Cargando…

Analysis of lung cancer risk model (PLCO(M2012) and LLP(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme

INTRODUCTION: Low-dose CT (LDCT) screening of high-risk smokers reduces lung cancer (LC) specific mortality. Determining screening eligibility using individualised risk may improve screening effectiveness and reduce harm. Here, we compare the performance of two risk prediction models (PLCO(M2012) an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lebrett, Mikey B, Balata, Haval, Evison, Matthew, Colligan, Denis, Duerden, Rebecca, Elton, Peter, Greaves, Melanie, Howells, John, Irion, Klaus, Karunaratne, Devinda, Lyons, Judith, Mellor, Stuart, Myerscough, Amanda, Newton, Tom, Sharman, Anna, Smith, Elaine, Taylor, Ben, Taylor, Sarah, Walsham, Anna, Whittaker, James, Barber, Phil V, Tonge, Janet, Robbins, Hilary A, Booton, Richard, Crosbie, Philip A J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7402560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32631933
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-214626
_version_ 1783566782999560192
author Lebrett, Mikey B
Balata, Haval
Evison, Matthew
Colligan, Denis
Duerden, Rebecca
Elton, Peter
Greaves, Melanie
Howells, John
Irion, Klaus
Karunaratne, Devinda
Lyons, Judith
Mellor, Stuart
Myerscough, Amanda
Newton, Tom
Sharman, Anna
Smith, Elaine
Taylor, Ben
Taylor, Sarah
Walsham, Anna
Whittaker, James
Barber, Phil V
Tonge, Janet
Robbins, Hilary A
Booton, Richard
Crosbie, Philip A J
author_facet Lebrett, Mikey B
Balata, Haval
Evison, Matthew
Colligan, Denis
Duerden, Rebecca
Elton, Peter
Greaves, Melanie
Howells, John
Irion, Klaus
Karunaratne, Devinda
Lyons, Judith
Mellor, Stuart
Myerscough, Amanda
Newton, Tom
Sharman, Anna
Smith, Elaine
Taylor, Ben
Taylor, Sarah
Walsham, Anna
Whittaker, James
Barber, Phil V
Tonge, Janet
Robbins, Hilary A
Booton, Richard
Crosbie, Philip A J
author_sort Lebrett, Mikey B
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Low-dose CT (LDCT) screening of high-risk smokers reduces lung cancer (LC) specific mortality. Determining screening eligibility using individualised risk may improve screening effectiveness and reduce harm. Here, we compare the performance of two risk prediction models (PLCO(M2012) and Liverpool Lung Project model (LLP(v2))) and National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) eligibility criteria in a community-based screening programme. METHODS: Ever-smokers aged 55–74, from deprived areas of Manchester, were invited to a Lung Health Check (LHC). Individuals at higher risk (PLCO(M2012) score ≥1.51%) were offered annual LDCT screening over two rounds. LLP(v2) score was calculated but not used for screening selection; ≥2.5% and ≥5% thresholds were used for analysis. RESULTS: PLCO(M2012) ≥1.51% selected 56% (n=1429) of LHC attendees for screening. LLP(v2) ≥2.5% also selected 56% (n=1430) whereas NLST (47%, n=1188) and LLP(v2) ≥5% (33%, n=826) selected fewer. Over two screening rounds 62 individuals were diagnosed with LC; representing 87% (n=62/71) of 6-year incidence predicted by mean PLCO(M2012) score (5.0%). 26% (n=16/62) of individuals with LC were not eligible for screening using LLP(v2) ≥5%, 18% (n=11/62) with NLST criteria and 7% (n=5/62) with LLP(v2) ≥2.5%. NLST eligible Manchester attendees had 2.5 times the LC detection rate than NLST participants after two annual screens (≈4.3% (n=51/1188) vs 1.7% (n=438/26 309); p<0.0001). Adverse measures of health, including airflow obstruction, respiratory symptoms and cardiovascular disease, were positively correlated with LC risk. Coronary artery calcification was predictive of LC ((adj)OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.11 to 5.64; p=0.028). CONCLUSION: Prospective comparisons of risk prediction tools are required to optimise screening selection in different settings. The PLCO(M2012) model may underestimate risk in deprived UK populations; further research focused on model calibration is required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7402560
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74025602020-08-17 Analysis of lung cancer risk model (PLCO(M2012) and LLP(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme Lebrett, Mikey B Balata, Haval Evison, Matthew Colligan, Denis Duerden, Rebecca Elton, Peter Greaves, Melanie Howells, John Irion, Klaus Karunaratne, Devinda Lyons, Judith Mellor, Stuart Myerscough, Amanda Newton, Tom Sharman, Anna Smith, Elaine Taylor, Ben Taylor, Sarah Walsham, Anna Whittaker, James Barber, Phil V Tonge, Janet Robbins, Hilary A Booton, Richard Crosbie, Philip A J Thorax Lung Cancer INTRODUCTION: Low-dose CT (LDCT) screening of high-risk smokers reduces lung cancer (LC) specific mortality. Determining screening eligibility using individualised risk may improve screening effectiveness and reduce harm. Here, we compare the performance of two risk prediction models (PLCO(M2012) and Liverpool Lung Project model (LLP(v2))) and National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) eligibility criteria in a community-based screening programme. METHODS: Ever-smokers aged 55–74, from deprived areas of Manchester, were invited to a Lung Health Check (LHC). Individuals at higher risk (PLCO(M2012) score ≥1.51%) were offered annual LDCT screening over two rounds. LLP(v2) score was calculated but not used for screening selection; ≥2.5% and ≥5% thresholds were used for analysis. RESULTS: PLCO(M2012) ≥1.51% selected 56% (n=1429) of LHC attendees for screening. LLP(v2) ≥2.5% also selected 56% (n=1430) whereas NLST (47%, n=1188) and LLP(v2) ≥5% (33%, n=826) selected fewer. Over two screening rounds 62 individuals were diagnosed with LC; representing 87% (n=62/71) of 6-year incidence predicted by mean PLCO(M2012) score (5.0%). 