[Further research on the effect of vitamin K on the respiration and glycolysis of ascites cells of NK lymphoma in white mice].

W. Strassner,R. Neubert,I. Pradel

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Brief Report: Understanding Program-Level Impact of COVID-19 in Lung Cancer Screening Programs in the United States

Valeda Yong,Lynde Lutzow,Andrew Ciupek,Angela Criswell,Jennifer C King,Grace X Ma,Cherie P Erkmen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtocrr.2024.100709

2024-07-31

Abstract:Introduction: Lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces lung cancer mortality, yet uptake pre- and post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains low. The impact of COVID-19 on LCS programs across the United States is unknown. Ours is the first multi-institutional study to identify barriers to LCS experienced during the pandemic. Our work will hopefully inform the development of targeted resources to facilitate increased uptake of LCS. Methods: A nationwide survey of Centers of Excellence (SCOE) in LCS was conducted by GO2 for Lung Cancer Foundation. In 2021, survey items included questions regarding program structure, screening rates, and systemic barriers to LCS delivery experienced amid COVID-19. Results: A total of 99 programs representing 1112 screening sites responded. A median of 868 patients were screened during the year of 2020. Patient recruitment, patient education, and in-person service access were negatively affected by COVID-19, whereas the use of telemedicine was positively affected. Coordination of care and timely reporting of results were largely unaffected by the pandemic. Conclusions: Our findings provide a real-world snapshot of how COVID-19 affected LCS from a program perspective. These findings highlight ongoing challenges with educating and engaging those at high risk for lung cancer in LCS. Program resources should be directed toward increasing adherence to LCS among eligible patients.
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
Prevalence of USPSTF Recommended Cancer Screenings Among Individuals Eligible For Lung Cancer Screening: An Analysis of the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey

EA Hirsch,WE Zahnd,JM Eberth,JL Studts

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-23-0373

2024-05-19

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Introduction: Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low dose CT (LDCT) is the newest cancer screening modality recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), and currently remains largely underutilized with uptake rates <20% among eligible individuals. As LCS continues to be integrated into routine public health practice, it is important to understand the context of cancer screenings among LCS-eligible individuals. The purpose of this study was to quantify rates of USPSTF recommended cancer screenings (lung, colorectal, breast, cervical) among LCS-eligible individuals. Methods: Data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey were used to estimate weighted percentages of being up-to-date with USPSTF recommended cancer screenings among all individuals eligible for LCS using 2013 USPSTF guidelines using the eight states who included the optional LCS module (Delaware, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia). Rates were additionally calculated separately for individuals compliant and non-compliant with LCS. Cancer screening eligibility was defined by USPSTF guideline variables available in the BRFSS, and rates were calculated using LCS-eligible subsets that matched screening eligibility (i.e., ages <75 for colorectal and <65 for cervical). Results: The study sample included 2,793 LCS-eligible individuals. Among these individuals, 16.5% of men and 20.2% of women, reported having a LDCT within the past 12 months. Comparatively, 63.0% of LCS-eligible men were up-to-date for colorectal screening, and 65.9%, 71.7%, and 60.4% of LCS-eligible women were up-to-date on colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings, respectively. Rates of being up-to-date for colorectal, breast, and cervical screenings were universally higher among women compliant with LCS compared to non-compliant with LCS, and significantly greater for colorectal screening among men compliant with LCS compared to non-compliant (84.5% vs. 58.9%, Wald P value = 0.003). Conclusions: Rates of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings are higher than LCS among individuals eligible for LCS, highlighting important opportunities to improve LCS and subsequently reducing lung cancer mortality.

