Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28429205›Full record

ArticleLa Radiologia medica2017

Comparison of digital tomosynthesis and computed tomography for lung nodule detection in SOS screening program.

Maurizio Grosso, Roberto Priotto, Donatella Ghirardo, Alberto Talenti, Emanuele Roberto, Luca Bertolaccini, Alberto Terzi, Stéphane Chauvie, SOS Study Group

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in La Radiologia medica, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Maurizio GrossoRadiology Department, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy.
Roberto PriottoRadiology Department, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy.
Donatella GhirardoRadiology Department, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy.
Alberto TalentiRadiology Department, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy.
Emanuele RobertoMedical Physics Division, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy.
Luca BertolacciniDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, AUSL Romagna Teaching Hospital, Ravenna, Italy.
Alberto TerziThoracic Surgery Division, Don Calabria Cancer Care Center, Negrar, Italy.
Stéphane ChauvieMedical Physics Division, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy. chauvie.s@ospedale.cuneo.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4394-5031
SOS Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the lung nodules' detection of digital tomosynthesis (DTS) and computed tomography (CT) in the context of the SOS (Studio OSservazionale) prospective screening program for lung cancer detection. MATERIALS AND

methodsOne hundred and thirty-two of the 1843 subjects enrolled in the SOS study underwent CT because non-calcified nodules with diameters larger than 5 mm and/or multiple nodules were present in DTS. Two expert radiologists reviewed the exams classifying the nodules based on their radiological appearance and their dimension. LUNG-RADS classification was applied to compare receiver operator characteristics curve between CT and DTS with respect to final diagnosis. CT was used as gold standard.

resultsDTS and CT detected 208 and 179 nodules in the 132 subjects, respectively. Of these 208 nodules, 189 (91%) were solid, partially solid, and ground glass opacity. CT confirmed 140/189 (74%) of these nodules but found 4 nodules that were not detected by DTS. DTS and CT were concordant in 62% of the cases applying the 5-point LUNG-RADS scale. The concordance rose to 86% on a suspicious/non-suspicious binary scale. The areas under the curve in receiver operator characteristics were 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.94) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.72-0.89) for CT and DTS, respectively. The mean effective dose was 0.09 ± 0.04 mSv for DTS and 4.90 ± 1.20 mSv for CT.

conclusionsThe use of a common classification for nodule detection in DTS and CT helps in comparing the two technologies. DTS detected and correctly classified 74% of the nodules seen by CT but lost 4 nodules identified by CT. Concordance between DTS and CT rose to 86% of the nodules when considering LUNG-RADS on a binary scale.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMultiple Pulmonary NodulesProspective StudiesRadiation DosageRadiographic Image EnhancementRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedSensitivity and SpecificityDigital tomosynthesisLung cancerLung nodule detection

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.