ArticleCancer2021
A risk-based framework for assessing real-time lung cancer screening eligibility that incorporates life expectancy and past screening findings.
Article in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 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.
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, 2 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
- Pooled it
- Lung Cancer Screening among Adults Older than Medicare's Upper Age Eligibility Criteria.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Article
- Updates in Lung Cancer Screening: A Decade of Evidence.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Risk of second primary lung cancer among cancer survivors stratified by the site of first primary cancer and the lung cancer screening eligibility status.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Association between depressive symptoms and smoking intensity with ethnic minorities in Yunnan Province, China: a moderated mediation model.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Computed Tomographic Screening Intervals for Patients at Moderate Risk of Lung Cancer.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Natural history models for lung Cancer: A scoping review.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Impact of Comorbidities on the Mortality Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening: A Post-Hoc Analysis of the PLCO and NLST Trials.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2025Article
- Review
- Estimating sojourn time and sensitivity of screening for ovarian cancer using a Bayesian framework.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- Benchmarking lung cancer screening programmes with adaptive screening frequency against the optimal screening schedules derived from the ENGAGE framework: a comparative microsimulation study.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- The Impact of Model Assumptions on Personalized Lung Cancer Screening Recommendations.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Acceptability of Personalized Lung Cancer Screening Program Among Primary Care Providers.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2024Article
- Clinical Adjuncts to Lung Cancer Screening: A Narrative Review.Thoracic surgery clinics · 2023Review
- Risk Model-Based Lung Cancer Screening : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of U.S. Preventive Services Task Force lung cancer screening update on drivers of disparities in screening eligibility.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of benefits and harms of adaptive screening schedules for lung cancer: A microsimulation study.Journal of medical screening · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent lung cancer risk-based screening approaches use a single risk-threshold, disregard life-expectancy, and ignore past screening findings. We address these limitations with a comprehensive analytical framework, the individualized lung cancer screening decision (ENGAGE) tool that aims to optimize lung cancer screening for US ever-smokers under dynamic risk assessment by incorporating life expectancy and past screening findings over time.
methodsENGAGE employs a partially observable Markov decision process framework that integrates published risk prediction and disease progression models, to dynamically assess the trade-off between the expected health benefits and harms associated with screening. ENGAGE evaluates lung cancer risk annually and provides real-time screening eligibility that maximizes the expected quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of ever-smokers. We compare ENGAGE against the 2013 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lung cancer screening guideline and single-threshold risk-based screening paradigms.
resultsCompared with the 2013 USPSTF guidelines, ENGAGE expands screening coverage among ever-smokers (ENGAGE: 78%, USPSTF: 61%), while reducing the number of screening examinations per person (ENGAGE:10.43, USPSTF:12.07, P < .001), yields higher effectiveness in terms of increased lung cancer-specific mortality reduction (ENGAGE: 19%, USPSTF: 15%, P < .001) and improves screening efficiency (ENGAGE: 696, USPSTF: 819 screens per death avoided, P < .001). When compared against a single-threshold risk-based screening strategy, ENGAGE increases QALY requiring 30% fewer screens per death avoided (ENGAGE: 696, single-threshold: 889, P < .001), and reduces false positives by 40%.
conclusionsENGAGE provides a comprehensive framework for dynamic risk-based assessment of lung cancer screening eligibility by incorporating life expectancy and past screening findings that can serve to guide future policies on the effectiveness and efficiency of screening. LAY SUMMARY: A novel decision-analytical screening framework was developed for lung cancer, the individualized lung cancer screening decision (ENGAGE) tool to provide personalized screening schedules for ever-smokers. ENGAGE captures the dynamic nature of lung cancer risk and incorporates life expectancy into the screening decision-making process. ENGAGE integrates past screening findings and changes in smoking behavior of individuals and provides informed screening decisions that outperform existing screening guidelines and single-threshold risk-based screening approaches. A personalized lung cancer screening program facilitated by a tool such as ENGAGE could enhance the efficiency of lung cancer screening.
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.