Not so civil

C. Dyte

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/293180A0

IF: 64.8

1981-09-01

Nature

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Lung Cancer Screening Uptake Under the Revised United States Preventive Service Task Force Guideline: Assessing Disparities

Abdi T. Gudina,Charles S. Kamen,Kelly A. Hirko,David H. Adler,Deborah J. Ossip,Edith M. Williams,Vinay K. Cheruvu,Ana-Paula Cupertino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-24-0725

2024-09-15

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Background: Scanning with low-dose computed tomography reduces lung cancer mortality by 20% among high-risk individuals. Despite its efficacy, the uptake of lung cancer screening (LCS) remains low. Our study aimed to estimate state-level and nationwide LCS rates among eligible individuals and to assess disparities in LCS uptake. Methods: Data for this study were obtained from the 2022 BRFSS. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to model the associations between predictors and outcome variables and to examine LCS variability across states. Results: Of the 28,071 participants eligible for LCS, 17.24% underwent LCS. Participants aged 65 -79 years were (OR: 1.75, 95%CI: 1.54 -1.99) more likely to undergo LCS than their younger counterparts. Those who were female (OR: 0.83, 95%CI: 0.73 - 0.94), divorced, separated, or widowed (OR: 0.85, 95%CI: 0.74-0.98), without health insurance (OR: 0.34, 95%CI: 0.22-0.53), without a primary care provider (OR: 0.29, 95%CI: 0.19-0.44), without COPD or those who did not disclose their COPD status ((OR: 0.35, 95%CI: 0.31-0.40) and (OR: 0.37, 95%CI: 0.19-0.73) respectively)) were less likely to undergo LCS than their respective counterparts. LCS uptake also varied significantly across U.S. states. Conclusions: We observed low uptake of LCS overall, and significant variability in LCS uptake by sociodemographic and health-related factors as well as by state of residence. Impact: The findings from this study have important implications for community health workers and healthcare clinicians and indicate the need to design effective interventions to increase LCS uptake targeting specific subgroups of populations and particular U.S. states.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Lung Cancer Screening in the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program: Availability and Service Organization

Ruth C Carlos,JoRean D Sicks,Caroline Chiles,Lucy Gansauer,Charles S Kamen,Anne E Kazak,Heather B Neuman,Joseph M Unger,Kathryn E Weaver

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2018.12.016

Abstract:Purpose: Annual low-dose CT (LDCT) for lung screening in high-risk individuals decreases both lung cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. Community oncology practice networks constituting the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) conduct clinical trials across the cancer spectrum. The authors report access to and characteristics of LDCT screening for lung cancer in these community oncology practices. Methods: A landscape capacity assessment was conducted in 2017 across the NCORP network. The primary outcome was the proportion of adult oncology practice groups offering LDCT lung screening on site. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of those screening services (1) with radiologist participation in service management and (2) offered at ACR Designated Lung Cancer Screening Centers. Results: Fifty-two percent of components and subcomponents responded to at least some portion of the assessment, representing 217 practice groups. Analyzing the 211 adult oncology practice groups responding to the primary question, 73% offered lung screening services on site. Radiologists participated in managing 69% of these services. Forty-seven percent were offered in ACR Designated Lung Cancer Screening Centers. Minority and underserved practice groups were less likely to offer lung screening; however, this association dissipated when analyses focused on practices within the United States. Safety net and Critical Access Hospital designation increased the likelihood of screening availability. Conclusions: The majority of community oncology practice groups within the NCORP offered lung screening on site, although radiologist participation in service management and ACR Lung Cancer Screening Center designation, markers of service quality, were more variable.
Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening Utilization at Two Health Systems in the Southeastern US

Soumy J Niranjan,Desiree Rivers,Rekha Ramachandran,J Edward Murrell,Kayleigh C Curry,Mohammed Mubasher,Eric Flenaugh,Mark T Dransfield,Sejong Bae,Isabel C Scarinci

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.12.24307248

2024-05-13

Abstract:Purpose : Low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening is effective for reducing lung cancer mortality. It is critical to understand the lung cancer screening practices for screen-eligible individuals living in Alabama and Georgia where lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death. High lung cancer incidence and mortality rates are attributed to high smoking rates among underserved, low income, and rural populations. Therefore, the purpose of this study: (1) to define sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients who were screened for lung cancer at an Academic Medical Center (AMC) in Alabama and a Safety Net Hospital (SNH) in Georgia. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patient electronic health records who received lung cancer screening between 2015 to 2020 was performed to identify the study population and outcome variable measures. Chi-square tests and Student t-tests were used to compare screening uptake across patient demographic and clinical variables. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions determined significant predictors of lung cancer screening uptake. Results: At the AMC, 67,355 were identified as eligible for LCS and 1,129 were screened. In bivariate analyses, there were several differences between those who were screened and those who were not screened. Screening status in the site at Alabama varied significantly by age (P<0.01), race (P<0.001), marital status (P<0.01), smoking status (P<0.01) health insurance (P<0.01), median income (P<0.01), urban status (P<0.01) and distance from UAB (P<0.01). Those who were screened were more likely to have lesser comorbidities (2.31 vs. 2.53; P<0.001). At the SNH, 11,011 individuals were identified as screen-eligible and 500 were screened. In the site at Georgia, screening status varied significantly by race (P<0.01), health insurance (P<0.01), and distance from site (P<0.01). At the AMC, the odds of being screened increased significantly if the individual was a current smoker compared to former smoker (OR=3.21; P<0.01). At the SNH, the odds of being screened for lung cancer increased significantly with every unit increase in co-morbidity count (OR = 1.12; P=0.01) Conclusion: The study provides evidence that LCS has not reached all subgroups and that additional targeted efforts are needed to increase lung cancer screening uptake. Furthermore disparity was noticed between adults living closer to screening institutions and those who lived farther.
Geographic access to lung cancer screening among eligible adults living in rural and urban environments in the United States

