Korean J Health Promot.  2019 Dec;19(4):166-170. 10.15384/kjhp.2019.19.4.166.

National Lung Cancer Screening Program in Korea: More Harm Than Good

• Shin SW
• Lee J

• KMID: 2469163
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.15384/kjhp.2019.19.4.166

Abstract

Although the result of low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for high risk smoker for lung cancer (National Lung Screening Trial, NLST) showed 20% of lower lung cancer death compare to chest X-ray screening, which published in 2011, after more than 8 years passed, no European or Asian country has implemented organized lung cancer screening with LDCT, and there are no National Lung Cancer Screening Program globally. In United States, where LDCT lung screening has become standard procedure, the screening rate is extremely low, less than 5%. That is because in spite of the considerable the benefit of the screening, the harms of screening; specifically, most notably due to the high level of false positives, and physical, psychological, and economical burdens. Recently the controversies regarding the harms of LDCT lung screening has been increasingly debated. Also, the novel strategies, such as artificial intelligence and volumetric measurement of suspicious nodules has been adopted for recently launched lung cancer screening clinical trials. However, amid of skeptical opinions increasing globally, Korean Government recently decided to include LDCT lung cancer screening as national cancer screening program, becoming Korea as the first and the only national lung cancer screening program worldwide. Without randomized trial proven to be effective for Korea population, hurried implementation of national lung cancer screening program could have more harmful effect than benefit in terms of public health perspectives.

Keyword

Lung cancer; Screening; Korea

MeSH Terms

Artificial Intelligence
Asian Continental Ancestry Group
Early Detection of Cancer
Humans
Korea*
Lung Neoplasms*
Lung*
Mass Screening*
Public Health
Thorax
United States

Reference

1. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, Black WC, Clapp JD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365(5):395–409.

2. Aberle DR, DeMello S, Berg CD, Black WC, Brewer B, Church TR, et al. Results of the two incidence screenings in the National Lung Screening Trial. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369(10):920–931.

3. Robbins HA, Callister M, Sasieni P, Quaife SL, Cheung LC, Brennan P, et al. Benefits and harms in the National Lung Screening Trial: expected outcomes with a modern management protocol. Lancet Respir Med. 2019; 7(8):655–656.

4. Okereke IC, Nishi S, Zhou J, Goodwin JS. Trends in lung cancer screening in the United States, 2016-2017. J Thorac Dis. 2019; 11(3):873–881.

5. Reich JM, Kim JS. Five reasons for caution in advocating low-dose computerized tomographic lung cancer screening. J Thorac Dis. 2017; 9(9):3433–3436.

6. Pinsky PF. Lung cancer screening with low-dose CT: a world-wide view. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2018; 7(3):234–242.

7. Bach PB, Brawley OW, Silvestri GA. Low-dose CT for lung cancer screening. Lancet Oncol. 2018; 19(3):e133–e134.

8. O'Dowd EL, Ten Haaf K. Lung cancer screening: enhancing risk stratification and minimising harms by incorporating information from screening results. Thorax. 2019; 74(9):825–827.

9. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. Lung cancer screening in Europe: hurdles to overcome. Lancet Respir Med. 2018; 6(12):885.

10. Oudkerk M, Devaraj A, Vliegenthart R, Henzler T, Prosch H, Heussel CP, et al. European position statement on lung cancer screening. Lancet Oncol. 2017; 18(12):e754–e766.

11. Hutchinson L. Screening: NELSON shows less is more in lung cancer screening. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014; 11(12):682.

12. Horeweg N, van der Aalst CM, Vliegenthart R, Zhao Y, Xie X, Scholten ET, et al. Volumetric computed tomography screening for lung cancer: three rounds of the NELSON trial. Eur Respir J. 2013; 42(6):1659–1667.

13. Reich JM, Kim JS. The National Lung Screening Trial premise of null and chest radiography equivalence is open to question. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015; 205(2):278–279.

14. Snowsill T, Yang H, Griffin E, Long L, Varley-Campbell J, Coelho H, et al. Low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2018; 22(69):1–276.

15. Ruano-Ravina A, Pérez-Ríos M, Casàn-Clará P, Provencio-Pulla M. Low-dose CT for lung cancer screening. Lancet Oncol. 2018; 19:e131–e132.

16. Howard DH, Richards TB, Bach PB, Kegler MC, Berg CJ. Comorbidities, smoking status, and life expectancy among individuals eligible for lung cancer screening. Cancer. 2015; 121(24):4341–4347.

17. Yankelevitz DF, Smith JP. Understanding the core result of the National Lung Screening Trial. N Engl J Med. 2013; 368(15):1460–1461.

18. Reich JM. Reservations regarding lung cancer screening guidelines. Chest. 2018; 154(3):715–716.

19. Patz EF Jr, Pinsky P, Gatsonis C, Sicks JD, Kramer BS, Tammemägi MC, et al. Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA Intern Med. 2014; 174(2):269–274.

20. Detterbeck FC. Overdiagnosis during lung cancer screening: is it an overemphasised, underappreciated, or tangential issue? Thorax. 2014; 69(5):407–408.

21. Bach PB, Mirkin JN, Oliver TK, Azzoli CG, Berry DA, Brawley OW, et al. Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA. 2012; 307(22):2418–2429.

22. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Church TR, Black WC, Aberle DR, Berg CD, Clingan KL, et al. Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013; 368(21):1980–1991.

23. Bach PB. Perilous potential: the chance to save lives, or lose them, through low dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2013; 108(5):287–288.

24. Twombly R. Lung cancer screening trial financed by tobacco-funded foundation, sparks debate. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008; 100(10):690–691.

25. Reich JM. A critical appraisal of overdiagnosis: estimates of its magnitude and implications for lung cancer screening. Thorax. 2008; 63(4):377–383.

26. Harris RP, Sheridan SL, Lewis CL, Barclay C, Vu MB, Kistler CE, et al. The harms of screening: a proposed taxonomy and application to lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2014; 174(2):281–285.

27. Tanner NT, Silvestri GA. Shared decision-making and lung cancer screening: let's get the conversation started. Chest. 2019; 155(1):21–24.

28. De Allie G, Tanksley P, Chang EY. Physicians' Responsibilities in Shared Decision-making for Lung Cancer Screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2019; 179(7):994–995.