Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38949177›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2024

Reinforcement learning for individualized lung cancer screening schedules: A nested case-control study.

Zixing Wang, Xin Sui, Wei Song, Fang Xue, Wei Han, Yaoda Hu, Jingmei Jiang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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.

Zixing WangPeking University People's Hospital, Peking University Hepatology Institute, Beijing Key Laboratory of Hepatitis C and Immunotherapy for Liver Diseases, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9617-2493
Xin SuiDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Wei SongDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Fang XueDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Wei HanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yaoda HuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jingmei JiangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

Funding

National High Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding 2022-PUMCH-A-034National Natural Science Foundation of China 82304215
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current guidelines for managing screen-detected pulmonary nodules offer rule-based recommendations for immediate diagnostic work-up or follow-up at intervals of 3, 6, or 12 months. Customized visit plans are lacking. PURPOSE: To develop individualized screening schedules using reinforcement learning (RL) and evaluate the effectiveness of RL-based policy models.

methodsUsing a nested case-control design, we retrospectively identified 308 patients with cancer who had positive screening results in at least two screening rounds in the National Lung Screening Trial. We established a control group that included cancer-free patients with nodules, matched (1:1) according to the year of cancer diagnosis. By generating 10,164 sequence decision episodes, we trained RL-based policy models, incorporating nodule diameter alone, combined with nodule appearance (attenuation and margin) and/or patient information (age, sex, smoking status, pack-years, and family history). We calculated rates of misdiagnosis, missed diagnosis, and delayed diagnosis, and compared the performance of RL-based policy models with rule-based follow-up protocols (National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline; China Guideline for the Screening and Early Detection of Lung Cancer).

resultsWe identified significant interactions between certain variables (e.g., nodule shape and patient smoking pack-years, beyond those considered in guideline protocols) and the selection of follow-up testing intervals, thereby impacting the quality of the decision sequence. In validation, one RL-based policy model achieved rates of 12.3% for misdiagnosis, 9.7% for missed diagnosis, and 11.7% for delayed diagnosis. Compared with the two rule-based protocols, the three best-performing RL-based policy models consistently demonstrated optimal performance for specific patient subgroups based on disease characteristics (benign or malignant), nodule phenotypes (size, shape, and attenuation), and individual attributes.

conclusionsThis study highlights the potential of using an RL-based approach that is both clinically interpretable and performance-robust to develop personalized lung cancer screening schedules. Our findings present opportunities for enhancing the current cancer screening system.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsAgedCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrecision MedicineReinforcement, PsychologyRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray Computedfollow‐uppersonalized cancer screeningpulmonary nodulereinforcement learning

Identifiers

PMID38949177
PMCPMC11215689

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.