Liora Sahar,Vanhvilai L. Douangchai Wills,Stacey A. Fedewa,Lauren Rosenthal,Ella A. Kazerooni,Debra S. Dyer,Robert A. Smith,Ka Kit (Antonio) Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.33996

IF: 6.9209

2022-02-15

Cancer

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Although recommended lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography scanning (LDCT) reduces mortality among high-risk adults, annual screening rates remain low. This study complements a previous nationwide assessment of access to lung cancer screening within 40 miles by evaluating differences in accessibility across rural and urban settings for the population aged 50 to 80 years and a subset eligible population based on the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force LDCT lung screening recommendations.METHODS: Distances from population centers to screening facilities (American College of Radiology Lung Cancer Screening Registry) were calculated, and the number of individuals who had access within graduating distances, including 10, 20, 40, 50, and 100 miles, were estimated. Census tract results were aggregated to counties, and both geographies were classified with rural-urban schemas.RESULTS: Approximately 5% of the eligible population did not have access to lung cancer screening facilities within 40 miles; however, different patterns of accessibility were observed at different distances, between regions, and across rural-urban environments. Across all distances and geographies, there was a larger percentage of the population in rural geographies with no access. Although the rural population represented approximately 8% of the eligible population, the larger percentage of the rural population with no access was noteworthy and translated into a larger number of individuals with no access at longer distance thresholds (≥40 miles).CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in access should be examined as both percentages of the population and numbers of individuals with no access in order to tailor interventions to communities and increase access. Geospatial analysis at the census tract level is recommended to help to identify optimal focus areas and reach the most people.LAY SUMMARY: As annual lung cancer screening rates remain low, this study examines access to lung cancer screening nationwide and across rural and urban settings. A geographic information system network analysis of census tract-level populations is used to estimate access at different distances, including 10, 20, 40, 50, and 100 miles, and the results are aggregated to counties. Approximately 5% of the eligible population does not have access to screening facilities within 40 miles; however, different patterns of accessibility are observed at different distances, between regions, and across rural-urban environments. Across all distances and geographies, there is a larger percentage of the population in rural geographies with no access.

oncology
Enzymological investigations on the causes for the PSE-syndrome, II. Comparative studies on glycogen phosphorylase from pig muscles.

F. Schwägele,P. L. Buesa,K. Honikel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(96)00045-9

IF: 7.077

1996-09-01

Meat Science

Abstract:
Abstract A086: Disparities in lung cancer screening uptake across the United States

Abdi Gudina,M. Patricia Rivera,Charles Kamen,AnaPaula Cupertino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp22-a086

2023-01-10

Abstract:Background: Despite the efficacy of low-dose computerized tomography (LDCT) to detect lung cancer early, the rate of lung cancer screening among high-risk individuals remains low. The purpose of this study was to assess lung cancer screening rates in contrast with state lung cancer mortality across the United States. Methods: Data for this study were obtained from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) from three consecutive years (2018-2020); a population-based survey administered via cell phone and landline and conducted annually by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Eligibility criteria follow the 2013 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation: high-risk individuals aged 55-80 years with a >30 pack-year smoking history who currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. After excluding ineligible subjects and those with missing information, 11,297 subjects were included in the final analysis. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the association between the predictor (i.e., state of residence) and the outcome variable (i.e., screening rate). Results: Of the 24 states included in this study, the states with the highest lung cancer screening rates were Rhode Island (24.75%), Vermont (22.51%), New Jersey (21.72%), Minnesota (21.64%), and Delaware (21.39%). The states with the lowest screening uptake were Oklahoma (9.23%), Utah (9.78%), West Virginia (12.23%), South Dakota (12.31%), and Kansas (12.41%). Kentucky has the highest lung cancer mortality and has become the 6th highest in screening rates. Utah has the lowest lung cancer mortality and is the second-lowest state in lung cancer screening rates. After adjusting for sociodemographic (i.e., age, gender, marital status, level of education, income, insurance, and race/ethnicity) and health-related factors (i.e., chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smoking history, and primary care provider), high-risk individuals in the state of Delaware (OR: 2.85, 95% CI: 1.50 - 5.41), Kentucky (OR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.03 - 4.04), Minnesota (OR: 2.74, 95% CI: 1.49 - 5.06), Montana (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.09 - 4.25), New Jersey (OR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.25 - 4.57), Pennsylvania (OR: 2.28, 95% CI: 1.17 - 4.44), Rhode Island (OR: 2.57, 95% CI: 1.33 - 4.98), Texas (OR: 4.51, 95% CI: 2.04 - 9.97) and Vermont (OR: 3.18, 95% CI: 1.61 - 6.28) were significantly more likely to receive lung cancer screening than those in Utah. High-risk individuals in all the remaining states were not significantly different in terms of their lung cancer screening rates compared to Utah. Conclusions: Lung cancer screening rates varied widely across 24 states and did not match with the lung cancer mortality burden in each state. The results from the present study highlights the importance of developing targeted initiatives and policies that enhance the rates of lung cancer screenings in the states that experience a disproportionate burden of lung cancer mortality. Citation Format: Abdi Gudina, M. Patricia Rivera, Charles Kamen, AnaPaula Cupertino. Disparities in lung cancer screening uptake across the United States [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 15th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2022 Sep 16-19; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2022;31(1 Suppl) nr A086.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
State Variation in Low-Dose Computed Tomography Scanning for Lung Cancer Screening in the United States