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 incidence, 2019–2020, United States: The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

Christine M. Kava,David A. Siegel,Susan A. Sabatino,Jin Qin,Thomas B. Richards,S. Jane Henley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2024.08.005

IF: 6.996

2024-08-30

Annals of Epidemiology

Abstract:Purpose Cancer incidence declined during the COVID-19 pandemic in part due to health care delivery challenges. We examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on changes in lung cancer incidence. Methods We used 2019–2020 US Cancer Statistics data from 49 cancer registries covering 97 % of the US population. We calculated the number of new lung cancer diagnoses in 2019 and 2020, age-adjusted lung cancer incidence rates per 100,000 persons, and 2019-to-2020 % changes in incidence rates. We also calculated number and percentage of new lung cancer diagnoses by month and stage at diagnosis. Results The age-adjusted lung cancer incidence rate per 100,000 persons was 47.9 in 2019 vs. 41.4 in 2020—a 13.6 % decrease. Differences in the percentage change in incidence rates were observed by age, race and ethnicity, US census region, histology, and stage at diagnosis. A higher percentage of people were diagnosed at distant stage in 2020 than 2019. Conclusions This report provides new insight into subgroups that experienced the greatest decline in observed lung cancer incidence during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings can be used to inform intervention efforts to improve lung cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment.

public, environmental & occupational health
Characteristics associated with early vs. late adoption of lung cancer screening

Christine S Shusted,Jan M Eberth,Hee-Soon Juon,Julie A Barta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102820

2024-07-07

Abstract:Background: Although lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces lung cancer mortality among high-risk individuals, uptake overall remains low. With all cancer screening modalities, a period of diffusion among medical providers and the public is expected, with screening uptake exhibiting a distribution among early vs. late adoption. We aimed to characterize individuals undergoing LCS based upon the timeframe of screening adoption. Methods: This retrospective study examined patients who underwent LCS between January 2015 - December 2022 in a centralized LCS program. Based on United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for LCS, early and late adopters of LCS - defined by time from eligibility to screening completion - were compared. A multivariable regression model was constructed to identify factors associated with early adoption of LCS. Results: Among patients screened during the study period, 90.4% were eligible based on USPSTF 2013 criteria, and 9.6% were eligible based on USPSTF 2021 criteria. Of the USPSTF 2013 eligible persons, multivariable analysis demonstrated Black/African-American individuals and current smokers had significantly greater odds of early adoption (aOR 1.428 and 1.514, respectively). Those without a family history of lung cancer or without a personal history of cancer had significantly lower odds of early adoption of LCS. Conclusions: Early adopters were more likely to report Black/African-American race or current smoking status after adjustment for covariates. Future research should examine how screening diffuses across the overall LCS-eligible population, as well as identify factors that drive and inhibit diffusion to create programs and policies with the ultimate goal of increasing timely LCS uptake.
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
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.
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.
Patient Adherence to Screening for Lung Cancer in the US

Maria A. Lopez-Olivo,Kristin G. Maki,Noah J. Choi,Richard M. Hoffman,Ya-Chen Tina Shih,Lisa M. Lowenstein,Rachel S. Hicklen,Robert J. Volk

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.25102

2020-11-16

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:Importance: To be effective in reducing deaths from lung cancer among high-risk current and former smokers, screening with low-dose computed tomography must be performed periodically.Objective: To examine lung cancer screening (LCS) adherence rates reported in the US, patient characteristics associated with adherence, and diagnostic testing rates after screening.Data Sources: Five electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science) were searched for articles published in the English language from January 1, 2011, through February 28, 2020.Study Selection: Two reviewers independently selected prospective and retrospective cohort studies from 95 potentially relevant studies reporting patient LCS adherence.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Quality appraisal and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for quality assessment. A random-effects model meta-analysis was conducted when at least 2 studies reported on the same outcome. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was LCS adherence after a baseline screening. Secondary measures were the patient characteristics associated with adherence and the rate of diagnostic testing after screening.Results: Fifteen studies with a total of 16 863 individuals were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled LCS adherence rate across all follow-up periods (range, 12-36 months) was 55% (95% CI, 44%-66%). Regarding patient characteristics associated with adherence rates, current smokers were less likely to adhere to LCS than former smokers (odds ratio [OR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.62-0.80); White patients were more likely to adhere to LCS than patients of races other than White (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6-2.6); people 65 to 73 years of age were more likely to adhere to LCS than people 50 to 64 years of age (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9); and completion of 4 or more years of college was also associated with increased adherence compared with people not completing college (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1). Evidence was insufficient to evaluate diagnostic testing rates after abnormal screening scan results. The main source of variation was attributable to the eligibility criteria for screening used across studies.Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the pooled LCS adherence rate after a baseline screening was far lower than those observed in large randomized clinical trials of screening. Interventions to promote adherence to screening should prioritize current smokers and smokers from minority populations.

