Jump to content

CBS's report on Early Detection


Recommended Posts

(CBS/AP) A new study suggests that screening smokers and former smokers for lung cancer doesn't save lives or prevent advanced disease and may lead to unneeded and harmful treatment.

But it's not the final word on CT scans.

Some experts have hoped that the scans, a special kind of X-ray that can detect tiny lung abnormalities, will prevent lung cancer deaths by getting people into treatment earlier. But there hasn't been convincing evidence of that.

A large, authoritative scientific study won't be completed for a few years. Without that evidence, the American Cancer Society doesn't recommend the test, which costs $300 to $400 — and most insurance companies won't pay for it.

The latest research, appearing in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association, analyzed lung cancer deaths and cases of advanced lung cancer among 3,246 smokers and former smokers who had annual CT scans for about four years.

Researchers compared deaths and advanced cancer cases with rates predicted by a mathematical model. The model — based on a person's age, gender, asbestos exposure and smoking history — has proven valid in previous studies.

The model predicted there would be 33.4 cases of advanced cancer; there were 42. The model predicted 38.8 lung cancer deaths; there were 38.

"We don't see a trace of evidence that a single life was saved, that a single case of advanced cancer was avoided," said study co-author Dr. Peter Bach of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

CT screening did increase diagnosis and treatment. The people screened were three times more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer and 10 times more likely to have lung surgery than predicted.

Bach said it's likely the cancers found by scans were so slow-growing they might never have caused death. Meanwhile, scanning missed the fast-growing, fatal cancers that popped up between the annual scans.

"It's like taking a photo of the night sky when you're looking for a shooting star," Bach said.

Because CT scanning led to more biopsies and surgeries, patients were at risk of complications such as lung punctures, bleeding and infection, Bach said.

"Getting screened for lung cancer with CT scanning is not only unproven, it's potentially a risky endeavor," he said.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States and worldwide. About 213,380 Americans will be diagnosed with lung cancer in 2007, and the disease is expected to kill 160,390. Smoking is the main culprit.

Last year, another study was more encouraging about the potential for CT screening. It found that people whose early tumors were detected and promptly removed had an estimated 10-year survival rate of 92 percent.

An author of that study, Dr. Claudia Henschke of New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center, said the new findings don't detract from the benefit found in her study. She said both studies should encourage discussion of how best to evaluate screening tools.

Henschke believes the test should be more widely available, reports CBS News correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook.

"We reported that 20 percent of the people died and 80 percent are still alive after 10 years," she says.

Any alternative to CT scans for lung cancer screening is many years away.

Dr. David Johnson at Nashville's Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, who wasn't involved in either study, said the new research adds a note of caution about CT scans as smokers, former smokers and their doctors wait for results from the National Cancer Institute's study of 50,000 people, coming in a few years.

In the meantime, Johnson doesn't recommend routine CT scans. "There's nothing more powerful to protect yourself from lung cancer than stopping smoking," he said. "CT scanning is not the answer. Stopping smoking is the answer."

© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This type of sterotyping continues top perpetuate the myth that all LC pateints smoked therefor acused their own disease.More press needs to be devoted to those who have never smoked and have no contributing factors or symtoms.Those whose DX was a shock.Maybe then the research dollars would start to trickle in to find a better cure,and early teasting options.I am appalled by this report even being published.With all the newly DX female population, never smokers being DX one would think someone would be researching that apparent link....But I suppose that just not newsworthy enough?OK I'm off my soapbox now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.