Stacey A Fedewa,Ella A Kazerooni,Jamie L Studts,Robert Smith,Priti Bandi,Ann Goding Sauer,Megan Cotter,Helmneh M Sineshaw,Ahmedin Jemal,Gerard A Silvestri,Robert A Smith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaa170

2020-11-12

Abstract:Abstract Background Annual lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose chest computed tomography in older current and former smokers (ie, eligible adults) has been recommended since 2013. Uptake has been slow and variable across the United States. We estimated the LCS rate and growth at the national and state level between 2016 and 2018. Methods The American College of Radiology’s Lung Cancer Screening Registry was used to capture screening events. Population-based surveys, the US Census, and cancer registry data were used to estimate the number of eligible adults and lung cancer mortality (ie, burden). Lung cancer screening rates (SRs) in eligible adults and screening rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to measure changes by state and year. Results Nationally, the SR was steady between 2016 (3.3%, 95% CI = 3.3% to 3.7%) and 2017 (3.4%, 95% CI = 3.4% to 3.9%), increasing to 5.0% (95% CI = 5.0% to 5.7%) in 2018 (2018 vs 2016 SR ratio = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.51 to 1.62). In 2018, several southern states with a high lung-cancer burden (eg, Mississippi, West Virginia, and Arkansas) had relatively low SRs (<4%) among eligible adults, whereas several northeastern states with lower lung cancer burden (eg, Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire) had the highest SRs (12.8%-15.2%). The exception was Kentucky, which had the nation’s highest lung cancer mortality rate and one of the highest SRs (13.7%). Conclusions Fewer than 1 in 20 eligible adults received LCS nationally, and uptake varied widely across states. LCS rates were not aligned with lung cancer burden across states, except for Kentucky, which has supported comprehensive efforts to implement LCS.
Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility and Use: A Population Health Perspective of One Community

Tina D Tailor,Norma E Farrow,Junheng Gao,Kingshuk R Choudhury,Betty C Tong,Tina D. Tailor,Norma E. Farrow,Kingshuk R. Choudhury,Betty C. Tong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18043/ncm.82.5.321

2021-09-01

North Carolina Medical Journal

Abstract:BACKGROUND Low-dose chest CT (LDCT) is the only effective screening test for lung cancer. Annual lung cancer screening (LCS) is recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) for individuals at high risk for primary lung neoplasm.METHODS We retrospectively identified patients receiving LCS from January 2016 through March 2018 whose residential addresses were within our health center's county. We estimated driving distance from the patient's address to our health center and obtained sociodemographic characteristics from the electronic health record (EHR). The census-tract-level LCS-eligible population size was estimated, and their population characteristics determined via US Census Bureau, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used to determine differences amongst the LCS-eligible and LCS-enrolled populations. Multivariable regression was used to determine the effects of sociodemographic characteristics on LCS eligibility.RESULTS There was modest correlation between census-tract-level LCS-eligible population size and LCS enrollment (r = 0.68, P < .001). 5.9% (364/6185) of the estimated LCS-eligible population in our county received LCS, with census-tract LCS rates ranging from 1.5% to 12.5%. Nonwhite race status (Hispanic and African American) was associated with decreased likelihood of LCS enrollment compared to White race (OR = 95% CI, 0.765 [0.61, 0.95] and 0.031 [0.008, 0.124], respectively). Older age, Medicaid, and uninsured statuses were positively correlated with LCS eligibility (P ≤ .01).LIMITATIONS This analysis comprises a single county. Other LCS facilities within our health system in neighboring counties, as well as individuals receiving LCS outside of our health system, are not captured.CONCLUSIONS The uptake of LCS remains low, with disproportionately lower screening rates amongst Hispanic and African American populations. Medicaid and uninsured patients in our community are also more likely to be LCS-eligible. These populations may be targets for interventions aimed at increasing LCS awareness and uptake.
Abstract C113: Geographic variation in low-dose computed tomography scanning for lung cancer screening in the United States

Abdi T. Gudina,Lee A. Kehoe,Sara Hardy,Charles S. Kamen,Paula Cupertino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp23-c113

