Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40387878›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2025

Incidence rate and malignancy risk in new nodules in a lung cancer screening programme.

Andrew W Creamer, Carolyn Horst, Priyam Verghese, Ruth Prendecki, Amyn Bhamani, Helen Hall, Jennifer L Dickson, Sophie Tisi, Chuen Ryan Khaw, John McCabe and 8 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Andrew W CreamerLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Carolyn HorstLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Priyam VergheseLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Ruth PrendeckiLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Amyn BhamaniLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Helen HallLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Jennifer L DicksonLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Sophie TisiLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Chuen Ryan KhawLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
John McCabeLungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Kylie GyertsonUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Anne-Marie HackerCancer 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.
Allan HackshawCancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Arjun NairUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Anand Devaraj *National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK.
Sam M Janes *Lungs For Living, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK. s.janes@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6634-5939
SUMMIT consortium

Funding

Cancer Research UK EDDCPGM\100002Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT107963AIA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is limited evidence for the malignancy risk posed by new nodules appearing at annual screening rounds or at short-term interval nodule follow-up (NFU) CTs in lung cancer screening programmes. We investigated incidence rate and malignancy risk in new nodules appearing at NFU and at first annual CT in a screening cohort and investigated nodule and participant characteristics which predicted malignancy.

methods11,566 participants underwent baseline CT screening between April 2019 and April 2020. CTs were read in conjunction with computer-aided detection software with semi-automated volumetry. Nodule management was based on British Thoracic Society guidelines, with the addition of a lower threshold for new solid nodules appearing at incident rounds; those ≥ 30 and < 200 mm

resultsNew nodules were identified in 8.4% of participants at NFU-CT and 11.1% at Y1. 0.63% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.016-3.433) of new nodules at NFU-CT and 2.98% (95% CI 1.83-4.57) at annual CT proved malignant. Malignancy risk in new nodules at Y1 was 1.67% in nodules < 30 mm

conclusionOur findings validate the need for lower volume thresholds for further surveillance or definitive investigation in new solid nodules at annual scans. Malignancy risk in new nodules with subsolid or typical perifissural morphology and in new nodules appearing in a shorter time frame of NFU CTs is low. KEY POINTS: Question What is the incidence and malignancy risk of new nodules appearing at annual and nodule follow-up interval CTs in lung cancer screening? Findings New nodules were seen in 11.1% and 8.4% of participants at annual low-dose CT and 3-month interval CT, respectively. Malignancy risk at annual CT increased with nodule size. Clinical relevance In a lung cancer screening programme, new nodules at annual and nodule follow-up CTs occur in around 1 in 10 participants. Lower size thresholds for further surveillance or definitive investigation should be considered compared to nodules at baseline CT.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsMultiple Pulmonary NodulesSolitary Pulmonary NoduleTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsCancer screeningLung cancerPulmonary nodules (multiple)Pulmonary nodules (solitary)

Identifiers

PMID40387878
PMCPMC12559159

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.