. European Commission. 2009.
  46. McKee BJ, Regis SM, McKee AB, et al. Performance of ACR Lung-RADS in a clinical CT lung screening program. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015; 12(3): 273–276.
  47. Pinsky PF, Gierada DS, Black W, et al. Performance of Lung-RADS in the National Lung Screening Trial: a retrospective assessment. Ann Intern Med. 2015; 162(7): 485–491.
  48. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2016. Cancer Facts Fig 2016. 2016: 1–9. doi:10.1097/01.NNR.0000289503.22414.79. 2016.
  49. Crestanello JA, Allen MS, Jett JR, et al. Thoracic surgical operations in patients enrolled in a computed tomographic screening trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004; 128(2): 254–259.
  50. Horeweg N, van der Aalst CM, Vliegenthart R, et al. Volumetric computed tomography screening for lung cancer: three rounds of the NELSON trial. Eur Respir J. 2013; 42(6): 1659–1667.
  51. Rampinelli C, De Marco P, Origgi D, et al. Exposure to low dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening and risk of cancer: secondary analysis of trial data and risk-benefit analysis. BMJ. 2017; 356: j347.
  52. Patz EF, Pinsky P, Gatsonis C, et al. NLST Overdiagnosis Manuscript Writing Team. Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA Intern Med. 2014; 174(2): 269–274.
  53. Gareen IF, Duan F, Greco EM, et al. Impact of lung cancer screening results on participant health-related quality of life and state anxiety in the National Lung Screening Trial. Cancer. 2014; 120(21): 3401–3409.
  54. van den Bergh KAM, Essink-Bot ML, Bunge EM, et al. Impact of computed tomography screening for lung cancer on participants in a randomized controlled trial (NELSON trial). Cancer. 2008; 113(2): 396–404.
  55. Rocco G, Allen MS, Altorki NK, et al. Clinical statement on the role of the surgeon and surgical issues relating to computed tomography screening programs for lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013; 96(1): 357–360.
  56. Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADSTM). Am Coll Radiol. http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Resources/LungRA.
  57. Fintelmann FJ, Bernheim A, Digumarthy SR, et al. The 10 Pillars of Lung Cancer Screening: Rationale and Logistics of a Lung Cancer Screening Program. Radiographics. 2015; 35(7): 1893–1908.
  58. Mazzone P, Powell C, Arenberg D, et al. Components Necessary for High-Quality Lung Cancer Screening. Chest. 2015; 147(2): 295–303.
  59. McMahon PM, Kong CY, Bouzan C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening for lung cancer in the United States. J Thorac Oncol. 2011; 6(11): 1841–1848.
  60. Goffin JR, Flanagan WM, Miller AB, et al. Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening in Canada. JAMA Oncol. 2015; 1(6): 807–813.
  61. Pedersen JH, Tønnesen P, Ashraf H. Smoking cessation and lung cancer screening. Ann Transl Med. 2016; 4: 157.
  62. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet. 1999; 354(9173): 99–105.
  63. Yankelevitz DF, Reeves AP, Kostis WJ, et al. Small pulmonary nodules: volumetrically determined growth rates based on CT evaluation. Radiology. 2000; 217(1): 251–256.
  64. Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Libby DM, et al. Early lung cancer action project: annual screening using single-slice helical CT. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001; 952: 124–134.
  65. Croswell JM, Baker SG, Marcus PM, et al. Cumulative incidence of false-positive test results in lung cancer screening: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2010; 152(8): 505–12, W176.
  66. Kazerooni EA, Austin JHM, Black WC, et al. American College of Radiology, Society of Thoracic Radiology. ACR-STR practice parameter for the performance and reporting of lung cancer screening thoracic computed tomography (CT): 2014 (Resolution 4). J Thorac Imaging. 2014; 29(5): 310–316.
  67. Fujita M, Higaki T, Awaya Y, et al. Lung cancer screening with ultra-low dose CT using full iterative reconstruction. Jpn J Radiol. 2017; 35(4): 179–189.
  68. Berrington de González A, Kim KP, Berg CD. Low-dose lung computed tomography screening before age 55: estimates of the mortality reduction required to outweigh the radiation-induced cancer risk. J Med Screen. 2008; 15(3): 153–158.
  69. Lung Cancer Screen Protoc Am Assoc Phys Med. http://www.aapm.org/pubs/CTProtocols/documents/LungCancerScreeningCT.pdf.
  70. Decis Memo Screen Lung Cancer with Low Dose Comput Tomogr (LDCT) (CAG-00439N) Centers Medicare Medicaid Serv. http://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=274.
  71. Donnelly EF. Technical parameters and interpretive issues in screening computed tomography scans for lung cancer. J Thorac Imaging. 2012; 27(4): 224–229.
  72. Gietema HA, Wang Y, Xu D, et al. Pulmonary nodules detected at lung cancer screening: interobserver variability of semiautomated volume measurements. Radiology. 2006; 241(1): 251–257.