2023-12-01

Abstract:Abstract Background: Early detection using low-dose computed tomography scanning reduces lung cancer specific mortality by 20%. Despite its efficacy and its recommendation by the United States Preventive Services Task Force, the uptake of lung cancer screening (LCS) among high-risk individuals (aged 55–80 years with a >30-pack-year smoking history and who currently smoke or have quit within the previous 15 years) remains low. The purpose of this study was to assess whether LCS uptake varies by geographic location. Methods: Data for this study were obtained from the 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. After excluding ineligible subjects, 10,242 subjects were included in the final analysis. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to model the associations between the predictor and the outcome variable, adjusting for potential confounders. Results: In metropolitan statistical areas, individuals who reside outside the center city are less likely to receive LCS than those who reside in the center city (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.43 – 0.98). Stratifying the data by race/ethnicity, we found a non-significant difference between Whites who reside in the center city and those outside the center city in LCS uptake (OR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.45 – 1.06). Among Blacks (OR:0.10; 95% CI: 0.02 – 0.59) and other minorities (OR:0.10; 95% CI: 0.02 – 0.63), individuals who reside outside the center city are less likely to receive LCS than their respective counterparts residing in the center city. Nevertheless, we found a non-significant difference in LCS uptake between urban and rural counties (OR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.76-1.48).Conclusions: LCS uptake is related to metropolitan statistical area (residents in the center city vs. outside the center city), but it is modified by race/ethnicity. This finding has important implications for policy makers and program planners in helping them design more effective interventions to promote LCS targeting racial/ethnic minorities residing outside the center city. Citation Format: Abdi T. Gudina, Lee A. Kehoe, Sara Hardy, Charles S. Kamen, Paula Cupertino. Geographic variation in low-dose computed tomography scanning for lung cancer screening in the United States [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 16th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2023 Sep 29-Oct 2;Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023;32(12 Suppl):Abstract nr C113.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Abstract A125: A nationwide initiative to expand access to lung cancer screening: Results and impact of the Color/American Cancer Society Lung Screening Access Program

Deanna Brockman,Jennifer Fung,Ashly Emig,Gabrielle Hands,Wendy McKennon,Jennifer Cho,Robert Smith,William Dahut,Alicia Zhou,Keegan Duchicela

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-a125

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Lung cancer is a leading health challenge in the United States – it is the third most common cancer and disproportionately impacts people of color. Early detection of lung cancer is possible through routine screenings using low-dose lung CT scans. Despite the efficacy of screening, 80-85% of people eligible for screening are not up-to-date. The underutilization of regular screening has often been attributed to gaps in primary care and insufficient support following an abnormal result. In an effort to improve access, Color and the American Cancer Society (ACS), launched a nationwide initiative to make lung cancer screening readily accessible and free across all 50 states based on ACS guidelines. The program simplifies the screening process by managing all logistical steps from physician orders to finding and booking appointments at local clinics to assisting with next steps if abnormalities are detected.Since the program launched in November 2023, 74 people completed the online health risk assessment. On average participants were 54 years of age (range: 18-81 years), 64% (n=41) female, and 65% (n=48) White. 28% (n=19) respondents currently smoked, 50% (n=34) had a former history of smoking, and average smoking history was 23.0 pack years (range: 0.1 - 66 pack years). While the program primarily supports individuals who meet ACS lung screening guidelines, all participants can speak with a clinician about screening.Of those who completed the health risk assessment, 45.6% (n=31) met ACS eligibility criteria for lung screening. Eligible participants were on average 62 years of age (range: 51 - 77 years), 74% (n=23) were female, and 87% (n=27) were White. Eligible participants resided in 21 states, with Georgia and Ohio having the highest number of eligible individuals.To date, 9 people have completed a lung CT and 3 are in progress of scheduling. On average, appointments were scheduled within 25 days from the initial referral submission (range: 8-55 days) and all appointments were within 17 miles from the individual's preferred location (average: 6.8 miles, range: 0.5-17 miles).3 participants had a change in their lung screening plan based on their result, with 2 participants having Lung-RADS 3 category nodules (follow-up in 6 months) and 1 having Lung-RADS 4A nodules (follow-up in 6 months). Other findings included an ascending aortic aneurysm (4.2 cm), a hiatal hernia, an indeterminate adrenal nodule, and mild coronary artery calcification, some of which required additional follow-up care with a PCP or cardiologist within 3-12 months. No participants were recommended to have immediate diagnostic testing for lung cancer based on their results. The Color/ACS Lung Screening Access Program demonstrates the impact that a virtual lung cancer screening program has on closing screening gaps. It underscores the critical role of supporting patients not only in undergoing cancer screening, but also in navigating the complexities of follow-up care, thereby enhancing the overall efficacy of lung cancer prevention and early detection strategies. Citation Format: Deanna Brockman, Jennifer Fung, Ashly Emig, Gabrielle Hands, Wendy McKennon, Jennifer Cho, Robert Smith, William Dahut, Alicia Zhou, Keegan Duchicela. A nationwide initiative to expand access to lung cancer screening: Results and impact of the Color/American Cancer Society Lung Screening Access Program [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr A125.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Understanding barriers to lung cancer screening in primary care

Julia M. Coughlin,Yanyu Zang,Samantha Terranella,Gillian Alex,Justin Karush,Nicole Geissen,Gary W. Chmielewski,Andrew T. Arndt,Michael J. Liptay,Laura J. Zimmermann,Linda Dowling,Ashley Levitan,Christopher W. Seder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2020.03.66

