Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17287305›Full record

SynthesisThorax2007

Population screening for lung cancer using computed tomography, is there evidence of clinical effectiveness? A systematic review of the literature.

Corri Black, Robyn de Verteuil, Shonagh Walker, Jon Ayres, Angela Boland, Adrian Bagust, Norman Waugh

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. [(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 · 2013
    Pooled it
  3. 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 · 2010
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 · 2010
    Article
  10. Lung cancer screening: the way forward.British journal of cancer · 2008
    Review
  11. Causes of widening life expectancy inequalities in Québec, Canada, 1989-2004.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Corri BlackAberdeen Health Technology Assessment Group, Department of Public Health, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK. Corri.black@abdn.ac.uk
Robyn de Verteuil
Shonagh Walker
Jon Ayres
Angela Boland
Adrian Bagust
Norman Waugh

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HERU1Chief Scientist Office HERU2Chief Scientist Office HSRU1
6 · The paper itself

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

HumansLung NeoplasmsMass ScreeningSurvival RateTomography, X-Ray ComputedTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID17287305
PMCPMC2111254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.