ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2017
Small pulmonary nodules in baseline and incidence screening rounds of low-dose CT lung cancer screening.
Review in Translational lung cancer research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating Deep Learning of Low-Dose CT Imaging With Clinical Data for Lung Cancer Risk Prediction.Chest · 2026Article
- COVID-19 Vaccination and Pulmonary Nodules: A Narrative Review of Causality, Detection Bias and Thoracic Imaging Pitfalls.Vaccines · 2026Review
- Article
- Development, Co-Design and Pilot Testing of Resources to Support Informed Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening in Australia: A Study Engaging Diverse Communities and Expert Healthcare Professionals.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Article
- Differentiating benign and malignant solitary pulmonary nodules through exhaled breath analysis.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Article
- Artificial intelligence in lung cancer screening: Detection, classification, prediction, and prognosis.Cancer medicine · 2024Review
- Current and Future Perspectives on Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: A Roadmap From 2023 to 2027 From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2024Review
- Genetic susceptibility loci of lung cancer are associated with malignant risk of pulmonary nodules and improve malignancy diagnosis based on CEA levels.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2023Article
- Association between visual emphysema and lung nodules on low-dose CT scan in a Chinese Lung Cancer Screening Program (Nelcin-B3).European radiology · 2022Article
- Cancer Risk in Nodules Detected at Follow-Up Lung Cancer Screening CT.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2022Article
- Defining growth in small pulmonary nodules using volumetry: results from a "coffee-break" CT study and implications for current nodule management guidelines.European radiology · 2022Article
- Correlation between lung cancer probability and number of pulmonary nodules in baseline computed tomography lung cancer screening: A retrospective study based on the Chinese population.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Localization of subcentimeter pulmonary nodules using an indocyanine green near-infrared imaging system during uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2021Article
- Comparative evaluation of conventional and deep learning methods for semi-automated segmentation of pulmonary nodules on CT.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2021Article
- Protocol and Rationale for the International Lung Screening Trial.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2020Article
- The Framingham Heart Study: Populational CT-based phenotyping in the lungs and mediastinum.European journal of radiology open · 2020Review
- Article
- Implementation of lung cancer screening at the national level: Polish example.Translational lung cancer research · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Currently, lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is widely recommended for high-risk individuals by US guidelines, but there still is an ongoing debate concerning respective recommendations for European countries. Nevertheless, the available data regarding pulmonary nodules released by lung cancer screening studies could improve future screening guidelines, as well as the clinical practice of incidentally detected pulmonary nodules on routine CT scans. Most lung cancer screening trials present results for baseline and incidence screening rounds separately, clustering pulmonary nodules initially found at baseline screening and newly detected pulmonary nodules after baseline screening together. This approach does not appreciate possible differences among pulmonary nodules detected at baseline and firstly detected at incidence screening rounds and is heavily influenced by methodological differences of the respective screening trials. This review intends to create a basis for assessing non-calcified pulmonary nodules detected during LDCT lung cancer screening in a more clinical relevant manner. The aim is to present data of non-calcified pulmonary baseline nodules and new non-calcified pulmonary incident nodules without clustering them together, thereby also simplifying translation to the clinical practice of incidentally detected pulmonary nodules. Small pulmonary nodules newly detected at incidence screening rounds of LDCT lung cancer screening may possess a greater lung cancer probability than pulmonary baseline nodules at a smaller size, which is essential for the development of new guidelines.
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.