2020-05-01

Journal of Thoracic Disease

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scan for lung cancer screening is underutilized. Studies suggest that up to one-third of providers do not know the current lung cancer screening guidelines. Thus, identifying the barriers to utilization of LDCT scan is essential.METHODS: Primary care providers in three different healthcare settings in the United States were surveyed to assess provider knowledge of LDCT scan screening criteria, lung cancer screening practices, and barriers to the utilization of LDCT scan screening. Fisher's Exact, Chi-Squared, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare provider responses. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test the association between provider characteristics and the likelihood of utilizing LDCT scan for lung cancer screening.RESULTS: The survey was sent to 614 providers, with a 15.7% response rate. Overall, 29.2% of providers report never ordering LDCT scans for eligible patients. Providers practicing at a community or academic hospital more frequently order LDCT scans than those practicing at a safety net hospital. Academic- and community-based providers received a significantly higher mean knowledge score than safety net-based providers [academic 6.84 (SD 1.33), community 6.72 (SD 1.46), safety net 5.85 (SD 1.38); P<0.01]. Overall, only 6.2% of respondents correctly identified all six Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services eligibility criteria when challenged with three incorrect criteria. Common barriers to utilization of LDCT scan included failure of the electronic medical record (EMR) to notify providers of eligible patients (54.7%), patient refusal (37%), perceived high false-positive rate leading to unnecessary procedures (18.9%), provider time constraints (16.8%), and lack of insurance coverage (13.7%).CONCLUSIONS: Provider knowledge of lung cancer screening guidelines varies, perhaps contributing to underutilization of LDCT scan for lung cancer screening. Improved provider education at safety net hospitals and improving EMR-based best practice alerts may improve the rate of lung cancer screening.

respiratory system
Improving LDCT screening rates within a large multidisciplinary community based practice using integrated ACR accredited imaging centers.

Garry Lachhar,Jarett Greenside,Harry Staszewski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.e13582

IF: 45.3

2024-05-31

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:e13582 Background: Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related death in the US, accounting for about 22% of such deaths. Lung cancer detected by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening is discovered at an early stage 64-85% of the time. The benefits of LDCT screening have been demonstrated in numerous trials, but there has been difficulty in establishing programs that screen a high percentage of eligible patients. We present data from the first 18 months of our lung cancer screening program that is designed to provide the highest quality screening, follow-up and access to prevention, diagnosis, and treatment including clinical trials within their local communities. Methods: New York Cancer and Blood Specialists (NYCBS) is a community practice with over 50 locations across NY. While most lung cancer screening programs are hospital-based, NYCBS has a series of American College of Radiology (ACR) accredited imaging centers that perform these screenings and are closely affiliated with oncology, primary care, Ob-Gyn, nephrology, urology and other specialty medical and surgical practices. These centers are strategically located in areas that have high rates of tobacco use as suggested by heat map data from the NY City Community Health Survey . Upon initial patient presentation, all NYCBS and affiliated sites screen patients with tablet-based questionnaires that prompt additional questions during follow-up appointments. Patients with positive findings are discussed during a monthly, system-wide multidisciplinary lung nodule review conference. Follow-up interventions include referrals to pulmonology, interventional radiology, or further imaging with PET/CT. Per ACR guidelines, patients not requiring acute intervention continue with follow-up CT. Results: In 2023, 29,501 patients were screened with an in-office questionnaire. Of those patients, 3,606 were eligible for screening, 225 declined, and 896 (29%) high risk patients proceeded to undergo LDCT screening. In screened patients, 128 underwent follow-up CT, 36 patients had findings requiring immediate intervention, and 6 were diagnosed with lung cancer. 5 of these patients were diagnosed with stage I and 1 patient was diagnosed with stage IV lung cancer. Conclusions: LDCT screening is a proven method to discover early stage lung cancer and improve the survival rate of diagnosed patients but has not been well adopted in practice. With access to a diverse array of multidisciplinary practices across NY and integrated accredited imaging centers, we have increased the accessibility of lung cancer screening and improved transitions to follow-up care. Nationally, only 4.5% of patients at high risk are screened, however, we found that with our approach to patient care, we have achieved among the highest reported screening rates in eligible individuals.

oncology
Treatment of facial injuries and deformities.

C. L. Straith,R. Straith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-195406000-00033

1953-09-01

Postgraduate Medicine

Abstract:Which facial deformities can be improved and when operation should be done are of vital concern to patients so afflicted. This article deals with the correction of numerous deformities so as to increase considerably the mental well-being and economic independence of these persons.
Urban-Rural Disparities in Access to Low-Dose Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening in Missouri and Illinois

Karthik W Rohatgi,Christine M Marx,Marquita W Lewis-Thames,Jingxia Liu,Graham A Colditz,Aimee S James

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd17.200202

2020-11-05

Abstract:Introduction: Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening is recommended for current and former smokers who meet eligibility criteria. Few studies have quantitatively examined disparities in access to LDCT screening. The objective of this study was to examine relationships between 1) rurality, sociodemographic characteristics, and access to LDCT lung cancer screening and 2) screening access and lung cancer mortality. Methods: We used census block group and county-level data from Missouri and Illinois. We defined access to screening as presence of an accredited screening center within 30 miles of residence as of May 2019. We used mixed-effects logistic models for screening access and county-level multiple linear regression models for lung cancer mortality. Results: Approximately 97.6% of metropolitan residents had access to screening, compared with 41.0% of nonmetropolitan residents. After controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, the odds of having access to screening in rural areas were 17% of the odds in metropolitan areas (95% CI, 12%-26%). We observed no association between screening access and lung cancer mortality. Southeastern Missouri, a rural and impoverished area, had low levels of screening access, high smoking prevalence, and high lung cancer mortality. Conclusion: Although access to LDCT is lower in rural areas than in urban areas, lung cancer mortality in rural residents is multifactorial and cannot be explained by access alone. Targeted efforts to implement rural LDCT screening could reduce geographic disparities in access, although further research is needed to understand how increased access to screening could affect uptake and rural disparities in lung cancer mortality.
Assessing disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility among high-risk individuals.

