SynthesisFuture oncology (London, England)2025
An umbrella review of systematic evidence on the Low Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening.
Synthesis in Future oncology (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence construction: a review of the bridge between CT imaging features of lung ground-glass nodules adenocarcinoma and carcinogenic driver genes.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Predicting lung cancer stage at diagnosis based on self-reported symptoms and background factors using machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Patient profiles, incidence and trends of lung cancer in Ethiopia from 2012 to 2023 using a cancer registry.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Maintaining momentum: the history and future of lung cancer disparities in the United States.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Methodological Development of a Test for Salivary Proteome Analysis Useful in Lung Cancer Screening.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimDespite lung cancer's high mortality rate, many countries still lack organized lung cancer screening programs. This review aims to evaluate the impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer diagnosis, mortality, and overall clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsFollowing the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for umbrella reviews, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for reviews published between January 2013 and December 2023. Eligible meta-analyses included studies comparing LDCT screening with chest X-ray (CXR) or no screening, reporting outcomes such as sensitivity, specificity, and lung cancer mortality. The methodological quality of the included reviews was assessed using AMSTAR-2.
resultsOut of 801 citations, 14 meta-analyses met the inclusion criteria. LDCT demonstrated high sensitivity (0.97, 95% CI: 0.94-0.98) and specificity (0.87, 95% CI: 0.82-0.91). It significantly increased early-stage lung cancer detection (RR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.18-1.45) and reduced lung cancer mortality by 18% (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75-0.90). However, the reduction in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.75-1.06) was not statistically significant. Overdiagnosis and false positives remain essential challenges.
conclusionThis umbrella review confirms that LDCT screening effectively reduces lung cancer mortality, particularly in high-risk populations.
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.