Back

Differential Diagnosis of Image Discovered Small Pulmonary Nodules (SPN): A Real-World Study

Zheng, R.; Lai, Y.; Huang, J.; Xu, N.; Zhang, H.; Xie, J.; Li, H.

2025-07-03 respiratory medicine
10.1101/2025.07.02.25330729
Show abstract

ObjectiveThe present investigation explored the disease spectrum of SPN ([&le;]2cm) and attempted to establish the potential predictive models for non-benign small pulmonary nodules (NBSPN) identified from CT screening in a real-world perspective study. MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 6166 patients with SPN detected via chest CT scans at Fuzhou University Affiliated Provincial Hospital from January 2017 to September 2022. R language and SPSS software were used for data analyses. ResultsOf the 6,166 patients with SPN, 954 (15.47%) had their diagnosis confirmed pathologically. Among these nodules, NBSPN accounted for 88.7%. In NBSPN, the precursor glandular lesion (PGL) accounted for 14.18%, including 5.83% with atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH) and 94.17% with adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS). Lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) accounted for 85.82%, of which 32.07% were microinvasive adenocarcinoma (MIAD) and 67.93% invasive adenocarcinoma (IAD). Using the ROC model, none of the classical clinical factors had predictive value to the nature of SPN, including age, smoking, underlying conditions, CEA level, family history etc. Interestingly, the risk factors for NBSPN predicted by the ROC model include: female (OR: 1.842, 95%CI: 1.086-3.125, P=0.024), pure ground-glass opacities(pGGO) (OR: 5.243, 95%CI: 2.640-10.411, P<0.001), and part-solid (PS) (OR: 5.643, 95%CI: 1.970-16.167, P=0.001) in chest imaging, collectively delivering a highly significant AUC value at 0.748 in training set and 0.799 in validation set for distinguishing NBSPN from BSPN. ConclusionConventional clinical data are not sufficient to differentiate NBSPN from BSPN. Factors with high predictive values for NBSPN include female, pGGO and PS.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 46%
11.1%
2
Annals of Translational Medicine
based on 14 papers
Top 0.1%
10.1%
3
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
based on 32 papers
Top 0.6%
7.5%
4
European Respiratory Journal
based on 44 papers
Top 0.8%
7.5%
5
ERJ Open Research
based on 36 papers
Top 0.7%
6.4%
6
Medicine
based on 29 papers
Top 1.0%
5.3%
7
Respiratory Research
based on 10 papers
Top 0.4%
5.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 34%
5.3%
9
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
based on 10 papers
Top 0.1%
4.7%
10
European Radiology
based on 11 papers
Top 2%
2.4%
11
Frontiers in Medicine
based on 99 papers
Top 8%
2.3%
12
Journal of Medical Virology
based on 95 papers
Top 4%
2.3%
13
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
based on 23 papers
Top 0.9%
2.3%
14
BMJ Open
based on 553 papers
Top 41%
1.6%
15
Frontiers in Pharmacology
based on 27 papers
Top 2%
1.6%
16
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
based on 15 papers
Top 1%
1.3%
17
Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy
based on 10 papers
Top 0.6%
1.2%
18
Clinical and Translational Medicine
based on 11 papers
Top 1%
1.2%
19
Thorax
based on 29 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
20
Frontiers in Public Health
based on 135 papers
Top 25%
0.8%
21
Epidemiology and Infection
based on 80 papers
Top 11%
0.8%
22
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
based on 116 papers
Top 25%
0.7%