ArticleMathematical biosciences2012
Longitudinal multistage model for lung cancer incidence, mortality, and CT detected indolent and aggressive cancers.
Article in Mathematical biosciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantifying and monitoring overdiagnosis in cancer screening: a systematic review of methods.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2015Pooled it
- Trends in uterine cancer incidence and mortality: insights from a natural history model.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Natural history models for lung Cancer: A scoping review.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Current Evidence for a Lung Cancer Screening Program.Portuguese journal of public health · 2024Review
- Predicting colorectal cancer risk from adenoma detection via a two-type branching process model.PLoS computational biology · 2020Article
- Article
- Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography.Radiologic clinics of North America · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
It is currently not known whether most lung cancers detected by computerized tomography (CT) screening are aggressive and likely to be fatal if left untreated, or if a sizable fraction are indolent and unlikely to cause death during the natural lifetime of the individual. We developed a longitudinal biologically-based model of the relationship between individual smoking histories and the probability for lung cancer incidence, CT screen detection, lung cancer mortality, and other-cause mortality. The longitudinal model relates these different outcomes to an underlying lung cancer disease pathway and an effective other-cause mortality pathway, which are both influenced by the individual smoking history. The longitudinal analysis provides additional information over that available if these outcomes were analyzed separately, including testing if the number of CT detected and histologically-confirmed lung cancers is consistent with the expected number of lung cancers "in the pipeline". We assume indolent nodules undergo Gompertz growth and are detectable by CT, but do not grow large enough to contribute significantly to symptom-based lung cancer incidence or mortality. Likelihood-based model calibration was done jointly to data from 6878 heavy smokers without asbestos exposure in the control (placebo) arm of the Carotene and Retinol Efficacy Trial (CARET); and to 3,642 heavy smokers with comparable smoking histories in the Pittsburgh Lung Screening Study (PLuSS), a single-arm prospective trial of low-dose spiral CT screening for diagnosis of lung cancer. Model calibration was checked using data from two other single-arm prospective CT screening trials, the New York University Lung Cancer Biomarker Center (NYU) (n=1,021), and Moffitt Cancer Center (Moffitt) cohorts (n=677). In the PLuSS cohort, we estimate that at the end of year 2, after the baseline and first annual CT exam, that 33.0 (26.9, 36.9)% of diagnosed lung cancers among females and 7.0 (4.9,11.7)% among males were overdiagnosed due to being indolent cancers. At the end of the PLuSS study, with maximum follow-up of 5.8 years, we estimate that due to early detection by CT and limited follow-up, an additional 2.2 (2.0,2.4)% of all diagnosed cancers among females and 7.1 (6.7,8.0)% among males would not have been diagnosed in the absence of CT screening. We also find a higher apparent cure rate for lung cancer among CARET females than males, consistent with the larger indolent fraction of CT detected and histologically confirmed lung cancers among PLuSS females. This suggests that there are significant gender differences in the aggressiveness of lung cancer. Females may have an inherently higher proportion of indolent lung cancers than males, or aggressive lung cancers may be brought into check by the immune system more frequently among females than males.
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.