Abdi Gudina,Charles Stewart Kamen,Nikesha Gilmore,Lee Kehoe,Ana Paula Cupertino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.10563

IF: 45.3

2023-06-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:10563 Background: Low-dose computerized tomography (LDCT) scanning confers a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality by diagnosing the disease at earlier, more treatable stages. Racial/ethnic minorities have historically been less likely to be eligible for lung cancer screening. In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) updated its 2013 guideline for lung cancer screening eligibility by reducing the minimum age (55 to 50) and decreasing the cumulative number of cigarette pack-years smoked (30 to 20). The purpose of this study was to assess if the updated guideline will mitigate disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility among high-risk individuals. Methods: Data were obtained from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2017-2019), a population-based survey administered annually by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Only subjects with complete information on the variables used to determine eligibility (age, smoking status, age at first start smoking, age at last smoked, average number of cigarettes smoked each day) (n = 793,537) were included in the final analysis. Logistic regression was used to model the association between predictors and 2021 vs. 2013 lung cancer screening eligibility. Results: Based on the 2013 guideline, Non-Hispanic Blacks (OR: 0.34; 95%CI: 0.31 - 0.38), Hispanics (OR: 0.12; 95%CI: 0.10 – 0.14), and other racial/ethnic minorities (OR: 0.59; 95%CI: 0.54 – 0.64) were less likely to be eligible for lung cancer screening than Non-Hispanic Whites. Using the 2021 guideline, Non-Hispanic Blacks (OR: 0.45; 95%CI: 0.42 - 0.49), Hispanics (OR: 0.15; 95%CI: 0.13 – 0.16), and other racial/ethnic minorities (OR: 0.63; 95%CI: 0.58 – 0.67) remain less likely to be eligible for lung cancer screening than Non-Hispanic Whites. Conclusions: The 2021 guideline slightly reduces racial/ethnic disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility. Further efforts should be made to develop a guideline that better addresses disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility to reduce lung cancer deaths in racial minorities.

oncology
Abstract A132: Missed Opportunities? Regional availability of Low Dose CT lung cancer screening facility locations in the year prior to diagnoses: A descriptive comparison of American Indian and Non-Hispanic White lung cancer patients in North Carolina

Bradford E. Jackson,Marc Emerson,Daniel Carrizosa,Chris Baggett,Lisa Spees,Joel Begay,Ana Salas,Yadurshirni Raveendran,Tomi Akinyemiju,Rachel Denlinger-Apte,Stephanie Wheeler,Ronny Bell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-a132

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:INTRODUCTION American Indians (AI) have much higher incidence rates of lung cancer (LC) compared with non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) in the US. While low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening facilitates early detection of lung cancer, it is unknown how available LDCT screenings are to racially and geographically diverse populations in North Carolina (NC). To address this gap in knowledge, we conducted a descriptive study to characterize incident LC cases among AIs and NHWs, the distance from their location at diagnosis to the nearest LDCT screening facility and explored whether distance was associated with late-stage LC diagnoses. Methods Data were obtained from the Cancer Information and Population Health Resource (CIPHR), which comprise data from NC Central Cancer Registry (CCR) as well as public and private health insurance claims for the state. We identified ZIP codes and dates of rendered service for facilities providing LDCT by searching through claims from 2015-20. In addition, we identified incident LC cases among AIs and NHWs aged ≥18 years, from 2015-19. We assembled lists of LDCT facilities that existed in the year prior to each incident LC case. We calculated the minimum centroid to centroid distance to all facilities. Clinical attributes included age at diagnosis, sex, histology, stage at diagnosis, and rurality as measured by Rural Urban Commuting Area. Risk ratios were calculated for late-stage LC diagnoses across a range of thresholds for patient's distance to nearest LDCT screening facility for AIs and NHWs. Results We identified 388 AI and 26,867 NHW incident LC cases in NC between 2015-20. Compared to NHWs, the median age at diagnosis for AIs was 5 years younger (AI: 65 vs. NHW: 69); more frequently male (AI: 54% vs NHW: 51%); and almost twice as likely to reside in rural areas (AI: 52% vs. NHW: 28%). There were no differences in late-stage LC diagnoses (AI: 54% vs. NHW: 52%). For distance (in miles) to the nearest LDCT screening facility, the median [Interquartile range] was twice as high for AIs (9.9 miles [0.8, 16.30]) compared to NHWs (5.3 miles [0, 12.1]). Among NHWs, there were statistically significant associations between distance and late-stage LC diagnosis at the shortest distance threshold of 5 miles (RR=1.04; 95%CL: 1.02, 1.07) through the threshold of 30 miles (RR=1.10 95%CL: 1.05, 1.15). There was no association across any distance threshold among AI lung cancer patients. Conclusions The large difference in accessibility of LDCT screening was not strongly associated with metastatic lung cancer diagnoses, possibly because so many patients were diagnosed late, reflecting poor early detection across all populations. We found that 80% of AIs with LC lived more than 10 miles away from LDCT screening facilities. This geographic distance may increase difficulty accessing cancer care geographically, and contribute to suboptimal LC screening rates. If efforts are to be made to increase early detection and improve survival, accessibility needs to be addressed on different dimensions. Citation Format: Bradford E. Jackson, Marc Emerson, Daniel Carrizosa, Chris Baggett, Lisa Spees, Joel Begay, Ana Salas, Yadurshirni Raveendran, Tomi Akinyemiju, Rachel Denlinger-Apte, Stephanie Wheeler, Ronny Bell. Missed Opportunities? Regional availability of Low Dose CT lung cancer screening facility locations in the year prior to diagnoses: A descriptive comparison of American Indian and Non-Hispanic White lung cancer patients in North Carolina [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr A132.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Lung Cancer Yield Among Those Undergoing Lung Cancer Screening in Community-based Healthcare Systems

AN Burnett-Hartman,KA Rendle,C Saia,RT Greenlee,NM Carroll,SA Honda,BP Hixon,RY Kim,C Neslund-Dudas,C Oshiro,K Wain,DP Ritzwoller,A Vachani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-23-0371

2024-05-19

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Purpose: Lung cancer screening (LCS) via low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for those with a high risk of lung cancer based on age and smoking history has been recommended in the United States for almost a decade, but performance of LCS in community-based settings is unclear. We aimed to estimate the proportion of those screened who were diagnosed with lung cancer across five healthcare systems in the United States. Methods: Study participants were LCS-eligible individuals who received care and a baseline LCS LDCT within the five healthcare systems in the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung Consortium (PROSPR-Lung). We collected data on LDCT utilization and results, as well as patient characteristics and smoking history, via electronic health records. LCS LDCT findings were categorized using Lung-RADS [negative (1), benign (2), probably benign (3), or suspicious (4)]. Lung cancer diagnoses occurring within 12 months of a baseline LDCT were ascertained via cancer registry data. Our preliminary analyses, presented here, includes estimates of lung cancer yield, overall, and by Lung-RADS category, among those receiving a baseline LDCT 2014–2018. Data collection through 2021 is underway and final analyses will include data through 2021. Results: There were 8,682 patients with a baseline scan included in analyses. Of these, 47% were female, 52% were ages 65+, and the ethnic and racial distribution was: 4% Hispanic, 2% Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 4% Asian, 14% Black, and 74% White. There were 142 (1.6%) patients diagnosed with lung cancer within 12-months of their baseline LDCT. Among those with negative LCS LDCT findings, Lung-RADS 1 (n = 1,987) or Lung-RADS 2 (n = 5,232), there were 1 and 8 lung cancer diagnoses, respectively. Among those with positive LCS LDCT findings, Lung-RADS 3 (n = 906), Lung-RADS 4/4A (n = 363), or Lung-RADS 4B/4X (n = 194), 10 (1%), 35 (10%), and 88 (45%) were diagnosed with lung cancer, respectively. Conclusions: The proportion of those diagnosed with lung cancer within 12 months of a baseline LDCT within community settings is similar to clinical trials settings, and use of Lung-RADS categorization in community settings appropriately stratifies patients into those with a low- vs. high-risk of prevalent lung cancer.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Effect of lung cancer screening on the incidence of advanced lung cancer in the United States: A SEER database analysis.

Maxwell Oluwole Akanbi,Orimisan Samuel Adekolujo,Dan Isaac,Ahsan Wahab,Ling Wang,Borys Hrinczenko

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.10506

IF: 45.3

2022-06-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:10506 Background: In 2013, the USPSTF recommended screening for lung cancer with low-dose chest computed tomography (LDCT). This was based on the results of the National Lung Screening Trial which showed a 20% relative reduction in mortality from LDCT compared with chest radiography. In Feb/March 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) provided screening guidelines and they and private insurers started covering the cost of LDCT. The impact of this recommendation in the real-world setting is unknown. We investigated the impact of LDCT recommendations on the incidence of advanced lung cancer (a-LCa) in the US general population. We sought to verify that the implementation of LDCT will yield an earlier lung cancer diagnosis and thereby reduce the incidence of later stages of lung cancer. Methods: From the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 18 registries database, we identified adults 55-80 years diagnosed with regional or metastatic (advanced) lung cancer from 2004 to 2018. Age-adjusted incidence rates (AAIR) of advanced lung cancer in 2004-2014 (Pre-LDCT) and 2015-2018 (Post-LDCT) were compared using interrupted time series (ITS) regression analyses. Analyses were stratified by sex, race, and residence. Results: A total of 400,343 patients who met the study criteria were included. Of these, 219,828 (55%) were women and 76% (n = 304,801) were non-Hispanic White. At all periods, the AAIR of a-LCa was highest in non-Hispanic Blacks. Overall, there was a 41% decline in the AAIR of a-LCa in the post-LDCT period compared to the pre-LDCT era (Annual decline of 7.6 vs 4.5 /100,000 person-years (PY) for 2015-2018 vs 2004-2014, p < 0.01). Women experienced a more accelerated decline in the AAIR of a-LCa compared to men (53% versus 30%). By race, the annual rates of a-LCa declined most rapidly among non-Hispanic Blacks (55%, 9.5/ 100,000 PY, 2015-2018 vs 4.7/100,000 PY, 2004-2014, p < 0.01), and the slowest rate of decline was among Hispanics (41%, 4.6/100,000 PY,2015-2018 vs 2.7/100,000 PY, 2004-2014, p < 0.01). By residence, non-metropolitan dwellers experienced a greater decline in annual rates of a-LCa compared with metropolitan dwellers (non-Metropolitan: 69%, 10.1/100,000 PY, 2015-2018 vs 3.2/100,000 PY 2003-2014, p < 0.01: Metropolitan dwellers: 37%, 7.2/100,000 PY 2015-2018 vs 4.5/100,000 PY, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Using population-based data we found a significant decline in rates of a-LCa following the adoption of LDCT for lung cancer screening in the US. Rates of decline in the incidence of a-LCa, however, varied among subgroups. Non-Hispanic Blacks, women, and rural dwellers experienced the most decline in annual rates of a-LCa from 2015 to 2018. Our study shows the overall benefit of LDCT in marginalized communities. However, the impact of our findings on lung cancer mortality will still need further study.

