Survival of Patients with Stage I Lung Cancer Detected on CT Screening
 

The International Early Lung Cancer Action Program Investigators

N Eng J Med 2006;355:1763

Background The outcome among patients with clinical stage I cancer that is detected on annual screening using spiral computed tomography (CT) is unknown.

Methods In a large collaborative study, we screened 31,567 asymptomatic persons at risk for lung cancer using low-dose CT from 1993 through 2005, and from 1994 through 2005, 27,456 repeated screenings were performed 7 to 18 months after the previous screening. We estimated the 10-year lung-cancer–specific survival rate among participants with clinical stage I lung cancer that was detected on CT screening and diagnosed by biopsy, regardless of the type of treatment received, and among those who underwent surgical resection of clinical stage I cancer within 1 month. A pathology panel reviewed the surgical specimens obtained from participants who underwent resection.

Results Screening resulted in a diagnosis of lung cancer in 484 participants. Of these participants, 412 (85%) had clinical stage I lung cancer, and the estimated 10-year survival rate was 88% in this subgroup (95% confidence interval [CI], 84 to 91). Among the 302 participants with clinical stage I cancer who underwent surgical resection within 1 month after diagnosis, the survival rate was 92% (95% CI, 88 to 95). The 8 participants with clinical stage I cancer who did not receive treatment died within 5 years after diagnosis.

Conclusions Annual spiral CT screening can detect lung cancer that is curable.


In 1993, the Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP) initiated a study of the early diagnosis of lung cancer in cigarette smokers with the use of annual screening with spiral computed tomography (CT). The principal finding was that more than 80% of persons given a diagnosis of lung cancer as a result of annual CT screening had clinical stage I cancer. This result has been confirmed by others who have adopted the updated protocol.  The question remains, however, whether early intervention in such patients is sufficiently effective to justify screening large asymptomatic populations who are at risk for lung cancer. We report the results of all patients in the study with stage I lung cancer detected with the use of spiral CT screening, including those who underwent surgical resection.

In making decisions about instituting CT screening for lung cancer, a major consideration is the outcome of treating a cancer detected on screening. In our study, the estimated 10-year lung-cancer–specific survival rate among the 484 participants with disease diagnosed on CT, regardless of the stage at diagnosis or type of treatment (including no treatment), was 80%. Among the 412 participants with clinical stage I lung cancer — the only stage at which cure by surgery is highly likely — the estimated 10-year survival rate was 88% (95% CI, 84 to 91), and among those with clinical stage I lung cancer who underwent surgical resection within 1 month after the diagnosis, the rate was 92% (95% CI, 88 to 95). The diagnosis of lung cancer of one type or another was verified by a panel of five expert pulmonary pathologists. In our series, the operative mortality rate was low — 0.5% — and was less than the 1.0% reported with lobectomy in a large cooperative study.

Sobue reported a 5-year survival rate of 100% in their series of 29 patients who underwent resection after pathological stage I cancer was detected on CT. Before CT screening, reports based on registries showed 10-year survival rates of 80% among 17 patients with pathological stage I lung cancer 20 mm or less in diameter and 93% among 35 patients with pathological stage I cancer less than 10 mm in diameter. The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry, the largest U.S. cancer registry, reported an 8-year survival rate of 75% among patients with pathological stage I cancer with nodules less than 15 mm in diameter who had undergone resection. Although the lung cancers in these three series were not detected on CT screening, most were presumably incidentally detected on imaging performed for other reasons in people who had no symptoms of lung cancer.

CT screening according to the I-ELCAP regimen can detect clinical stage I lung cancer in a high proportion of persons when it is curable by surgery. In a population at risk for lung cancer, such screening could prevent some 80% of deaths from lung cancer. In comparison, in the United States at present, annually approximately 173,000 persons are diagnosed with lung cancer and 164,000 deaths are attributed to this disease, so that approximately 95% of those who are diagnosed with lung cancer die from it.

Are these results sufficiently effective to justify screening people who are at risk of lung cancer? As compared with mammographic screening for breast cancer, for lung cancer the rates of detection among the participants in this study who were 40 years of age and older were 1.3% on baseline CT screening and 0.3% on annual screening, values that were slightly higher than those for the detection of breast cancer (0.6 to 1.0% on baseline screening) and similar to those for annual screening (0.2 to 0.4%) among women 40 years of age and older. The rate of cancer detection depends on the risk profile of those undergoing screening; the higher the risk, the more productive the screening. Thus, as expected, CT screening of the original participants in ELCAP, who were former and current smokers 60 years of age and older,was more productive in detecting lung cancer (detection rates, 2.7% on baseline screening and 0.6% on annual screening) than among participants in the expanded study. The cost of low-dose CT is below $200, and surgery for stage I lung cancer is less than half the cost of late-stage treatment. Using the original ELCAP data and the actual hospital costs for the workup, we found CT screening for lung cancer to be highly cost-effective.  Other estimates of the cost-effectiveness of CT screening for lung cancer for various risk profiles are similar to that for mammography screening.