ReviewFrontiers in oncology2026
Management of suspicious nodules in lung cancer screening - a narrative review of monitoring strategies based on nodule features and further needs.
Review in Frontiers in 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/objectives: Low-dose computed tomography screening plays a pivotal role in early lung cancer detection. This narrative review aims to evaluate nodule characteristics, especially volume doubling time (VDT), and their relevance to lung cancer suspicion, staging, and clinical outcomes, to support more accurate risk stratification in screening programs for lung cancer. Materials and methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, covering studies published from January 2012 to August 2024. A total of 27 studies (23 original and 4 reviews) were included. Key nodule features (VDT, size, attenuation, margins, histology, and stage) were extracted, reclassified, and analyzed to ensure standardized graphical comparison. Diagnostic performance metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of VDT were also assessed. Results: Findings revealed that all malignant nodules had a VDT under 200 days, with the shortest VDTs observed in aggressive histological subtypes and advanced disease stages. PET-CT positivity correlated with shorter VDTs, and never-smokers exhibited faster nodule growth than ever-smokers. Stage-specific growth patterns showed a trend of decreasing VDT with disease progression. However, variability in study designs and classification criteria made it necessary to implement standardization. Digital tools in the field of lung imaging may be valuable assets in early detection and risk prediction and could minimize inter-reader variability and thus overdiagnosis. Conclusions: VDT is a valuable indicator for assessing nodule malignancy risk but should be integrated into multifactorial risk models. Standardizing VDT reporting and incorporating it into personalized lung cancer screening algorithms could enhance early detection and reduce overtreatment. Digital tools can support this integration by enabling accurate, automated VDT calculations, improving measurement consistency, and facilitating the incorporation of volumetric and attenuation data into advanced risk prediction models, provided that healthcare professionals receive proper training to use these tools effectively.
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.