SynthesisThorax2007
Population screening for lung cancer using computed tomography, is there evidence of clinical effectiveness? A systematic review of the literature.
Synthesis in Thorax, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) versus other cancer screenings in early diagnosis of lung cancer: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2018Pooled it
- [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2013Pooled it
- Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the baseline findings of randomized controlled trials.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2010Pooled it
- Lung cancer in interstitial lung disease: a matched case-control and cohort analysis.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Do we know enough about the effect of low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer on survival to act? A systematic review, meta-analysis and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2019Article
- Cancer screening: the journey from epidemiology to policy.Annals of epidemiology · 2012Article
- CT scans for pulmonary surveillance may be overused in lower-grade sarcoma.The Iowa orthopaedic journal · 2012Article
- TGF-β1 serum concentration as a complementary diagnostic biomarker of lung cancer: establishment of a cut-point value.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2011Article
- Joint registration and segmentation of serial lung CT images for image-guided lung cancer diagnosis and therapy.Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society · 2010Article
- Lung cancer screening: the way forward.British journal of cancer · 2008Review
- Causes of widening life expectancy inequalities in Québec, Canada, 1989-2004.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publiqueArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of death among all cancer types in the UK, killing approximately 34 000 people per year. By the time symptoms develop, the tumour is often at an advanced stage and the prognosis is bleak. Treatment at a less advanced stage of disease by surgical resection has been shown to substantially reduce mortality. Screening would be attractive if it could detect presymptomatic lung cancer at a stage when surgical intervention is feasible but has been the subject of scientific debate for the past three decades. The aim of this review was to examine the current evidence on the clinical effectiveness of screening for lung cancer using computed tomography. A systematic literature review searching 15 electronic databases and Internet resources from 1994 until December 2004/January 2005 was carried out. Information was summarised narratively. A total of 12 studies of computed tomography screening for lung cancer were identified including two RCTs and 10 studies of screening without comparator groups. The two RCTs were of short duration (1 year). None examined the effect of screening on mortality compared with no screening. The proportion of people with abnormal computed tomography findings varied widely between studies (5-51%). The prevalence of lung cancer detected was between 0.4% and 3.2% (number needed to screen to detect one lung cancer = 31 to 249). Incidence rates of lung cancer were lower (0.1-1%). Among the detected tumours, a high proportion were stage I or resectable tumours, 100% in some studies. Currently, there is insufficient evidence that computed tomography screening is clinically effective in reducing mortality from lung cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.