Adherence to Radiology Recommendations in a Clinical CT Lung Screening Program.

BACKGROUND: Assess patient adherence to radiologist recommendations in a clinical CT lung cancer screening program. METHODS: Patients undergoing CT lung cancer screening between January 12, 2012, and June 12, 2013, were included in this institutional review board-approved retrospective review. Patients referred from outside our institution were excluded. All patients met National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines Lung Cancer Screening high-risk criteria. Full-time program navigators used a CT lung screening program management system to schedule patient appointments, generate patient result notification letters detailing the radiologist follow-up recommendation, and track patient and referring physician notification of missed appointments at 30, 60, and 90 days. To be considered adherent, patients could be no more than 90 days past due for their next recommended examination as of September 12, 2014. Patients who died, were diagnosed with cancer, or otherwise became ineligible for screening were considered adherent. Adherence rates were assessed across multiple variables. RESULTS: During the study interval, 1,162 high-risk patients were screened, and 261 of 1,162 (22.5%) outside referrals were excluded. Of the remaining 901 patients, 503 (55.8%) were male, 414 (45.9%) were active smokers, 377 (41.8%) were aged 65 to 73, and >95% were white. Of the 901 patients, 772 (85.7%) were adherent. Most common reasons for nonadherence were patient refusal of follow-up exam (66.7%), inability to successfully contact the patient (20.9%), and inability to obtain the follow-up order from the referring provider (7.8%); 23 of 901 (2.6%) were discharged for other reasons. CONCLUSIONS: High rates of adherence to radiologist recommendations are achievable for in-network patients enrolled in a clinical CT lung screening program.

Smoking cessation results in a clinical lung cancer screening program.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening may provide a "teachable moment" for promoting smoking cessation. This study assessed smoking cessation and relapse rates among individuals undergoing follow-up low-dose chest computed tomography (CT) in a clinical CT lung screening program and assessed the influence of initial screening results on smoking behavior. METHODS: Self-reported smoking status for individuals enrolled in a clinical CT lung screening program undergoing a follow-up CT lung screening exam between 1st February, 2014 and 31st March, 2015 was retrospectively reviewed and compared to self-reported smoking status using a standardized questionnaire at program entry. Point prevalence smoking cessation and relapse rates were calculated across the entire population and compared with exam results. All individuals undergoing screening fulfilled the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Lung Cancer Screening v1.2012(®) high-risk criteria and had an order for CT lung screening. RESULTS: A total of 1,483 individuals underwent a follow-up CT lung screening exam during the study interval. Smoking status at time of follow-up exam was available for 1,461/1,483 (98.5%). A total of 46% (678/1,461) were active smokers at program entry. The overall point prevalence smoking cessation and relapse rates were 20.8% and 9.3%, respectively. Prior positive screening exam results were not predictive of smoking cessation (OR 1.092; 95% CI, 0.715-1.693) but were predictive of reduced relapse among former smokers who had stopped smoking for 2 years or less (OR 0.330; 95% CI, 0.143-0.710). Duration of program enrollment was predictive of smoking cessation (OR 0.647; 95% CI, 0.477-0.877). CONCLUSIONS: Smoking cessation and relapse rates in a clinical CT lung screening program rates are more favorable than those observed in the general population. Duration of participation in the screening program correlated with increased smoking cessation rates. A positive exam result correlated with reduced relapse rates among smokers recently quit smoking.

Performance of ACR Lung-RADS in a Clinical CT Lung Screening Program.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of applying ACR Lung-RADS in a clinical CT lung screening program on the frequency of positive and false-negative findings. METHODS: Consecutive, clinical CT lung screening examinations performed from January 2012 through May 2014 were retroactively reclassified using the new ACR Lung-RADS structured reporting system. All examinations had initially been interpreted by radiologists credentialed in structured CT lung screening reporting following the National Comprehensive Cancer Network's Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Lung Cancer Screening (version 1.2012), which incorporated positive thresholds modeled after those in the National Lung Screening Trial. The positive rate, number of false-negative findings, and positive predictive value were recalculated using the ACR Lung-RADS-specific positive solid/part-solid nodule diameter threshold of 6 mm and nonsolid (ground-glass) threshold of 2 cm. False negatives were defined as cases reclassified as benign under ACR Lung-RADS that were diagnosed with malignancies within 12 months of the baseline examination. RESULTS: A total of 2,180 high-risk patients underwent baseline CT lung screening during the study interval; no clinical follow-up was available in 577 patients (26%). ACR Lung-RADS reduced the overall positive rate from 27.6% to 10.6%. No false negatives were present in the 152 patients with >12-month follow-up reclassified as benign. Applying ACR Lung-RADS increased the positive predictive value for diagnosed malignancy in 1,603 patients with follow-up from 6.9% to 17.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The application of ACR Lung-RADS increased the positive predictive value in our CT lung screening cohort by a factor of 2.5, to 17.3%, without increasing the number of examinations with false-negative results.