  73. Horeweg N, van Rosmalen J, Heuvelmans MA, et al. Lung cancer probability in patients with CT-detected pulmonary nodules: a prespecified analysis of data from the NELSON trial of low-dose CT screening. Lancet Oncol. 2014; 15(12): 1332–1341.
  74. Walter JE, Heuvelmans MA, de Jong PA, et al. Occurrence and lung cancer probability of new solid nodules at incidence screening with low-dose CT: analysis of data from the randomised, controlled NELSON trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016; 17(7): 907–916.
  75. Herder GJ, van Tinteren H, Golding RP, et al. Clinical prediction model to characterize pulmonary nodules: validation and added value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Chest. 2005; 128(4): 2490–2496.
  76. McWilliams A, Tammemagi MC, Mayo JR, et al. Probability of cancer in pulmonary nodules detected on first screening CT. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369(10): 910–919.
  77. Shlomi D, Ben-Avi R, Balmor GR, et al. Screening for lung cancer: time for large-scale screening by chest computed tomography. Eur Respir J. 2014; 44(1): 217–238.
  78. Pyenson BS, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Offering lung cancer screening to high-risk medicare beneficiaries saves lives and is cost-effective: an actuarial analysis. Am Health Drug Benefits. 2014; 7(5): 272–282.
  79. Rubin GD. Lung nodule and cancer detection in computed tomography screening. J Thorac Imaging. 2015; 30(2): 130–138.
  80. Henschke CI, Yip R, Yankelevitz DF, et al. International Early Lung Cancer Action Program Investigators*. Definition of a positive test result in computed tomography screening for lung cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2013; 158(4): 246–252.
  81. Wood DE. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening. Thorac Surg Clin. 2015; 25: 185–197.
  82. Tammemägi MC, Church TR, Hocking WG, et al. Evaluation of the lung cancer risks at which to screen ever- and never-smokers: screening rules applied to the PLCO and NLST cohorts. PLoS Med. 2014; 11(12): e1001764.
  83. Tammemägi MC. Application of risk prediction models to lung cancer screening: a review. J Thorac Imaging. 2015; 30(2): 88–100.
  84. Mulshine JL, D'Amico TA. Issues with implementing a high-quality lung cancer screening program. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014; 64(5): 352–363.
  85. Silvestri GA, Vachani A, Whitney D, et al. AEGIS Study Team. A Bronchial Genomic Classifier for the Diagnostic Evaluation of Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015; 373(3): 243–251.
  86. Vachani A, Pass HI, Rom WN, et al. Validation of a multiprotein plasma classifier to identify benign lung nodules. J Thorac Oncol. 2015; 10(4): 629–637.
  87. Atwater T, Massion PP. Biomarkers of risk to develop lung cancer in the new screening era. Ann Transl Med. 2016; 4(8): 158.
  88. Didkowska J, Wojciechowska U, Mańczuk M, et al. Lung cancer epidemiology: contemporary and future challenges worldwide. Ann Transl Med. 2016; 4(8): 150.
  89. Adamek M, Wachuła E, Szabłowska-Siwik S, et al. Risk factors assessment and risk prediction models in lung cancer screening candidates. Ann Transl Med. 2016; 4(8): 151.
  90. de Koning HJ, Meza R, Plevritis SK, et al. Benefits and harms of computed tomography lung cancer screening strategies: a comparative modeling study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160(5): 311–320.
  91. https://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm/tools-and-resources/patient-decision-aids/lung-cancer-screening/.
  92. Quaife SL, Janes SM. Lung cancer screening: improving understanding of the psychological impact. Thorax. 2016; 71(11): 971–972.
  93. Zeliadt SB, Heffner JL, Sayre G, et al. Attitudes and Perceptions About Smoking Cessation in the Context of Lung Cancer Screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2015; 175(9): 1530–1537.
  94. Swamy L, Sloan KA, Fitzgerald C, et al. Identifying Clinician Barriers To Improve Smoking Cessation Integration Within A Lung Cancer Screening Program At An Urban Safety-Net Hospital. D22. REDUCING HARMS Tob. USE. Am Thorac Soc. 2016; 133: A6504–A6504.
  95. Goffin JR, Flanagan WM, Miller AB, et al. Biennial lung cancer screening in Canada with smoking cessation-outcomes and cost-effectiveness. Lung Cancer. 2016; 101: 98–103.
  96. Ashraf H, Dirksen A, Loft A, et al. Combined use of positron emission tomography and volume doubling time in lung cancer screening with low-dose CT scanning. Thorax. 2011; 66(4): 315–319.
  97. de Torres JP, Bastarrika G, Wisnivesky JP, et al. Assessing the relationship between lung cancer risk and emphysema detected on low-dose CT of the chest. Chest. 2007; 132(6): 1932–1938.
