Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19918924›Full record

ArticleCancer2010

Modeling excess lung cancer risk among screened arm participants in the Mayo Lung Project.

Deborah L Goldwasser, Marek Kimmel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Article
  3. Natural history models for lung Cancer: A scoping review.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Deborah L GoldwasserDepartment of Statistics, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005, USA. dlg2004@rice.edu
Marek Kimmel
Rice University · US

Funding

R25 SUPPLEMENT IN GENETIC EPIDEMIOLOGY EDUCATIONR25CA057730 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI CHANG, SHINE · 1992 to 2016
$18.6M
Training Program in Biostatistics for Cancer ResearchT32CA096520 · NCI · RICE UNIVERSITY · PI KIMMEL, MAREK, YUAN, YING · 2003 to 2023
$4.5M
Modeling Lung Cancer: Risks, Progression, and ScreeningU01CA097431 · NCI · RICE UNIVERSITY · PI KIMMEL, MAREK · 2002 to 2009
$1.8M
NCI NIH HHS R25 CA057730NCI NIH HHS R25 CA57730NCI NIH HHS T32 CA096520NCI NIH HHS U01 CA097431NCI NIH HHS U01CA097431
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Mayo Lung Project (MLP) was a randomized clinical trial designed to test whether periodic screening by chest x-ray reduced lung cancer (LC) mortality in men who were high-risk smokers. Among MLP participants, there were more deaths from LC in the screening arm both at the trial's end and after long-term follow-up. Overdiagnosis was cited widely as an explanation for the MLP results, whereas a role for excess LC risk attributable to undergoing numerous chest x-ray screenings largely was unexamined. The authors of this report examined the consistency of the MLP data with a modified 2-stage clonal expansion (TSCE) model of excess LC risk.

methodsBy using a simulation model calibrated to the initial MLP data, the authors examined the expected statistical variance of LC incidence and mortality between the screening and control arms. A Bayesian estimation framework using a modified version of the TSCE model to evaluate the role of excess LC risk attributable to chest x-ray screening was derived and applied to the MLP data.

resultsSimulation experiments indicated that the overall difference in LC deaths and incidence between the study arm and the control arm was unlikely (P = .0424 and P = .0104, respectively) assuming no excess risk of LC. The authors estimated that the 10-year excess LC risk for a man aged 60 years who smoked and who received 10 chest x-ray screenings was 0.574% (P = .0021).

conclusionsThe excess LC risk observed among screening arm participants was found to be statistically significant with respect to the TSCE model framework in part because of the incorporation of key risk correlates of age and screen frequency into the estimation framework.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerModels, BiologicalHumansLikelihood FunctionsLung NeoplasmsMathematicsRadiographyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk

Identifiers

PMID19918924
PMCPMC2807892
OpenAlexW2026563602

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.