Experience With a CT Screening Program for Individuals at High Risk for Developing Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare results of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk group 2 with those of NCCN high-risk group 1 in a clinical CT lung screening program. METHODS: The results of consecutive clinical CT lung screening examinations performed from January 2012 through December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. All examinations were interpreted by radiologists credentialed in structured CT lung screening reporting, following the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Lung Cancer Screening (version 1.2012). Positive results required a solid nodule ≥4 mm, a ground-glass nodule ≥5 mm, or a mediastinal or hilar lymph node >1 cm, not stable for >2 years. Significant incidental findings and findings suspicious for pulmonary infection were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1,760 examinations were performed (464 in group 2, 1,296 in group 1); no clinical follow-up was available in 432 patients (28%). Positive results, clinically significant incidental findings, and suspected pulmonary infection were present in 25%, 6%, and 6% in group 2 and 28.2%, 6.2%, and 6.6% in group 1, respectively. Twenty-three cases of lung cancer were diagnosed (6 in group 2, 17 in group 1), for annualized rates of malignancy of 1.8% in group 2 and 1.6% in group 1. CONCLUSION: NCCN group 2 results were substantively similar to those for group 1 and closely resemble those reported in the National Lung Screening Trial. Similar rates of positivity and lung cancer diagnosis in both groups suggest that thousands of additional lives may be saved each year if screening eligibility is expanded to include this particular high-risk group.

Surgical Outcomes in a Large, Clinical, Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Lung Cancer Screening Program.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography is proven to reduce lung cancer mortality among high-risk patients. However, critics raise concern over the potential for unnecessary surgical procedures performed for benign disease as a result of screening. We reviewed our outcomes in a large clinical lung cancer screening program to assess the number of surgical procedures done for benign disease, as we believe this is an important quality metric. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our surgical outcomes of consecutive patients who underwent low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening from January 2012 through June 2014 using a prospectively collected database. All patients met the National Comprehensive Cancer Network lung cancer screening guidelines high-risk criteria. RESULTS: There were 1,654 screened patients during the study interval with clinical follow-up at Lahey Hospital & Medical Center. Twenty-five of the 1,654 (1.5%) had surgery. Five of 25 had non-lung cancer diagnoses: 2 hamartomas, 2 necrotizing granulomas, and 1 breast cancer metastasis. The incidence of surgery for non-lung cancer diagnosis was 0.30% (5 of 1,654), and the incidence of surgery for benign disease was 0.24% (4 of 1,654). Twenty of 25 had lung cancer, 18 early stage and 2 late stage. There were no surgery-related deaths, and there was 1 major surgical complication (4%) at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of surgical intervention for non-lung cancer diagnosis was low (0.30%) and is comparable to the rate reported in the National Lung Screening Trial (0.62%). Surgical intervention for benign disease was rare (0.24%) in our experience.

Experience with a CT screening program for individuals at high risk for developing lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare results of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk group 2 with those of NCCN high-risk group 1 in a clinical CT lung screening program. METHODS: The results of consecutive clinical CT lung screening examinations performed from January 2012 through December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. All examinations were interpreted by radiologists credentialed in structured CT lung screening reporting, following the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Lung Cancer Screening (version 1.2012). Positive results required a solid nodule ≥4 mm, a ground-glass nodule ≥5 mm, or a mediastinal or hilar lymph node >1 cm, not stable for >2 years. Significant incidental findings and findings suspicious for pulmonary infection were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1,760 examinations were performed (464 in group 2, 1,296 in group 1); no clinical follow-up was available in 432 patients (28%). Positive results, clinically significant incidental findings, and suspected pulmonary infection were present in 25%, 6%, and 6% in group 2 and 28.2%, 6.2%, and 6.6% in group 1, respectively. Twenty-three cases of lung cancer were diagnosed (6 in group 2, 17 in group 1), for annualized rates of malignancy of 1.8% in group 2 and 1.6% in group 1. CONCLUSION: NCCN group 2 results were substantively similar to those for group 1 and closely resemble those reported in the National Lung Screening Trial. Similar rates of positivity and lung cancer diagnosis in both groups suggest that thousands of additional lives may be saved each year if screening eligibility is expanded to include this particular high-risk group.

Performance of ACR Lung-RADS in a clinical CT lung screening program.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of applying ACR Lung-RADS in a clinical CT lung screening program on the frequency of positive and false-negative findings. METHODS: Consecutive, clinical CT lung screening examinations performed from January 2012 through May 2014 were retroactively reclassified using the new ACR Lung-RADS structured reporting system. All examinations had initially been interpreted by radiologists credentialed in structured CT lung screening reporting following the National Comprehensive Cancer Network's Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Lung Cancer Screening (version 1.2012), which incorporated positive thresholds modeled after those in the National Lung Screening Trial. The positive rate, number of false-negative findings, and positive predictive value were recalculated using the ACR Lung-RADS-specific positive solid/part-solid nodule diameter threshold of 6 mm and nonsolid (ground-glass) threshold of 2 cm. False negatives were defined as cases reclassified as benign under ACR Lung-RADS that were diagnosed with malignancies within 12 months of the baseline examination. RESULTS: A total of 2,180 high-risk patients underwent baseline CT lung screening during the study interval; no clinical follow-up was available in 577 patients (26%). ACR Lung-RADS reduced the overall positive rate from 27.6% to 10.6%. No false negatives were present in the 152 patients with >12-month follow-up reclassified as benign. Applying ACR Lung-RADS increased the positive predictive value for diagnosed malignancy in 1,603 patients with follow-up from 6.9% to 17.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The application of ACR Lung-RADS increased the positive predictive value in our CT lung screening cohort by a factor of 2.5, to 17.3%, without increasing the number of examinations with false-negative results.

Initial experience with a free, high-volume, low-dose CT lung cancer screening program.

The National Lung Screening Trial demonstrated a significant mortality benefit for patients at high risk for lung cancer undergoing serial low-dose CT. Currently, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and several United States-based professional associations recommend CT Lung screening for high-risk patients. In the absence of established reimbursement, the authors modeled and implemented a free low-dose CT lung cancer screening program to provide equitable access to all eligible patients. Elements of the program reported in this article include a decentralized referral network, centralized program coordination, structured reporting, and a patient data management system. The experience and initial results observed in this clinical setting closely match the performance metrics of the National Lung Screening Trial with regard to cancer detection and incidental findings rates. To eliminate health care disparities a vigorous lobbying effort will be needed to expedite reimbursement and make CT lung screening equally available to all patients at high-risk.

Thalamic involvement in sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: a diffusion-weighted MR imaging study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent neuropathologic research suggests thalamic involvement in sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJD), which has been disregarded in imaging studies. Diffusion-weighted (DW) MR imaging has the highest sensitivity for the detection of signal intensity (SI) abnormalities in CJD. We hypothesized that pathologic changes in the thalamus in sCJD can be detected by using a subtle analysis of DW MR imaging. METHODS: Six sCJD patients and nine healthy controls were examined with a 1.5-T system by using DW single-shot spin-echo echo planar (b = 0, 1000 s/mm(2)), T2-weighted turbo spin-echo, and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery sequences. One patient was examined serially (3, 4, and 8 months after onset of symptoms). MR images were reviewed for SI changes in the striatum, hippocampus, mediodorsal thalamic nucleus (MD), and pulvinar thalami. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) were measured in these areas. RESULTS: All sCJD patients showed increased SI on DW images in the striatum bilaterally. ADCs in these areas were significantly reduced. Four of six sCJD patients showed increased SI on DW images in the pulvinar thalami, whereas ADCs were significantly reduced in all patients (mean ADC +/- SEM: in patients with SI changes, 701 +/- 38; in patients without SI changes, 684 +/- 37; in controls, 853 +/- 15 [P <.0001]). No patient showed SI changes in the MD on DW images, whereas ADCs were significantly reduced in all (664 +/- 28 as compared with 800 +/- 24 in controls [P =.0011]). Serial measurements in one sCJD patient showed ADC reduction in the pulvinar thalami preceding the SI changes on DW images. CONCLUSION: A quantitative analysis of DW images with ADC measurements shows slight MR imaging changes in the thalamus in sCJD when abnormal SI may not be present.