Gagnat Ane Aamli, Gulsvik Amund, Bakke Per, Gjerdevik Miriam
Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Clin Respir J. 2019 Feb;13(2):114-119. doi: 10.1111/crj.12988.
Based on the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST), guidelines on screening programs for lung cancer have recommended low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). De Torres et al made a score for COPD patients (COPD-LUCSS) to improve their selection criteria.
To examine and compare the discriminating value of both scores in a community-based cohort of COPD patients.
Four hundred and twenty-two ever-smokers with COPD from the GenKOLS study in Bergen were merged with the Cancer Registry of Norway. We divided the patients into groups of high and low risk according to the COPD-LUCSS and the NLST criteria. Cox regression and logistic regression were used to analyse the associations between the scores and lung cancer. We used Harrell's C and area under the curve (AUC) to estimate discriminating values and to compare the models.
Hazard ratio for the high risk vs the low risk in the COPD-LUCSS was 3.0 (1.4-6.5 95% CI), P < 0.01. Hazard ratio for the NLST criteria was 2.2 (95% CI 1.1-4.5), P < 0.05. Harrell's C was 0.63 for the COPD-LUCSS and 0.59 for the NLST selection criteria. AUC was 0.61 for COPD-LUCSS and 0.59 for NLST criteria. Comparing tests showed no differences (P = 0.76).
Although the COPD-LUCSS and the NLST criteria were associated with increased risk of lung cancer, the AUC and Harrell's C values showed that these models have poor discriminating abilities in our cohort of COPD patients. The COPD-LUCSS was not significantly better than the NLST criteria.
基于国家肺癌筛查试验(NLST),肺癌筛查项目指南推荐使用低剂量计算机断层扫描(LDCT)。德托雷斯等人制定了慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者评分系统(COPD-LUCSS)以改进其选择标准。
在一个以社区为基础的慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者队列中检验并比较这两种评分系统的鉴别价值。
来自卑尔根GenKOLS研究的422名曾吸烟者慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者与挪威癌症登记处的数据进行合并。我们根据COPD-LUCSS和NLST标准将患者分为高风险组和低风险组。采用Cox回归和逻辑回归分析评分与肺癌之间的关联。我们使用哈雷尔C指数和曲线下面积(AUC)来估计鉴别价值并比较模型。
COPD-LUCSS中高风险组与低风险组的风险比为3.0(95%置信区间1.4 - 6.5),P < 0.01。NLST标准的风险比为2.2(95%置信区间1.1 - 4.5),P < 0.05。COPD-LUCSS的哈雷尔C指数为0.63,NLST选择标准的哈雷尔C指数为0.59。COPD-LUCSS的AUC为0.61,NLST标准的AUC为0.59。比较检验显示无差异(P = 0.76)。
虽然COPD-LUCSS和NLST标准与肺癌风险增加相关,但AUC和哈雷尔C指数值表明这些模型在我们的慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者队列中的鉴别能力较差。COPD-LUCSS并不显著优于NLST标准。