Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 379

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Never-Smokers With Lung Cancer: Epidemiologic Evidence of a Distinct Disease Entity

Toh, Chee-Keong, Gao, Fei, Lim, Wan-Teck, Leong, Swan-Swan, Fong, Kam-Weng, Yap, Swee-Peng, Hsu, Anne A.L., Eng, Philip, Koong, Heng-Nung, Thirugnanam, Agasthian, Tan, Eng-Huat·2006·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Tobacco smoke is a definite causative agent for lung cancer. It is increasingly being recognized that never-smokers can be afflicted with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aim to assess survival differences between smokers and never-smokers with NSCLC. Patients and Methods: We analyzed 975 NSCLC patients who presented from January 1999 to December 2002. Clinical characteristics among current-, former- and never-smokers were tested using χ 2 or Kruskal-Wallis test. The hazard ratio (HR) for death and its 95% CI were calculated by Cox regression. Results: Of 975 patients, 59 had no smoking history and 33 had no quit time recorded. Of 883 patients analyzed, 286 patients (32.4%) were never-smokers. One hundred ninety-six never-smokers (68.5%) were females compared with 12% among current- and 13% among former-smokers (P < .001). There was a significant difference in histologic subtype between never-smokers and smokers: 69.9% with adenocarcinoma versus 39.9% (current-smokers) versus 47.3% (former-smokers); 5.9% with squamous cell carcinoma versus 35.7% (current-smokers) versus 28% (former-smokers; P < .001). Smokers had significantly poorer performance status (P = .002) and higher median age at diagnosis (P < .001) while more never-smokers presented with advanced disease (P = .002). Eight hundred and five patients (82.6%) died by May 30, 2005. The HR for smokers was significantly higher on both univariate and multivariate analysis (HR, 1.297; 95% CI, 1.040 to 1.619). Conclusion: Never-smokers comprised a high proportion of NSCLC patients in Singapore. Definite epidemiologic differences exist between never-smokers and smokers. Differences in survival outcome further suggest that the biology underlying the pathogenesis and behavior of the disease may be different for never-smokers.

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 · 10.1200/jco.2005.04.8033

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 379

Metadata

Authors
Toh, C.-K., Gao, F., Lim, W.-T., Leong, S.-S., Fong, K.-W., Yap, S.-P., Hsu, A. A. L., Eng, P., Koong, H.-N., Thirugnanam, A., & Tan, E.-H.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2006-05-20
Volume
24
Issue
15
Pages
2245-2251
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2132542518
Cited by
379
References
3
FWCI
13.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Never-Smokers With Lung Cancer: Epidemiologic Evidence of a Distinct Disease Entity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2005.04.8033
The paper
Toh, C.-K., Gao, F., Lim, W.-T., Leong, S.-S., Fong, K.-W., Yap, S.-P., Hsu, A. A. L., Eng, P., Koong, H.-N., Thirugnanam, A., & Tan, E.-H. (2006). Never-Smokers With Lung Cancer: Epidemiologic Evidence of a Distinct Disease Entity. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.04.8033

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.