Comparison of National Comprehensive Cancer Network and European Position Statement protocols for nodule management in low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening in a general Chinese population

Yihui Du, Yanju Li, Monique D. Dorrius, Grigory Sidorenkov, Marleen Vonder, Rozemarijn Vliegenthart, Marjolein A. Heuvelmans, Xiaonan Cui, Zhaoxiang Ye*, Geertruida H. de Bock

*Bijbehorende auteur voor dit werk

OnderzoeksoutputAcademicpeer review

33 Downloads (Pure)


Background: Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening often refers individuals to unnecessary examinations. This study aims to compare the European Position Statement (EUPS) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) protocols in management of participants at baseline screening round. Methods: LDCT lung cancer screening was prospectively performed in a Chinese asymptomatic population aged 40-74 years. A total of 1,000 consecutive baseline LDCT scans were read twice independently. All screen-detected lung nodules by the first reader were included. The first reader manually measured the diameter of lung nodules (NCCN protocol), and the second reader semi-automatically measured the volume and diameter (EUPS volume and diameter protocols). The protocols were used to classify the participants into three management groups: next screening round, short-term repeat LDCT scan and referral to a pulmonologist. Groups were compared using Wilcoxon test for paired samples. Number of lung cancers by protocols was provided. Results: Of the 1,000 participants (61.4 +/- 6.7 years old), 168 lung nodules in 124 participants were visually detected and manually measured in the first reading, and re-measured semi-automatically. Applying the NCCN protocol, EUPS volume and diameter protocol, the proportion of referrals among all participants was 0.6%, 1.9%, and 1.4%, respectively. The proportion of short-term repeat scans was 4.5%, 9.7% and 4.5%, respectively. Among the 10 lung cancer patients, one would have been diagnosed earlier if the EUPS volume protocol would have been followed. Conclusions: In a first round screening in a Chinese general population, the lower threshold for referral in the EUPS protocol as compared to the NCCN protocol, leads to more referrals to a pulmonologist, with the potential of earlier cancer diagnosis. The EUPS volume protocol recommends fewer participants to shortterm repeat LDCT scan than the EUPS diameter protocol. Follow-up studies should show the impact of both protocols on (interval) cancer diagnosis.

Originele taal-2English
Pagina's (van-tot)6855-6865
Aantal pagina's13
TijdschriftJournal of thoracic disease
Nummer van het tijdschrift12
Vroegere onlinedatum14-okt.-2021
StatusPublished - dec.-2021

Citeer dit