oncology
Assessment and Efficacy of Low-Dose CT Screening and Primary Care Providers Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening: An Institutional Review

Manan Shah,Phani K. Surapaneni,Kirat Sandhu,Saba Shafi,Temidayo Abe,Sanjay Jain,Gabriela Oprea,Judith Volcy,Phani Keerthi Surapaneni,Gabriela M. Oprea-Ilies,Phani K Surapaneni

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.13778

2021-03-09

Cureus

Abstract:Lung cancer is the most common cause of death in both men and women. The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends annual lung screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) chest for individuals aged 55-80 who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. We reviewed the electronic medical records of patients visiting our outpatient clinic over a period of one year. We included all eligible individuals according to USPSTF guidelines for LDCT to identify screening rates at our institution. All primary care physicians, including residents and attendings, were given a prepared questionnaire to understand their beliefs and concerns with the implementation of this program. A total of 13,500 patients visited the outpatient clinic and 1178 were eligible for LDCT. Forty-five percent (45%) of patients received LDCT screening, which was higher than the national average of 2%-5%. A total of 50 primary care providers were included in the survey. The majority of the providers were aware of the USPSTF guidelines and believed that patients with multiple comorbidities and insurance issues were barriers in initiating LDCT screening. Lung cancer screening is an important component in cancer preventive strategies. Widespread awareness among the primary care providers and the public is extremely necessary for improving the use of LDCT.
The Role of Primary Care Providers in Lung Cancer Screening: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Lye-Yeng Wong,Ntemena Kapula,Augustine Kang,Anuradha J. Phadke,Andrew D. Schechtman,Irmina A. Elliott,Brandon A. Guenthart,Douglas Z. Liou,Leah M. Backhus,Mark F. Berry,Joseph B. Shrager,Natalie S. Lui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2024.10.002

IF: 4.84

2024-10-30

Clinical Lung Cancer

Abstract:Background Multidisciplinary lung cancer screening (LCS) programs that perform shared decision-making visits (SDMV) and follow up annual low dose computed tomography (LDCT) have been emerging. We hypothesize that primary care providers (PCPs) prefer to refer patients to LCS programs instead of facilitating the screening process themselves. Methods This is a mixed-methods, cross-sectional study in which an online survey was administered to PCPs between April 2023 and June 2023. Results 58 PCPs in the same hospital network participated in the study with a median age of 43 (34-51), predominance of women (77.6%), and clinicians of white and Asian race (44.8% and 48.3%). Respondents estimated that 26.1% (SD 32.4%) of their eligible patients participate in LCS screening. PCPs thought that an LCS program was equally convenient to performing screening themselves for identifying eligible patients and ordering LDCT. However, 63.8% of participants preferred an LCS program for performing SDMVs, 62.1% for ensuring annual follow-up on negative LDCTs, 70.7% for deciding next steps on positive LDCTs, and 60.4% for performing smoking cessation counseling. PCPs agreed that an LCS program saves time (69%), allows patients to receive specialty care (65.6%), addresses patient concerns (70.7%), ensures annual follow-up (77.6%), and manages abnormal findings (79.3%). However, they also expressed concerns about an additional visit for the patient (48.2%) and patient cost (46.5%). Conclusion Most PCPs believe that formal LCS programs have many benefits including providing specialized care and follow up, although there were concerns about patient time and cost.

oncology

Not so civil

Lung Cancer Screening Uptake Under the Revised United States Preventive Service Task Force Guideline: Assessing Disparities

Lung Cancer Screening in the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program: Availability and Service Organization

Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening Utilization at Two Health Systems in the Southeastern US

Geographic access to lung cancer screening among eligible adults living in rural and urban environments in the United States

Enzymological investigations on the causes for the PSE-syndrome, II. Comparative studies on glycogen phosphorylase from pig muscles.

Abstract A086: Disparities in lung cancer screening uptake across the United States

State Variation in Low-Dose Computed Tomography Scanning for Lung Cancer Screening in the United States

Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility and Use: A Population Health Perspective of One Community

Abstract C113: Geographic variation in low-dose computed tomography scanning for lung cancer screening in the United States

Abstract A125: A nationwide initiative to expand access to lung cancer screening: Results and impact of the Color/American Cancer Society Lung Screening Access Program

Understanding barriers to lung cancer screening in primary care

Improving LDCT screening rates within a large multidisciplinary community based practice using integrated ACR accredited imaging centers.

Treatment of facial injuries and deformities.

Urban-Rural Disparities in Access to Low-Dose Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening in Missouri and Illinois

Assessing disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility among high-risk individuals.

Abstract A132: Missed Opportunities? Regional availability of Low Dose CT lung cancer screening facility locations in the year prior to diagnoses: A descriptive comparison of American Indian and Non-Hispanic White lung cancer patients in North Carolina

Lung Cancer Yield Among Those Undergoing Lung Cancer Screening in Community-based Healthcare Systems

Effect of lung cancer screening on the incidence of advanced lung cancer in the United States: A SEER database analysis.

Assessment and Efficacy of Low-Dose CT Screening and Primary Care Providers Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening: An Institutional Review

The Role of Primary Care Providers in Lung Cancer Screening: A Cross-Sectional Survey