Evidence Hub

Pulmonary Nodule Prevalence at CT in Middle-Aged Participants from the Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS)

Karen Sörensen, Åse A. Johnsson, P. Liv, Elin Bacsovics Brolin, A. Blomberg, A. Bolejko, C. Carlhäll, Kerstin Cederlund et al.

Radiology, 2026

29 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background Pulmonary nodules (PNs) are clinically challenging because differentiation between benign and malignant PNs is not possible at CT detection; recurring CT examinations and invasive procedures are often required in PN follow-up. Purpose To investigate PN prevalence in a middle-aged population and the risk factors associated with these nodules. Materials and Methods In this secondary analysis of the cross-sectional population-based Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (known as SCAPIS, from November 2013 to November 2018), participants aged 50-64 years with chest CT data were analyzed. Risk factors such as smoking history, occupational exposure (vapor, dust, gas, and fumes), and lung diseases were derived from comprehensive questionnaires. Robust Poisson regression was used to evaluate associations, adjusted for age and sex, between potential risk factors and the binary outcome of nodule presence or absence. Prevalence ratios (PRs), adjusted for age and sex, and 95% CIs were estimated. Results Among 29 574 participants (median age, 57.4 years; IQR, 53.7-61.2 years; 15 168 women), solid nodules sized 100-300 mm3, part-solid, and ground-glass nodules were found in 1420 (4.8%), 199 (0.7%), and 430 (1.5%), respectively. The prevalence of solid nodules among participants who never, formerly, and currently smoked was 32.5% (4713 of 14 515), 34.5% (3602 of 10 437), and 37.9% (1381 of 3644), respectively. Solid nodules sized 100-300 mm3 were associated with current smoking…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 29 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free