Evidence Hub

AI-based chest X-ray prioritization in the lung cancer diagnostic pathway: the LungIMPACT randomized controlled trial

N. Woznitza, Lesley Smith, J. Rawlinson, I. Au-Yong, Bindu George, M. Djearaman, Arjun Nair, R. Lee et al.

Nature Medicine, 2026

558 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Prioritizing artificial intelligence (AI)-detected imaging findings may reduce the time to diagnosis of lung cancer. This prospective, multicentre, randomized controlled trial tested whether immediate AI prioritization of primary care-requested chest X-rays (CXR) influenced time to computed tomography (CT) and lung cancer diagnosis, the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included the number of urgent suspected lung cancer referrals, incidence and stage of lung cancer, times to urgent referral and treatment, concordance between AI and radiology reports, and algorithm accuracy. AI was available in both study arms, with AI prioritization randomized by day. Of 97,731 participant CXRs, 4,405 were excluded due to data compliance issues or failure of randomization, resulting in 93,326 CXRs analyzed (45,987 and 47,339 in the prioritization ‘on’ or ‘off’ arms, respectively). A total of 13,347 CTs were identified, with 2,766 performed within 14 days of CXR. Median (interquartile range) times to CT were 53 days (17–145) and 53 days (19–141), with and without AI prioritization, corresponding to a ratio of geometric means of 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93–1.02; P = 0.31). When restricted to CTs performed within 14 days of CXR, the median time to CT was 8 days (5–11) in both groups. Lung cancer was diagnosed in 558 people (0.6% of CXRs). Median times to diagnosis were 44 days (26–90) and 46 days (24–105) respectively, with a ratio of geometric means of 0.98 (95% CI =…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 558 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