medicine, general & internal
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
Patient-provider Lung Cancer Screening Discussions: An analysis of a National Survey

Niki Nourmohammadi,Trinity Hsiao Pei Liang,Gelareh Sadigh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2024.02.008

IF: 4.84

2024-03-04

Clinical Lung Cancer

Abstract:Background : The US Preventative Service Task Force (USPSTF) updated their lung cancer screening (LCS) recommendations with annual low-dose CT (LDCT) in 2021. We aimed to assess prevalence of patient-provider discussion about LCS and determine factors associated with such discussions. Materials and Methods : Using data from Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 2022 cycle 6, two cohorts were evaluated: (1) Potentially LCS-eligible, included participants at least 50 years old with a history of current or former smoking and no prior history of lung cancer; (2) LCS-ineligible individuals based on age (e.g., 18 to 49 years old), smoking history (e.g., never smoked) or history of lung cancer. We assessed association of demographic, clinical and social factors with LDCT discussion in a multivariable logistic regression model. Results : Among potentially LCS-eligible patients, 19% had never heard of LDCT and only 9.4% had discussed LCS with their provider within the past year. Those who accessed online patient portals were more likely to discuss LCS with their healthcare provider (OR, 4.25; 95% CI, 1.67, 10.81; P, 0.003), as were respondents with a history of current (vs. former) smoking (OR, 3.15; 95% CI, 1.21, 8.19; P, 0.019). Among LCS-ineligible, 1.9% discussed LCS with their providers. Individuals with a personal history of cancer (OR, 6.70; 95% CI, 1.65, 27.19; P, 0.009), and those who discussed colorectal cancer screening (OR, 5.74; 95% CI, 1.63, 20.14; P, 0.007) were more likely to discuss LCS with their provider. Conclusion : Despite updated USPSTF recommendations, rates of patient-provider LCS remains low. Multi-level interventions to address barriers to LCS are needed.

oncology
Disruptions in Lung Cancer Detection During COVID-19

Trisha Lal,Uriel Kim,Christina S. Boutros,Natalie N. Chakraborty,Susan J. Doh,Christopher W. Towe,Richard S. Hoehn

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16234001

2024-11-30

Cancers

Abstract:Objective: To quantify the extent of the disruption and recovery of lung cancer detection during the first two years of the pandemic, focusing on disparities across demographic and community factors. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used the SEER database to identify lung cancer cases from 2001 to 2021. Expected incidence rates for 2020 and 2021 were projected based on pre-pandemic trends (2000–2019) using the NCI's Joinpoint Regression program. Percent differences between expected and observed incidence rates were calculated. Multivariate and propensity score analyses were conducted to quantify changes in the odds of being diagnosed with metastatic disease during the pandemic. Results: Lung cancer incidence fell by 10% in 2020 compared to pre-pandemic projections, with rural populations, non-Hispanic Black and Asian patients, and females disproportionately affected. By 2021, detection rates partially recovered but remained 5% below expected levels. Localized disease detection improved significantly, while rural communities not adjacent to metropolitan areas faced further declines. Adjusted analyses showed that patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and those of Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, or Asian/Pacific Islander ethnicity had persistently higher rates of distant disease presentation through 2021. Conclusions: The pandemic significantly reduced lung cancer detection, with only partial recovery by 2021. Persistent gaps, particularly in rural and minoritized populations, highlight the need for targeted interventions to reengage these communities.

oncology
Short-Term Outcomes of COVID-19 Pandemic on Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Screening and Management

Felix Orelaru,Melanie Edwards,Ruth Raleigh,Ali Abunayla,Rachel Bush,Shannon Porter,Kate Schumaker,Jeremy Albright,Kumari N. Adams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1777856

