Washington Briefs:

Letter to the Editor of the Archives of Internal Medicine:

February 25, 2008

Dear Editor,
 
In regard to your November 26, 2007 article entitled “Overstating the Evidence for Lung Cancer Screening” I believe the authors overstate their own case by remarking that …”it is a mistake to screen for lung cancer using spiral CT”. 

The fact is that CT screening for lung cancer is happening – hundreds of times each day – and benefiting many by detecting and treating their lung cancer early.   Even among the most critical reports concerning screening for lung cancer, not even the United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPHSTF) takes the position the authors have.  The USPHSTF concluded in its 2004 review that “the evidence is insufficient to recommend for or against” CT screening for lung cancer -- the exact same language used by USPSTF on PSA testing for prostate cancer.  Finally, even the American Cancer Society’s has adapted their position that those at high risk for lung cancer should talk to their doctor about the risks and benefits of CT and have it done at a place with experience.

Surely the authors understand that while breast cancer and prostate cancer now have 5-year survival rates of 88% and 99%, lung cancer’s 5-year survival rate is still only 15% primarily because most patients are not diagnosed until late stage.

Lung Cancer Alliance stands by its position that those at high risk for lung cancer should talk to their doctors about the risks and benefits of screening. We will continue to advocate aggressively for increased funding for all areas of lung cancer research: tobacco cessation, chemoprevention, more screening methods, early disease management and more effective treatments for late stage lung cancer.

Laurie Fenton Ambrose

President & CEO