ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2025
Eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening in France: a modelling study.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating Eligibility for Lung Cancer Screening in Ireland: A Dynamic Modelling Study of Smoking Trends.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- From evidence to action: the IARC's role in strengthening cancer prevention and early detection.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2026Review
- Eligibility for Lung Cancer Screening in Switzerland: A Comparative Analysis of Three Data Sources From Lausanne and the Canton of Vaud.International journal of public health · 2026Article
- Defining eligibility for lung cancer screening based on individual risk.The Lancet. Oncology · 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
Abstract
Background: We estimated the potential impact of different eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening in France, to inform a planned national pilot program. Methods: We simulated the French population by integrating national population estimates and smoking prevalence with lung cancer risk factors from the CONSTANCES cohort. We predicted lung cancer cases and deaths using the Lung Cancer [Death] Risk Assessment Tool for individuals with a smoking history. We evaluated four screening eligibility strategies: the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria (USPSTF) 2013, USPSTF-2021, NELSON, and a risk-based strategy (PLCOm2012 model). Findings: We simulated 14,860,000 individuals with a smoking history aged 50-80 years in France. We estimated 11,000-14,000 preventable lung cancer deaths over 5 years by screening 2.4-4.0 million individuals, depending on eligibility criteria. When screening the same number of individuals, we estimated the risk-based strategy would identify an additional 12-22% preventable lung cancer deaths compared with categorical criteria. Individuals selected by risk-based criteria were typically 5-7 years older, with 4-6 years shorter life expectancy, but categorical criteria selected many individuals with low anticipated screening benefit (33% among USPSTF-2021-eligible). Restricting to individuals aged 50-74, 55-80, and 55-74 years gave smaller differences between categorical and risk-based criteria in age (2-6 years difference), life expectancy (2-5 years difference), and preventable lung cancer deaths (6-17% difference). Interpretation: Screening high-risk individuals for lung cancer might prevent over 10,000 lung cancer deaths in France over 5 years, with potentially higher efficiency for risk-based eligibility compared with categorical criteria. Funding: l'Institut National du Cancer.
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.