Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 466

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Benefits and Harms of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Strategies: A Comparative Modeling Study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Open access
de Koning, Harry J., Meza, Rafael, Plevritis, Sylvia K., ten Haaf, Kevin, Munshi, Vidit N., Jeon, Jihyoun, Erdogan, Saadet Ayca, Kong, Chung Yin, Han, Summer S., van Rosmalen, Joost, Choi, Sung Eun, Pinsky, Paul F., de Gonzalez, Amy Berrington, Berg, Christine D., Black, William C., Tammemägi, Martin C., Hazelton, William D., Feuer, Eric J., McMahon, Pamela M.·2014·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimum screening policy for lung cancer is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To identify efficient computed tomography (CT) screening scenarios in which relatively more lung cancer deaths are averted for fewer CT screening examinations. DESIGN: Comparative modeling study using 5 independent models. DATA SOURCES: The National Lung Screening Trial; the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening trial; the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; and the U.S. Smoking History Generator. TARGET POPULATION: U.S. cohort born in 1950. TIME HORIZON: Cohort followed from ages 45 to 90 years. PERSPECTIVE: Societal. INTERVENTION: 576 scenarios with varying eligibility criteria (age, pack-years of smoking, years since quitting) and screening intervals. OUTCOME MEASURES: Benefits included lung cancer deaths averted or life-years gained. Harms included CT examinations, false-positive results (including those obtained from biopsy/surgery), overdiagnosed cases, and radiation-related deaths. RESULTS OF BEST-CASE SCENARIO: The most advantageous strategy was annual screening from ages 55 through 80 years for ever-smokers with a smoking history of at least 30 pack-years and ex-smokers with less than 15 years since quitting. It would lead to 50% (model ranges, 45% to 54%) of cases of cancer being detected at an early stage (stage I/II), 575 screening examinations per lung cancer death averted, a 14% (range, 8.2% to 23.5%) reduction in lung cancer mortality, 497 lung cancer deaths averted, and 5250 life-years gained per the 100,000-member cohort. Harms would include 67,550 false-positive test results, 910 biopsies or surgeries for benign lesions, and 190 overdiagnosed cases of cancer (3.7% of all cases of lung cancer [model ranges, 1.4% to 8.3%]). RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: The number of cancer deaths averted for the scenario varied across models between 177 and 862; the number of overdiagnosed cases of cancer varied between 72 and 426. LIMITATIONS: Scenarios assumed 100% screening adherence. Data derived from trials with short duration were extrapolated to lifetime follow-up. CONCLUSION: Annual CT screening for lung cancer has a favorable benefit-harm ratio for individuals aged 55 through 80 years with 30 or more pack-years' exposure to smoking. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.

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 · 10.7326/m13-2316

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 466

Metadata

Authors
de Koning, H. J., Meza, R., Plevritis, S. K., ten Haaf, K., Munshi, V. N., Jeon, J., Erdogan, S. A., Kong, C. Y., Han, S. S., van Rosmalen, J., Choi, S. E., Pinsky, P. F., de Gonzalez, A. B., Berg, C. D., Black, W. C., Tammemägi, M. C., Hazelton, W. D., Feuer, E. J., & McMahon, P. M.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
2014-03-04
Volume
160
Issue
5
Pages
311-320
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2161254570
Cited by
466
References
2
FWCI
35.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Benefits and Harms of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Strategies: A Comparative Modeling Study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/m13-2316
The paper
de Koning, H. J., Meza, R., Plevritis, S. K., ten Haaf, K., Munshi, V. N., Jeon, J., Erdogan, S. A., Kong, C. Y., Han, S. S., van Rosmalen, J., Choi, S. E., Pinsky, P. F., de Gonzalez, A. B., Berg, C. D., Black, W. C., Tammemägi, M. C., Hazelton, W. D., Feuer, E. J., & McMahon, P. M. (2014). Benefits and Harms of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Strategies: A Comparative Modeling Study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/m13-2316

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.