Study: Scan May Be Best Test for Lung Cancer A computerized chest scan passes the test for detecting lung cancer early, says a new study. That in turn may give doctors more time to beat the disease. But other experts say it remains to be seen if early detection translates into a full cure vs. adding a few years to a patient's life.
NPR logo

Study: Scan May Be Best Test for Lung Cancer

  • Download
  • <iframe src="" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript
Study: Scan May Be Best Test for Lung Cancer

Study: Scan May Be Best Test for Lung Cancer

  • Download
  • <iframe src="" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript


Lung cancer kills more Americans than breast, prostate and colon cancer combined. And unlike those other cancers, there is no agreed upon screening test to catch lung cancer when it's early and curable. A study in tomorrow's New England Journal of Medicine may help change that.

But as NPR's Richard Knox reports, experts disagree about when the evidence will be strong enough to recommend that people at risk of lung cancer get the screening test.

RICHARD KNOX: The test is called Spiral CT. It's a computerized x-ray scan that takes hundreds of detailed pictures of the chest in the space of three seconds. It can spot lung tumors smaller than a pea.

Seven years ago, a group at Cornell University published one of the first big studies suggesting that spiral CT might be used to screen the lungs of smokers and former smokers for signs of lung cancer long before symptoms appear. Now the same group is publishing results on more than 31,000 patients from around the world.

Dr. Claudia Henschke, who heads the Cornell group, says spiral CT turned up nearly 500 lung cancers.

Dr. CLAUDIA HENSCHKE (Cornell University): The overall survival was 80 percent, which is quite dramatic compared to what the rates are in the U.S. year after year. Only about five percent of the people who are diagnosed with Lung cancer eventually are cured of it. So that's a tremendous improvement.

KNOX: The results look even better among the great majority of patients in the study diagnosed with early stage lung cancer. Based on results so far, an impressive 92 percent of those are projected to be alive 10 years after diagnosis.

Dr. HENSCHKE: I think our study gives compelling evidence that screening is useful and can be done responsibly now.

KNOX: Henschke is the most prominent enthusiast for lung cancer screening but she's not alone. Dr. James Mulshine of Rush University in Chicago is a veteran cancer prevention expert who sits on Henschke's advisory board. He calls the new results a landmark.

Dr. JAMES MULSHINE (Rush University): In one fell swoop, you go from 15 percent, five year survival, to 92 percent, 10 year survival. That's amazing. Claudia's result is spectacular. The question is, is it generalizable? And should it be the basis of public health policy changes?

KNOX: Mulshine says the new results should force a public debate on that question.

Dr. MULSHINE: This is a very strong suggestion that lung cancer screening can conform to the kind of experience we've had with colon cancer and breast cancer and cervical cancer.

KNOX: Other experts say not so fast. Dr. Ned Patz is a radiologist at Duke University.

Dr. NED PATZ (Duke University): This study basically demonstrates that those individuals who have a lesion detected by CT, who are then diagnosed with early stage lung cancer, do fairly well, which we've known for over 40 years, but tells us nothing though about if we screen a group of individuals, whether they'll do better than if we don't screen a group of individuals.

KNOX: That's exactly the question that Dr. Denise Aberle of UCLA Medical Center is trying to answer. She heads a giant, federally financed study that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars. It's enrolled 53,000 smokers and former smokers. Half are getting annual CT scans, half are getting annual chest x-rays.

Aberle says the study published this week can't determine if spiral CT actually reduces lung cancer deaths in the long run because there was no comparison group that didn't get spiral CT.

Dr. DENISE ABERLE (UCLA Medical Center): We know it prolongs survival. We absolutely need to know whether or not the screening intervention reduces lung cancer mortality.

KNOX: She says prolonging individual patients' survival isn't the same thing as making a big dent in the overall lung cancer death rate, and only studies like hers and others underway in Europe can nail down that question.

But results from those studies won't be available for at least three years. Four hundred eighty thousand Americans will die from lung cancer in that time, and some experts think spiral CT might save some of those lives.

Still, there's not likely to be an official recommendation until further big studies are concluded.

For the 80 million Americans at risk of lung cancer who choose to seek a spiral CT test in the meantime, the American Cancer Society warns that there are risks from spiral CT. A positive result can lead to lung biopsies and even major surgery for findings that may turn out not to be lung cancer.

The Cornell group found ways to reduce those risks. But everyone agrees that American doctors in general are a long way from being ready to deal with the complicated issues that arise from screening for lung cancer.

Richard Knox, NPR News.

Copyright © 2006 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.