ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2015
Screening for lung cancer using low-dose computed tomography: concerns about the application in low-risk individuals.
Review in Translational lung cancer research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Necessity of organized low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer: From epidemiologic comparisons between China and the Western nations.Oncotarget · 2017Pooled it
- Lung cancer screening with low-dose spiral computed tomography: evidence from a pooled analysis of two Italian randomized trials.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2017Trial
- Imaging foundation model for universal enhancement of non-ideal measurement CT.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Lung Cancer-Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Treatment and Molecular Aspect (Review of Literature).International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- A Holistic Approach to Implementing Artificial Intelligence in Lung Cancer.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2025Review
- Multiplex plasma protein assays as a diagnostic tool for lung cancer.Cancer science · 2024Article
- Review
- Enhanced Lung Cancer Detection Using a Combined Ratio of Antigen-Autoantibody Immune Complexes against CYFRA 21-1 and p53.Cancers · 2024Article
- The Usefulness of the Ratio of Antigen-Autoantibody Immune Complexes to Their Free Antigens in the Diagnosis of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Editorial: Influence of potential diagnostic biomarkers in lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Risk Assessment of Early Lung Cancer with LDCT and Health Examinations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Diagnosis of pulmonary nodules by DNA methylation analysis in bronchoalveolar lavage fluids.Clinical epigenetics · 2021Article
- The Current Understanding Of Asbestos-Induced Epigenetic Changes Associated With Lung Cancer.Lung Cancer (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Review
- Association of Smoking with Metabolic Volatile Organic Compounds in Exhaled Breath.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Article
- DNA Methylation as a Noninvasive Epigenetic Biomarker for the Detection of Cancer.Disease markers · 2017Review
- Measures of outcome in lung cancer screening: maximising the benefits.Journal of thoracic disease · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has been increasingly accepted as an efficient screening method for high-risk individuals to reduce lung cancer mortality. However, there remains a gap of knowledge in the practical implementation of screening on a larger scale, especially for low-risk individuals. The aim of this study is to initiate discussion through an evidence-based analysis and provide valuable suggestions on LDCT screening for lung cancer in clinical practice. Among previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) is the only one demonstrating positive results in a high-risk population of old age and heavy smokers. It is also shown that the potential harms include false-positive findings, radiation exposure etc., but its magnitude is uncertain. In the meantime, the current risk stratification system is inadequate, and is difficult to define selection criteria. Thus, the efficacy of LDCT in lung cancer screening needs to be confirmed in future trials, and the procedure should not be proposed to individuals without comparable risk to those in the NLST. Furthermore, there is a lack of evidence to support the expansion of LDCT screening to low-risk individuals. Therefore, recommendation of LDCT screening for these patients could be premature in clinical practice although some of them might be missed based on current definition of risk factors. Further studies and advances in risk assessment tools are urgently needed to address the concerns about lung cancer screening in order to improve the outcomes of lung cancer.
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.