Systematic screening reduces mortality, but is it the best way to go?
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in Australia. Late diagnosis of advanced disease contributes to the poor 13% 5-year survival rate associated with lung cancer. However, the recently updated United States National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) showed a 20% survival benefit from early detection with low-dose computed tomography (CT) screening.1,2 In light of these results, should people in Australia at high risk of lung cancer now undergo screening?
- 1. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team; Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 395-409.
- 2. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team; Church TR, Black WC, Aberle DR, et al. Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1980-1991.
- 3. Bach PB, Mirkin JN, Oliver TK, et al. Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA 2012; 307: 2418-2429.
- 4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. National Bowel Cancer Screening Program monitoring report: phase 2, July 2008–June 2011. Canberra: AIHW, 2012. (AIHW Cat. No. CAN 61; Cancer Series No. 65.) http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=10737421408 (accessed Jun 2013).
- 5. Marshall HM, Bowman RV, Crossin J, et al. Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study: rationale, design and methods. Intern Med J 2013; 43: 174-182.
- 6. Manser R, Dalton A, Carter R, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for lung cancer with low dose spiral CT (computed tomography) in the Australian setting. Lung Cancer 2005; 48: 171-185.
- 7. Liu PH, Wang JD, Keating NL. Expected years of life lost for six potentially preventable cancers in the United States. Prev Med 2013; 56: 309-313.
- 8. Pignone MP, Flitcroft KL, Howard K, et al. Costs and cost-effectiveness of full implementation of a biennial faecal occult blood test screening program for bowel cancer in Australia. Med J Aust 2011; 194: 180-185. <MJA full text>
- 9. Lew JB, Howard K, Gertig D, et al. Expenditure and resource utilisation for cervical screening in Australia. BMC Health Serv Res 2012; 12: 446.
- 10. Shearer J, Shanahan M. Cost effectiveness analysis of smoking cessation interventions. Aust N Z J Public Health 2006; 30: 428-434.
- 11. Jha P, Ramasundarahettige C, Landsman V, et al. 21st-century hazards of smoking and benefits of cessation in the United States. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 341-350.
- 12. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and Cancer Australia. Lung cancer in Australia: an overview. Canberra: AIHW, 2011. (AIHW Cat. No. CAN 58; Cancer Series No. 64.) http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=10737420419 (accessed Jun 2013).
Publication of your online response is subject to the Medical Journal of Australia's editorial discretion. You will be notified by email within five working days should your response be accepted.