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)
Top Cited Papers
- 27 December 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in International Journal of Cancer
- Vol. 120 (4), 868-874
- https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.22134
Abstract
A method to obtain the optimal selection criteria, taking into account available resources and capacity and the impact on power, is presented for the Dutch‐Belgian randomised lung cancer screening trial (NELSON). NELSON investigates whether 16‐detector multi‐slice computed tomography screening will decrease lung cancer mortality compared to no screening. A questionnaire was sent to 335,441 (mainly) men, aged 50–75. Smoking exposure (years smoked, cigarettes/day, years quit) was determined, and expected lung cancer mortality was estimated for different selection scenarios for the 106,931 respondents, using lung cancer mortality data by level of smoking exposure (US Cancer Prevention Study I and II). Selection criteria were chosen so that the required response among eligible subjects to reach sufficient sample size was minimised and the required sample size was within our capacity. Inviting current and former smokers (quit ≤ 10 years ago) who smoked >15 cigarettes/day during >25 years or >10 cigarettes/day during >30 years was most optimal. With a power of 80%, 17,300–27,900 participants are needed to show a 20–25% lung cancer mortality reduction 10 years after randomisation. Until October 18, 2005 11,103 (first recruitment round) and 4,325 (second recruitment round) (total = 15,428) participants have been randomised. Selecting participants for lung cancer screening trials based on risk estimates is feasible and helpful to minimize sample size and costs. When pooling with Danish trial data (n = ±4,000) NELSON is the only trial without screening in controls that is expected to have 80% power to show a lung cancer mortality reduction of at least 25% 10 years after randomisation.Keywords
Funding Information
- Zorg Onderzoek Nederland-Medische Wetenschappen (ZonMW)
- KWF Kankerbestrijding, Stichting Centraal Fonds Reserves van Voormalig Vrijwillige Ziekenfondsverzekeringen (RvvZ)
- Siemens Germany, G. Ph. Verhagen Stichting, Rotterdam Oncologic Thoracic Steering committee (ROTS)
- Erasmus Trust fund, Stichting tegen Kanker
- Vlaamse Liga Tegen Kanker
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Lung Cancer ScreeningNew England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Multistage Carcinogenesis and Lung Cancer Mortality in Three CohortsCancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 2005
- Final results of the Lung Screening Study, a randomized feasibility study of spiral CT versus chest X-ray screening for lung cancerLung Cancer, 2005
- Gender differences in non–small-cell lung cancer survival: an analysis of 4,618 patients diagnosed between 1997 and 2002The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2004
- Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years' observations on male British doctorsBMJ, 2004
- Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year resultsThe Lancet, 2003
- Prostate cancer mortality reduction by screening: Power and time frame with complete enrollment in the European randomised screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC) trialInternational Journal of Cancer, 2001
- Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screeningThe Lancet, 1999
- Rationale for randomised trials of prostate cancer screeningEuropean Journal Of Cancer, 1999
- Patterns of Absolute Risk of Lung Cancer Mortality in Former SmokersJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1993