Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27009070›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2016

Lung cancer incidence and mortality in National Lung Screening Trial participants who underwent low-dose CT prevalence screening: a retrospective cohort analysis of a randomised, multicentre, diagnostic screening trial.

Edward F Patz, Erin Greco, Constantine Gatsonis, Paul Pinsky, Barnett S Kramer, Denise R Aberle

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00047385 (National Lung Screening Trial A Randomized Trial Comparing Low-dose Helical CT With Chest Xray for Lung Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 101 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
18.2field-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.

NCT00047385 phase3completednot on this map

National Lung Screening Trial A Randomized Trial Comparing Low-dose Helical CT With Chest Xray for Lung Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Cancer Institute (NCI)Ran2002 to 2010Enrolled53,454ConditionsLung CancerArmslow-dose helical computed tomography, chest radiography
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

101 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 182 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Guideline
  7. Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT: a Meta-Analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Lung Cancer Screening, Version 3.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2018
    Guideline
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Prolonged lung cancer screening reduced 10-year mortality in the MILD trial: new confirmation of lung cancer screening efficacy.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2019
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Edward F PatzDepartment of Radiology, and Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: patz0002@mc.duke.edu.
Erin GrecoCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA.
Constantine GatsonisCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA; Department of Biostatistics, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA.
Paul PinskyDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Barnett S KramerDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Denise R AberleDepartment of Radiology, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Brown University · USNational Cancer Institute · USDuke Medical Center · US

Funding

ECOG-ACRIN NCORP Research Base - TMISTUG1CA189828 · NCI · ECOG-ACRIN MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI Peter J ODwyer, MITCHELL D. SCHNALL · 2014 to 2026
$199.7M
ARRA - ADOPT New Technologies for RDC/CDMSU01CA080098 · NCI · AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY · PI SCHNALL, MITCHELL D. · 1999 to 2011
$182.7M
Project-006U10CA180820 · NCI · ECOG-ACRIN MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI Peter J ODwyer · 2014 to 2026
$167.6M
Statistics CoreU10CA180794 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI PAUL J CATALANO, CONSTANTINE A. GATSONIS · 2014 to 2026
$111.2M
BIOSTATISTICS DATA MANAGEMENT CENTER FOR ACROINU01CA079778 · NCI · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI GATSONIS, CONSTANTINE A. · 1999 to 2011
$48.6M
PROSTATE, LUNG, COLORECTAL, &OVARIAN CANCER SCREENINGN01CN025476 · CN · WESTAT, INC. · PI O'BRIEN, BARBARA B · 1992 to 2000
$7.9M
Biostatistics Data Management Center for ACRINU10CA079778 · NCI · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI GATSONIS, CONSTANTINE A. · 2013 to 2013
$2.4M
PROSTATE, LUNG, COLORECTAL AND OVARIAN (PLCO) CANCERN01CN025512 · CN · HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM · PI DEMERS, RAYMOND Y · 1992 to 2001
$2.0M
PROSTATE, LUNG, COLORECTAL AND OVARIAN (PLCO) CANCERN01CN075022 · CN · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI FOUAD, MONA N. · 1997 to 2001
$1.6M
PROSTATE, LUNG, COLORECTAL &OVARIAN (PLCO) CANCERN01CN025516 · CN · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI ANDRIOLE, GERALD LOUIS · 1992 to 2001
$1.5M
PROSTATE, LUNG, COLORECTAL AND OVARIAN (PLCO) CANCERN01CN025524 · CN · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI BUYS, SAUNDRA S · 1992 to 2000
$1.5M
PROSTATE, LUNG, COLORECTAL AND OVARIAN (PLCO) CANCERN01CN025514 · CN · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI CRAWFORD, E DAVID · 1992 to 2000
$1.3M
NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025476NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025511NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025512NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025513NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025514NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025515NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025516NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025518NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025522NCI NIH HHS N01 CN025524NCI NIH HHS N01 CN075022NCI NIH HHS N02 CN063300NCI NIH HHS U01 CA079778NCI NIH HHS U01 CA080098NCI NIH HHS U10 CA079778NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180794NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180820NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189828
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnnual low-dose CT screening for lung cancer has been recommended for high-risk individuals, but the necessity of yearly low-dose CT in all eligible individuals is uncertain. This study examined rates of lung cancer in National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) participants who had a negative prevalence (initial) low-dose CT screen to explore whether less frequent screening could be justified in some lower-risk subpopulations.

methodsWe did a retrospective cohort analysis of data from the NLST, a randomised, multicentre screening trial comparing three annual low-dose CT assessments with three annual chest radiographs for the early detection of lung cancer in high-risk, eligible individuals (aged 55-74 years with at least a 30 pack-year history of cigarette smoking, and, if a former smoker, had quit within the past 15 years), recruited from US medical centres between Aug 5, 2002, and April 26, 2004. Participants were followed up for up to 5 years after their last annual screen. For the purposes of this analysis, our cohort consisted of all NLST participants who had received a low-dose CT prevalence (T0) screen. We determined the frequency, stage, histology, study year of diagnosis, and incidence of lung cancer, as well as overall and lung cancer-specific mortality, and whether lung cancers were detected as a result of screening or within 1 year of a negative screen. We also estimated the effect on mortality if the first annual (T1) screen in participants with a negative T0 screen had not been done. The NLST is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00047385.

findingsOur cohort consisted of 26 231 participants assigned to the low-dose CT screening group who had undergone their T0 screen. The 19 066 participants with a negative T0 screen had a lower incidence of lung cancer than did all 26 231 T0-screened participants (371·88 [95% CI 337·97-408·26] per 100 000 person-years vs 661·23 [622·07-702·21]) and had lower lung cancer-related mortality (185·82 [95% CI 162·17-211·93] per 100 000 person-years vs 277·20 [252·28-303·90]). The yield of lung cancer at the T1 screen among participants with a negative T0 screen was 0·34% (62 screen-detected cancers out of 18 121 screened participants), compared with a yield at the T0 screen among all T0-screened participants of 1·0% (267 of 26 231). We estimated that if the T1 screen had not been done in the T0 negative group, at most, an additional 28 participants in the T0 negative group would have died from lung cancer (a rise in mortality from 185·82 [95% CI 162·17-211·93] per 100 000 person-years to 212·14 [186·80-239·96]) over the course of the trial.

interpretationParticipants with a negative low-dose CT prevalence screen had a lower incidence of lung cancer and lung cancer-specific mortality than did all participants who underwent a prevalence screen. Because overly frequent screening has associated harms, increasing the interval between screens in participants with a negative low-dose CT prevalence screen might be warranted.

fundingNone.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedFemaleHumansLungLung NeoplasmsMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedRadiation DosageRetrospective StudiesSmoking

Identifiers

PMID27009070
PMCPMC5094059
OpenAlexW2297980830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.