SynthesisClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2025
Risk factors for the growth of ground-glass nodules in the lungs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Expert Consensus on Shared Decision-making in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Ground-glass Opacity-featured Lung Adenocarcinoma].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe growth of ground-glass nodules in the lungs is an independent risk factor for the occurrence of lung cancer, which provides the basic conditions for the occurrence of lung cancer. However, risk factors for the growth of ground-glass nodules in the lungs have not been fully identified. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess risk factors for the growth of ground-glass nodules in the lungs.
methodsComputerized searches of the electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus for published studies on risk factors for the growth of ground-glass nodules in the lungs. The search time limit is from the establishment of the database to March 2024. Two review authors independently searched the studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the quality of the selected studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and RevMan 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis. This review is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (identifier CRD42024499763).
resultsFourteen studies involving 2059 patients were included, and 14 statistically significant risk factors were identified. The results of meta-analysis showed that age (WMD = 4.61, 95 % CI [1.73∼7.49], p = 0.002), female (OR = 0.65, 95 % CI [0.51∼0.82], p = 0.0003), history of smoking (OR = 1.76, 95 % CI [1.07∼2.92], p = 0.03), history of malignancy (OR = 1.53, 95 % CI [1.16∼2.02], p = 0.003), lesion size (≥ 8 mm) (OR = 1.19, 95 % CI [1.12∼1.26], p < 0.00001), air bronchial sign (OR = 6.09, 95 % CI [3∼12.33], p < 0.00001), lobulation sign (OR = 2.3, 95 % CI [1.58∼3.36], p < 0.00001), spiculated sign (OR = 5.56, 95 % CI [1.39∼22.3], p = 0.02), vascular bundle sign [OR = 2.54, 95 % CI [1.85∼3.48], p < 0.00001), initial diameter (≥ 8 mm) (OR = 1.89, 95 % CI [1.34∼2.67], p = 0.0003), vacuolar sign (OR = 2.62, 95 % CI [1.46∼4.69], p = 0.001), solid nodules (OR = 4.6, 95 % CI [1.96∼10.79], p = 0.0005), solid components (OR = 13.77, 95 % CI [7.08∼26.78], p < 0.00001) and nodule roundness (OR = 2.85, 95 % CI [1.19∼6.81], p = 0.02) were risk factors for the growth of ground-glass nodules in the lungs. However, pleural adhesion (p = 0.47) and pleural retraction (p = 0.07) were not statistically significant.
conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis showed that there are many risk factors for the growth of ground-glass nodules in the lungs, and medical staff should identify the above risk factors as early as possible in clinical work and formulate targeted interventions for precise prevention.
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.