Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2019
Low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer in people with workplace exposure to asbestos.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Maisonneuve Patrick, Rampinelli Cristiano, Bertolotti Raffaella, Misotti Alessandro, Lococo Filippo, Casiraghi Monica, Spaggiari Lorenzo, Bellomi Massimo, Novellis Pierluigi, Solinas Michela, Dieci Elisa, Alloisio Marco, Fontana Luca, Persechino Benedetta, Iavicoli Sergio, Veronesi Giulia
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Smoking is the main risk factor for lung cancer, but environmental and occupational exposure to carcinogens also increase lung cancer risk. We assessed whether extending low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening to persons with occupational exposure to asbestos may be an effective way reducing lung cancer mortality.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study within the COSMOS screening program, assessing past asbestos exposure with a questionnaire. LDCT scans of asbestos-exposed participants were reviewed to assess the presence of pulmonary, interstitial and pleural alterations in comparison to matched unexposed controls. We also performed an exhaustive review, with meta-analysis, of the literature on LDCT screening in asbestos-exposed persons.
RESULTS: Exposure to asbestos, initially self-reported by 9.8% of COSMOS participants, was confirmed in 216 of 544 assessable cases, corresponding to 2.6% of the screened population. LDCT of asbestos-exposed persons had significantly more pleural plaques, diaphragmatic pleural thickening and pleural calcifications, but similar frequency of parenchymal and interstitial alterations to unexposed persons. From 16 papers, including this study, overall lung cancer detection rates at baseline were 0.81% (95% CI 0.50-1.19) in asbestos-exposed persons, 0.94% (95% CI 0.47-1.53) in asbestos-exposed smokers (12 studies), and 0.11% (95% CI 0.00-0.43) in asbestos-exposed non-smokers (9 studies).
CONCLUSION: Persons occupationally exposed to asbestos should be monitored to gather more information about risks. Although LDCT screening is effective in the early detection lung cancer in asbestos-exposed smokers, our data suggest that screening of asbestos-exposed persons with no additional risk factors for cancer does is not viable due to the low detection rate.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study within the COSMOS screening program, assessing past asbestos exposure with a questionnaire. LDCT scans of asbestos-exposed participants were reviewed to assess the presence of pulmonary, interstitial and pleural alterations in comparison to matched unexposed controls. We also performed an exhaustive review, with meta-analysis, of the literature on LDCT screening in asbestos-exposed persons.
RESULTS: Exposure to asbestos, initially self-reported by 9.8% of COSMOS participants, was confirmed in 216 of 544 assessable cases, corresponding to 2.6% of the screened population. LDCT of asbestos-exposed persons had significantly more pleural plaques, diaphragmatic pleural thickening and pleural calcifications, but similar frequency of parenchymal and interstitial alterations to unexposed persons. From 16 papers, including this study, overall lung cancer detection rates at baseline were 0.81% (95% CI 0.50-1.19) in asbestos-exposed persons, 0.94% (95% CI 0.47-1.53) in asbestos-exposed smokers (12 studies), and 0.11% (95% CI 0.00-0.43) in asbestos-exposed non-smokers (9 studies).
CONCLUSION: Persons occupationally exposed to asbestos should be monitored to gather more information about risks. Although LDCT screening is effective in the early detection lung cancer in asbestos-exposed smokers, our data suggest that screening of asbestos-exposed persons with no additional risk factors for cancer does is not viable due to the low detection rate.