Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37321665›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open respiratory research2023

Prevalence and clinical characteristics of non-malignant CT detected incidental findings in the SUMMIT lung cancer screening cohort.

Sophie Tisi, Andrew W Creamer, Jennifer Dickson, Carolyn Horst, Samantha Quaife, Helen Hall, Priyam Verghese, Kylie Gyertson, Vicky Bowyer, Claire Levermore and 9 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open respiratory research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03934866 (The SUMMIT Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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.

NCT03934866 active not recruitingnot on this map

The SUMMIT Study: Cancer Screening Study With or Without Low Dose Lung CT to Validate a Multi-cancer Early Detection Test

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2019 to 2030Enrolled13,035ConditionsCancer, Lung CancerArmsLow Dose CT scan
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. How will lung cancer screening and lung nodule management change the diagnostic and surgical lung cancer landscape?European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Review
  7. 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

19 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Sophie TisiLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Andrew W CreamerLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9314-1210
Jennifer DicksonLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Carolyn HorstLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Samantha QuaifeWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Helen HallLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Priyam VergheseLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Kylie GyertsonUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Vicky BowyerUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Claire LevermoreUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Anne-Marie HackerCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Jonathon TeagueCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Laura FarrellyCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Arjun NairUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Anand DevarajNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Allan HackshawCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
John R HurstUCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
SUMMIT Consortium
Samuel JanesLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK s.janes@ucl.ac.uk.
University College London · GBCancer Research UK · GBUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBRoyal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 28706Cancer Research UK CTUQQR-DEC22/100009Cancer Research UK EDDCPGM\100002Department of HealthWellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT107963AIA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPulmonary and extrapulmonary incidental findings are frequently identified on CT scans performed for lung cancer screening. Uncertainty regarding their clinical significance and how and when such findings should be reported back to clinicians and participants persists. We examined the prevalence of non-malignant incidental findings within a lung cancer screening cohort and investigated the morbidity and relevant risk factors associated with incidental findings. We quantified the primary and secondary care referrals generated by our protocol.

methodsThe SUMMIT study (NCT03934866) is a prospective observational cohort study to examine the performance of delivering a low-dose CT (LDCT) screening service to a high-risk population. Spirometry, blood pressure, height/weight and respiratory history were assessed as part of a Lung Health Check. Individuals at high risk of lung cancer were offered an LDCT and returned for two further annual visits. This analysis is a prospective evaluation of the standardised reporting and management protocol for incidental findings developed for the study on the baseline LDCT.

resultsIn 11 115 participants included in this analysis, the most common incidental findings were coronary artery calcification (64.2%) and emphysema (33.4%). From our protocolised management approach, the number of participants requiring review for clinically relevant findings in primary care was 1 in 20, and the number potentially requiring review in secondary care was 1 in 25.

conclusionsIncidental findings are common in lung cancer screening and can be associated with reported symptoms and comorbidities. A standardised reporting protocol allows systematic assessment and standardises onward management.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerHumansIncidental FindingsPrevalenceTomography, X-Ray ComputedImaging/CT MRI etcLung Cancer

Identifiers

PMID37321665
PMCPMC10277548
OpenAlexW4380869585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.