Abstract:Importance: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death in the United States. Objective: To systematically review literature on the accuracy of screening questionnaires and office-based screening pulmonary function testing and the efficacy and harms of treatment of screen-detected COPD. Data sources: MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant English-language studies published through January 2015. Study selection: Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and studies. The search yielded 13,141 unique citations; 465 full-text articles were reviewed, and 33 studies met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction and synthesis: Two reviewers rated the quality of each study using USPSTF criteria. Main outcomes and measures: Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], and negative predictive value [NPV]; treatment efficacy (COPD exacerbations, all-cause mortality, quality of life, and dyspnea); and treatment harms. Results: All screening questionnaires were based on symptoms as well as risk factors such as age and smoking history. The COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire was the most extensively studied (5 studies, n = 3048), with moderate overall performance for COPD detection: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), 0.65 to 0.72; sensitivity, 80% to 93%; and specificity, 24% to 49%, at a threshold of greater than 16.5. Positive predictive value and NPV ranged from 17% to 45% and 76% to 98%, respectively. For pulmonary function-based screening tools, FEV1/FEV6 was the best studied (3 studies, n = 1587), with AUC ranging from 0.84 to 0.85. Sensitivity ranged from 51% to 80%. Specificity (range, 90%-95%) and PPV (range, 63%-75%) appeared better than questionnaires. There was not strong evidence to support that screening and supplying smokers with spirometry results improves smoking cessation rates. Treatment trials were unavailable for screen-detected patients. Trials that reported outcomes in patients with mild to moderate COPD included 2 trials of long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) (n = 3174), 1 RCT of LABAs and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) (n = 1097), 5 RCTs of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium (n = 4592), and 6 RCTs of ICS (n = 3983). They suggested no benefit in all-cause mortality, but a decrease in annual rates of exacerbations with pharmacologic treatments. Few trials reported harms for any individual drug class. Adverse effects were generally mild (eg, dry mouth and cough). Conclusions and relevance: There was no direct evidence available to determine the benefits and harms of screening asymptomatic adults for COPD using questionnaires or office-based screening pulmonary function testing or to determine the benefits of treatment in screen-detected populations. Indirect evidence suggests that the COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire has moderate overall performance for COPD detection. Among patients with mild to moderate COPD, the benefit of pharmacotherapy for reducing exacerbations was modest.

Screening for lung cancer with computed tomography: protocol for systematic reviews for the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care

Screening for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer: protocol for systematic reviews to inform Canadian recommendations

Screening for Lung Cancer With Low-Dose Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review to Update the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation

Screening for prostate cancer: protocol for updating multiple systematic reviews to inform a Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care guideline update

Computed tomography screening for lung cancer: Review of screening principles and update on current status

Screening to prevent fragility fractures among adults 40 years and older in primary care: protocol for a systematic review

Patient preferences for breast cancer screening: a systematic review update to inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care

Screening for hypertension in adults: protocol for evidence reviews to inform a Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care guideline update

Current and Future Perspectives on Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: A Roadmap From 2023 to 2027 From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

Risk-based lung cancer screening performance in a universal healthcare setting

Current and Future Perspectives on CT Screening for Lung Cancer: A Road Map for 2023-2027 from the IASLC

Recommendations on routine screening pelvic examination: Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care adoption of the American College of Physicians guideline.

Perspective on Management of Low-Dose Computed Tomography Findings on Low-Dose Computed Tomography Examinations for Lung Cancer Screening. From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Early Detection and Screening Committee

Public perspectives on the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening: A systematic review and mixed-method integrative synthesis

Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening and treatment methods: a systematic review of systematic reviews

Screening for Breast Cancer: A Comparative Review of Guidelines

Assessment and Efficacy of Low-Dose CT Screening and Primary Care Providers Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening: An Institutional Review

Screening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Multilevel factors associated with delays in screening, diagnosis, and treatment for lung cancer-A mixed methods systematic review protocol

Defining the road map to a UK national lung cancer screening programme

General practice focussed strategies to increase participation in lung cancer screening – a systematic review protocol