,
6 tweets,
9 min read
Read on Twitter
@JulianTreadwel1 @BBCNewsnight @deb_cohen @carlheneghan Having talked with @DRBLUNGS & @carlheneghan I think it is worth explaining that the Manchester lung health check study has not killed 1 in 1,000 people. They have done over 2500 scans and have no screening-related deaths. This is also true for the Liverpool pilot (1300 people).
@JulianTreadwel1 @BBCNewsnight @deb_cohen @carlheneghan @DRBLUNGS The Canadian analysis said to be best evidence for lung cancer screening uses US protocol written *20 years ago*. Clinicians like @DRBLUNGS know that it is possible to do vastly better and has been saying so since 2013.
@JulianTreadwel1 @BBCNewsnight @deb_cohen @carlheneghan @DRBLUNGS Other figures in screening, like @BobSteele6 say lung cancer screening should be rolled out nationally—targeting those at high risk.
@JulianTreadwel1 @BBCNewsnight @deb_cohen @carlheneghan @DRBLUNGS @BobSteele6 To give you some idea of how different the UK lung cancer work in Manchester and Liverpool is to the US trial used in the Canadian analysis, 24% of people without cancer had surgery in the US whereas in Manchester it was 2% and Liverpool 0%. The secret sauce is the protocol.
@JulianTreadwel1 @BBCNewsnight @deb_cohen @carlheneghan @DRBLUNGS @BobSteele6 They select ever smokers from the GP record and invite them for health check. In-person assessment decision > CT screen > biopsies only larger nodules > small nodules repeat CT later >> no change in size no further action is needed.
@JulianTreadwel1 @BBCNewsnight @deb_cohen @carlheneghan @DRBLUNGS @BobSteele6 In the context of a rollout of lung cancer screening in the UK, patients should feel reassured that they are not facing the sorts of risks found in the Canadian study.
