ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2021
Implementation of lung cancer screening: what are the main issues?
Review in Translational lung cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer-related mortality.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Lung cancer screening in Finland: a prospective randomized trial.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Trial
- Why Women Appear to Have Better Outcomes When Undergoing Screening for Lung Cancer.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Trial
- Innovative approaches for lung cancer screening and interception.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Feasibility of lung cancer screening in low-risk populations of the Nordic countries.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
- Baseline results from the Norwegian radiology-led lung cancer screening pilot.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
- Lessons Learned From International Lung Cancer Screening Trials; People at Risk Deserve Screening for Early Detection.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2025Review
- Review
- Patient Perspectives on a Patient-Facing Tool for Lung Cancer Screening.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Lung cancer screening: where do we stand?Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2024Review
- Lung cancer screening in Brazil: recommendations from the Brazilian Society of Thoracic Surgery, Brazilian Thoracic Association, and Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2024Review
- Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT: What We Have Learned in Two Decades of ITALUNG and What Is Yet to Be Addressed.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Prevalence and clinical characteristics of non-malignant CT detected incidental findings in the SUMMIT lung cancer screening cohort.BMJ open respiratory research · 2023Observational
- Risk Model-Based Lung Cancer Screening : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2023Article
- Radiation Exposure to Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening: Should We Be Concerned?Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023Review
- Thoracic surgery in the Netherlands.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Review
- Lung cancer and Covid-19: lessons learnt from the pandemic and where do we go from here?NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2022Article
- Implementing Lung Cancer Screening in Europe: Taking a Systems Approach.JTO clinical and research reports · 2022Review
- Underreporting of Coronary Stents in LDCT for Lung Cancer Screening and Their Differentiation From Severe Coronary Artery Calcifications.Journal of computer assisted tomographyArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two large-scale RCTs have shown computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening to be efficacious in reducing lung cancer mortality (8-24% in men, 26-59% in women). However, lung cancer screening implicitly means personalised and risk-based approaches. Health care systems' implementation of personalised screening and prevention is still sparse, and likely to be of variable quality, because of important remaining uncertainties, which have been incompletely addressed or not at all so far. Further optimisation of lung cancer screening programs is expected to reduce harms and maintain or enhance benefit for eligible European citizens, whilst significantly reducing health care costs. Some main uncertainties (e.g., Risk-based eligibility, Risk-based screening intervals, Volume CT screening, Smoking Cessation, Gender and Sex differences, Cost-Effectiveness) are discussed in this review. 4-IN-THE-LUNG-RUN (acronym for: Towards INdividually tailored INvitations, screening INtervals and INtegrated co-morbidity reducing strategies in lung cancer screening) is the first multi-centred implementation trial on volume CT lung cancer screening amongst 24,000 males and females, at high risk for developing lung cancer, across five European countries, started in January 2020. Through providing answers to the remaining questions with this trial, many EU citizens will swiftly benefit from this high-quality screening technology, others will face less harms than previously anticipated, and health care costs will be substantially reduced. Implementing a new cancer screening programme is a major task, with many stakeholders and many possible facilitators but also barriers and obstacle.
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.