2023-12-22

Surgery Journal

Abstract:Background To assess the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) screening, staging, and management in a single health care system. Materials and Methods From November 2015 to December 2020, a total of 1,547 NSCLC cases was reported at our institution including 1,329 cases pre-COVID-19 and 218 cases during COVID-19. Pre-COVID-19 was defined as November 2015 to February 2020, while during COVID-19 was March 2020 to December 2020. Data were collected from tumor registry and medical record review. Patients with mesothelioma, lymphoma, small cell, or mixed small cell cancer were excluded from the study. Results Both pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19 cohorts had similar comorbidities including age (70 vs. 71 years), current smokers (35 vs. 32%), and chronic obstructive lung disease (32 vs. 28%). The number of low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening scans decreased by 25% during COVID-19 compared with pre-COVID-19 era. There were more cases of stage 1A NSCLC pre-COVID-19 (31 vs. 25%) and more stage 4 cancer during COVID-19 (42 vs. 33%); p = 0.01. The proportion of patients treated with radiotherapy was similar between pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19 (49 vs. 50%), but fewer patients underwent surgery during COVID-19 (17 vs. 27%; p = 0.004). The median time to radiotherapy (67 days) and surgery (29 days) was similar between the groups. The unadjusted overall 6-month mortality after lung cancer diagnoses was higher during COVID-19 compared with pre-COVID-19 (28 vs. 22%; p = 0.04). Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in delayed lung cancer screening scans, and more patients had diagnosis of advanced NSCLC; however, short-term mortality was unchanged. This article was presented at Academic Surgical Congress 2023. All authors contributed equally to the study conception and design, analysis and interpretation, data collection, writing the article, critical revision of the article, and obtaining funding. Received: 17 October 2023 Accepted: 29 November 2023 Article published online: 20 December 2023 © 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
Lung cancer screening use among screening‐eligible adults with disabilities

Hermine Poghosyan,Ilana Richman,Sayantani Sarkar,Carolyn J. Presley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.18795

2024-02-17

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract:Background Lung cancer screening (LCS) use among adults with disabilities has not been well characterized. We estimated the prevalence of LCS use by disability types and counts and investigated the association between disability counts and LCS utilization among LCS‐eligible adults. Methods We used cross‐sectional data from the 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Lung Cancer Screening Module. Based on the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force criteria for LCS, the sample included 4407 LCS‐eligible adults, aged 55–79 years, with current or former (quit smoking in the past 15 years) tobacco use history of at least 30 pack‐years. Disability types included limitations in hearing, vision, cognition, mobility, self‐care, and independent living. We also categorized respondents by number of disabilities (no disability, 1 disability, 2 disabilities, 3+ disabilities). We utilized descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses to determine the association between disability counts and the receipt of LCS (yes/no) in the past 12 months. Results In 2019, 16.4% of LCS‐eligible adults were screened for lung cancer. Overall, 49.6% of participants had no disability, and 14.5% had >3 disabilities. Mobility was the most prevalent disability type (35.4%), followed by cognitive impairment (18.2%) and hearing (16.6%). LCS was more prevalent in adults with disability in self‐care versus no disability in self‐care (24.0% vs. 15.5%, p = 0.01), disability in independent living versus no disability in independent living (22.2% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.02), and cognitive impairment disability versus no cognitive impairment (22.1% vs. 15.3%, p = 0.03). The prevalence rates of LCS among groups of LCS‐eligible adults with different disability counts were not significant (p = 0.17). Conclusions Despite the lack of clinical guidelines on LCS among individuals with disabilities, some individuals with disabilities are being screened for lung cancer. Future research should address this knowledge gap to determine clinical benefit versus harm of LCS among those with disabilities.

geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Implementation of an Electronic Medical Record Alert Significantly Increases Lung Cancer Screening Uptake

Ju Ae Park,Sriya Yalamanchili,Zeliene Brown,Andrew Myers,Michael J Weyant,Amit K Mahajan,Christopher Patrick Connolly,Kei Suzuki

