ArticleLung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2022
Sex disparities in lung cancer survival rates based on screening status.
Article in Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Effects of Sex on Mortality in Patients With Lung Cancer: A Multiple Mediation Analysis of The Boston Lung Cancer Study.Clinical lung cancer · 2026Article
- Activated Lymphocyte-Based Immunotherapy Plus Tomotherapy in an Older Patient with Stage III Lung Cancer: A Case Report.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Beyond tobacco: understanding the growing burden of lung adenocarcinoma in women.Oncology reviews · 2026Review
- Sex differences persist across surgical treatments in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer.JTCVS open · 2025Article
- Ambient beta particle radioactivity and lung cancer survival: Results from the Boston Lung Cancer Study.Environmental research · 2025Article
- Representativeness of Patients With Lung Cancer in an Integrated Health Care Delivery System.The Permanente journal · 2024Observational
- Smoking, mortality, access to diagnosis, and treatment of lung cancer in Brazil.Revista de saude publica · 2024Article
- Sex Differences in Lung Cancer.Cancers · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveLow dose computed tomography (LDCT) became the standard method for lung cancer (LC) screening in 2013. However, it is unclear whether there are differences in survival rates based on sex and whether the differences depend on screening status. We aimed to evaluate the LC survival rates between females and males based on screening. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis retrospective cohort study examined data from the Boston LC Study (BLCS) between 2013 and 2021. LC screening depends on patients' demographics (age and smoking history) to determine whether a person is a high-risk individual and, therefore, undergo LDCT. Descriptive statistics were calculated for race, age, histology, smoking history, stage, and treatment. These variables' distributions were compared between sex and screening status using t-test and chi-square, respectively. Cox proportional hazards model and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare survival between sex and screening. Propensity score matching was applied to account for selection bias in screening when evaluating the association between screening and stage.
resultsA total of 1,216 LC patients were identified with a screening incidence of 9.4 %, among whom 56 % were female. Unscreened males had 1.59 times higher risk of mortality than unscreened females (P=.0002) and had a worse 5-year survival (male 50 %; 95 %CI, 0.38,0.6 vs female 70 %; 95 %CI,0.62,0.76). In contrast, there were no significant differences in survival between sexes among screened. In a balanced cohort of screened and unscreened, the odds of being diagnosed at late stages for females and smokers were 1.33 and 2.51 times that of males and nonsmokers; however, there were no statistical significance.
conclusionUnscreened females had a lower risk of mortality and better survival than unscreened males, while among the screened population, there was no difference in the overall survival. These observations demonstrate the influence of sex on survival prognosis in LC when screening is not performed.
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.