Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23570286›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2013

Indirectly estimated absolute lung cancer mortality rates by smoking status and histological type based on a systematic review.

Peter N Lee, Barbara A Forey

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Association between downexpression of MiR-203 and poor prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer patients.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2016
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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.

Peter N LeeP N Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd, Sutton, Surrey, UK. PeterLee@pnlee.co.uk
Barbara A Forey

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNational smoking-specific lung cancer mortality rates are unavailable, and studies presenting estimates are limited, particularly by histology. This hinders interpretation. We attempted to rectify this by deriving estimates indirectly, combining data from national rates and epidemiological studies.

methodsWe estimated study-specific absolute mortality rates and variances by histology and smoking habit (never/ever/current/former) based on relative risk estimates derived from studies published in the 20th century, coupled with WHO mortality data for age 70-74 for the relevant country and period. Studies with populations grossly unrepresentative nationally were excluded. 70-74 was chosen based on analyses of large cohort studies presenting rates by smoking and age. Variations by sex, period and region were assessed by meta-analysis and meta-regression.

results148 studies provided estimates (Europe 59, America 54, China 22, other Asia 13), 54 providing estimates by histology (squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma). For all smoking habits and lung cancer types, mortality rates were higher in males, the excess less evident for never smokers. Never smoker rates were clearly highest in China, and showed some increasing time trend, particularly for adenocarcinoma. Ever smoker rates were higher in parts of Europe and America than in China, with the time trend very clear, especially for adenocarcinoma. Variations by time trend and continent were clear for current smokers (rates being higher in Europe and America than Asia), but less clear for former smokers. Models involving continent and trend explained much variability, but non-linearity was sometimes seen (with rates lower in 1991-99 than 1981-90), and there was regional variation within continent (with rates in Europe often high in UK and low in Scandinavia, and higher in North than South America).

conclusionsThe indirect method may be questioned, because of variations in definition of smoking and lung cancer type in the epidemiological database, changes over time in diagnosis of lung cancer types, lack of national representativeness of some studies, and regional variation in smoking misclassification. However, the results seem consistent with the literature, and provide additional information on variability by time and region, including evidence of a rise in never smoker adenocarcinoma rates relative to squamous cell carcinoma rates.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAgedAged, 80 and overAsiaCarcinoma, Squamous CellEuropeFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNorth AmericaSex FactorsSmokingSouth America

Identifiers

PMID23570286
PMCPMC3639928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.