Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40209556›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2025

Virtual lung screening trial (VLST): An in silico study inspired by the national lung screening trial for lung cancer detection.

Fakrul Islam Tushar, Liesbeth Vancoillie, Cindy McCabe, Amareswararao Kavuri, Lavsen Dahal, Brian Harrawood, Milo Fryling, Mojtaba Zarei, Saman Sotoudeh-Paima, Fong Chi Ho and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image analysis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Next Frontier in Quantitative Co-Clinical Imaging to Advance Functional Precision Oncology.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Fakrul Islam TusharCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA. Electronic address: fakrulislam.tushar@duke.edu.
Liesbeth VancoillieCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Cindy McCabeCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, USA.
Amareswararao KavuriCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Lavsen DahalCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA.
Brian HarrawoodCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Milo FrylingCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Mojtaba ZareiCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA.
Saman Sotoudeh-PaimaCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA.
Fong Chi HoCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA.
Dhrubajyoti GhoshDept. of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Michael R HarowiczCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Tina D TailorCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Sheng LuoDept. of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
W Paul SegarsCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA; Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, USA.
Ehsan AbadiCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA; Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, USA.
Kyle J LafataCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA; Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, USA; Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA.
Joseph Y LoCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA; Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, USA.
Ehsan SameiCenter for Virtual Imaging Trials, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Dept. of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, USA; Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University, USA; Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, USA.

Funding

TR&D Project 3: Virtual ReadersP41EB028744 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Ehsan Samei · 2021 to 2026
$7.8M
Simulation Tools for Dynamic CTR01EB001838 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SAMEI, EHSAN, SEGARS, WILLIAM P · 2005 to 2023
$6.9M
Computer-Aided Triage of Body CT Scans with Deep LearningR01CA261457 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LO, JOSEPH Y, RUBIN, GEOFFREY D · 2023 to 2025
$2.3M
Accuracy and Precision in CT Quantification of COPD Through Virtual Imaging TrialsR01HL155293 · NHLBI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI ABADI, EHSAN · 2021 to 2025
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA261457NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL155293NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB028744NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB001838
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical imaging trials play a crucial role in advancing medical innovation but are often costly, inefficient, and ethically constrained. Virtual Imaging Trials (VITs) present a solution by simulating clinical trial components in a controlled, risk-free environment. The Virtual Lung Screening Trial (VLST), an in silico study inspired by the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), illustrates the potential of VITs to expedite clinical trials, minimize risks to participants, and promote optimal use of imaging technologies in healthcare. This study aimed to show that a virtual imaging trial platform could investigate some key elements of a major clinical trial, specifically the NLST, which compared Computed tomography (CT) and chest radiography (CXR) for lung cancer screening. With simulated cancerous lung nodules, a virtual patient cohort of 294 subjects was created using XCAT human models. Each virtual patient underwent both CT and CXR imaging, with deep learning models, the AI CT-Reader and AI CXR-Reader, acting as virtual readers to perform recall patients with suspicion of lung cancer. The primary outcome was the difference in diagnostic performance between CT and CXR, measured by the Area Under the Curve (AUC). The AI CT-Reader showed superior diagnostic accuracy, achieving an AUC of 0.92 (95 % CI: 0.90-0.95) compared to the AI CXR-Reader's AUC of 0.72 (95 % CI: 0.67-0.77). Furthermore, at the same 94 % CT sensitivity reported by the NLST, the VLST specificity of 73 % was similar to the NLST specificity of 73.4 %. This CT performance highlights the potential of VITs to replicate certain aspects of clinical trials effectively, paving the way toward a safe and efficient method for advancing imaging-based diagnostics.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsTomography, X-Ray ComputedComputer SimulationDeep LearningFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiography, ThoracicSensitivity and SpecificityChest radiography (CXR)Computed tomography (CT)Computer-aided diagnosisHuman digital twinsNational lung screening trials (NLST)Neural networksVirtual lung screening trial (VLST)

Identifiers

PMID40209556
PMCPMC12147717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.