Performance of a low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening program: Findings from a registry study.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 304-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernardo Goulart ◽  
David Madtes ◽  
Lisel Koepl ◽  
Andrew Karnopp ◽  
Judy Ann Nelson ◽  
...  

304 Background: Many centers are establishing LDCT lung cancer screening programs after the 2013 grade B recommendation from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Uncertainty remains regarding the extent to which new programs will adhere to recommended selection criteria, as well as screening program performance. We analyzed adherence to selection criteria, rate of positive screens, and prevalence of incidental findings in a single-center LDCT screening registry study. Methods: We established a prospective, longitudinal registry study of patients undergoing LDCT screening at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance. Baseline data include socio-demographic characteristics and eligibility for LDCT screening. We conduct chart reviews at 6 and 12 months to determine screening results (based on NLST definitions); lung cancer diagnosis; and incidental findings. Results: From August 2012 to April 2014, 62 out of 105 (59%) screened patients enrolled in the registry. Mean age is 62 years; 38 (61%) are male; 52 (84%) are white; mean household income is $97,363; 31 (50%) are current smokers; and 39 (63%) have a smoking history ≥ 30 pack-years. A total of 28 (45%), 31 (50%), and 31 (50%) of patients were eligible for screening based on criteria used in the NLST or recommended by the NCCN or USPSTF guidelines, respectively. Sixteen patients (26%) were not eligible for screening based on any of these criteria. For fourteen (88%) of these patients, LDCT screening was ordered by a primary care provider as opposed to a lung cancer specialist. Initial screening results were positive in 7 (13%) patients, with 1 patient diagnosed with lung cancer. At least one incidental finding was reported in 40 (74%) patients, including cardiac and pulmonary abnormalities in 28 (70%) and 25 (63%) patients. Conclusions: About one quarter of patients undergoing LDCT screening do not meet recommended criteria, with primary care providers most commonly ordering the LDCT screen for these patients. Primary care provider education may improve adherence to screening guidelines. Incidental findings were more frequently reported than in the NLST; their impact on healthcare outcomes and costs deserves further investigation.

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 1977-1982 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeti M. Kanodra ◽  
Charlene Pope ◽  
Chanita H. Halbert ◽  
Gerard A. Silvestri ◽  
LaShanta J. Rice ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 205510291881916 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret M Byrne ◽  
Sarah E Lillie ◽  
Jamie L Studts

We describe the characteristics of individuals being screened in community settings including factors influencing screening decisions and the level of information sought prior to screening. Individuals from two community-based radiology clinics ( N = 27) were surveyed after screening. Screening efficacy and salience were the most important factors in screening decisions, whereas healthcare provider recommendations were rated not important. Half of participants reported no or little conversation about screening with their primary care provider, and 61.5 percent had not sought any information on screening. Individuals being screened in a community setting are unlikely to have sufficient information for an informed decision about screening.


Radiographics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 1893-1908 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian J. Fintelmann ◽  
Adam Bernheim ◽  
Subba R. Digumarthy ◽  
Inga T. Lennes ◽  
Mannudeep K. Kalra ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document