ArticleCancer2024
Assessing the impact of increasing lung screening eligibility by relaxing the maximum years-since-quit threshold: A simulation modeling study.
Article in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions Integrated Into Lung Cancer Screening.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Benefits and harms of lung cancer screening strategies in Argentina: a modeling study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Performance of smoking duration-based lung cancer screening eligibility criteria: a comparative modeling study.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Eligibility and Prognostic Performance of Smoking Duration-Based Versus Pack-Year-Based U.S. National Lung Cancer Screening Criteria Across Racial and Ethnic Groups.Annals of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Risk-Adapted Lung Cancer Screening Starting Ages for Former Smokers.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Updates in Lung Cancer Screening: A Decade of Evidence.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Reducing Lung Cancer Disparities Calls for Another Look: Inclusion of Priority Populations in Screening Guidelines.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
- Computed Tomographic Screening Intervals for Patients at Moderate Risk of Lung Cancer.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Characteristics of the Newly Eligible Population under Two Recent Updates of Lung Cancer Screening Recommendations.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Article
- The present and future of lung cancer screening: latest evidence.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Review
- Analysis of Lung Cancer Incidence in Non-Hispanic Black and White Americans using a Multistage Carcinogenesis Model.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Lung cancer screening updates: Impact of 2023 American Cancer Society's guidelines for lung cancer screening.Clinical imaging · 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
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force expanded its lung screening recommendation to include persons aged 50-80 years who had ever smoked and had at least 20 pack-years of exposure and less than 15 years since quitting (YSQ). However, studies have suggested that screening persons who formerly smoked with longer YSQ could be beneficial.
methodsThe authors used two validated lung cancer models to assess the benefits and harms of screening using various YSQ thresholds (10, 15, 20, 25, 30, and no YSQ) and the age at which screening was stopped. The impact of enforcing the YSQ criterion only at entry, but not at exit, also was evaluated. Outcomes included the number of screens, the percentage ever screened, screening benefits (lung cancer deaths averted, life-years gained), and harms (false-positive tests, overdiagnosed cases, radiation-induced lung cancer deaths). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the effect of restricting screening to those who had at least 5 years of life expectancy.
resultsAs the YSQ criterion was relaxed, the number of screens and the benefits and harms of screening increased. Raising the age at which to stop screening age resulted in additional benefits but with more overdiagnosis, as expected, because screening among those older than 80 years increased. Limiting screening to those who had at least 5 years of life expectancy would maintain most of the benefits while considerably reducing the harms.
conclusionsExpanding screening to persons who formerly smoked and have greater than 15 YSQ would result in considerable increases in deaths averted and life-years gained. Although additional harms would occur, these could be moderated by ensuring that screening is restricted to only those with reasonable life expectancy.
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.