Meta-analysis of the impact of low-dose CT screening on population lung cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality

doi:10.19983/j.issn.2096-8493.2024027

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective: To systematically evaluate the effectiveness of low-dose computed tomography screening (LDCT) in reducing lung cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality among screened populations. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform for prospective studies on LDCT lung cancer screening, published domestically and internationally from January 2000 to August 2023. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed on studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The primary outcome was lung cancer-specific mortality, while secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and the number need to be screened (NNBS) to prevent one lung cancer death or death from all causes. Meta-analysis was conducted using R software version 4.3.1. Results: Nine studies with a prospective design were included, covering 123880 individuals screened, aged 40-75 years. The median follow-up time of the studies ranged from 3.6 to 13.0 years. Meta-analysis results showed that compared to non-LDCT screening groups, LDCT screening reduced lung cancer-specific mortality by 16% (RR=0.84, 95%CI: 0.78-0.91, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the all-cause mortality (RR=0.93, 95%CI: 0.84-1.03, P=0.151). Subgroup analysis indicated that the specific subcategories of the non-LDCT screening group (control group) were related to the reduction in lung cancer mortality. Meta-regression results showed that the median follow-up time was related to the reduction in all-cause mortality. To prevent one death caused by lung cancer through LDCT screening, 139 people were estimated to be screened in the non-imaging prevention/general population; to prevent one death caused by all-cause, 81 people were estimated to be screened. Conclusion: LDCT screening significantly reduces lung cancer-specific mortality in the 40-75 age group, underlining its important public health significance for specific age groups and risk populations.

Key words: Lung neoplasms, Tomography scanners, X-ray computed, Diagnostic services, Mortality, Meta-analysis as topic

CLC Number:

R734.2

Zi Xiaohui, Wu Peng, Zheng Sufei, Sun Nan, He Jie. Meta-analysis of the impact of low-dose CT screening on population lung cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality[J]. Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease , 2024, 5(2): 106-112. doi: 10.19983/j.issn.2096-8493.2024027

