Annals of Thoracic Medicine Official publication of the Saudi Thoracic Society, affiliated to King Saud University
Search Ahead of print Current Issue Archives Instructions Subscribe e-Alerts Login 
Home Email this article link Print this article Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 17  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 189-192

Lung cancer screening in the gulf: Rationale and recommendations

1 Sultan Qaboos Comprehensive Cancer Care and Research Centre, Muscat, Oman
2 Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Muscat, Oman
3 Department of Medicine, Armed Forces Hospital, Muscat, Oman

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sami M Bennji
Sultan Qaboos Comprehensive Cancer Care and Research Center, P. O. Box: 566; PC: 123, Muscat
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/atm.atm_69_22

Rights and Permissions

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide among both men and women. Although advances in therapy have been made, the 5-year survival rates for lung cancer remain poor, ranging from 10% to 20%. One of the main reasons is late presentation, as only 25% of patients are amenable to cure at the time of presentation. Therefore, the emphasis on lung cancer screening (LCS) is growing with the current evidence that has shown benefits with low-dose computed tomography scan of the chest in high-risk populations. LCS remains a debated topic in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, possibly due to a lack of local experience. In this article, we explore the rationale and give recommendations on the best approach for LCS in GCC.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded197    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal