ArticleJournal of comparative effectiveness research2013
Low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer: results of the first screening round.
Article in Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer-related mortality.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Predictive Factors of Nonmalignant Pathological Diagnosis and Final Diagnosis of Ultrasound-Guided Cutting Biopsy for Peripheral Pulmonary Diseases.Canadian respiratory journal · 2023Article
- Associations of systemic inflammation markers with identification of pulmonary nodule and incident lung cancer in Chinese population.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Ongoing challenges in implementation of lung cancer screening.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Review
- Stereotactic body radiation therapy for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer in octogenarians and older: an alternative treatment.Journal of radiation research · 2020Article
- Current and future targeted therapies for non-small-cell lung cancers with aberrant EGF receptors.Future oncology (London, England) · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evaluation of: National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Church TR, Black WC, Aberle DR et al. Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 368, 1980-1991 (2013). In 2011, the US NLST trial demonstrated that mortality from lung cancer can be reduced by using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening rather than chest x-ray (CXR) screening. This paper from the US NLST research team focuses on the results of the initial round of LDCT for lung cancer. A total of 53,439 participants were included and randomly assigned to LDCT screening (n = 26,715) or CXR screening (n = 26,724). In total, 27.3% of the participants in the LDCT group and 9.2% in the CXR group had a positive screening result. As a result, 3.8% (LDCT group) and 5.7% (CXR group) of these subjects were diagnosed with lung cancer. The sensitivity (93.8%) and specificity (73.4%) for lung cancer were higher for LDCT compared with CXR screening; 73.5 and 91.3%, respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24236740What 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.