Comparative effect of different strategies for the screening of lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Aim: The largest-ever European randomized controlled trial (RCT) compared low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) with usual care for lung cancer screening and reported the mortality results in 2011. Therefore, we conducted this network meta-analysis (NMA) to update the evidence. Subject and methods: Th...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice (2198-1833) Vol. 30; no. 12; pp. 2937 - 2952 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Dec2022
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=160293814&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 160293814 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 21981833 NENI jtl: Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice (2198-1833) issn: 21981833 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Dec2022 vid: 30 iid: 12 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 160293814 10.1007/s10389-022-01696-1 ppf: 2937 ppct: 15 formats: tig: atl: Comparative effect of different strategies for the screening of lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. aug: au: Chen, Yancong Zhang, Zixuan Wang, Huan Sun, Xuemei Lin, Yali Wu, Irene X. Y. affil: Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, No. 238, Shang Ma Yuan ling Alley, Kaifu District, Changsha, Hunan, China Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Clinical Epidemiology, Changsha, China su: Quality of life Mortality prevention Relative medical risk Online information services Medical databases Publication bias Computer software Patient aftercare Meta-analysis Confidence intervals Medical information storage & retrieval systems Smoking cessation Systematic reviews Operative surgery Early detection of cancer Health outcome assessment Lung tumors Tumor classification Research funding Computed tomography Diagnostic errors MEDLINE Research bias Statistical models Sensitivity & specificity (Statistics) Cancer patient medical care sug: subj: Quality of life Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals Irradiation Apparatus Manufacturing Computer, computer peripheral and pre-packaged software merchant wholesalers Computer and Computer Peripheral Equipment and Software Merchant Wholesalers Computer and software stores Software publishers (except video game publishers) Home Health Care Services All other ambulatory health care services All Other Miscellaneous Ambulatory Health Care Services Mortality prevention Relative medical risk Online information services Medical databases Publication bias Computer software Patient aftercare Meta-analysis Confidence intervals Medical information storage & retrieval systems Smoking cessation Systematic reviews Operative surgery Early detection of cancer Health outcome assessment Lung tumors Tumor classification Research funding Computed tomography Diagnostic errors MEDLINE Research bias Statistical models Sensitivity & specificity (Statistics) Cancer patient medical care keyword: LDCT Lung cancer Mortality Network meta-analysis Screening LDCT Lung cancer Mortality Network meta-analysis Screening ab: Aim: The largest-ever European randomized controlled trial (RCT) compared low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) with usual care for lung cancer screening and reported the mortality results in 2011. Therefore, we conducted this network meta-analysis (NMA) to update the evidence. Subject and methods: Three electronic databases were searched for potentially eligible RCTs. Pairwise meta-analyses and NMA were conducted. Results: Eleven RCTs were finally included. Results from pairwise meta-analysis showed that when compared with usual care, LDCT reduced lung cancer mortality (pooled relative risk [RR]: 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69–0.90), but not all-cause mortality (pooled RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.90–1.01). NMA showed differences between LDCT and usual care (pooled RR: 0.85; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.72–0.97) in reducing lung cancer mortality. No statistically meaningful difference was found in terms of all-cause mortality reduction (LDCT vs. usual care: pooled RR: 0.97; 95% CrI: 0.91–1.02). LDCT showed the highest probability of being the most effective screening strategy in terms of mortality reduction. Conclusion: LDCT showed a statistically significant effect in reducing long-term lung cancer mortality when compared with usual care in lung cancer screening. It also showed a promising absolute effect in reducing all-cause mortality, although no statistical difference was observed. Further studies are needed to explore population-specific optimal screening strategies. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|