4.6 Article

Insights for Management of Ground-Glass Opacities From the National Lung Screening Trial

Journal

JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY
Volume 14, Issue 9, Pages 1662-1665

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.05.012

Keywords

Computed tomographic screening; Lung cancer screening; Malignancy probability; Nodule classification; Lung Computed Tomographic Screening Reporting and Data System; Ground-glass opacities; Risk-based screening

Funding

  1. Intramural Research Program of the U.S. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health
  2. National Cancer Institute Ruth L. Kirschstein individual predoctoral fellowship [F31CA210660]
  3. INTEGRAL program (National Cancer Institute) [U19 CA203654]
  4. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [ZIACP010181] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: In the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), screen-detected cancers that would not have been identified by the Lung Computed Tomographic Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) nodule management guidelines were frequently ground-glass opacities (GGOs). Lung-RADS suggests that GGOs with diameter less than 20 mm return for annual screening, and GGOs greater than or equal to 20 mm receive 6-month follow-up. We examined whether this 20-mm threshold gives consistent management of GGOs compared with solid nodules. Methods: First, we calculated diameter-specific malignancy probabilities for GGOs and solid nodules in the NLST. Using the solid-nodule malignancy risks as benchmarks, we suggested risk-based management categories for GGOs based on their probability of malignancy. Second, we compared lung-cancer mortality between GGOs and solid nodules in the same risk-based category. Results: Using the Lung-RADS v1.0 classifications, malignancy probability is higher for GGOs than solid nodules within the same category. A risk-based classification of GGOs would assign annual screening for GGOs 4 to 5 mm (0.4% malignancy risk); 6-month follow-up for GGOs 6 to 7 mm (1.1%), 8 to 14 mm (3.0%), and 15 to 19 mm (5.2%); and 3-month follow-up for greater than or equal to 20 mm (10.9%). This reclassification would have assigned similarly fatal cancers to 3-month follow-up (hazard ratio = 2.0 for lung-cancer death in GGOs versus solid-nodule cancers, 95% confidence interval: 0.4-8.7), but for 6-month followup, mortality was lower in GGO cancers (hazard ratio = 0.18, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.67). Conclusions: If Lung-RADS categories for GGOs were based on malignancy probability, then 6- to 19-mm GGOs would receive 6-month follow-up and greater than or equal to 20 mm GGOs would receive 3-month follow-up. Such risk-based management for GGOs could improve the sensitivity of Lung-RADS, especially for large GGO cancers. However, small GGO cancers were less aggressive than their solid-nodule counterparts. (C) 2019 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available