ArticleDiscover oncology2026
Large scale evaluation of a multiple tumor marker panel for lung cancer diagnosis and histological subtyping.
Article in Discover oncology, 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
backgroundEarly detection and accurate differential diagnosis of lung cancer (LC) remain significant clinical challenges. This study aimed to develop and validate a multi-marker panel (5LCTM) to optimize diagnostic performance, particularly for ultra-early stage LC and complex differential scenarios.
methodsA retrospective cohort of 2423 participants (1761 LC and 662 benign controls) was analyzed. Eleven serum tumor markers (TMs) were evaluated, and a five-marker panel (5LCTM: CEA, NSE, CYFRA 21 - 1, ProGRP, and SCC-Ag) was integrated. Diagnostic models were constructed using binary logistic regression (Enter method). Diagnostic performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV)and negative predictive value (NPV).
resultsThe 5LCTM panel significantly outperformed individual markers, achieving an AUC of 0.822 for overall LC detection. Notably, the panel exhibited promising performance in Stage 0 LC, with an AUC of 0.843, a sensitivity of 0.83, and a high NPV of 0.97. For histological subtypes, the 5LCTM model maintained high accuracy for SCLC (AUC = 0.921), SCC (AUC = 0.904), and AD (AUC = 0.801). In differential diagnosis, the panel achieved an NPV of 1.00 across nearly all BLT and BLD subgroups, including pulmonary hamartoma and organizing pneumonia. Gender-stratified analysis confirmed the model's robustness, with stable AUCs in both males (0.827) and females (0.810).
conclusionThe 5LCTM panel is a robust, non-invasive tool that provides high diagnostic accuracy across all pathological stages and histological types. Its superior performance in Stage 0 LC and its exceptional NPV make it a potential screening tool for refining the triage of patients with indeterminate pulmonary nodules.
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.