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2024.08.002

2024-08-18

Abstract:Introduction: Lung cancer survival is significantly improved with early detection. However, lung cancer screening (LCS) uptake remains low despite national recommendations. Our aim was to determine whether implementation of an electronic medical record (EMR) alert and order set would increase LCS uptake. Study design: A query of current and former smokers identified 62,630 patients aged 50 and above in the primary care setting between January 1, 2021 and May 5, 2022. We randomly reviewed 3704 charts for LCS eligibility and recorded who received LCS in the form of low-dose computed tomography amongst the eligible patients. We collected demographic information including gender, race, primary language, ethnicity, zip code, and insurance. Data analysis was performed utilizing 2-proportional z tests. Results: We identified 461 patients who were LCS eligible. Our overall LCS uptake was 19.9% (92/461). Three-time frames were analyzed: (1) prior to EMR alert implementation, (2) after implementation of EMR alert (January 7, 2021), and (3) after implementation of EMR alert and order set (March 3, 2021). Screening uptake was significantly improved with initiation of EMR alert (1/46 [2.2%] to 23/109 [21.1%]; P = .003). LCS uptake remained similarly high after subsequent order set implementation (23/109 [21.1%] and 68/306 [22.2%]; P = .72). Amongst the different demographics, age was significantly associated with screening uptake, with age ≥65 demonstrating statistically significant increased rates of screening (15.6% [41/263] for <65 vs 25.8% [51/198] for ≥65; P = .007). Conclusion: Implementation of EMR alerts significantly improves LCS uptake in the primary care setting. Such efforts should be considered in other hospital settings to improve LCS uptake.
Lung Cancer Screening in Individuals With and Without Lung-Related Comorbidities

Eman M Metwally,M Patricia Rivera,Danielle D Durham,Lindsay Lane,Pasangi Perera,Derek Lamb,Louise M Henderson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.30146

2022-09-01

Abstract:Importance: Comorbidities characterize the underlying health status of individuals. In the context of lung cancer screening (LCS), lung-related comorbidities may influence the observed benefits and harms. Objective: To compare the characteristics of individuals undergoing LCS, the LCS examination result, the cancer detection rate (CDR), and the false-positive rate (FPR) in those with and without lung-related comorbidities. Design, setting, and participants: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 5 academic and community screening sites across North Carolina from January 1, 2014, to November 7, 2020. Participants included 611 individuals screened for lung cancer who completed a 1-page health history questionnaire. Exposures: Presence of at least 1 self-reported lung-related comorbidity, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, asthma, bronchiectasis, pulmonary fibrosis, silicosis, asbestosis, sarcoidosis, and tuberculosis. Main outcomes and measures: The LCS examination result was determined from the radiologist's Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System assessment (negative, 1 or 2; positive, 3 or 4). The age-adjusted CDR and FPR were calculated per 100 LCS examinations, using binary logistic regression. Results: Among the 611 individuals screened for lung cancer (308 men [50.4%]; mean [SD] age, 64 [6.2] years), 335 (54.8%) had at least 1 lung-related comorbidity. Individuals with vs without lung-related comorbidities were more likely to be female than male (180 of 335 [53.7%] vs 123 of 276 [44.6%]; P = .02), White vs non-White race (275 of 326 [84.4%] vs 193 of 272 [71.0%]; P < .001), and have high school or less education vs greater than a high school education (108 of 231 [46.7%] vs 64 of 208 [30.8%]; P = .001). There were no significant differences in the proportion of positive LCS examinations in those with vs without a lung-related comorbidity at baseline (37 [16.0%] vs 22 [11.1%]; P = .14) or subsequent (40 [12.3%] vs 23 [10.6%]; P = .54) LCS examination. Comparing individuals with vs without lung-related comorbidities, there was no statistically significant difference in the CDR (1.6 vs 1.9 per 100; P = .73) or FPR (13.0 vs 9.3 per 100; P = .16). Of the 17 individuals with lung cancer, 13 patients (76.5%) were diagnosed with stage I lung cancer. Conclusions and relevance: The findings of this study suggest that individuals with self-reported lung-related comorbidities undergoing LCS were more likely to be female, of White race, and have less education than those without lung-related comorbidity. Although no statistically significant differences in the proportion of positive examinations, CDR, or FPR by self-reported lung comorbidities were noted, additional studies with larger numbers of individuals undergoing screening are needed to understand LCS outcomes in those with lung-related comorbidities.
Letter to the Editor in Response to "Adherence to Annual Lung Cancer Screening in a Centralized Academic Program"