  98. Henschke CI, Yip R, Boffetta P, et al. I-ELCAP Investigators. CT screening for lung cancer: Importance of emphysema for never smokers and smokers. Lung Cancer. 2015; 88(1): 42–47.
  99. Flores R, Bauer T, Aye R, et al. I-ELCAP Investigators. Balancing curability and unnecessary surgery in the context of computed tomography screening for lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014; 147(5): 1619–1626.
  100. Eguchi T, Kadota K, Park BJ, et al. IASLC Pathology Committee, American Thoracic Society. International association for the study of lung cancer/american thoracic society/european respiratory society international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Oncol. 2011; 6(2): 244–285.
  101. Van Schil PE, Asamura H, Rusch VW, et al. Surgical implications of the new IASLC/ATS/ERS adenocarcinoma classification. Eur Respir J. 2012; 39(2): 478–486.
  102. Xu DM, Gietema H, de Koning H, et al. Nodule management protocol of the NELSON randomised lung cancer screening trial. Lung Cancer. 2006; 54(2): 177–184.
  103. Yip R, Yankelevitz DE, Henschke CI. CT screening for lung cancer: Definition of positive test result in the National Lung Screening Trial ct cohort compared with I-ELCAP. J Thorac Oncol. 2013; 8: S326.
  104. MacMahon H, Austin JHM, Gamsu G, et al. Fleischner Society. Guidelines for management of small pulmonary nodules detected on CT scans: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology. 2005; 237(2): 395–400.
  105. Naidich DP, Bankier AA, MacMahon H, et al. Recommendations for the management of subsolid pulmonary nodules detected at CT: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology. 2013; 266(1): 304–317.
  106. Kazerooni EA, Armstrong MR, Amorosa JK, et al. ACR CT Accreditation Program and the Lung Cancer Screening Program Designation. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016; 13(2 Suppl): R30–R34.
  107. Nicholson AG, Chansky K, Crowley J, et al. Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee, Advisory Boards, and Participating Institutions, Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee Advisory Boards and Participating Institutions. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for the Revision of the Clinical and Pathologic Staging of Small Cell Lung Cancer in the Forthcoming Eighth Edition of the TNM Classification for Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2016; 11(3): 300–311.
  108. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/lungb.html.
  109. Travis W, Brambilla E, Burke A, et al. WHO Classification on tumours of the lung, pleura, thymus and heart. Lyon: International Agency for Research oc Cancer. 2015; 48: S7.
  110. Travis WD, Asamura H, Bankier AA, et al. International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee and Advisory Board Members. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Coding T Categories for Subsolid Nodules and Assessment of Tumor Size in Part-Solid Tumors in the Forthcoming Eighth Edition of the TNM Classification of Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2016; 11(8): 1204–1223.
  111. Rami-Porta R. Staging handbook in thoracic oncology. IASLC. 2 ed North Fort Myers.
  112. Russell PA, Wainer Z, Wright GM, et al. Does lung adenocarcinoma subtype predict patient survival?: A clinicopathologic study based on the new International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society international multidisciplinary lung adenocarcinoma classification. J Thorac Oncol. 2011; 6(9): 1496–1504.
  113. Tsuta K, Kawago M, Inoue E, et al. The utility of the proposed IASLC/ATS/ERS lung adenocarcinoma subtypes for disease prognosis and correlation of driver gene alterations. Lung Cancer. 2013; 81(3): 371–376.
  114. Tsao AS, Scagliotti GV, Bunn PA, et al. Scientific Advances in Lung Cancer 2015. J Thorac Oncol. 2016; 11(5): 613–638.
  115. Pass HI, Beer DG, Joseph S, et al. Biomarkers and molecular testing for early detection, diagnosis, and therapeutic prediction of lung cancer. Thorac Surg Clin. 2013; 23(2): 211–224.
  116. Dacic S, Shuai Y, Yousem S, et al. Clinicopathological predictors of EGFR/KRAS mutational status in primary lung adenocarcinomas. Mod Pathol. 2010; 23(2): 159–168.
  117. World Health Organization, editor. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2010. 2011.
  118. Shemesh J. Coronary artery calcification in clinical practice: what we have learned and why should it routinely be reported on chest CT? Ann Transl Med. 2016; 4(8): 159.
  119. Greenland P, Alpert J, Beller G, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk in Asymptomatic Adults: Executive Summary. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2010; 56(25): 2182–2199.
  120. Perk J, De Backer G, Gohlke H. ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG)European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (version 2012). Eur Hear J. 2012; 33: 1635–1701.
  121. Gonzalez J, Marín M, Sánchez-Salcedo P, et al. Lung cancer screening in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ann Transl Med. 2016; 4(8): 160.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

Czasopismo Pneumonologia i Alergologia Polska dostęne jest również w Ikamed - księgarnia medyczna

Wydawcą serwisu jest "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl