Managing of screening-detected sub-solid nodules-a European perspective

Sara Ricciardi, Richard Booton, Renè Horsleben Petersen, Maurizio Infante, Marco Scarci, Giulia Veronesi, Giuseppe Cardillo

Abstract

Since the National Lung Screening Trial in 2011 showed a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality using annual low-dose computed tomography (LDCT), several randomised controlled trials and studies have been started in Europe. These include the Italian lung study (ITALUNG), the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (NELSON), the UK lung cancer screening trial (UKLS), the Detection and screening of early lung cancer with novel imaging technology (DANTE), the Danish lung cancer screening trial (DLCST), the German lung cancer screening intervention trial (LUSI), the Multicentric Italian lung detection trial (MILD) and the CT screening for lung cancer study (COSMOS). As a result of the increasing number of screening trials and the growing utilization of LDCT, the high detection of subsolid nodules is an increasingly important clinical problem. In the last few years, several guidelines have been published and providing guidance on the optimal management of subsolid nodules, but many controversies still exist. Follow-up imaging plays an important role in clinical assessment and subsequent management of this particular type of lung nodules, since they can be transient inflammatory lesions, and if persistent they can be both benign lesions or lung cancers of variable clinical behaviour. However, the vast majority of subsolid nodules retain an indolent course over many years. The aim of this review is to present a European perspective in management of screening detected subsolid nodules.

Original languageEnglish
JournalTranslational lung cancer research
Volume10
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)2368-2377
Number of pages10
ISSN2218-6751
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2021

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Managing of screening-detected sub-solid nodules-a European perspective'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this