ArticleCancer research and treatment2026
Comparison of Surveillance with Low-Dose and Contrast-Enhanced Chest Computed Tomography in Patients Disease-Free for 2 Years after Curative Resection for Lung Cancer.
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeLow-dose chest computed tomography (LDCT) is recommended for surveillance 2-3 years after curative resection of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, supporting clinical evidence is limited. This study compared LDCT with contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography (CECT) in terms of recurrence detection and overall survival (OS) in patients 2 years after curative resection of NSCLC. MATERIALS AND
methodsAmong patients who underwent curative resection for NSCLC between January 2011 and December 2017 and survived for 2 years without recurrence, 2,083 patients were included. Comparisons between the LDCT and CECT groups were performed in both the entire cohort and propensity score-matched cohort. The primary outcome was the difference in overall survival. Secondary outcomes included time-to-recurrence, recurrence-free survival, and post-recurrence survival in each group.
resultsIn the propensity score-matched population, the 5-year OS (96.0% for LDCT, 98.0% for CECT, p=0.097) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (95.4% for LDCT, 96.0% for CECT, p=0.761) did not differ. The OS and RFS did not differ in subgroup analyses stratified by pathologic stage and histologic type. In the competing risk analysis, the overall 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence did not differ between the two groups (4.56% for LDCT, 3.93% for CECT, p=0.765). When stratified by pathologic stage and histologic type, there was no significant difference in the cumulative incidence of recurrence. The distribution of recurrence sites did not differ between groups.
conclusionSimilar OS and RFS were observed in LDCT and CECT surveillance in patients who achieved a 2-year disease-free status after curative resection for NSCLC.
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.