ArticleBMC cancer2025
Prognostic factors of survival in patients with lung cancer after low-dose computed tomography screening: a multivariate analysis of a lung cancer screening cohort in China.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of symptoms at diagnosis with prognosis in patients with surgically treated stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort analysis of a prospectively maintained registry.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- A robust machine learning model based on ribosomal-subunit-derived piRNAs for diagnostic potential of nonsmall cell lung cancer across multicentre, large-scale of sequencing data.Clinical and translational 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the prognostic factors influencing the survival of patients with lung cancer identified from a lung cancer screening cohort in the community.
methodsA total of 25,310 eligible participants were enrolled in this population-based prospective cohort study, derived from a community lung cancer screening program started from 2013 to 2017. Survival analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards regression models were utilized to identify prognostic factors, including demographic characteristics, risk factors, low-dose CT (LDCT) screening, and treatment information.
resultsThe screening cohort identified a total of 429 patients with lung cancer (276 men, 153 women) during the study period. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates were 74.4%, 59.4% and 54.5%, respectively. The prognostic factors discovered by the multivariate analysis include gender (male vs. female, HR: 2.96, 95% CI: 1.88-4.64), age (HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.05), personal monthly income (2000-3999 CNY vs. < 2000 CNY, HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.52-0.95), pathological type (small cell carcinoma vs. adenocarcinoma, HR: 2.55, 95% CI: 1.39-4.66), stage (IV vs. 0-I, HR: 5.21, 95% CI: 2.78-9.75; III vs. 0-I, HR: 3.81, 95% CI: 1.88-7.74), surgery (yes vs. no, HR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.23-0.57), and KPS (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.98-0.99) among lung cancer patients identified by the basic model. Furthermore, solid nodule (non-solid nodule vs. solid nodule, HR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.23-0.96) and larger-sized nodule (HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.03) were associated with a worse prognosis for lung cancer in the LDCT screening model.
conclusionPrognostic factors of patients with lung cancer detected by LDCT screening were identified, which could potentially guide clinicians in the decision-making process for lung cancer management and treatment. Further studies with larger sample sizes and more detailed follow-up data are warranted for prognostic prediction.
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.