Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,508

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening

Open access
Henschke, Claudia I, McCauley, Dorothy I, Yankelevitz, David F, Naidich, David P, McGuinness, Georgeann, Miettinen, Olli S, Libby, Daniel M, Pasmantier, Mark W, Koizumi, June, Altorki, Nasser K, Smith, James P·1999·The Lancet

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP) is designed to evaluate baseline and annual repeat screening by low-radiation-dose computed tomography (low-dose CT) in people at high risk of lung cancer. We report the baseline experience. METHODS: ELCAP has enrolled 1000 symptom-free volunteers, aged 60 years or older, with at least 10 pack-years of cigarette smoking and no previous cancer, who were medically fit to undergo thoracic surgery. After a structured interview and informed consent, chest radiographs and low-dose CT were done for each participant. The diagnostic investigation of screen-detected non-calcified pulmonary nodules was guided by ELCAP recommendations, which included short-term high-resolution CT follow-up for the smallest non-calcified nodules. FINDINGS: Non-calcified nodules were detected in 233 (23% [95% CI 21-26]) participants by low-dose CT at baseline, compared with 68 (7% [5-9]) by chest radiography. Malignant disease was detected in 27 (2.7% [1.8-3.8]) by CT and seven (0.7% [0.3-1.3]) by chest radiography, and stage I malignant disease in 23 (2.3% [1.5-3.3]) and four (0.4% [0.1-0.9]), respectively. Of the 27 CT-detected cancers, 26 were resectable. Biopsies were done on 28 of the 233 participants with non-calcified nodules; 27 had malignant non-calcified nodules and one had a benign nodule. Another three individuals underwent biopsy against the ELCAP recommendations; all had benign non-calcified nodules. No participant had thoracotomy for a benign nodule. INTERPRETATION: Low-dose CT can greatly improve the likelihood of detection of small non-calcified nodules, and thus of lung cancer at an earlier and potentially more curable stage. Although false-positive CT results are common, they can be managed with little use of invasive diagnostic procedures.

Overview

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 · 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)06093-6

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 2,508

Metadata

Authors
Henschke, C. I., McCauley, D. I., Yankelevitz, D. F., Naidich, D. P., McGuinness, G., Miettinen, O. S., Libby, D. M., Pasmantier, M. W., Koizumi, J., Altorki, N. K., & Smith, J. P.
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-07
Volume
354
Issue
9173
Pages
99-105
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2031827337
Cited by
2,508
References
0
FWCI
101.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(99)06093-6
The paper
Henschke, C. I., McCauley, D. I., Yankelevitz, D. F., Naidich, D. P., McGuinness, G., Miettinen, O. S., Libby, D. M., Pasmantier, M. W., Koizumi, J., Altorki, N. K., & Smith, J. P. (1999). Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(99)06093-6

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.