Overdiagnosis: An underrecognized cause of confusion and harm in cancer screening.

The Mayo Lung Project (MLP) was a National Cancer Institute-funded randomized clinical trial designed to determine the effectiveness of intensive screening with chest radiography and sputum cytology in comparison with usual care (1). The trial was begun in 1971 and was completed in 1983, when the average follow-up after the last screen was about 3 years. Although the 5-year survival for lung cancer was much higher in the screened group than in the control group, there was no difference in lung cancer mortality. This apparent discrepancy between survival and mortality along with an excess of 46 lung cancer cases in the screened group (206, as compared with 160 in the usual-care arm) has been the source of much controversy. Marcus et al. (2), in an attempt to resolve this controversy, used the National Death Index–Plus search to extend the follow-up of the MLP participants through 1996. The investigators report their findings in this issue of the Journal (2).

[1]  H. Welch,et al.  US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey. , 2000, BMJ.

[2]  S. Wannamethee,et al.  Life expectancy in men who have never smoked and those who have smoked continuously: 15 year follow up of large cohort of middle aged British men , 1996, BMJ.

[3]  P. Prorok,et al.  Reanalysis of the Mayo Lung Project data: the impact of confounding and effect modification , 1999, Journal of medical screening.

[4]  J S Spratt,et al.  Rates of growth of human neoplasms: Part II , 1996, Journal of surgical oncology.

[5]  H. Welch,et al.  Screening for disease. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[6]  F. Pigula,et al.  Unsuspected lung cancer found in work-up for lung reduction operation. , 1996, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[7]  Lisa M. Schwartz,et al.  Are increasing 5-year survival rates evidence of success against cancer? , 2000, JAMA.

[8]  P C Prorok,et al.  Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[9]  A. Miller,et al.  SCREENING FOR LUNG CANCER , 1977, The Lancet.

[10]  R. Chiba,et al.  Atypical adenomatous hyperplasia of the lung and its differentiation from adenocarcinoma. Characterization of atypical cells by morphometry and multivariate cluster analysis , 1993, Cancer.

[11]  W C Black,et al.  Advances in diagnostic imaging and overestimations of disease prevalence and the benefits of therapy. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  E. Bergstralh,et al.  Screening for lung cancer. A critique of the mayo lung project , 1991, Cancer.

[13]  H Nakata,et al.  Evolution of peripheral lung adenocarcinomas: CT findings correlated with histology and tumor doubling time. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  M. Wick,et al.  Inflammatory sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung: report of three cases and clinicopathologic comparison with inflammatory pseudotumors in adult patients. , 1995, Human pathology.

[15]  G. Bepler,et al.  Screening for lung cancer. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  D. Sugarbaker,et al.  Screening for Lung Cancer: Another Look; A Different View , 1997 .

[17]  C. Henschke Early lung cancer action project , 2000, Cancer.

[18]  C. Wells,et al.  More lung cancer but better survival. Implications of secular trends in "necropsy surprise" rates. , 1989, Chest.