Challenging the Status Quo Regarding the Benefit of Chest Radiographic Screening.

Authors

Abstract

Chest radiographic (CXR) screening is currently not recommended in the United States by any major guideline organization. Multiple randomized controlled trials done in the United States and also in Europe, with the largest being the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) trial, all failed to show a benefit and are used as evidence to support the current recommendation. Nevertheless, there is renewed interest in CXR screening, especially in low- and middle-resourced countries around the world. Reasons for this are multi-factorial, including the continued concern that those trials still may have missed a benefit, but perhaps more importantly, it is now established conclusively that finding smaller cancers is better than finding larger ones. This was the key finding in those large randomized controlled trials for CT screening. So, while CT finds cancers smaller than CXR, both clearly perform better than waiting for cancers to be larger and detected by symptom prompting. Without it being well understood that treating cancers found in the asymptomatic state by CXR, there would also be no basis for treating them when found incidentally. In addition, advances in artificial intelligence are allowing for nodules to be found earlier and more reliably with CXR than in those prior studies, and in many countries around the world, TB screening is already taking place on a large scale. This presents a major opportunity for integration with lung screening programs.

Tags

Topics