DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Review of the Radiation Risk and Clinical Efficacy Associated with Computed Tomography Cancer Screening

암의 조기발견을 위한 CT촬영에서의 임상적 효능과 방사선위해에 대한 고찰

  • Kim, Hyun Ja (Dept. of Radiologic Technology, Daejeon Health Sciences College)
  • 김현자 (대전보건대학교 방사선과)
  • Received : 2013.11.18
  • Accepted : 2013.12.05
  • Published : 2013.12.30

Abstract

Computed tomographic scan as a screening procedures in asymptomatic individuals has seen a steady increase with the introduction of multiple-raw detector CT scanners. This report provides a brief review of the current controversy surrounding CT cancer screening, with a focus on the radiation induced cancer risks and clinical efficacy. 1. A large study of patients at high risk of lung cancer(the National Lung Screening Trial[NLST]) showed that CT screening reduced cancer deaths by 20%(1.33% in those screened compared with 1.67% in those not screened). The rate of positive screening tests was 24.2% and 96.4% of the positive screening results in the low-dose CT group were false-positive. Radiation induced lung cancer risk was estimated the most important in screening population because ERR of radiation induced lung cancer does not show the decrease with increasing age and synergistic connection between smoking and radiation risk. Therefore, the radiation risk may be on the same order of magnitude as the benefit observed in the NLST. Optimal screening strategy remain uncertain, CT lung cancer screening is not yet ready for implementation. 2. Computed tomographic colonography is as good as colonoscopy for detecting colon cancer and is almost as good as colonoscopy for detecting advanced adenomas, but significantly less sensitive and specific for smaller lesions and disadvantageous for subsequent therapeutic optical colonoscopy if polyps are detected. The average effective dose from CT colonography was estimated 8-10 $mS{\nu}$, which could be a significant dose if administered routinely within the population over many years. CT colonography should a) achieve at least 90% sensitivity and specificity in the size category from 6 and 10 mm, b) offer non-cathartic bowl preparation and c) be optimized and standardized CT parameters if it is to be used for mass screening. 3. There is little evidence that demonstrates, for whole-body scanning, the benefit outweighs the detriment. This test found large portion of patient(86~90.8%) had at least one abnormal finding, whereas only 2% were estimated to have clinically significant disease. Annual scans from ages 45 to 75 years would accrue an estimated lifetime cancer mortality risk of 1.9%. There is no group within the medical community that recommends whole-body CT. No good studies indicate the accuracy of screening CT, at this time. The benefit/risk balance for any of the commonly suggested CT screening techniques has yet to be established. These areas need further research. Therefore wild screening should be avoided.

References

  1. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD health care resources. http://stats.oecd.org
  2. National health insurance statistical yearbook. 2012.
  3. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. National Council on Radiation Protection Report no. 160. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States(2009). Bethesda, MD, USA. 2009.
  4. You JJ, Levinson W, Laupacis A. Attitudes of family physicians, specialists and radiologists about the use of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in Ontario. Health Policy. 2009;5(1):54-65.
  5. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, Kim KP, Mahesh M, Gould R, Berrington de Gonzalez A, Miglioretti DL. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch. Intern. Med. 2009;169(22):2078-2086. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2009.427
  6. Obuchowski NA, Graham RJ, Baker ME, Powell KA. Ten criteria for effective screening: their application to multislice CT screening for pulmonary and colorectal cancers. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2001:176(6):1357-1362. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.176.6.1761357
  7. Cole P. Morrison AS. Basic issues in population screening for patients. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1980:64:1263-1272.
  8. Black WC, Welch HG. Screening for disease. Am. J. Roentgenol. 1997;168(1):3-11. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.168.1.8976910
  9. Herman CR, Gill HK, Eng J, Fajardo LL. Screening for preclinical disease: test and disease characteristics. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002;179(4):825-831. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.179.4.1790825
  10. Black WC, Welch HG. Advances in diagnostic imaging and overestimation of disease prevalence and the benefits of therapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 1993;328(17):1237-1243. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199304293281706
  11. Morrison AS. Screening in chronic disease. 2nd ed. New York. Oxford University Press. 1992:25-42.
  12. Laupacis A, Sackett DL, Roberts RS. An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. N. Engl. J. Med. 1988:318(26):1728-1733. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198806303182605
  13. National Research Council (US). Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation, BEIR VII phase 2. Washington DC. USA. 2006.
  14. http://www.index.go.kr/egams/stts/jsp/potal/stts/PO_STTS_IdxMain.jsp?idx_cd=2770
  15. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, Naidich DP, McGuinness G, Miettinen OS, Libby DM, Pasmantier MW, Koizumi J, Altorki NK, Smith JP. Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet. 1999;354:99-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)06093-6
  16. Henschke CI, Naidich DP, Yankelevitz DF, McGuinness G, McCauley DI, Smith JP, Libby D, Pasmantier M, Vazquez M, Koizumi J, Flieder D, Altorki N, Miettinen OS. Early lung cancer action project: initial findings on repeat screenings. Cancer. 2001;92(1):153-159. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20010701)92:1<153::AID-CNCR1303>3.0.CO;2-S
  17. International Early Lung Cancer Action Program Investigators, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Libby DM, Pasmantier MW, Smith JP, Miettinen OS. Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 2006;355(17):1763-1771. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa060476
  18. Sone S, Li F, Yang ZG, et al. Results of three-year mass screening programme for lung cancer using mobile low-dose spiral computed tomography scanner. Br. J. Cancer. 2001;84(1):25-32. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.2000.1531
  19. Nawa T, Nakagawa T, Kusano S, Kawasaki Y, Sugawara Y, Nakata H. Lung cancer screening using low-dose spiral CT: results of baseline and 1-year follow-up studies. Chest. 2002;122(1):15-20. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.122.1.15
  20. Sobue T, Moriyama N, Kaneko M, et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose helical computed tomography:anti-lung cancer association project. J. Clin. Oncol. 2002;20(4):911-920. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.20.4.911
  21. Swensen SJ, Jett JR, Hartman TE, Midthun DE, Sloan JA, Sykes AM, Aughenbaugh GL, Clemens MA. Lung cancer screening with CT: Mayo Clinic experience. Radiology. 2003;226(3):756-761. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2263020036
  22. Pastorino U, Bellomi M, Landoni C, De Fiori E, Arnaldi P, Picchio M, Pelosi G, Boyle P, Fazio F. Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year results. Lancet. 2003;362:593-597. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14188-8
  23. Mulshine JL, Sullivan DC. Clinical practice. Lung cancer screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 2005;352(26):2714-2720. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp042630
  24. Libby DM, Wu N, Lee IJ, Farooqi A, Smith JP, Pasmantier MW, McCauley D, Yankelevitz DF, Henschke CI. CT screening for lung cancer:the value of short-term CT follow-up. Chest. 2006;129(4):1039-1042. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.129.4.1039
  25. MacRedmond R, McVey G, Lee M, Costello RW, Kenny D, Foley C, Logan PM. Screening for lung cancer using low dose CT scanning: results of 2 year follow up. Thorax. 2006;61(1):54-56.
  26. Bach PB, Niewoehner DE, Black WC. American College of Chest Physicians. Screening for lung cancer: the guidelines. Chest. 2003;123:83S-88S. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.123.1_suppl.83S
  27. Paci E. Observational, one-arm studies and randomized population-based trials for evaluation of the efficacy of lung cancer screening. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2007;2:S45-S46. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.JTO.0000268644.78944.3f
  28. Infante M, Lutman FR, Cavuto S, Brambilla G, Chiesa G, Passera E, Angeli E, Chiarenza M, Aranzulla G, Cariboni U, Alloisio M, Incarbone M, Testori A, Destro A, Cappuzzo F, Roncalli M, Santoro A, Ravasi G, DANTE Study Group. Lung cancer screening with spiral CT Baseline results of the randomized DANTE trial. Lung Cancer. 2008;59(3):355-363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2007.08.040
  29. Infante M, Cavuto S, Lutman FR, Brambilla G, Chiesa G, Ceresoli G, Passera E, Angeli E, Chiarenza M, Aranzulla G, Cariboni U, Errico V, Inzirillo F, Bottoni E, Voulaz E, Alloisio M, Destro A, Roncalli M, Santoro A, Ravasi G, DANTE Study Group. A randomized Study of lung cancer screening with spiral computed tomography: three-year results from the DANTE Trial. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2009;180(5):445-453. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200901-0076OC
  30. Clark KW, Gierada DS, Marquez G, Moore SM, Maffitt DR, Moulton JD, Wolfsberger MA, Koppel P, Phillips SR, Prior FW. Collecting 48,000 CT Exams for the lung screening study of the National Lung Screening Trial. J. Digit. Imaging. 2009;22(6):667-680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-008-9145-9
  31. van Iersel CA, de Koning HJ, Draisma G, Mali WP, Scholten ET, Nackaerts K, Prokop M, Habbema JD, Oudkerk M, van Klaveren RJ. Risk-based selection from the general population in a screening trial: selection criteria, recruitment and power for the Dutch-Belgian randomised lung cancer multi-slice CT screening trial(NELSON). Int. J. Cancer. 2007;120(4):868-874. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.22134
  32. Pedersen JH, Ashraf H, Dirksen A, Bach K, Hansen H, Toennesen P, Thorsen H, Brodersen J, Skov BG, Dossing M, Mortensen J, Richter K, Clementsen P, Seersholm N. The Danish randomized lung cancer CT screening trial-overall design and results of the prevalence round. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2009;4(5):608-614. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181a0d98f
  33. Lopes Pegna A, Picozzi G, Mascalchi M, Maria Carozzi F, Carrozzi L, Comin C, Spinelli C, Falaschi F, Grazzini M, Innocenti F, Ronchi C, Paci E, ITALUNG Study Research Group. Design, recruitment and baseline results of the ITALUNG trial for lung cancer screening with low-dose CT. Lung Cancer. 2009;64(1):34-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.07.003
  34. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, Black WC, Clapp JD, Fagerstrom RM, Gareen IF, Gatsonis C, Marcus PM, Sicks JD. Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011;365(5):395-409. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1102873
  35. Boiselle PM, Lynm C, Livingston EH. JAMA patient page. Lung cancer screening. JAMA. 2013;309(18):1948. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.4324
  36. Christensen JD, Tong BC. Computed tomography screening for lung cancer: where are we now? N. C. Med J. 2013;74(5):406-410.
  37. Thompson DE, Mabuchi K, Ron E, Soda M, Tokunaga M, Ochikubo S, Sugimoto S, Ikeda T, Terasaki M, Izumi S, et al. Cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors. Part II. Solid tumors, 1958-1987. Radiat. Res. 1994;137(2 suppl):S17-S67. https://doi.org/10.2307/3578892
  38. National Research Council. Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR V. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 1990.
  39. Brenner DJ. Radiation risks potentially associated with low-dose CT screening of adult smokers for lung cancer. Radiology. 2004;231(2):440-445. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2312030880
  40. Pierce, D.A., G.B. Sharp, and K. Mabuchi. Joint effects of radiation and smoking on lung cancer risk among atomic bomb survivors. Radiat. Res. 2003;159(4):511-520. https://doi.org/10.1667/0033-7587(2003)159[0511:JEORAS]2.0.CO;2
  41. Tokarskaya ZB, Scott BR, Zhuntova GV, Okladnikova ND, Belyaeva ZD, Khokhryakov VF, Schollnberger H, Vasilenko EK. Interaction of radiation and smoking in lung cancer induction among workers at the Mayak nuclear enterprise. Health Phys. 2002;83(6):833-846. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004032-200212000-00011
  42. Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, Funamoto S, Nishi N, Soda M, Mabuchi K, Kodama K. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Radiat. Res. 2007;168(1):1-64. https://doi.org/10.1667/RR0763.1
  43. Nishizawa K, Iwai K, Matsumoto T, Sakashita K, Iinuma TA, Tateno Y, Miyamoto T, Shimura A, Takagi H. Estimation of the exposure and a risk-benefit analysis for a CT system designed for a lung cancer mass screening unit. Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry. 1996;67(2):101-108. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a031801
  44. Albert JM. Radiation risk from CT: implications for cancer screening. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2013;201(1):W81-87. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.9226
  45. Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, Brink JA, Forman HP. Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology. 2004;231(2):393-398. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2312030767
  46. Italian Multicentre Study Group, Citarda F, Tomaselli G, Capocaccia R, Barcherini S, Crespi M. Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence. Gut. 2001;48(6):812-815. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.48.6.812
  47. Lieberman DA, Weiss DG, Bond JH, Ahnen DJ, Garewal H, Chejfec G. Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer: Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380. N. Engl. J. Med. 2000;343(3):162-168 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM200007203430301
  48. Coin CG, Wollett FC, Coin JT, Rowland M, DeRamos RK, Dandrea R. Computerized radiology of the colon: a potential screening technique. Comput. Radiol. 1983;7(4):215-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/0730-4862(83)90145-2
  49. Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH. CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a practical approach for population screening. Radiol. Clin. North Am. 2007;45(2):361-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2007.03.011
  50. van Dam J, Cotton P, Johnson CD, McFarland BG, Pineau BC, Provenzale D, Ransohoff D, Rex D, Rockey D, Wootton FT 3rd. American Gastroenterological Association. AGA future trends report: CT colonography. Gastroenterology. 2004;127(3):970-984. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2004.07.003
