Search

Background Pulmonary and extrapulmonary incidental findings are frequently identified on CT scans performed for lung cancer screening. Uncertainty regarding their clinical significance and how and when such findings should be reported back to clinicians and participants persists. We examined the prevalence of non-malignant incidental findings within a lung cancer screening cohort and investigated the morbidity and relevant risk factors associated with incidental findings. We quantified the primary and secondary care referrals generated by our protocol.Methods The SUMMIT study (NCT03934866) is a prospective observational cohort study to examine the performance of delivering a low-dose CT (LDCT) screening service to a high-risk population. Spirometry, blood pressure, height/weight and respiratory history were assessed as part of a Lung Health Check. Individuals at high risk of lung cancer were offered an LDCT and returned for two further annual visits. This analysis is a prospective evaluation of the standardised reporting and management protocol for incidental findings developed for the study on the baseline LDCT.Results In 11 115 participants included in this analysis, the most common incidental findings were coronary artery calcification (64.2%) and emphysema (33.4%). From our protocolised management approach, the number of participants requiring review for clinically relevant findings in primary care was 1 in 20, and the number potentially requiring review in secondary care was 1 in 25.Conclusions Incidental findings are common in lung cancer screening and can be associated with reported symptoms and comorbidities. A standardised reporting protocol allows systematic assessment and standardises onward management.

Currently the screening for lung cancer for risk groups is based on Computed Tomography (CT) or low dose CT (LDCT); however, the lung cancer death rate has not decreased significantly with people undergoing LDCT. We aimed to develop a simple reliable blood test for early detection of all types of lung cancer based on the immunogenicity of aberrant forms of BARD1 that are specifically upregulated in lung cancer.ELISA assays were performed with a panel of BARD1 epitopes to detect serum levels of antibodies against BARD1 epitopes. We tested 194 blood samples from healthy donors and lung cancer patients with a panel of 40 BARD1 antigens. Using fitted Lasso logistic regression we determined the optimal combination of BARD1 antigens to be used in ELISA for discriminating lung cancer from healthy controls. Random selection of samples for training sets or validations sets was applied to validate the accuracy of our test.Fitted Lasso logistic regression models predict high accuracy of the BARD1 autoimmune antibody test with an AUC = 0.96. Validation in independent samples provided and AUC = 0.86 and identical AUCs were obtained for combined stages 1-3 and late stage 4 lung cancers. The BARD1 antibody test is highly specific for lung cancer and not breast or ovarian cancer.The BARD1 lung cancer test shows higher sensitivity and specificity than previously published blood tests for lung cancer detection and/or diagnosis or CT scans, and it could detect all types and all stages of lung cancer. This BARD1 lung cancer test could therefore be further developed as i) screening test for early detection of lung cancers in high-risk groups, and ii) diagnostic aid in complementing CT scan.