1 in 5 CT Screenings for Lung Cancer Results in Overdiagnosis
The study is consistent with other trends in cancer research, for example in prostate cancer, that "suggest we do need to reclassify what we've always considered to be cancer. We know now it's a broad disease, with lots of ways it can manifest. But the problem is really trying to separate out those whom you should treat and be aggressive with, versus those who have indolent disease, and right now, there's no way of knowing that."
An accompanying piece by Russell Harris, MD, and colleagues at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, proposes a way to tally the types of harm to patients who undergo lung cancer screening, "to improve our thinking about the harms of screening."
They weighed resulting physical harm, such as exposure to radiation, the workup from a positive screening test, or endurance of treatment; psychological harm; financial harm, and missed opportunities to work or be with family and friends.
The researchers said their template or taxonomy is an effort "to help investigators, policy makers, clinicians and the public think more clearly and systematically about harms and to consider harms equally with benefits in decisions about screening. We do not assert that harms always outweigh benefits, only that it is always necessary to weigh the two."
Cheryl Clark is senior quality editor and California correspondent for HealthLeaders Media. She is a member of the Association of Health Care Journalists.
- 'Kafkaesque' Value System Unfairly Penalizes Doctor Pay
- Proton Beam Therapy Poised for Growth in US
- mHealth Tackles Readmissions
- CNO Leads $1M Charge for New Scrubs, Uniforms
- Some Cancer Hospitals' Quality Data Will Soon Be Public
- 4 Crucial Tactics for Reining in Healthcare Cost
- Targeting Self-Insured Populations
- How Digital Strategy Shapes Patient Engagement at Boston Children's Hospital
- MA an Insurance Proving Ground for Providers
- How, and Why, to Recruit Male Nurses