ArticleThe Lancet. Oncology2017
Participant selection for lung cancer screening by risk modelling (the Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer [PanCan] study): a single-arm, prospective study.
Article in The Lancet. Oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00751660 (Early Detection of Lung Cancer - A Pan Canadian Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 112 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Early Detection of Lung Cancer - A Pan Canadian Study
Who cites it
112 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Use and impact of risk-based eligibility models in low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening: a systematic review.Public health reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Knowledge translation strategies to enhance lung cancer screening programme implementation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical implications of the family history in patients with lung cancer: a systematic review of the literature and a new cross-sectional/prospective study design (FAHIC: lung).Journal of translational medicine · 2024Pooled it
- The prevalence of comorbidity in the lung cancer screening population: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of medical screening · 2023Pooled it
- Patient Adherence to Screening for Lung Cancer in the US: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2020Pooled it
- Why Women Appear to Have Better Outcomes When Undergoing Screening for Lung Cancer.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Trial
- Lung cancer screening primer: Key information for primary care providers.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2021Trial
- Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease prevalence and prediction in a high-risk lung cancer screening population.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2020Trial
- Impact of a Lung Cancer Screening Information Film on Informed Decision-making: A Randomized Trial.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2019Trial
- Development and Validation of a Multivariable Lung Cancer Risk Prediction Model That Includes Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening Results: A Secondary Analysis of Data From the National Lung Screening Trial.JAMA network open · 2019Trial
- Pulmonary nodules: classification, biomarkers, signaling pathways, diseases, early diagnosis and management.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- A Re-parameterized Network-Based Lightweight Multimodal Fusion Network for Early Lung Cancer Risk Prediction.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2026Article
- Integrating Deep Learning of Low-Dose CT Imaging With Clinical Data for Lung Cancer Risk Prediction.Chest · 2026Article
- A Noninvasive Circulating Tumor DNA Methylation Classifier to Identify Benign Pulmonary Nodules.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026Article
- Recruitment strategies and outcomes in lung cancer screening programmes: a scoping review.European radiology · 2026Article
- Clinical usefulness of polygenic risk scores in risk prediction models for lung cancer screening and lung nodule management.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Biopsy-Proven Pulmonary Tumors Detected by LDCT: A 10-Year Single-Center Study of Growth Patterns and Diagnostic Pitfalls.International journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- Low-Dose Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening for Individuals Who Have Never Smoked: A Review of Recent Updates in Taiwan and the United States.Journal of chest surgery · 2025Review
- Cost-effectiveness of risk model-based lung cancer screening in smokers and nonsmokers in China.BMC medicine · 2025Article
52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
49 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResults from retrospective studies indicate that selecting individuals for low-dose CT lung cancer screening on the basis of a highly predictive risk model is superior to using criteria similar to those used in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST; age, pack-year, and smoking quit-time). We designed the Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer (PanCan) study to assess the efficacy of a risk prediction model to select candidates for lung cancer screening, with the aim of determining whether this approach could better detect patients with early, potentially curable, lung cancer.
methodsWe did this single-arm, prospective study in eight centres across Canada. We recruited participants aged 50-75 years, who had smoked at some point in their life (ever-smokers), and who did not have a self-reported history of lung cancer. Participants had at least a 2% 6-year risk of lung cancer as estimated by the PanCan model, a precursor to the validated PLCOm2012 model. Risk variables in the model were age, smoking duration, pack-years, family history of lung cancer, education level, body-mass index, chest x-ray in the past 3 years, and history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Individuals were screened with low-dose CT at baseline (T0), and at 1 (T1) and 4 (T4) years post-baseline. The primary outcome of the study was incidence of lung cancer. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00751660.
findings7059 queries came into the study coordinating centre and were screened for PanCan risk. 15 were duplicates, so 7044 participants were considered for enrolment. Between Sept 24, 2008, and Dec 17, 2010, we recruited and enrolled 2537 eligible ever-smokers. After a median follow-up of 5·5 years (IQR 3·2-6·1), 172 lung cancers were diagnosed in 164 individuals (cumulative incidence 0·065 [95% CI 0·055-0·075], incidence rate 138·1 per 10 000 person-years [117·8-160·9]). There were ten interval lung cancers (6% of lung cancers and 6% of individuals with cancer): one diagnosed between T0 and T1, and nine between T1 and T4. Cumulative incidence was significantly higher than that observed in NLST (4·0%; p<0·0001). Compared with 593 (57%) of 1040 lung cancers observed in NLST, 133 (77%) of 172 lung cancers in the PanCan Study were early stage (I or II; p<0·0001).
interpretationThe PanCan model was effective in identifying individuals who were subsequently diagnosed with early, potentially curable, lung cancer. The incidence of cancers detected and the proportion of early stage cancers in the screened population was higher than observed in previous studies. This approach should be considered for adoption in lung cancer screening programmes.
fundingTerry Fox Research Institute and Canadian Partnership Against Cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29055736What 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.