ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2021
Ongoing challenges in implementation of lung cancer screening.
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 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engaging Patients in Smoking Cessation Treatment within the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: Lessons Learned from an NCI SCALE Trial.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Trial
- Plasma proteomic profiles associated with low-dose computed tomography findings and incident lung cancer: a prospective pilot study.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Patient and Healthcare Provider Barriers in the LDCT Lung Cancer Screening Continuum.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- Article
- Biomarker trajectory for earlier detection of lung cancer.EBioMedicine · 2024Article
- Lung cancer screening: where do we stand?Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2024Review
- Lung CAncer SCreening in French women using low-dose CT and Artificial intelligence for DEtection: the CASCADE study protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Level of knowledge on low-dose CT lung cancer screening in Sichuan province, China: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Potential of Inflammatory Protein Signatures for Enhanced Selection of People for Lung Cancer Screening.Cancers · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in Europe and around the world. Although available therapies have undergone considerable development in the past decades, the five-year survival rate for lung cancer remains low. This sobering outlook results mainly from the advanced stages of cancer most patients are diagnosed with. As the population at risk is relatively well defined and early stage disease is potentially curable, lung cancer outcomes may be improved by screening. Several studies already show that lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality. However, for a successful implementation of LCS programmes, several challenges have to be overcome: selection of high-risk individuals, standardization of nodule classification and measurement, specific training of radiologists, optimization of screening intervals and screening duration, handling of ancillary findings are some of the major points which should be addressed. Last but not least, the psychological impact of screening on screened individuals and the impact of potential false positive findings should not be neglected. The aim of this review is to discuss the different challenges of implementing LCS programmes and to give some hints on how to overcome them. Finally, we will also discuss the psychological impact of screening on quality of life and the importance of smoking cessation.
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.