Julie Wu,Theodore Thomas,Hannah Tavalire,Fran Vecchio,Tassos Kariakides,Kristina Crothers,Michael J. Kelley,Drew Moghanaki,Scott Shofer,Fred Hendler,Larry Feldman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2024.08.009

IF: 4.84

2024-09-03

Clinical Lung Cancer

Abstract:Background Adherence to lung cancer screening (LCS) protocols is critical for achieving mortality reductions. However, adherence rates, particularly for recommended annual screening among patients with low-risk findings, are often sub-optimal. We evaluated annual LCS adherence for patients with low-risk findings participating in a centralized screening program at a tertiary academic center. Patients and methods We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of a centralized lung cancer screening program launched in July 2018. We performed electronic medical review of 337 patients who underwent low-dose CT (LDCT) screening before February 1, 2021 (to ensure ≥ 15 months follow up) and had a low-risk Lung-RADS score of 1 or 2. Captured data included patient characteristics (smoking history, Fagerstrom score, environmental exposures, lung cancer risk score), LDCT imaging dates, and Lung-RADS results. The primary outcome measure was adherence to annual screening. We used multivariable logistic regression models to identify factors associated with adherence. Results Overall, 337 patients had an initial Lung-RADS result of 1 (n = 189) or 2 (n = 148). Among this cohort, 139 (73.5%) of Lung-RADS 1 and 111 (75.0%) of Lung-RADS 2 patients completed the annual repeat LDCT within 15 months, respectively. The only patient characteristic associated with adherence was having Medicaid coverage; compared to having private insurance, Medicaid patients were less adherent (adjusted OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.15-0.92). No other patient characteristic was associated with adherence. Conclusion Our centralized screening program achieved a high initial annual adherence rate. Although LCS has first-dollar insurance coverage, other socioeconomic concerns may present barriers to annual screening for Medicaid recipients.

oncology
Evaluation of Population-Level Changes Associated With the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force Lung Cancer Screening Recommendations in Community-Based Health Care Systems

Debra P Ritzwoller,Rafael Meza,Nikki M Carroll,Erica Blum-Barnett,Andrea N Burnett-Hartman,Robert T Greenlee,Stacey A Honda,Christine Neslund-Dudas,Katharine A Rendle,Anil Vachani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.28176

2021-10-01

Abstract:Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released updated lung cancer screening recommendations in 2021, lowering the screening age from 55 to 50 years and smoking history from 30 to 20 pack-years. These changes are expected to expand screening access to women and racial and ethnic minority groups. Objective: To estimate the population-level changes associated with the 2021 USPSTF expansion of lung cancer screening eligibility by sex, race and ethnicity, sociodemographic factors, and comorbidities in 5 community-based health care systems. Design, setting, and participants: This cohort study analyzed data of patients who received care from any of 5 community-based health care systems (which are members of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung Consortium, a collaboration that conducts research to better understand how to improve the cancer screening processes in community health care settings) from January 1, 2010, through September 30, 2019. Individuals who had complete smoking history and were engaged with the health care system for 12 or more continuous months were included. Those who had never smoked or who had unknown smoking history were excluded. Exposures: Electronic health record-derived age, sex, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), comorbidities, and smoking history. Main outcomes and measures: Differences in the proportion of the newly eligible population by age, sex, race and ethnicity, Charlson Comorbidity Index, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnosis, and SES as well as lung cancer diagnoses under the 2013 recommendations vs the expected cases under the 2021 recommendations were evaluated using χ2 tests. Results: As of September 2019, there were 341 163 individuals aged 50 to 80 years who currently or previously smoked. Among these, 34 528 had electronic health record data that captured pack-year and quit-date information and were eligible for lung cancer screening according to the 2013 USPSTF recommendations. The 2021 USPSTF recommendations expanded screening eligibility to 18 533 individuals, representing a 53.7% increase. Compared with the 2013 cohort, the newly eligible 2021 population included 5833 individuals (31.5%) aged 50 to 54 years, a larger proportion of women (52.0% [n = 9631]), and more racial or ethnic minority groups. The relative increases in the proportion of newly eligible individuals were 60.6% for Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander; 67.4% for Hispanic; 69.7% for non-Hispanic Black; and 49.0% for non-Hispanic White groups. The relative increase for women was 13.8% higher than for men (61.2% vs 47.4%), and those with a lower comorbidity burden and lower SES had higher relative increases (eg, 68.7% for a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 0; 61.1% for lowest SES). The 2021 recommendations were associated with an estimated 30% increase in incident lung cancer diagnoses compared with the 2013 recommendations. Conclusions and relevance: This cohort study suggests that, in diverse health care systems, adopting the 2021 USPSTF recommendations will increase the number of women, racial and ethnic minority groups, and individuals with lower SES who are eligible for lung cancer screening, thus helping to minimize the barriers to screening access for individuals with high risk for lung cancer.
Lung RADS: Lessons Learned and Strategies for the Optimization of Lung Cancer Screening

