Trial reportPloS one2016
Diagnostic Performance of Ultra-Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Detecting Asbestos-Related Pleuropulmonary Diseases: Prospective Study in a Screening Setting.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection, measurement, and diagnosis of lung nodules by ultra-low-dose CT in lung cancer screening: a systematic review.BJR open · 2024Article
- Ultra-low-dose CT vs. chest X-ray in non-traumatic emergency department patients - a prospective randomised crossover cohort trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- Impact of Morphotype on Image Quality and Diagnostic Performance of Ultra-Low-Dose Chest CT.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Image quality of ultralow-dose chest CT using deep learning techniques: potential superiority of vendor-agnostic post-processing over vendor-specific techniques.European radiology · 2021Article
- Added benefits of early detection of other diseases on low-dose CT screening.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Review
- The Regimen of Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: Lessons Learned Over 25 Years From the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program.Journal of thoracic imaging · 2021Article
- Wide-volume versus helical acquisition in unenhanced chest CT: prospective intra-patient comparison of diagnostic accuracy and radiation dose in an ultra-low-dose setting.European radiology · 2019Article
- Dose estimation of ultra-low-dose chest CT to different sized adult patients.European radiology · 2019Article
- Added Value of Ultra-low-dose Computed Tomography, Dose Equivalent to Chest X-Ray Radiography, for Diagnosing Chest Pathology.Journal of thoracic imaging · 2019Article
- Evaluation of AI-Based Segmentation Tools for COVID-19 Lung Lesions on Conventional and Ultra-low Dose CT Scans.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of Ultra-Low-Dose Chest CT (ULD CT) for the detection of any asbestos-related lesions (primary endpoint) and specific asbestos-related abnormalities, i.e. non-calcified and calcified pleural plaques, diffuse pleural thickening, asbestosis and significant lung nodules (secondary endpoints). MATERIAL AND
methods55 male patients (55.7±8.1 years old) with occupational asbestos exposure for at least 15 years and where CT screening was indicated were prospectively included. They all underwent a standard unenhanced chest CT (120kV, automated tube current modulation), considered as the reference, and an ULD CT (135kV, 10mA), both with iterative reconstruction. Two chest radiologists independently and blindly read the examinations, following a detailed protocol. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy and error rate of ULD CT were calculated using the exact method of Pearson with a confidence interval of 95%.
resultsRadiation dose was 17.9±1.2mGy.cm (0.25mSv) for the ULD-CT versus 288.8 ±151mGy.cm (4mSv); p <2.2e-16. Prevalence of abnormalities was 20%. The ULD CT's diagnostic performance in joint reading was high for the primary endpoint (sensitivity = 90.9%, specificity = 100%, positive predictive value = 100%, negative predictive value = 97.8%), high for lung nodules, diffuse pleural thickening and calcified pleural plaques (sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV = 100%) and fair for asbestosis (sensitivity = 75%, specificity = 100%, PPV = 00%, NPV = 98.1%). Intra-reader accuracy between the ULD CT and the reference CT for the primary endpoint was 98% for the senior and 100% for the junior radiologist. Inter-reader agreement for the primary endpoint was almost perfect (Cohen's Kappa of 0.81).
conclusionULD CT in the screening of asbestos exposure related diseases has 90.9% sensitivity and 100% specificity, and could therefore be proposed as a first line examination.
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.