Trial reportJournal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer2019
Lung Cancer Incidence and Mortality with Extended Follow-up in the National Lung Screening Trial.
Trial report in Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07104630 (Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Advanced Lung Cancer Survivors), which is not on this map. Cited by 244 papers, 10 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.
Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Advanced Lung Cancer Survivors
Who cites it
244 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Screening for lung cancer: A systematic review of overdiagnosis and its implications.Molecular oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Time to Benefit for Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Survival Meta-Analysis.American journal of preventive medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Patient barriers and facilitators to lung cancer screening uptake and intention to screen: a systematic review using the Theoretical Domains Framework.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance and safety for robotic-assisted bronchoscopy in pulmonary nodules: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Current status, hotspots, and trends in cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation: A bibliometric analysis.Oncology research · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic yield and safety of diagnostic techniques for pulmonary lesions: systematic review, meta-analysis and network meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Pooled it
- Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2023Pooled it
- The influence of postscreening follow-up time and participant characteristics on estimates of overdiagnosis from lung cancer screening trials.International journal of cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer-related mortality.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Real-time margin assessment for video-assisted thoracic surgery: A pilot clinical trial.JTCVS techniques · 2025Trial
- A comparative analysis of heterogeneity in lung cancer screening effectiveness in two randomised controlled trials.Nature communications · 2025Trial
- 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
- Long-term efficacy and adherence of a lung cancer screening strategy with extended LDCT intervals: Results from the BioMILD trial.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Article
- Pulmonary nodules: classification, biomarkers, signaling pathways, diseases, early diagnosis and management.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Incidence and mortality trends after introduction of lung cancer screening in a community-based healthcare system.Cancer epidemiology · 2026Article
- Integrating Deep Learning of Low-Dose CT Imaging With Clinical Data for Lung Cancer Risk Prediction.Chest · 2026Article
- Decoding Malignant Lung Ground Glass Opacities: A Radiologic-Pathologic Study From Pure to Semi-Solid Lesions.Thoracic cancer · 2026Article
- 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
184 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) randomized high-risk current and former smokers to three annual screens with either low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) or chest radiography (CXR) and demonstrated a significant reduction in lung cancer mortality in the LDCT arm after a median of 6.5 years' follow-up. We report on extended follow-up of NLST subjects.
methodsSubjects were followed by linkage to state cancer registries and the National Death Index. The number needed to screen (NNS) to prevent one lung cancer death was computed as the reciprocal of the difference in the proportion of patients dying of lung cancer across arms. Lung cancer mortality rate ratios (RRs) were computed overall and adjusted for dilution effect, with the latter including only deaths with a corresponding diagnosis close enough to the end of protocol screening.
resultsThe median follow-up times were 11.3 years for incidence and 12.3 years for mortality. In all, 1701 and 1681 lung cancers were diagnosed in the LDCT and CXR arms, respectively (RR = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.09). The observed numbers of lung cancer deaths were 1147 (with LDCT) versus 1236 (with CXR) (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.85-1.00). The difference in the number of patients dying of lung cancer (per 1000) across arms was 3.3, translating into an NNS of 303, which is similar to the original NNS estimate of around 320. The dilution-adjusted lung cancer mortality RR was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80-0.997). With regard to overall mortality, there were 5253 (with LDCT) and 5366 (with CXR) deaths, for a difference across arms (per 1000) of 4.2 (95% CI: -2.6 to 10.9).
conclusionExtended follow-up of the NLST showed an NNS similar to that of the original analysis. There was no overall increase in lung cancer incidence in the LDCT arm versus in the CXR arm.
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.