CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home » NEWS

Oncology NEWS International. Vol. 17 No. 6
 

NELSON trial sails on toward final results in 2015

By June Skinner

| June 1, 2008
Baseline and second-round screening results show a low rate of positive tests: 2.6% at baseline and 1.8% after the second round.

CHICAGO—Baseline and second-round screening results from the Dutch-Belgian NELSON randomized CT lung screening trial show a low rate of positive tests: 2.6% on baseline screening and 1.8% on second-round screening. This could make low-dose CT screening “more acceptable to the public and suitable for mass screening programs,” said Rob J. van Klaveren, MD, PhD, of Erasmus Medical College, Rotterdam. Dr. van Klaveren reported the results at ASCO 2008 (abstract 1508).

NELSON is the only CT lung cancer screening trial in which patients have been recruited using a population registry and the only randomized lung cancer screening trial with no screening in the control arm. Screening began in 2004; interim results are expected in 2009, with final results in 2015. The trial enrolled individuals aged 50 to 75 years who were smokers or ex-smokers who had stopped smoking for less than 10 years.

Screening results

Of 7,556 subjects with baseline scans, 51% had at least one nodule: 79.1% were negative, 19.3% indeterminate, and 1.6% positive. Based on repeat scans of these nodules at 3 months, 96.6% were negative, 1.8% indeterminate, and 2.6% positive.

Second-round screening results at 1 year (n = 7,264) showed 2,313 new nodules: 92.1% were negative, 6.6% indeterminate, and 1.3% positive. Based on 6-week and 1-year repeat scans, “the test eventually became negative in 97.2%, 1% remained indeterminate, and 1.8% became positive,” Dr. van Klaveren said.

The lung cancer prevalence rate at baseline was 0.9%, with 25 patients (0.3%) undergoing resection for a benign lesion. This represented 30% of resections. “It’s important to realize that not all resections for benign lesions were futile,” Dr. van Klaveren said. He pointed out that a large number of nonmalignant diagnoses could be made only at resection, eg, hamartomas, granulomas, sarcoidosis, tuberculosis, and fungal infections.

At first-line screening (baseline and 3-month repeat), 72 cancers were found, with 53 found in the second screening round. “The majority of the nodules originated from previously existing nodules at subsequent repeat scans, and very few cancers originated from new nodules,” Dr. van Klaveren said.

Most cancers stage I

Of the cancers detected in the first round, 72.9% were resectable (64% stage I) and in the second round, 80% were resectable (74% stage I).

Baseline screening had a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 98%, with a positive predictive value of 39% and a negative predictive value of 99.9%.

 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.






 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Key Differences between FQHCs and RHCs
Chastity Werner, RHIT, June 13, 2013
FQHCs and RHCs take up a unique niche among physician practices. And that affects compensation and billing.
Improving Care Coordination in Your Practice
Susanne Madden,  June 12, 2013
Practices are feverishly working to control the rising costs of healthcare - effective care coordination can help.
Refunding Overpayments: Two Options for Medical Practices
Ericka L. Adler,  June 12, 2013
Medicare and Medicaid providers must return overpayments once identified. Here are two different refund approaches for practices to consider when necessary.
Four Easy Ways to Boost Patient Time of Service Collections
Aubrey Westgate,  June 12, 2013
Simple ways your medical practice staff can increase the likelihood patients will pay when presenting for appointments.
iPad Alternatives for Mobile Physicians
Marisa Torrieri, June 11, 2013
As more physicians are seeing the merits of media tablets, the market is expanding, too.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
  • Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Who Is Benefiting?
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
  • Cannabis Linked to Decreased Bladder Cancer Risk
  • Breast Cancer Screening, Risk, and Options for High-Risk Women
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Rising PSA Level in a 46-Year-Old Man
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • ASCO: Dabrafenib Shows Activity in BRAF-Mutated NSCLC Patients
  • Preventing Burnout in Oncology
  • ASCO: Yoga Reduces Insomnia in Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Hormone Therapy
  • Physical Activity Across the Cancer Continuum
  • Exercise After Cancer Diagnosis: Time to Get Moving
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter


CancerNetwork on Facebook


CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy