Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38405003›Full record

ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2024

Lung cancer in females-sex-based differences from males in epidemiology, biology, and outcomes: a narrative review.

Kaylan Gee, Sai Yendamuri

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational lung cancer research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
15.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Sex Differences in Cancer Stage at Diagnosis of Nonreproductive Solid Organ Tumors in the United States, 2015 to 2022.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Sexually distinct multi-omic responses to progressive endurance exercise training in the rat lung.American journal of respiratory cell and molecular biology · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Symptom clusters and network analysis in lung cancer patients receiving taxane-based chemotherapy: a comprehensive assessment using the CIPNAT multi-scale tool.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kaylan GeeDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Sai YendamuriDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.
University at Buffalo, State University of New York · USUniversity of Tennessee at Knoxville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objective: The role of biological sex is seldom considered in characterizing lung cancer, the deadliest cancer in both the United States and the world. Lung cancer has traditionally been regarded as a male disease; as such, research in female-specific phenomena is frequently conflicting or absent. Currently, disparities in lung cancer incidence are primarily driven by females, especially non-smokers and those of younger age. This narrative review provides insight into sex-specific characteristics of lung cancer, highlighting risk factors, diagnosis patterns, carcinogenesis, and treatment outcomes in females. Methods: The PubMed database was searched on July 26, 2023 to identify research published between 2013 and 2023 in English. Sixty-three articles were considered relevant, and their full texts and citations were studied to compile information for this narrative review. Key Content and Findings: Exposure-related risk factors, including personal tobacco use, are thought to impact female lung cancer risk more profoundly. However, studies on occupational exposures are underpowered to conclude risk in females. Data characterizing the effect of endogenous and exogenous hormonal exposures on female lung cancer risk remain two-sided. Screening guidelines are tailored to white males, exacerbating sex and race disparities. The effect of biological sex on carcinogenesis and the immune system response to cancer is not fully understood, though the female immune system clearly reacts more aggressively to lung cancer. In early-stage disease, females have greater survival in the perioperative setting and during follow-up of several years, attributed to favorable histopathology and healthier baseline status. Sex-specific response to systemic treatment continues to be optimized as lack of standardization in randomized trials makes interpreting results difficult when aggregated. Conclusions: Biological sex plays a critical role in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), though further study is needed to depict the complex web of factors that affect lung cancer risk, development, and outcomes. Female underrepresentation in studies has contributed to this lack of understanding. As these disparities are eliminated, we can move towards more effective treatment for both sexes in this pervasive yet deadly disease.

Indexed as

femaleLung cancernon-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)sexsex difference

Identifiers

PMID38405003
PMCPMC10891406
OpenAlexW4391330294

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.