Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36576991›Full record

ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2023

Machine Learning and Real-World Data to Predict Lung Cancer Risk in Routine Care.

Urmila Chandran, Jenna Reps, Robert Yang, Anil Vachani, Fabien Maldonado, Iftekhar Kalsekar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Risk prediction for lung cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-regression.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Urmila ChandranJohnson & Johnson Global Epidemiology, Titusville, New Jersey.ORCID 0000-0001-7183-3622
Jenna RepsJohnson & Johnson Global Epidemiology, Titusville, New Jersey.ORCID 0000-0002-2970-0778
Robert YangLung Cancer Initiative, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, New Jersey.ORCID 0000-0002-5546-7199
Anil VachaniUniversity of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID 0000-0002-3871-8697
Fabien MaldonadoVanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.ORCID 0000-0002-6504-2063
Iftekhar KalsekarLung Cancer Initiative, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, New Jersey.ORCID 0000-0001-5232-5972

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study used machine learning to develop a 3-year lung cancer risk prediction model with large real-world data in a mostly younger population.

methodsOver 4.7 million individuals, aged 45 to 65 years with no history of any cancer or lung cancer screening, diagnostic, or treatment procedures, with an outpatient visit in 2013 were identified in Optum's de-identified Electronic Health Record (EHR) dataset. A least absolute shrinkage and selection operator model was fit using all available data in the 365 days prior. Temporal validation was assessed with recent data. External validation was assessed with data from Mercy Health Systems EHR and Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database. Racial inequities in model discrimination were assessed with xAUCs.

resultsThe model AUC was 0.76. Top predictors included age, smoking, race, ethnicity, and diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The model identified a high-risk group with lung cancer incidence 9 times the average cohort incidence, representing 10% of patients with lung cancer. Model performed well temporally and externally, while performance was reduced for Asians and Hispanics.

conclusionsA high-dimensional model trained using big data identified a subset of patients with high lung cancer risk. The model demonstrated transportability to EHR and claims data, while underscoring the need to assess racial disparities when using machine learning methods. IMPACT: This internally and externally validated real-world data-based lung cancer prediction model is available on an open-source platform for broad sharing and application. Model integration into an EHR system could minimize physician burden by automating identification of high-risk patients.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveEarly Detection of CancerElectronic Health RecordsHumansIncidenceMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID36576991
PMCPMC9986687

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.