|
Summary of Evidence
Screening for Lung Cancer with Chest X-Ray and/or Sputum Cytology
Benefits
Harms
Screening for Lung Cancer with Low-Dose Helical Computed Tomography (LDCT)
Benefits
Harms
Separate PDQ summaries on Lung Cancer Prevention, Small Cell Lung
Cancer Treatment, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treatment, and Levels of Evidence for Cancer Screening and Prevention Studies are also available.
Screening for Lung Cancer with Chest X-Ray and/or Sputum Cytology
Benefits
Based on fair evidence, screening does not reduce mortality from lung cancer.
Description of the Evidence
-
Study Design: Evidence obtained from randomized controlled trials.
-
Internal Validity: Fair, due to lack of unscreened groups and contamination.
-
Consistency: Good.
-
Direction and Magnitude of Effect: No evidence of effect.
-
External Validity: Fair, due to lack of women and minority groups.
Harms
Based on solid evidence, screening would lead to false-positive tests and unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures and treatments.
Description of the Evidence
-
Study Design: Evidence obtained from randomized controlled trials.
-
Internal Validity: Fair.
-
Consistency: Good.
-
Direction and Magnitude of Effect: False-positive results range from 4% to 15%; there is a possibility of overdiagnosis and overtreatment (magnitude uncertain).
-
External Validity: Fair.
Screening for Lung Cancer with Low-Dose Helical Computed Tomography (LDCT)
Benefits
The evidence is inadequate to determine whether screening reduces mortality from lung cancer.
Description of the Evidence
-
Study Design: Evidence obtained from cohort or case-control studies.
-
Internal Validity: Poor for answering the question of mortality reduction from screening with LDCT.
-
Consistency: Good.
-
Direction and Magnitude of Effect: Cannot determine from the available studies.
-
External Validity: Not applicable, as the internal validity of the evidence is poor.
Harms
Based on solid evidence, screening would lead to false-positive tests and unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures and treatments.
Description of the Evidence
-
Study Design: Evidence obtained from cohort or case-control studies.
-
Internal Validity: Poor.
-
Consistency: Good.
-
Direction and Magnitude of Effect: False-positive results range from 20% to 50%; overdiagnosis and overtreatment are possible (magnitude uncertain).
-
External Validity: Fair.
 Back to Top
< Previous Section | Next Section > |
