Trial reportPloS one2025
Five year mortality in an RCT of a lung cancer biomarker to select people for low dose CT screening.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact of Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Updates in Lung Cancer Screening: A Decade of Evidence.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Review
- The Importance of Comorbidities at Baseline and 5-Year Follow-Up in a Lung Cancer Biomarker Screening Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of biomarkers in risk-based early detection of lung cancer may enable screening to become cost effective and widely accessible. EarlyCDT-Lung is an example of such a blood-based autoantibody biomarker which may improve accessibility to Low dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) screening for those at highest risk. We randomized 12 208 individuals aged 50-75 at high risk of developing lung cancer to either the test or to standard clinical care. Outcomes were ascertained from Register of Deaths and Cancer Registry. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratio of the rate of deaths from all causes and lung cancer. Additional analyses were performed for cases of lung cancer diagnosed within two years of the initial test. After 5 years 326 lung cancers were detected (2.7% of those enrolled). The total number of deaths reported from all causes in the intervention group was 344 compared to 388 in the control group. There were 73 lung cancer deaths in the intervention arm and 90 in the controls (Adjusted HR 0.789 (0.636, 0.978). An analysis of cases of lung cancer detected within 2 years of randomization in the intervention group showed that there were 34 deaths from all causes and 29 from lung cancer. In the control group there were 56 deaths with 49 from lung cancer. In those diagnosed with lung cancer within 2 years of randomization the hazard ratio for all cause mortality was 0.615 (0.401,0.942) and for lung cancer 0.598 (0.378, 0.946). Further large-scale studies of the role of biomarkers to target lung cancer screening, in addition to LDCT, are likely to provide additional value.
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.