Increasing the lung nodule threshold for a positive finding on the initial lung cancer screening from 5 mm to 7 or 8 mm in the baseline CT screening round may provide an optimal balance between downstream work-ups and delays in diagnosis, according to a study published online Feb. 18 in Annals of Internal Medicine. Although the “provocative data could substantially” reduce screening costs, the approach may overlook other risks, according to an accompanying editorial.

The number of cores taken at initial biopsy in patients diagnosed with a single microfocus of prostate cancer is an independent predictor of having pathologically confirmed insignificant prostate cancer, according to a study published in the March issue of the Journal of Urology.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (US) may be used as a diagnostic tool in patients with suspected prostate cancer, but it cannot provide complete biopsy guidance or replace biopsy, according to a meta-analysis published in the February issue of Academic Radiology.

When Methodist Health System, a community hospital in Omaha, first launched lung cancer screening in November 2000, the Midwest provider was finding significantly more nodules in its patients than other screening sites reported. “Academic centers on the coast had a nodule detection rate of 15 to 20 percent; ours was 70 percent,” recalled Richard Kutilek, MD. The difference, however, reflected disparate patient populations not clinical expertise.

ViewRay’s board of directors has appointed Chris A. Raanes as president and CEO, effective immediately.

Whole-body MRI is not justified as the initial study for staging of pediatric malignant tumors, with accuracy no better than conventional imaging for detection of distant metastatic disease, according to a study published in the February issue of Radiology.

The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) delivered some very positive statistics, capped by the 20 percent relative mortality risk reduction among high-risk individuals undergoing three rounds of CT screening. However, other statistics, particularly those associated with follow-up nodules, may be a bit more problematic. Various research teams are focusing on the development and validation of biomarkers, including imaging biomarkers, to address some of these challenges.

“The learning curve for lung cancer screening cannot be underestimated,” James L. Mulshine, MD, director of Rush Translational Sciences Consortium at Rush Medical College in Chicago, told Health Imaging. Given the massive learning curve, it can be helpful to survey the clinical landscape and see what lessons it holds.