EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,214,146
Abstracts:
29,074,682
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on Google+Follow on Google+
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

ROC curves for low-dose CT in the National Lung Screening Trial


Journal of Medical Screening 20(3): 165-168
ROC curves for low-dose CT in the National Lung Screening Trial
The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported a 20% reduction in lung cancer specific mortality using low-dose chest CT (LDCT) compared with chest radiograph (CXR) screening. The high number of false positive screens with LDCT (around 25%) raises concerns. NLST radiologists reported LDCT screens as either positive or not positive, based primarily on the presence of a 4+ mm non-calcified lung nodule (NCN). They did not explicitly record a propensity score for lung cancer. However, by using maximum NCN size, or alternatively, radiologists' recommendations for diagnostic follow-up categorized hierarchically, surrogate propensity scores (PSSZ and PSFR) were created. These scores were then used to compute ROC curves, which determine possible operating points of sensitivity versus false positive rate (1-Specificity). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.934 and 0.928 for PSFR and PSSZ, respectively; the former was significantly greater than the latter. With the NLST definition of a positive screen, sensitivity and specificity of LDCT was 93.1% and 76.5%, respectively. With cutoffs based on PSFR, a specificity of 92.4% could be achieved while only lowering sensitivity to 86.9%. Radiologists using LDCT have good predictive ability; the optimal operating point for sensitivity and specificity remains to be determined.

(PDF same-day service: $19.90)

Accession: 055338079

PMID: 24009092

DOI: 10.1177/0969141313500666



Related references

Lung cancer incidence and mortality in National Lung Screening Trial participants who underwent low-dose CT prevalence screening: a retrospective cohort analysis of a randomised, multicentre, diagnostic screening trial. Lancet. Oncology 17(5): 590-599, 2016

Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography after the National Lung Screening Trial. The debate is still open. Archivos de Bronconeumologia 49(4): 158-165, 2013

Lung Cancer Screening Using Low Dose CT Scanning in Germany. Extrapolation of results from the National Lung Screening Trial. Deutsches Arzteblatt International 112(38): 637-644, 2015

Lung cancer screening with low-dose helical CT: results from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). Journal of Medical Screening 18(3): 109-111, 2012

Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography Beyond the National Lung Screening Trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 107(11): -, 2015

The national lung screening trial. A before and after in lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography. Archivos de Bronconeumologia 49(10): 453-454, 2014

Estimated radiation dose associated with low-dose chest CT of average-size participants in the National Lung Screening Trial. Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology 197(5): 1165-1169, 2011

Prediction of lung cancer incidence on the low-dose computed tomography arm of the National Lung Screening Trial: A dynamic Bayesian network. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 72(): 42-55, 2016

Normalized CT dose index of the CT scanners used in the National Lung Screening Trial. Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology 194(6): 1539-1546, 2010

Renal-cell carcinoma risk estimates based on participants in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial and national lung screening trial. Urologic Oncology 34(4): 167.E9-16, 2015