Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40154514›Full record

Observational studyThe Lancet. Oncology2025

Low-dose CT for lung cancer screening in a high-risk population (SUMMIT): a prospective, longitudinal cohort study.

Amyn Bhamani, Andrew Creamer, Priyam Verghese, Ruth Prendecki, Carolyn Horst, Sophie Tisi, Helen Hall, Chuen Ryan Khaw, Monica Mullin, John McCabe and 28 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in The Lancet. Oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03934866 (The SUMMIT Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 42 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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.

NCT03934866 active not recruitingnot on this map

The SUMMIT Study: Cancer Screening Study With or Without Low Dose Lung CT to Validate a Multi-cancer Early Detection Test

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2019 to 2030Enrolled13,035ConditionsCancer, Lung CancerArmsLow Dose CT scan
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Large Language Models in Lung Cancer: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cotinine Promotes Cancer Cell Proliferation and mEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Improving lung cancer screening diagnostic efficiency.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2026
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

38 authors.

Amyn BhamaniLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Andrew CreamerLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Priyam VergheseLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Ruth PrendeckiLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Carolyn HorstLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Sophie TisiLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Helen HallLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Chuen Ryan KhawLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Monica MullinLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
John McCabeLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Kylie GyertsonUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Vicky BowyerUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Dominique AranconUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Jeannie EngUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Fanta BojangUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Claire LevermoreUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Anne-Marie HackerCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Esther Arthur-DarkwaCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Laura FarrellyCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Anant PatelRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Sara LockWhittington Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Alan ShawWhittington Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Rajesh BankaBarking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Romford, UK.
Angshu BhowmikHomerton University Hospital Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Ugo EkeowaThe Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, Harlow, UK.
Zaheer MangeraNorth Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.
Christopher ValerioNorth Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.
William M RickettsBarts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Ali MohammedBarts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Terry O'ShaughnessyBarts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Neal NavaniLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Samantha L QuaifeCentre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Arjun NairUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Anand DevarajRoyal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK; National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
SUMMIT consortium
Jennifer L DicksonLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Allan HackshawCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Sam M JanesLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK; University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. Electronic address: s.janes@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow-dose CT screening reduces lung cancer mortality. In advance of planned national lung cancer screening programmes, research is needed to inform policies regarding implementation. We aimed to assess the implementation of low-dose CT for lung cancer screening in a high-risk population and to validate a multicancer early detection blood test.

methodsIn this prospective, longitudinal cohort study, individuals aged 55-77 years recorded as current smokers in their primary care records at any point within the past 20 years were identified from 329 primary care practices in London (UK) and invited for a lung health check via postal letter. Individuals meeting the 2013 United States Preventive Services Taskforce criteria (current or former smokers within the past 15 years with at least 30 pack-year smoking histories) or having a Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian 2012 model 6-year risk of 1·3% or greater, and not currently receiving treatment for an active cancer (except adjuvant hormonal therapy), were eligible for the study. These individuals underwent lung cancer screening via non-contrast, thin collimation low-dose CT. In this analysis, we report the results of the baseline round of low-dose CT screening. Key primary endpoints were those associated with examining the performance of a lung cancer screening service. Outcome measures were analysed on a per-participant level using descriptive frequencies. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03934866.

findingsBetween April 8, 2019, and May 14, 2021, 12 773 participants were recruited and analysed. 7353 (57·6%) of 12 773 participants were male and 5420 (42·4%) were female, and 10 665 (83·5%) participants were White. 261 (2·0%) of 12 773 participants were diagnosed with lung cancer (including 163 [1·3%] participants with screen-detected lung cancer and 98 [0·8%] with delayed screen-detected lung cancer [ie, after a 3-month or 6-month nodule follow-up CT]) and 276 (2·2%) participants were diagnosed with any intrathoracic malignancy after a positive baseline screen. 207 (79·3%) of 261 individuals with prevalent screen-detected lung cancer were diagnosed at stage I or II and surgical resection was the primary treatment modality in 201 (77·0%) of 261 individuals. Including cases where multiple resections were done in the same participant (eg, for synchronous primaries), 28 (11·6%) of 241 surgical resections were benign, and there was one (0·4%) death within 90 days of surgery. At 12 months, the episode sensitivity of our low-dose CT screening protocol for detecting lung cancer was 97·0% (95% CI 95·0-99·1; 261 of 269 participants). The specificity was 95·2% (94·8-95·6; 11 905 of 12 504 participants), with a false-positive rate of 4·8% (4·4-5·2).

interpretationLarge-scale lung cancer screening is effective and can be delivered efficiently to an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse population.

fundingGRAIL.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRadiation DosageRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID40154514

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.