The long-term course of subsolid nodules and predictors of interval growth on chest CT: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To calculate the pooled incidence of interval growth after long-term follow-up and identify predictors of interval growth in subsolid nodules (SSNs) on chest CT. METHODS: A search of MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, Web of Science Core Collection, and Embase was performed on November 08, 2021, for relevant studies. Patient information, CT scanner, and SSN follow-up information were extracted from each included study. A random-effects model was applied along with subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Study quality was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and publication bias was assessed by Egger's test. RESULTS: Of the 6802 retrieved articles, 16 articles were included and analyzed, providing a total of 2898 available SSNs. The pooled incidence of growth in the 2898 SSNs was 22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15-29%). The pooled incidence of growth in the subgroup analysis of pure ground-glass nodules was 26% (95% CI: 12-39%). The incidence of SSN growth after 2 or more years of stability was only 5% (95% CI: 3-7%). An initially large SSN size was found to be the most frequent risk factor affecting the incidence of SSN growth and the time of growth. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled incidence of SSN growth was as high as 22%, with a 26% incidence reported for pure ground-glass nodules. Although the incidence of growth was only 5% after 2 or more years of stability, long-term follow-up is needed in certain cases. Moreover, the initial size of the SSN was the most frequent risk factor for growth. KEY POINTS: • Based on a meta-analysis of 2898 available subsolid nodules in the literature, the pooled incidence of growth was 22% for all subsolid nodules and 26% for pure ground-glass nodules. • After 2 or more years of stability on follow-up CT, the pooled incidence of subsolid nodule growth was only 5%. • Given the incidence of subsolid nodule growth, management of these lesions with long-term follow-up is preferred.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.039 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".