Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 820

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Management of Lung Nodules Detected by Volume CT Scanning

Open access
van Klaveren, Rob J., Oudkerk, Matthijs, Prokop, Mathias, Scholten, Ernst T., Nackaerts, Kristiaan, Vernhout, Rene, van Iersel, Carola A., van den Bergh, Karien A.M., van 't Westeinde, Susan, van der Aalst, Carlijn, Thunnissen, Erik, Xu, Dong Ming, Wang, Ying, Zhao, Yingru, Gietema, Hester A., de Hoop, Bart-Jan, Groen, Harry J.M., de Bock, Geertruida H., van Ooijen, Peter, Weenink, Carla, Verschakelen, Johny, Lammers, Jan-Willem J., Timens, Wim, Willebrand, Dik, Vink, Aryan, Mali, Willem, de Koning, Harry J.·2009·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The use of multidetector computed tomography (CT) in lung-cancer screening trials involving subjects with an increased risk of lung cancer has highlighted the problem for the clinician of deciding on the best course of action when noncalcified pulmonary nodules are detected by CT. METHODS: A total of 7557 participants underwent CT screening in years 1, 2, and 4 of a randomized trial of lung-cancer screening. We used software to evaluate a noncalcified nodule according to its volume or volume-doubling time. Growth was defined as an increase in volume of at least 25% between two scans. The first-round screening test was considered to be negative if the volume of a nodule was less than 50 mm(3), if it was 50 to 500 mm(3) but had not grown by the time of the 3-month follow-up CT, or if, in the case of those that had grown, the volume-doubling time was 400 days or more. RESULTS: In the first and second rounds of screening, 2.6% and 1.8% of the participants, respectively, had a positive test result. In round one, the sensitivity of the screen was 94.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86.5 to 98.0) and the negative predictive value 99.9% (95% CI, 99.9 to 100.0). In the 7361 subjects with a negative screening result in round one, 20 lung cancers were detected after 2 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Among subjects at high risk for lung cancer who were screened in three rounds of CT scanning and in whom noncalcified pulmonary nodules were evaluated according to volume and volume-doubling time, the chances of finding lung cancer 1 and 2 years after a negative first-round test were 1 in 1000 and 3 in 1000, respectively. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN63545820.)

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 · 10.1056/nejmoa0906085

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 820

Metadata

Authors
van Klaveren, R. J., Oudkerk, M., Prokop, M., Scholten, E. T., Nackaerts, K., Vernhout, R., van Iersel, C. A., van den Bergh, K. A. M., van 't Westeinde, S., van der Aalst, C., Thunnissen, E., Xu, D. M., Wang, Y., Zhao, Y., Gietema, H. A., de Hoop, B.-J., Groen, H. J. M., de Bock, G. H., van Ooijen, P., Weenink, C., Verschakelen, J., Lammers, J.-W. J., Timens, W., Willebrand, D., Vink, A., Mali, W., & de Koning, H. J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2009-12-03
Volume
361
Issue
23
Pages
2221-2229
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2147757711
Cited by
820
References
0
FWCI
45.48
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: Management of Lung Nodules Detected by Volume CT Scanning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa0906085
The paper
van Klaveren, R. J., Oudkerk, M., Prokop, M., Scholten, E. T., Nackaerts, K., Vernhout, R., van Iersel, C. A., van den Bergh, K. A. M., van 't Westeinde, S., van der Aalst, C., Thunnissen, E., Xu, D. M., Wang, Y., Zhao, Y., Gietema, H. A., de Hoop, B.-J., Groen, H. J. M., de Bock, G. H., van Ooijen, P., . . . de Koning, H. J. (2009). Management of Lung Nodules Detected by Volume CT Scanning. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa0906085

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.