NELSON
Needs reviewNELSON: randomized trial of volume-based low-dose CT screening versus no screening for lung cancer in the Netherlands and Belgium
- Population
- People aged 50 to 74 years described as high-risk persons: 13,195 men (primary analysis) and 2594 women (subgroup analyses). The abstract frames the question for male former and current smokers; smoking-history thresholds are not given there.
- Design
- Randomised trial in the Netherlands and Belgium. Participants were assigned to volume-based low-dose CT screening at baseline (T0), year 1, year 3 and year 5.5, or to no screening. Cancer diagnoses and the date and cause of death were obtained through linkage with national registries in the Netherlands and Belgium, and a review committee confirmed lung cancer as the cause of death when possible. Minimum follow-up of 10 years to 31 December 2015 was completed for all participants. The abstract gives the Netherlands Trial Register number NL580.
- Arms
- Volume CT screening (experimental): Low-dose CT at baseline (T0), year 1, year 3 and year 5.5
- No screening (control): No screening
- People
- de Koning HJ, senior author Oudkerk M
Show the numbers
| Endpoint | Analysis | Volume CT screening | No screening | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adherence to CT screeningMen (primary analysis population), screening groupAverage adherence to the scheduled CT screening examinations among men. | primaryde 2020 | 90% | — | — |
| Additional CT scan after an indeterminate resultScreened participants; the abstract does not state whether this figure is for men only (the preceding sentence refers to men)Proportion of screened participants who underwent at least one additional CT scan because the initial result was indeterminate (average across rounds, as worded in the abstract). | primaryde 2020 | 9.2% | — | — |
| Referral rate for suspicious nodulesScreening group; the abstract does not state whether this figure is for men onlyOverall referral rate for suspicious nodules in the screening group. | primaryde 2020 | 2.1% | — | — |
| Endpoint | Analysis | Volume CT screening | No screening | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adherence to CT screeningMen (primary analysis population), screening groupAverage adherence to the scheduled CT screening examinations among men. | primaryde 2020 | 90% | — | — |
| Additional CT scan after an indeterminate resultScreened participants; the abstract does not state whether this figure is for men only (the preceding sentence refers to men)Proportion of screened participants who underwent at least one additional CT scan because the initial result was indeterminate (average across rounds, as worded in the abstract). | primaryde 2020 | 9.2% | — | — |
| Referral rate for suspicious nodulesScreening group; the abstract does not state whether this figure is for men onlyOverall referral rate for suspicious nodules in the screening group. | primaryde 2020 | 2.1% | — | — |