Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30499068›Full record

ReviewAdvances in therapy2019

Recognising Lung Cancer in Primary Care.

Stephen H Bradley, Martyn P T Kennedy, Richard D Neal

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05227261 (Assessment of a Novel Blood Test in Early Detection of the Five Common Cancers Based on the Investigation of the Circulating Tumour DNA), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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.

NCT05227261 completednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Assessment of a Novel Blood Test in Early Detection of the Five Common Cancers Based on the Investigation of the Circulating Tumour DNA

TypeobservationalSponsorGene SolutionsRan2022 to 2024Enrolled9,057ConditionsCancer, Lung, Cancer, Breast, Cancer Liver, Cancer, Colorectal
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Current Evidence for a Lung Cancer Screening Program.Portuguese journal of public health · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stephen H BradleyAcademic Unit of Primary Care, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. medsbra@leeds.ac.uk.
Martyn P T KennedyDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Richard D NealAcademic Unit of Primary Care, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
University of Leeds · GBLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK C8640/A23385
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant advances in the management of both early and advanced stage lung cancer have not yet led to the scale of improved outcomes which have been achieved in other cancers over the last 40 years. Diagnosis of lung cancer at the earliest stage of disease is strongly associated with improved survival. Therefore, although recent advances in oncology may herald breakthroughs in effective treatment, achieving early diagnosis will remain crucial to obtaining optimal outcomes. This is challenging, as most lung cancer symptoms are non-specific or are common respiratory symptoms which usually represent benign disease. Identification of patients at risk of lung cancer who require further investigation is an important responsibility for general practitioners (GPs). Diagnosis has historically relied upon plain chest X-ray (CXR), organised in response to symptoms. The sensitivity of this modality, however, compares unfavourably with that of computed tomography (CT). In some jurisdictions screening high-risk individuals with low dose CT (LDCT) is now recommended. However uptake remains low and the eligibility for screening programmes is restricted. Therefore, even if screening is widely adopted, most patients will continue to be diagnosed after presenting with symptoms. Achieving early diagnosis requires GPs to maintain an appropriate level of suspicion and readiness to investigate in high-risk patients or those with non-resolving symptoms. This article discusses the early detection of lung cancer from a primary care perspective. We outline risk factors and epidemiology, the role of screening and offer guidance on the recognition of symptomatic presentation and the investigation and referral of suspected lung cancer.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMass ScreeningPhysician's RolePrimary Health CareRisk FactorsTomography, X-Ray ComputedCancer diagnosisChest X-rayCT chestGeneral practitionerGPLung cancerLung cancer screeningOncologyPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID30499068
PMCPMC6318240
OpenAlexW2903104647

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.