Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 17, 2025
Evaluating Regional Pulmonary Deposition using Patient-Specific 3D Printed Lung Models
Published on: November 11, 2020
Performance of Lung-RADS in different target populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Yifei Mao1, Jiali Cai1, Marjolein A Heuvelmans1
1Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9700 RB, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Objectives:
Multiple lung cancer screening studies reported the performance of Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS), but none systematically evaluated its performance across different populations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance of Lung-RADS (versions 1.0 and 1.1) for detecting lung cancer in different populations.
Methods:
We performed literature searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases on October 21, 2022, for studies that evaluated the accuracy of Lung-RADS in lung cancer screening. A bivariate random-effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity, and heterogeneity was explored in stratified and meta-regression analyses.
Results:
A total of 31 studies with 104,224 participants were included. For version 1.0 (27 studies, 95,413 individuals), pooled sensitivity was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-0.99) and pooled specificity was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87-0.92). Studies in high-risk populations showed higher sensitivity (0.98 [95% CI: 0.92-0.99] vs. 0.84 [95% CI: 0.50-0.96]) and lower specificity (0.87 [95% CI: 0.85-0.88] vs. 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92-0.97]) than studies in general populations. Non-Asian studies tended toward higher sensitivity (0.97 [95% CI: 0.91-0.99] vs. 0.91 [95% CI: 0.67-0.98]) and lower specificity (0.88 [95% CI: 0.85-0.90] vs. 0.93 [95% CI: 0.88-0.96]) than Asian studies. For version 1.1 (4 studies, 8811 individuals), pooled sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.83-0.96) and specificity was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.67-0.90).
Conclusion:
Among studies using Lung-RADS version 1.0, considerable heterogeneity in sensitivity and specificity was noted, explained by population type (high risk vs. general), population area (Asia vs. non-Asia), and cancer prevalence.
Clinical Relevance Statement:
Meta-regression of lung cancer screening studies using Lung-RADS version 1.0 showed considerable heterogeneity in sensitivity and specificity, explained by the different target populations, including high-risk versus general populations, Asian versus non-Asian populations, and populations with different lung cancer prevalence.
Key Points:
• High-risk population studies showed higher sensitivity and lower specificity compared with studies performed in general populations by using Lung-RADS version 1.0. • In non-Asian studies, the diagnostic performance of Lung-RADS version 1.0 tended to be better than in Asian studies. • There are limited studies on the performance of Lung-RADS version 1.1, and evidence is lacking for Asian populations.
More Related Videos
02:09Multi-modal Pulmonary Imaging: Using Complementary Information from CT and Hyperpolarized 129Xe MRI to Evaluate Lung Structure-Function
Published on: April 12, 2024
06:15Protocol and Guidelines for Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Diagnosing Neonatal Pulmonary Diseases Based on International Expert Consensus
Published on: March 6, 2019
Related Concept Videos
01:13Radiological Investigation III: Pulmonary Angiogram and PET Scan
Pulmonary Angiogram
A Pulmonary Angiogram is an invasive procedure involving injecting a contrast medium through a catheter threaded into the pulmonary artery or the right side of the heart to visualize the pulmonary vasculature. Computed Tomography (CT) scans have mainly replaced this...
01:30Radiological Investigation II: MRI and Ventilation Perfusion Scan
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Ventilation Perfusion Scans are two radiological investigations that offer detailed diagnostic images of the body, particularly lung structures.
MRI
MRI uses magnetic fields and radiofrequency signals to distinguish between normal and abnormal tissues. This technology provides a more detailed diagnostic image than CT scans, enabling it to characterize pulmonary nodules, stage bronchogenic carcinoma, and evaluate inflammatory activity in...
01:27Pneumothorax-II
Clinical Manifestations:
01:25Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
01:25Pulmonary Function Tests
Pulmonary Function Tests are crucial diagnostic tools for assessing respiratory function, particularly in patients with chronic respiratory disorders. They comprehensively evaluate lung volumes, ventilatory function, breathing mechanics, diffusion, and gas exchange. These tests help diagnose pulmonary diseases and play a significant role in monitoring disease progression, evaluating disability, and assessing response to therapy.
PFTs involve using a spirometer, a...