Cited by 1,816Lung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningOccupational and environmental lung diseases

Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Open access
US Preventive Services Task Force, Krist, Alex H., Davidson, Karina W., Mangione, Carol M., Barry, Michael J., Cabana, Michael, Caughey, Aaron B., Davis, Esa M. +12 more·2021·JAMA

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in the US. In 2020, an estimated 228 820 persons were diagnosed with lung cancer, and 135 720 persons died of the disease. The most important risk factor for lung cancer is smoking. Increasing age is also a risk factor for lung cancer. Lung cancer has a generally poor prognosis, with an overall 5-year survival rate of 20.5%. However, early-stage lung cancer has a better prognosis and is more amenable to treatment. OBJECTIVE: To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the accuracy of screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and on the benefits and harms of screening for lung cancer and commissioned a collaborative modeling study to provide information about the optimum age at which to begin and end screening, the optimal screening interval, and the relative benefits and harms of different screening strategies compared with modified versions of multivariate risk prediction models. POPULATION: This recommendation statement applies to adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT has a moderate net benefit in persons at high risk of lung cancer based on age, total cumulative exposure to tobacco smoke, and years since quitting smoking. RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF recommends annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. Screening should be discontinued once a person has not smoked for 15 years or develops a health problem that substantially limits life expectancy or the ability or willingness to have curative lung surgery. (B recommendation) This recommendation replaces the 2013 USPSTF statement that recommended annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 55 to 80 years who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2021.1117

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 42 · Cited by 1,816

Authors
US Preventive Services Task Force, Krist, A. H., Davidson, K. W., Mangione, C. M., Barry, M. J., Cabana, M., Caughey, A. B., Davis, E. M., Donahue, K. E., Doubeni, C. A., Kubik, M., Landefeld, C. S., Li, L., Ogedegbe, G., Owens, D. K., Pbert, L., Silverstein, M., Stevermer, J., Tseng, C.-W., & Wong, J. B.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • Northwell Health (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • University of Virginia (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
  • Boston University (US)
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
Corresponding author
Krist, Alex H.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2021-03-09
Volume
325
Issue
10
Pages
962
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W3134934271
Cited by
1,816
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 309 · 2025: 375 · 2024: 326 · 2023: 351 · 2022: 292 · 2021: 132 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
179.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Network (American Medical Association) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Occupational and environmental lung diseases
Keywords
lung cancer screening, low-dose CT, smoking history, pack-years, screening frequency, screening cessation, net benefit, risk prediction model, cancer mortality, early-stage lung cancer, USPSTF recommendations
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Humans, Lung, Lung Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Smoking, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Smoking Cessation, Risk Assessment, Early Detection of Cancer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review