ArticleJTO clinical and research reports2024
The Benefits and Harms of Lung Cancer Screening in Individuals With Comorbidities.
Article in JTO clinical and research reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Why Women Appear to Have Better Outcomes When Undergoing Screening for Lung Cancer.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Trial
- Pretest-posttest trial of a lung cancer screening decision aid for individuals with multimorbidity from a primary care population.PEC innovation · 2026Article
- Performance of smoking duration-based lung cancer screening eligibility criteria: a comparative modeling study.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Comparison of Underlying Risk of Developing and Dying From Lung Cancer in Screened Populations.Chest · 2026Article
- Structured narrative review on lung cancer screening: current evidence, clinical practice implications and implementation insights from a multidisciplinary task force and patient representatives.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Review
- Curative intent therapy of stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer: a patient-centered precision approach to assess, measure, and interpret benefits and harms.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Do Differences in Comorbidity Explain Sex-based Differences in Lung Cancer Screening Outcomes?Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
- Impact of Comorbidities on the Mortality Benefits of Lung Cancer Screening: A Post-Hoc Analysis of the PLCO and NLST Trials.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2025Article
- The Importance of Comorbidities at Baseline and 5-Year Follow-Up in a Lung Cancer Biomarker Screening Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The risk and benefit profiles of US-eligible lung cancer screening attendees vs nonattendees.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Individuals with a history of smoking and a high risk of lung cancer often have a high prevalence of smoking-related comorbidities. The presence of these comorbidities might alter the benefit-to-harm ratio of lung cancer screening by influencing the risk of complications, quality of life, and competing risks of death. Nevertheless, individuals with chronic diseases are underrepresented in screening clinical trials. In this study, we use microsimulation modeling to determine the impact of chronic diseases on lung cancer benefits and harms. Methods: We extended a validated lung cancer screening microsimulation model that comprehensively recapitulates an individual's lung cancer development, progression, detection, follow-up, treatment, and survival. We parameterized the model to reflect the impact of chronic diseases on complications from invasive testing, quality of life, and mortality in individuals in five-year age categories between the ages of 50 and 80 years. Outcomes included life-years (LY) gained per 100,000 in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, heart disease, and history of stroke compared with screening-eligible individuals without comorbidities. Results: Among individuals between the ages of 50 and 54 years, we found that the presence of a comorbidity altered the LY gained from screening per 100,000 individuals depending on the comorbidity: 4296 LY with no comorbidities; 3462 LY, 3260 LY, 3031 LY, and 3257 LY with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart disease, diabetes mellitus, and stroke, respectively. We observed greater reductions in LY gained in individuals with two comorbidities; we observed similar patterns for individuals between the ages of 55 and 59 years, 60 and 64 years, 65 and 69 years, 70 and 74 years, and 75 and 80 years. Conclusions: Comorbidities reduce LY gained from screening per 100,000 compared with no comorbidities, and our results can be used by clinicians when discussing the benefits and harms of screening in their patients with comorbidities.
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.