ArticleJAMA network open2025
Gender Disparities and Lung Cancer Screening Outcomes Among Individuals Who Have Never Smoked.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global inequalities in tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer care quality from 1990 to 2021.iScience · 2026Article
- Improving lung cancer screening diagnostic efficiency.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2026Review
- Over- and underscreening for lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Review
- LDCT screening for lung cancer in East Asian never-smokers: balancing benefits and overdiagnosis-related harms.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2026Review
- Review
- Lung cancer in never-smoking females: epidemiology, risk factors and screening.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Editorial: Advancing diagnostic excellence in early lung cancer detection.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Risk Factors Associated With Incidence of Lung Cancer in Never-Smokers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JTO clinical and research reports · 2025Article
- Low dose CT for lung cancer screening.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Lung cancer in non-smoking women (LCINSW): from risk factors to precision therapy.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2025Review
- Article
- Low-Dose Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening for Individuals Who Have Never Smoked: A Review of Recent Updates in Taiwan and the United States.Journal of chest surgery · 2025Review
- Reducing Lung Cancer Disparities Calls for Another Look: Inclusion of Priority Populations in Screening Guidelines.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
- Association between age and lung cancer risk: evidence from lung lobar radiomics.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Editorial: Current Approaches to Screening for Lung Cancer in Smokers and Non-Smokers.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Insights Into Opportunistic Lung Cancer Screening for Individuals Who Have Never Smoked.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Global respiratory tumor mortality correlation study with economic level, 2000-2019.Frontiers in public health · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Lung cancer in individuals who have never smoked (INS) is a growing global concern, with a rapidly increasing incidence and proportion among all lung cancer cases. Particularly in East Asia, opportunistic lung cancer screening (LCS) programs targeting INS have gained popularity. However, the sex-specific outcomes and drawbacks of screening INS remain unexplored, with data predominantly focused on women. Objective: To compare LCS outcomes between Asian women and men with no smoking history. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study was conducted at health checkup centers in South Korea from 2009 to 2021. Participants included individuals aged 50 to 80 years with no smoking history who underwent low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening. Data were retrospectively analyzed from November 2023 to June 2024. Exposures: Opportunistic LDCT screening for lung cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participants were followed up until December 2022 for the outcome of death. Lung cancer diagnosis, diagnostic characteristics, clinical course, and lung cancer-specific deaths (LCSD) were compared between women and men. Results: A total of 21 062 participants (16 133 [76.6%] women and 4929 [23.4%] men) with a mean (SD) age of 59.8 (7.2) years were included. From baseline screening, 176 participants (139 women [0.9%] and 37 men [0.8%]) were diagnosed with lung cancer (screen-detected); 131 of 139 women (94.3%) and 33 of 37 men (89.2%) were diagnosed with stage 0 to I disease, with 133 of 139 women (95.7%) and 36 of 37 men (97.3%) having adenocarcinoma. There were no significant sex-based differences in stage or histologic type distribution. Among the 21 062 screened individuals, LCSD was reported in 8 women and 3 men during a mean (SD) follow-up of 83.8 (41.7) months. Multivariable analyses found no significant association between sex and cumulative hazards of lung cancer diagnosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.64-1.26] for men vs women) or LCSD (aHR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.28-4.00] for men vs women). The estimated 5-year lung cancer-specific survival rate was 97.7% for women and 100% for men with screen-detected lung cancer, showing no significant sex differences. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Asian individuals with no smoking history who underwent LDCT screening, no significant sex-based differences were detected in lung cancer diagnosis, stage distribution, or LCSD. These findings suggest that men and women who have never smoked would experience similar risks of overdiagnosis with little to no benefit when exposed to indiscriminate screening.
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.