Figures/Tables 7

References 28

[1]	Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71(3): 209-249. doi:10.3322/caac.21660.
[2]	Sadate A, Occean BV, Beregi JP, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography. Eur J Cancer, 2020, 134: 107-114. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2020.04.035. pmid: 32502939
[3]	孟瑞瑞, 刘圆圆, 官新立, 等. 低剂量螺旋CT肺癌筛查的研究现状与进展. 实用肿瘤学杂志, 2020, 34(4): 372-376. doi:10.11904/j.issn.1002-3070.2020.04.015.
[4]	张温馨, 潘宇, 李峒作, 等. 肺癌筛查的卫生经济学评价研究. 中国卫生经济, 2023, 42(8): 78-81.
[5]	梁迪, 师金, 李道娟, 等. 人群肺癌筛查的研究进展. 中国肿瘤, 2023, 32(1): 46-53. doi:10.11735/j.issn.1004-0242.2023.01.A008.
[6]	Bonney A, Malouf R, Marchal C, et al. Impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer-related mortality. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2022, 8(8): CD013829. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD013829.pub2.
[7]	Wood DE, Kazerooni EA, Aberle D, et al. NCCN Guidelines insights: lung cancer screening, version 1.2022. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2022, 20(7): 754-764. doi:10.6004/jnccn.2022.0036.
[8]	中国肺癌早诊早知专家组, 中国西部肺癌研究协作中心. 中国肺癌低剂量CT筛查指南(2023年版). 中国肺癌杂志, 2023, 26(1): 1-9. doi:10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2023.102.10.
[9]	Jonas DE, Reuland DS, Reddy SM, et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US preventive services task force. JAMA, 2021, 325(10): 971-987. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.0377. pmid: 33687468
[10]	艾飞玲, 胡葵茹, 石钰霖, 等. 基于纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表对中国吸烟队列研究文献的质量评价. 中华疾病控制杂志, 2021, 25(6): 722-729. doi:10.16462/j.cnki.zhjbkz.2021.06.018.
[11]	Butcher NJ, Monsour A, Mew EJ, et al. Guidelines for reporting outcomes in trial reports: the CONSORT-outcomes 2022 extension. JAMA, 2022, 328(22): 2252-2264. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.21022. pmid: 36511921
[12]	Infante M, Cavuto S, Lutman FR, et al. Long-term follow-up results of the DANTE trial, a randomized study of lung cancer screening with spiral computed tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2015, 191(10): 1166-1175. doi:10.1164/rccm.201408-1475OC.DOI:10.1164/rccm.201408-1475OC.
[13]	Wille MM, Dirksen A, Ashraf H, et al. Results of the randomized danish lung cancer screening trial with focus on high-risk profiling. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2016, 193(5): 542-551. doi:10.1164/rccm.201505-1040OC.
[14]	Paci E, Puliti D, Lopes Pegna A, et al. Mortality, survival and incidence rates in the ITALUNG randomised lung cancer screening trial. Thorax, 2017, 72(9): 825-831. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2016-209825. pmid: 28377492
[15]	Doroudi M, Pinsky PF, Marcus PM. Lung cancer mortality in the lung screening study feasibility trial. JNCI Cancer Spectr, 2018, 2(3): pky042. doi:10.1093/jncics/pky042.
[16]	Pastorino U, Silva M, Sestini S, et al. Prolonged lung cancer screening reduced 10-year mortality in the mild trial: new confirmation of lung cancer screening efficacy. Ann Oncol, 2019, 30(7): 1162-1169. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz117. pmid: 31987384
[17]	National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Lung cancer incidence and mortality with extended follow-up in the National Lung Screening Trial. J Thorac Oncol, 2019, 14(10): 1732-1742. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2019.05.044. pmid: 31260833
[18]	Becker N, Motsch E, Trotter A, et al. Lung cancer mortality reduction by LDCT screening-results from the randomized German LUSI trial. Int J Cancer, 2020, 146(6): 1503-1513. doi:10.1002/ijc.32486. pmid: 31162856
[19]	de Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, de Jong PA, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with volume CT screening in a randomi-zed trial. N Engl J Med, 2020, 382(6): 503-513. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1911793.
[20]	Li N, Tan F, Chen W, et al. One-off low-dose CT for lung cancer screening in China: a multicentre, population-based, prospective cohort study. Lancet Respir Med, 2022, 10(4): 378-391. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00560-9. pmid: 35276087
[21]	Miglioretti DL, Lange J, van den Broek JJ, et al. Radiation-induced breast cancer incidence and mortality from digital mammography screening: a modeling study. Ann Intern Med, 2016, 164(4): 205-214. doi:10.7326/M15-1241. pmid: 26756460
[22]	Dobbin KK, Ebell M. Should we expect all-cause mortality reductions in large screening studies?. Br J Gen Pract, 2018, 68(671): 290-291. doi:10.3399/bjgp18X696545.
[23]	Passiglia F, Cinquini M, Bertolaccini L, et al. Benefits and harms of lung cancer screening by chest computed tomography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol, 2021, 39(23): 2574-2585. doi:10.1200/JCO.20.02574.
[24]	Shemesh J, Henschke CI, Shaham D, et al. Ordinal scoring of coronary artery calcifications on low-dose CT scans of the chest is predictive of death from cardiovascular disease. Radio-logy, 2010, 257(2): 541-548. doi:10.1148/radiol.10100383.
[25]	Rossaki FM, Hurst JR, van Gemert F, et al. Strategies for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of copd in low- and middle-income countries: the importance of primary care. Expert Rev Respir Med, 2021, 15(12): 1563-1577. doi:10.1080/17476348.2021.1985762.
[26]	Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M, et al. Ovarian cancer population screening and mortality after long-term follow-up in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2021, 397(10290): 2182-2193. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00731-5. pmid: 33991479
[27]	Doubeni CA, Gabler NB, Wheeler CM, et al. Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: a systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR consortium. CA Cancer J Clin, 2018, 68(3): 199-216. doi:10.3322/caac.21452.
[28]	Marcus PM, Bergstralh EJ, Fagerstrom RM, et al. Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2000, 92(16): 1308-1316. doi:10.1093/jnci/92.16.1308. pmid: 10944552

