ArticleMultidisciplinary respiratory medicine2026
Imaging and AI in tertiary prevention of lung cancer: Narrative review and clinical perspectives.
Article in Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo provide a structured narrative review of current evidence and future directions for artificial intelligence (AI) applications in the tertiary prevention of lung cancer, with a focus on radiology-driven recurrence surveillance, treatment response assessment, prognostic stratification, and real-world clinical implementation.
methodsA narrative review was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore databases, covering studies published between January 2019 and March 2024. Search terms included lung cancer, tertiary prevention, radiomics, deep learning, recurrence, treatment response, and survival prediction. Studies were selected based on relevance to post-diagnosis clinical management, availability of quantitative performance metrics, and clarity of validation strategy. AI methodologies evaluated included radiomics, convolutional neural networks (CNNs), transformer-based temporal models, ensemble learning, and multimodal data integration. Evidence was critically appraised with respect to study design, cohort size, validation approach, and clinical applicability.
resultsAcross tertiary-prevention tasks-particularly recurrence detection, treatment response monitoring, and survival prediction-AI-assisted models demonstrate performance improvements over conventional radiological assessment in selected, well-defined scenarios, especially when multimodal imaging and external validation are employed. Reported AUC values for recurrence and response prediction generally range from 0.75 to 0.92, though results remain heterogeneous. Radiomics-deep learning integration and ensemble models show the most consistent gains, while evidence for immunotherapy response prediction and long-term survival modeling remains limited by small cohorts and lack of prospective validation. Key barriers include data heterogeneity, limited interpretability, regulatory constraints, and integration into clinical workflows.
conclusionsAI has the potential to meaningfully support tertiary prevention of lung cancer by enhancing surveillance accuracy, treatment monitoring, and prognostic assessment. However, clinical adoption requires rigorous external validation, standardized imaging and data pipelines, transparent model behavior, and alignment with evolving regulatory frameworks. With continued multidisciplinary collaboration and quality assurance, AI is likely to become an integral adjunct to radiological practice in personalized lung cancer management.
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.