Classic base rate problem, the rate of lung cancer rate is low compared to the false positive rate. It seems that one option is to follow up with a second scan

Classic base rate problem, the rate of lung cancer rate is low compared to the false positive rate. It seems that one option is to follow up with a second scan 3-6 months latter and see if the tumor has increased in size. However there probably serious liability issues with this approach even if it means you're still catching the cancer earlier on average compared to waiting for physical symptoms. I'm curious how counties like France, where smoking rates are high yet have high life expectancies, deal with screening for lung cancer currently.