Dataset Information

Commonly Applied Selection Criteria for Lung Cancer Screening May Have Strongly Varying Diagnostic Performance in Different Countries.

ABSTRACT: Lung cancer (LC) screening often focuses heavy smokers as a target for screening group. Heavy smoking can thus be regarded as an LC pre-screening test with sensitivities and specificities being different in various populations due to the differences in smoking histories. We derive here expected sensitivities and specificities of various criteria to preselect individuals for LC screening in 27 European countries with diverse smoking prevalences. Sensitivities of various heavy-smoking-based pre-screening criteria were estimated by combining sex-specific proportions of people meeting these criteria in the target population for screening with associations of heavy smoking with LC risk. Expected specificities were approximated by the proportion of individuals not meeting the heavy smoking definition. Estimated sensitivities and specificities varied widely across countries, with sensitivities being generally higher among men (range: 33-80%) than among women (range: 9-79%), and specificities being generally lower among men (range: 48-90%) than among women (range: 70-99%). Major variation in sensitivities and specificities was also seen across different pre-selection criteria for LC screening within individual countries. Our results may inform the design of LC screening programs in European countries and serve as benchmarks for novel alternative or complementary tests for selecting people at high risk for CT-based LC screening.

SUBMITTER: Brenner H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7602978 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Commonly Applied Selection Criteria for Lung Cancer Screening May Have Strongly Varying Diagnostic Performance in Different Countries.

Brenner Hermann H Krilaviciute Agne A

Cancers 20201016 10

Lung cancer (LC) screening often focuses heavy smokers as a target for screening group. Heavy smoking can thus be regarded as an LC pre-screening test with sensitivities and specificities being different in various populations due to the differences in smoking histories. We derive here expected sensitivities and specificities of various criteria to preselect individuals for LC screening in 27 European countries with diverse smoking prevalences. Sensitivities of various heavy-smoking-based pre-sc ...[more]

PMID: 33081402

Similar Datasets

Project description:To develop criteria to identify thresholds for the minimally acceptable performance of physicians interpreting diagnostic mammography studies.In an institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant study, an Angoff approach was used to set criteria for identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance for both workup after abnormal screening examinations and workup of a breast lump. Normative data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) was used to help the expert radiologist identify the impact of cut points. Simulations, also using data from the BCSC, were used to estimate the expected clinical impact from the recommended performance thresholds.Final cut points for workup of abnormal screening examinations were as follows: sensitivity, less than 80%; specificity, less than 80% or greater than 95%; abnormal interpretation rate, less than 8% or greater than 25%; positive predictive value (PPV) of biopsy recommendation (PPV2), less than 15% or greater than 40%; PPV of biopsy performed (PPV3), less than 20% or greater than 45%; and cancer diagnosis rate, less than 20 per 1000 interpretations. Final cut points for workup of a breast lump were as follows: sensitivity, less than 85%; specificity, less than 83% or greater than 95%; abnormal interpretation rate, less than 10% or greater than 25%; PPV2, less than 25% or greater than 50%; PPV3, less than 30% or greater than 55%; and cancer diagnosis rate, less than 40 per 1000 interpretations. If underperforming physicians moved into the acceptable range after remedial training, the expected result would be (a) diagnosis of an additional 86 cancers per 100,000 women undergoing workup after screening examinations, with a reduction in the number of false-positive examinations by 1067 per 100,000 women undergoing this workup, and (b) diagnosis of an additional 335 cancers per 100,000 women undergoing workup of a breast lump, with a reduction in the number of false-positive examinations by 634 per 100,000 women undergoing this workup.Interpreting physicians who fall outside one or more of the identified cut points should be reviewed in the context of an overall assessment of all their performance measures and their specific practice setting to determine if remedial training is indicated.

Project description:IntroductionAbnormalities on CT imaging may contribute to the diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis (TBM). Recently, an expert consensus case definition (CCD) and set of imaging criteria for diagnosing basal meningeal enhancement (BME) have been proposed. This study aimed to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity and reliability of these in a prospective cohort of adult meningitis patients.MethodsInitial diagnoses were based on the CCD, classifying patients into: 'Definite TBM' (microbiological confirmation), 'Probable TBM' (diagnostic score ?10), 'Possible TBM' (diagnostic score 6-9), 'Not TBM' (confirmation of an alternative diagnosis) or 'Uncertain' (diagnostic score of <6). CT images were evaluated independently on two occasions by four experienced reviewers. Intra-rater and inter-rater agreement were calculated using the kappa statistic. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated using both 'Definite TBM' and either 'Definite TBM' or 'Probable TBM' as gold standards.ResultsCT scan criteria for BME had good intra-rater agreement (? range 0.35-0.78) and fair to moderate inter-rater agreement (? range 0.20-0.52). Intra- and inter-rater agreement on the CCD components were good to fair (? ?=? ranges 0.47-0.81 and 0.21-0.63). Using 'Definite TBM' as a gold standard, the criteria for BME were very specific (61.5%-100%), but insensitive (5.9%-29.4%). Similarly, the imaging components of the CCD were highly specific (69.2-100%) but lacked sensitivity (0-56.7%). Similar values were found when using 'Definite TBM' or 'Probable TBM' as a gold standard.DiscussionThe fair to moderate inter-rater agreement and poor sensitivities of the criteria for BME suggest that little reliance should be placed in these features in isolation. While the presence of the CCD criteria of acute infarction or tuberculoma(s) appears useful as rule-in criteria, their absence is of little help in excluding TBM. The CCD and criteria for BME, as well as any new criteria, need to be standardized and validated in prospective cohort studies.

Dataset Information

Commonly Applied Selection Criteria for Lung Cancer Screening May Have Strongly Varying Diagnostic Performance in Different Countries.

Publications

Commonly Applied Selection Criteria for Lung Cancer Screening May Have Strongly Varying Diagnostic Performance in Different Countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets