Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38079172›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Lung Cancer Screening in Brazil Comparing the 2013 and 2021 USPSTF Guidelines.

Isabel Cristina Martins Emmerick, Mônica Rodrigues Campos, Debora Castanheira, Jessica Muzy, Aline Marques, Luisa Arueira Chaves, Mario Jorge Sobreira da Silva

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Isabel Cristina Martins EmmerickDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Mônica Rodrigues CamposDepartamento de Ciências Sociais, Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Debora CastanheiraLaboratório de Pesquisa Clínica em DST e Aids, Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Jessica MuzyLaboratório de Informações em Saúde, Instituto de Comunicação Científica e Tecnológica em Saúde, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Aline MarquesLaboratório de Informações em Saúde, Instituto de Comunicação Científica e Tecnológica em Saúde, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Luisa Arueira ChavesInstituto de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Macaé, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Mario Jorge Sobreira da SilvaInstituto Nacional de Câncer, Coordenação de Ensino, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz · BREscola Nacional de Saúde Pública · BRInstituto Nacional do Câncer · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BRUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: It is estimated that, from 2023 to 2025, lung cancer (LC) will be the second most frequent cancer in Brazil, but the country does not have an LC screening (LCS) policy. Objective: To compare the number of individuals eligible for screening, 5-year preventable LC deaths, and years of life gained (YLG) if LC death is averted by LCS, considering 3 eligibility strategies by sociodemographic characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness research study assessed 3 LCS criteria by applying a modified version of the LC-Death Risk Assessment Tool (LCDRAT) and the LC-Risk Assessment Tool (LCRAT). Data are from the 2019 Brazilian National Household Survey. Participants included ever-smokers aged 50 to 80 years. Data analysis was performed from February to May 2023. Exposures: Exposures included ever-smokers aged 50 to 80 years, US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 guidelines (ever-smokers aged 55 to 80 years with ≥30 pack-years and <15 years since cessation), and USPSTF 2021 guidelines (ever-smokers aged 50 to 80 years with 20 pack-years and <15 years since cessation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were the numbers of individuals eligible for LCS, the 5-year preventable deaths attributable to LC, and the number of YLGs if death due to LC was averted by LCS. Results: In Brazil, the eligible population for LCS was 27 280 920 ever-smokers aged 50 to 80 years (13 387 552 female [49.1%]; 13 249 531 [48.6%] aged 50-60 years; 394 994 Asian or Indigenous [1.4%]; 3 111 676 Black [11.4%]; 10 942 640 Pardo [40.1%]; 12 830 904 White [47.0%]; 12 428 536 [45.6%] with an incomplete middle school education; and 12 860 132 [47.1%] living in the Southeast region); 5 144 322 individuals met the USPSTF 2013 criteria for LCS (2 090 636 female [40.6%]; 2 290 219 [44.5%] aged 61-70 years; 66 430 Asian or Indigenous [1.3%]; 491 527 Black [9.6%]; 2 073 836 Pardo [40.3%]; 2 512 529 [48.8%] White; 2 436 221 [47.4%] with an incomplete middle school education; and 2 577 300 [50.1%] living in the Southeast region), and 8 380 279 individuals met the USPSTF 2021 LCS criteria (3 507 760 female [41.9%]; 4 352 740 [51.9%] aged 50-60 years; 119 925 Asian or Indigenous [1.4%]; 839 171 Black [10.0%]; 3 330 497 Pardo [39.7%]; 4 090 687 [48.8%] White; 4 022 784 [48.0%] with an incomplete middle school education; and 4 162 070 [49.7%] living in the Southeast region). The number needed to screen to prevent 1 death was 177 individuals according to the USPSTF 2013 criteria and 242 individuals according to the USPSTF 2021 criteria. The YLG was 23 for all ever-smokers, 19 for the USPSTF 2013 criteria, and 21 for the USPSTF 2021 criteria. Being Black, having less than a high school education, and living in the North and Northeast regions were associated with increased 5-year risk of LC death. Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study, USPSTF 2021 criteria were better than USPSTF 2013 in reducing disparities in LC death rates. Nonetheless, the risk of LC death remained unequal, and these results underscore the importance of identifying an appropriate approach for high-risk populations for LCS, considering the local epidemiological context.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsBrazilEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansRisk FactorsSmokers

Identifiers

PMID38079172
PMCPMC10714246
OpenAlexW4389573559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.