  51. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, Butler JA, Puckett ML, Hildebrandt HA, Wong RK, Nugent PA, Mysliwiec PA, Schindler WR. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N. Engl. J. Med. 2003;349(23):2191-2200. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa031618
  52. Brenner D, Georgsson MA. Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology. 2005;129(1):328-337. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2005.05.021
  53. Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X, Milano A, Katz SS, Resnick D, Chandarana H, Krinsky G, Klingenbeck K, Marshall CH, Megibow AJ. Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. Radiology. 2002;224(2):383-92. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2242011382
  54. Halligan S, Altman DG, Taylor SA, et al. CT colonography in the detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: systematic review, meta-analysis, and proposed minimum data set for study level reporting. Radiology. 2005;237(3):893-904. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2373050176
  55. Taylor SA, Slater A, Burling DN, Tam E, Greenhalgh R, Gartner L, Scarth J, Pearce R, Bassett P, Halligan S. CT colonography: optimisation, diagnostic performance and patient acceptability of reduced-laxative regimens using barium-based faecal tagging. Eur. Radiol. 2008;18(1):32-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0631-0
  56. Zalis ME, Perumpillichira JJ, Magee C, Kohlberg G, Hahn PF. Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability. Radiology. 2006;239(1):149-159. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2383041308
  57. Regge D, Laudi C, Galatola G, Della Monica P, Bonelli L, Angelelli G, Asnaghi R, Barbaro B, Bartolozzi C, Bielen D, Boni L, Borghi C, Bruzzi P, Cassinis MC, Galia M, Gallo TM, Grasso A, Hassan C, Laghi A, Martina MC, Neri E, Senore C, Simonetti G, Venturini S, Gandini G. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomographic colonography for the detection of advanced neoplasia in individuals at increased risk of colorectal cancer. JAMA. 2009;301(23):2453-2461. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.832
  58. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim KP, Berg CD. Low-dose lung computed tomography screening before age 55:estimates of the mortality reduction required to outweigh the radiation-induced cancer risk. J. Med. Screen. 2008;15(3):153-158. https://doi.org/10.1258/jms.2008.008052
  59. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, Heiken JP, Dachman A, Kuo MD, Menias CO, Siewert B, Cheema JI, Obregon RG, Fidler JL, Zimmerman P, Horton KM, Coakley K, Iyer RB, Hara AK, Halvorsen RA Jr, Casola G, Yee J, Herman BA, Burgart LJ, Limburg PJ. Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008;359(12):1207-1217. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0800996
  60. Flicek KT, Hara AK, Silva AC, Wu Q, Peter MB, Johnson CD. Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a pilot study. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2010;195(1):126-131. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.3855
  61. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Bartram CI, Morgan PR, Talbot IC, Fry N, Saunders BP, Khosraviani K, Atkin W. Multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of collimation, pitch, and orientation on polyp detection in a human colectomy specimen. Radiology. 2003;229(1):109-118. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2291020561
  62. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IW, Nio CY, Determann RM, Tipker CA, Vos FM, Glas AS, Bartelsman JF, Bossuyt PM, Lameris JS, Stoker J. CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology. 2002;224(1):25-33. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2241011126
  63. Illes J, Fan E, Koenig BA, Raffin TA, Kann D, Atlas SW. Self-referred whole-body CT imaging: current implications for health care consumers. Radiology. 2003;228(2):346-351. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2282021083
  64. Berland LL, Berland NW. Whole-body computed tomography screening. Semin. Roentgenol. 2003;38(1):65-76.
  65. Casarella WJ. A patient's viewpoint on a current controversy. Radiology. 2002;224(3):927. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2243020024
  66. Beinfeld MT, Wittenberg E, Gazelle GS. Cost-effectiveness of whole-body CT screening. Radiology. 2005;234(2):415-422. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2342032061
  67. Furtado CD, Aguirre DA, Sirlin CB, Dang D, Stamato SK, Lee P, Sani F, Brown MA, Levin DL, Casola G. Whole-body CT screening: spectrum of findings and recommendations in 1192 patients. Radiology. 2005;237(2):385-394. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2372041741
  68. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology. 2004;232(3):735-738. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323031095
  69. http://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/news/newdetarget.cfm?ID=5