Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25660225›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Respiratory medicine2015

Lung cancer diagnosis and staging with endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration compared with conventional approaches: an open-label, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

Neal Navani, Matthew Nankivell, David R Lawrence, Sara Lock, Himender Makker, David R Baldwin, Richard J Stephens, Mahesh K Parmar, Stephen G Spiro, Stephen Morris and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Respiratory medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00652769 (A Randomized Controlled Trial of Endobronchial or Endoscopic Ultrasound as a First Test in the Diagnosis and Staging of Lung Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 121 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
121citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
19.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT00652769 phase3completednot on this map

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Endobronchial or Endoscopic Ultrasound as a First Test in the Diagnosis and Staging of Lung Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity College London HospitalsRan2008 to 2012Enrolled168ConditionsBronchogenic CarcinomaArmsEndobronchial or Endoscopic Ultrasound, Bronchoscopy, CT-guided biopsy, PET scan, Mediastinoscopy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

121 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 267 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Transbronchial needle core biopsyEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Improving lung cancer screening diagnostic efficiency.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2026
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

61 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Neal NavaniDepartment of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospital, London, UK; Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, London, UK.
Matthew NankivellMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, London, UK.
David R LawrenceDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, The Heart Hospital, London, UK.
Sara LockDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Whittington Hospital, London, UK.
Himender MakkerDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, North Middlesex University Hospital, London, UK.
David R BaldwinDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Nottingham University Hospital, Nottingham, UK.
Richard J StephensMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, London, UK.
Mahesh K ParmarMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, London, UK.
Stephen G SpiroDepartment of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospital, London, UK; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK.
Stephen MorrisDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Sam M JanesDepartment of Thoracic Medicine, University College London Hospital, London, UK; Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK. Electronic address: s.janes@ucl.ac.uk.
Lung-BOOST trial investigators
University College London · GBMedical Research Council · GBNorth Middlesex Hospital · GBRoyal Brompton Hospital · GBUniversity College Hospital · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0800465Medical Research Council G0800465/1Wellcome Trust 091730
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe diagnosis and staging of lung cancer is an important process that identifies treatment options and guides disease prognosis. We aimed to assess endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration as an initial investigation technique for patients with suspected lung cancer.

methodsIn this open-label, multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients who had undergone a CT scan and had suspected stage I to IIIA lung cancer, from six UK centres and randomly assigned them to either endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) or conventional diagnosis and staging (CDS), for further investigation and staging. If a target node could not be accessed by EBUS-TBNA, then endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) was allowed as an alternative procedure. Randomisation was stratified according to the presence of mediastinal lymph nodes measuring 1 cm or more in the short axis and by recruiting centre. We used a telephone randomisation method with permuted blocks of four generated by a computer. Because of the nature of the intervention, masking of participants and consenting investigators was not possible. The primary endpoint was the time-to-treatment decision after completion of the diagnostic and staging investigations and analysis was by intention-to-diagnose. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00652769.

findingsBetween June 10, 2008, and July 4, 2011, we randomly allocated 133 patients to treatment: 66 to EBUS-TBNA and 67 to CDS (one later withdrew consent). Two patients from the EBUS-TBNA group underwent EUS-FNA. The median time to treatment decision was shorter with EBUS-TBNA (14 days; 95% CI 14-15) than with CDS (29 days; 23-35) resulting in a hazard ratio of 1·98, (1·39-2·82, p<0·0001). One patient in each group had a pneumothorax from a CT-guided biopsy sample; the patient from the CDS group needed intercostal drainage and was admitted to hospital.

interpretationTransbronchial needle aspiration guided by endobronchial ultrasound should be considered as the initial investigation for patients with suspected lung cancer, because it reduces the time to treatment decision compared with conventional diagnosis and staging techniques.

fundingUK Medical Research Council.

Indexed as

AgedBiopsyBronchoscopyCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungClinical Decision-MakingEndoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle AspirationFemaleHumansLungLung NeoplasmsLymph NodesMaleMediastinoscopyMiddle AgedMultimodal ImagingNeoplasm Staging

Identifiers

PMID25660225
PMCPMC4648022
OpenAlexW2098189323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.