ArticleJAMA oncology2022
Assessment of Lung Cancer Risk Among Smokers for Whom Annual Screening Is Not Recommended.
Article in JAMA oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- ESR Essentials: lung cancer screening with low-dose CT-practice recommendations by the European Society of Thoracic Imaging.European radiology · 2026Guideline
- Endometrial thickness in patients with postmenopausal bleeding and endometrial cancer: A retrospective cohort study.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- The association between night shift work and elevated risk of smoking use among ride-hailing drivers: findings from a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Association Between the Creatinine-to-Body Weight Ratio and All-Cause Mortality in a Rural Japanese Community.Cureus · 2025Article
- Updates in Lung Cancer Screening: A Decade of Evidence.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Age- and sex-related reference values for central blood pressure parameters in middle-aged and older Japanese adults: the Wakayama study.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
- HBV-Induced Carcinogenesis: Mechanisms, Correlation With Viral Suppression, and Implications for Treatment.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2025Review
- Prognostic stratification through smoking status and cumulative smoking dose in advanced non-small cell lung cancer immunotherapy: a dose-dependent real-world analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Machine learning for automated classification of lung collagen in a urethane-induced lung injury mouse model.Biomedical optics express · 2024Article
- Uncovering molecular features driving lung adenocarcinoma heterogeneity in patients who formerly smoked.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Machine Learning and Real-World Data to Predict Lung Cancer Risk in Routine Care.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023Article
- Errors in Abstract and Affiliations.JAMA oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force does not recommend annual lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for adults aged 50 to 80 years who are former smokers with 20 or more pack-years of smoking who quit 15 or more years ago or current smokers with less than 20 pack-years of smoking. Objective: To determine the risk of lung cancer in older smokers for whom LDCT screening is not recommended. Design, Settings, and Participants: This cohort study used the Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS) data sets obtained from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, which also sponsored the study. The CHS enrolled 5888 community-dwelling individuals aged 65 years and older in the US from June 1989 to June 1993 and collected extensive baseline data on smoking history. The current analysis was restricted to 4279 individuals free of cancer who had baseline data on pack-year smoking history and duration of smoking cessation. The current analysis was conducted from January 7, 2022, to May 25, 2022. Exposures: Current and prior tobacco use. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incident lung cancer during a median (IQR) of 13.3 (7.9-18.8) years of follow-up (range, 0 to 22.6) through December 31, 2011. A Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model was used to estimate incidence of lung cancer in the presence of competing risk of death. Cox cause-specific hazard regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for incident lung cancer. Results: There were 4279 CHS participants (mean [SD] age, 72.8 [5.6] years; 2450 [57.3%] women; 663 [15.5%] African American, 3585 [83.8%] White, and 31 [0.7%] of other race or ethnicity) included in the current analysis. Among the 861 nonheavy smokers (<20 pack-years), the median (IQR) pack-year smoking history was 7.6 (3.3-13.5) pack-years for the 615 former smokers with 15 or more years of smoking cessation, 10.0 (5.3-14.9) pack-years for the 146 former smokers with less than 15 years of smoking cessation, and 11.4 (7.3-14.4) pack-years for the 100 current smokers. Among the 1445 heavy smokers (20 or more pack-years), the median (IQR) pack-year smoking history was 34.8 (26.3-48.0) pack-years for the 516 former smokers with 15 or more years of smoking cessation, 48.0 (35.0-70.0) pack-years for the 497 former smokers with less than 15 years of smoking cessation, and 48.8 (31.6-57.0) pack-years for the 432 current smokers. Incident lung cancer occurred in 10 of 1973 never smokers (0.5%), 5 of 100 current smokers with less than 20 pack-years of smoking (5.0%), and 26 of 516 former smokers with 20 or more pack-years of smoking with 15 or more years of smoking cessation (5.0%). Compared with never smokers, cause-specific HRs for incident lung cancer in the 2 groups for whom LDCT is not recommended were 10.54 (95% CI, 3.60-30.83) for the current nonheavy smokers and 11.19 (95% CI, 5.40-23.21) for the former smokers with 15 or more years of smoking cessation; age, sex, and race-adjusted HRs were 10.06 (95% CI, 3.41-29.70) for the current nonheavy smokers and 10.22 (4.86-21.50) for the former smokers with 15 or more years of smoking cessation compared with never smokers. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that there is a high risk of lung cancer among smokers for whom LDCT screening is not recommended, suggesting that prediction models are needed to identify high-risk subsets of these smokers for 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.