26% (n=16/62) of individuals with LC were not eligible for screening using LLP(v2) ≥5%, 18% (n=11/62) with NLST criteria and 7% (n=5/62) with LLP(v2) ≥2.5%. NLST eligible Manchester attendees had 2.5 times the LC detection rate than NLST participants after two annual screens (≈4.3% (n=51/1188) vs 1.7% (n=438/26 309); p<0.0001). Adverse measures of health, including airflow obstruction, respiratory symptoms and cardiovascular disease, were positively correlated with LC risk. Coronary artery calcification was predictive of LC ((adj)OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.11 to 5.64; p=0.028). CONCLUSION: Prospective comparisons of risk prediction tools are required to optimise screening selection in different settings. The PLCO(M2012) model may underestimate risk in deprived UK populations; further research focused on model calibration is required. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-08 2020-07-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7402560/ /pubmed/32631933 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-214626 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Lung Cancer
Lebrett, Mikey B
Balata, Haval
Evison, Matthew
Colligan, Denis
Duerden, Rebecca
Elton, Peter
Greaves, Melanie
Howells, John
Irion, Klaus
Karunaratne, Devinda
Lyons, Judith
Mellor, Stuart
Myerscough, Amanda
Newton, Tom
Sharman, Anna
Smith, Elaine
Taylor, Ben
Taylor, Sarah
Walsham, Anna
Whittaker, James
Barber, Phil V
Tonge, Janet
Robbins, Hilary A
Booton, Richard
Crosbie, Philip A J
Analysis of lung cancer risk model (PLCO(M2012) and LLP(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme
title Analysis of lung cancer risk model (PLCO(M2012) and LLP(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme
title_full Analysis of lung cancer risk model (PLCO(M2012) and LLP(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme
title_fullStr Analysis of lung cancer risk model (PLCO(M2012) and LLP(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of lung cancer risk model (PLCO(M2012) and LLP(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme
title_short Analysis of lung cancer risk model (PLCO(M2012) and LLP(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme
title_sort analysis of lung cancer risk model (plco(m2012) and llp(v2)) performance in a community-based lung cancer screening programme
topic Lung Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7402560/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32631933
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-214626
work_keys_str_mv AT lebrettmikeyb analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT balatahaval analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT evisonmatthew analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT colligandenis analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT duerdenrebecca analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT eltonpeter analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT greavesmelanie analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT howellsjohn analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT irionklaus analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT karunaratnedevinda analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT lyonsjudith analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT mellorstuart analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT myerscoughamanda analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT newtontom analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT sharmananna analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT smithelaine analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT taylorben analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT taylorsarah analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT walshamanna analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT whittakerjames analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT barberphilv analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT tongejanet analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT robbinshilarya analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT bootonrichard analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme
AT crosbiephilipaj analysisoflungcancerriskmodelplcom2012andllpv2performanceinacommunitybasedlungcancerscreeningprogramme