Allison Herring,Lydia Chelala,Charles S. White

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13665-023-00325-w

2023-09-18

Current Pulmonology Reports

Abstract:Purpose of ReviewLung cancer screening (LCS) using low-dose chest CT (LDCT) has been shown to decrease lung cancer specific morbidity and mortality (Jonas et al. in JAMA 325(10):971–87, 2021•). We aim to discuss important current and evolving concepts related to LCS, including major updates to the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations and to the lexicon used by radiologists in the reporting of LCS LDCT, the Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS).Recent FindingsThe number of individuals eligible to receive LCS has increased following the latest update to USPSTF recommendations, notably among women, minorities, and individuals of lower socioeconomic status (Ritzwoller et al. in JAMA Netw Open 4(10):e2128176, 2021). Since the inception of LCS programs, emerging evidence has allowed for updates to the Lung-RADS guidelines aimed at optimizing LCS efficiency and addressing various challenging clinical scenarios.SummaryLCS has continually evolved since its debut. Updated guidelines aim at improving outcomes in the at-risk population. Nevertheless, continued efforts focused on increased LCS uptake are needed. Less than 6% of the eligible population is currently enrolled in a LCS program nationwide, while screening programs for breast and colon cancer have participation rates of 60–70% (New Report: Critically Low Lung Cancer Screening Rates Reveal Opportunity to Save More Lives. American Lung Association, 2022; Hall in Prev Chronic Dis 15, 2018).

[Further research on the effect of vitamin K on the respiration and glycolysis of ascites cells of NK lymphoma in white mice].

Brief Report: Understanding Program-Level Impact of COVID-19 in Lung Cancer Screening Programs in the United States

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

Prevalence of USPSTF Recommended Cancer Screenings Among Individuals Eligible For Lung Cancer Screening: An Analysis of the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey

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

Lung cancer incidence, 2019–2020, United States: The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

Characteristics associated with early vs. late adoption of lung cancer screening

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

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

Treatment of facial injuries and deformities.

Patient Adherence to Screening for Lung Cancer in the US

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

Patient-provider Lung Cancer Screening Discussions: An analysis of a National Survey

Disruptions in Lung Cancer Detection During COVID-19

Short-Term Outcomes of COVID-19 Pandemic on Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Screening and Management

Lung cancer screening use among screening‐eligible adults with disabilities

Implementation of an Electronic Medical Record Alert Significantly Increases Lung Cancer Screening Uptake

Lung Cancer Screening in Individuals With and Without Lung-Related Comorbidities

Letter to the Editor in Response to "Adherence to Annual Lung Cancer Screening in a Centralized Academic Program"

Evaluation of Population-Level Changes Associated With the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force Lung Cancer Screening Recommendations in Community-Based Health Care Systems

Lung RADS: Lessons Learned and Strategies for the Optimization of Lung Cancer Screening