ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Innovations in Early Lung Cancer Detection: Tracing the Evolution and Advancements in Screening.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Surgical Aspects of Treatment of the Lung Cancer Found in Low-Dose CT-Based Screenings.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Genomics and Epigenomics Approaches for the Quantification of Circulating Tumor DNA in Liquid Biopsy: Relevance of a Multimodal Strategy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- The impact of rurality, socioeconomic status, and health literacy on lung cancer screening uptake: a systematic review protocol.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review of AI Performance in Lung Cancer Detection on CT Thorax.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Cell-Free DNA: Features and Attributes Shaping the Next Frontier in Liquid Biopsy.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2025Review
- Minimally invasive biomarkers for triaging lung nodules-challenges and future perspectives.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer mortality rates, particularly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), continue to present a significant global health challenge, and the adoption of lung cancer screening remains limited, often influenced by inequities in access to healthcare. Despite clinical evidence demonstrating the efficacy of annual screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and recommendations from medical organizations including the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the national lung cancer screening uptake remains around 5% among eligible individuals. Advancements in the clinical management of NSCLC have recently become more personalized with the implementation of blood-based biomarker testing. Extensive research into tumor-derived cell-free DNA (cfDNA) through fragmentation offers a novel method for improving early lung cancer detection. This review assesses the screening landscape, explores obstacles to lung cancer screening, and discusses how a plasma whole genome fragmentome test (pWGFrag-Lung) can improve lung cancer screening participation and adherence.
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.