作者	发表年份	国家	筛查时间	非LDCT筛查组类别	筛查年龄范围(岁)	纳入人数 (名)	筛查人数 (名)	筛查女性构成比(%)	筛查轮数(次)	中位随访时间(年)
Infante等^[12]	2015	意大利	2001—2012年	胸部X线摄片等	60~74	2450	1264	0.0	5	8.4
Wille等^[13]	2016	丹麦	2004—2008年	非影像学预防^a	50~70	4104	2052	44.8	5	10.0
Paci等^[14]	2017	意大利	2004—2014年	非影像学预防	55~69	3206	1613	35.1	4	9.3
Doroudi等^[15]	2018	美国	2000—2001年	胸部X线摄片	55~74	3318	1660	22.7	2	5.2
Pastorino等^[16]	2019	意大利	2005—2018年	非影像学预防	49~75	4099	2376	31.6	3	10.0
National Lung Screening Trial Research Team^[17]	2019	美国	2002—2007年	胸部X线摄片	55~74	53454	26722	41.0	3	6.5
Becker等^[18]	2020	德国	2011—2018年	非影像学预防	50~59	4052	2029	35.3	5	8.9
de Koning等^[19]	2020	荷兰	2003—2015年	非影像学预防	50~74	13195	6583	16.4	4	10.0
Li等^[20]	2022	中国	2013—2018年	非影像学预防	40~74	223302	79581	43.7	1	3.6

亚组	纳入研究(项)	肺癌死亡率			全因死亡率
亚组	纳入研究(项)	RR(95%CI)值	异质性检验 (Tau²)	组间差异 (P值)	RR(95%CI)值	异质性检验 (Tau²)	组间差异 (P值)
非LDCT筛查组				0.016			0.175
胸部X线摄片	3	0.91(0.82~1.01)	0		0.97(0.94~1.01)	0
非影像学预防	6	0.74(0.65~0.85)	0		0.88(0.77~1.01)	0.019
随访时间(年)				0.250			0.822
<6	2	0.89(0.50~1.57)	0.127		0.90(0.51~1.57)	0.149
6~9	4	0.89(0.80~0.99)	0		0.97(0.94~1.00)	0
>9	3	0.76(0.65~0.89)	0		0.94(0.83~1.05)	0.006
区域				0.239			0.001
欧洲	6	0.79(0.68~0.90)	0		0.96(0.89~1.03)	0.001
北美洲	2	0.95(0.73~1.23)	0.019		1.04(0.86~1.27)	0.015
国内	1	0.69(0.52~0.91)	-		0.68(0.86~1.27)	-
女性构成比(%)				0.362			0.790
≥40	3	0.85(0.71~1.01)	0.011		0.88(0.69~1.11)	0.038
<40	5	0.76(0.65~0.89)	0		0.96(0.85~1.09)	0.009
0	1	0.99(0.69~1.44)	-		0.95(0.77~1.17)	-

分组	非LDCT筛查人群					SRR	LDCT筛查人群		ARR	NNBS (名)
分组	肺癌死亡 (例)	全因死亡 (例)	总人数 (名)	肺癌死亡率(%)	全因死亡率(%)	SRR	预计肺癌死亡率(%)	预计全因死亡率(%)	ARR	NNBS (名)
胸部X线摄片^a	727	-	29574	2.46	-	0.91	2.24	-	0.0022	456
	-	5658	29574	-	19.13	0.97	-	18.56	0.0058	174
非影像学预防^b	388	-	14003	0.027	-	0.74	2.05	-	0.0072	139
	-	1460	14003	-	10.43	0.88	-	9.18	0.0125	81

因素	单因素模型 (P值)	多因素模型 (P值)
对照组(胸部X线摄片)	0.520	0.691
女性构成比	0.320	0.978
筛查轮数	0.175	0.713
中位随访时间	<0.001	0.009