Lung cancer screening in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND: The 5-year overall survival rate of lung cancer patients is approximately 15%. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced-stage disease and have shorter survival rates than patients with early-stage disease. Although screening for lung cancer has the potential to increase early diagnosis, it has not been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality rates. In 1993, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial was initiated specifically to determine whether screening would reduce mortality rates from PLCO cancers. METHODS: A total of 77 464 participants, aged 55-74 years, were randomly assigned to the intervention arm of the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial between November 8, 1993, and July 2, 2001. Participants received a baseline chest radiograph (CXR), followed by three annual single-view CXRs at the 10 US screening centers. Cancers were classified as screen detected and nonscreen detected (interval or never screened) and according to tumor histology. The positivity rates of screen-detected cancers and positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated. Because 51.6% of the participants were current or former smokers, logistic regression analysis was performed to control for smoking status. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Compliance with screening decreased from 86.6% at baseline to 78.9% at the last screening. Overall positivity rates were 8.9% at baseline and 6.6%-7.1% at subsequent screenings; positivity rates increased modestly with smoking risk categories (P(trend) < .001). The PPVs for all participants were 2.0% at baseline and 1.1%, 1.5%, and 2.4% at years 1, 2, and 3, respectively; PPVs in current smokers were 5.9% at baseline and 3.3%, 4.2%, and 5.6% at years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. A total of 564 lung cancers were diagnosed, of which 306 (54%) were screen-detected cancers and 87% were non-small cell lung cancers. Among non-small cell lung cancers, 59.6% of screen-detected cancers and 33.3% of interval cancers were early (I-II) stage. CONCLUSIONS: The PLCO Cancer Screening Trial demonstrated the ability to recruit, retain, and screen a large population over multiple years at multiple centers. A higher proportion of screen-detected lung cancers were early stage, but a conclusion on the effectiveness of CXR screening must await final PLCO results, which are anticipated at the end of 2015.

Statistical procedures for determination and verification of minimum reporting levels for drinking water methods.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water has developed a single-laboratory quantitation procedure: the lowest concentration minimum reporting level (LCMRL). The LCMRL is the lowest true concentration for which future recovery is predicted to fall, with high confidence (99%), between 50% and 150%. The procedure takes into account precision and accuracy. Multiple concentration replicates are processed through the entire analytical method and the data are plotted as measured sample concentration (y-axis) versus true concentration (x-axis). If the data support an assumption of constant variance over the concentration range, an ordinary least-squares regression line is drawn; otherwise, a variance-weighted least-squares regression is used. Prediction interval lines of 99% confidence are drawn about the regression. At the points where the prediction interval lines intersect with data quality objective lines of 50% and 150% recovery, lines are dropped to the x-axis. The higher of the two values is the LCMRL. The LCMRL procedure is flexible because the data quality objectives (50-150%) and the prediction interval confidence (99%) can be varied to suit program needs. The LCMRL determination is performed during method development only. A simpler procedure for verification of data quality objectives at a given minimum reporting level (MRL) is also presented. The verification procedure requires a single set of seven samples taken through the entire method procedure. If the calculated prediction interval is contained within data quality recovery limits (50-150%), the laboratory performance at the MRL is verified.

Baseline chest radiograph for lung cancer detection in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial was initiated in 1992 to examine cause-specific mortality reduction from screening for these four cancers in men and women. We report lung cancer detection results of the baseline screening round. METHODS: Of the 154,942 participants enrolled, who were aged 55-74 years with no history of PLCO cancers, 77,465 were randomly assigned to the intervention arm. Current or former smokers and never smokers in this arm received an initial single-view posterior-anterior chest radiograph. RESULTS: In the initial screen, 5991 (8.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.7% to 9.2%) of radiographs were suspicious for lung cancer: 8.2% (95% CI = 7.9% to 8.5%) for women and 9.6% (95% CI = 9.3% to 10.0%) for men. Rates were highest for older age groups and for smokers. Among those 5991 participants with a positive screen, 206 (3.4%, 95% CI = 3.0% to 3.9%) underwent biopsy examination, 126 (61.2%, 95% CI = 54.5% to 67.8%) of whom were diagnosed with lung cancer within 12 months of the screen (59 in women and 67 in men). The positive predictive value was 2.1% (95% CI = 1.7% to 2.5%), and 1.9 lung cancers were detected per 1000 screens. Among these cancers, 44% (95% CI = 35% to 52%) were stage I non-small-cell lung cancer. High rates of lung cancer were found in current smokers (6.3 per 1000 screens) and in former smokers who had smoked within the past 15 years (4.9 per 1000 screens). The lung cancer detection rate among never smokers was 0.4 per 1000 screens; this group accounted for 11% (95% CI = 5.6% to 16.6%) of the cancers identified. CONCLUSIONS: In the baseline screen, nearly half the cancers were stage I. Whether this experience results in a reduction in lung cancer mortality is yet to be seen.