Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38813535›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2024

Impact of single round of low dose CT lung cancer screening on cause of mortality in different socio-economic groups: a post-hoc analysis of long-term follow-up of the UKLS trial.

Michael P A Davies, Daniel Vulkan, Rhian Gabe, Stephen W Duffy, John K Field

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Michael P A DaviesDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine Institute of Systems, Molecular & Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Daniel VulkanCentre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Rhian GabeCentre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Stephen W DuffyCentre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
John K FieldDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine Institute of Systems, Molecular & Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Lower socioeconomic status, as measured by the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), is associated with higher rates of smoking-related disease mortality, and with poor uptake of cancer screening. Here we explore whether socioeconomic status impacts the effectiveness of a single round of low-dose-CT screening, or impacts other causes of death, in the UKLS LDCT screening trial. Methods: IMD quintiles were defined according to UK-wide data, with the deprived group defined as the lower two quintiles (Q1-2) and the less deprived as Q3-5. Follow-up data was obtained for lung cancer diagnosis (median follow-up 9.1 years) and cause of death (median follow-up 9.9 years). Outcomes were compared based on IMD group and trial arm (CT or control). Findings: More deprived quintiles were less likely to respond to the questionnaire, but this population was more likely to be selected for screening by the LLP risk model. Lower IMD quintiles benefitted from low-dose-CT screening in terms of lung cancer survival (HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.16-3.08) to the same extent as upper quintiles (HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.07-3.26). However, there was a bigger impact on deaths due to COPD and emphysema in more deprived quintiles. Interpretation: Whilst LDCT screening benefit for lung cancer was similar, significant impact on the rates of death from other smoking-related diseases, notably COPD and emphysema, was seen primarily in lower socioeconomic groups. Future research is required to confirm how lung cancer screening benefits other disease outcomes. Funding: NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme; NIHR Policy Research programme; Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation.

Indexed as

CT screeningIndex of multiple deprivationLung cancerMortality

Identifiers

PMID38813535
PMCPMC11134881

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.