Patient adherence to LungRADS recommendations at an academic institution.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18592-e18592
Author(s):  
Yannan Lin ◽  
Tianran Zhang ◽  
William Hsu ◽  
Denise R. Aberle ◽  
Ashley Prosper
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Patient Adherence ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Lung Cancer Screening ◽  
Lung Cancer Mortality ◽  
Adherence Rate ◽  
Tobacco Exposure ◽  
Published Evidence ◽  
Former Smokers

e18592 Background: The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality when screened with low dose computed tomography (LDCT) as opposed to chest radiography. Notably, participants’ adherence to the screening protocol was 90%. To date, published evidence on the adherence of patients enrolled in clinical lung cancer screening (LCS) programs to LungRADS recommendations is limited. We investigate the adherence rate at our institution and determine the predictors of non-adherence to LungRADS recommendations. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis on patients aged 50-80 years at time of baseline screen with initial screening exam at our institution between Jan 1, 2015 and Jan 12, 2021. Patients were excluded if 1) their follow-up period was insufficient to determine adherence as of Jan 28, 2021, 2) the follow-up recommendation was inconsistent with LungRADS guidelines, or 3) they died before the expected follow-up date. Adherence was defined as completion of recommended or more invasive follow-up at our institution within 12 months for LungRADS 0, 15 months for LungRADS 1/2, 9 months for LungRADS 3, 5 months for LungRADS 4A, and 3 months for LungRADS 4B/4X. A univariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of non-adherence. Results: Among the 2120 eligible patients, 1266 (60%) were male and 854 (40%) were female with a median age of 65 at the baseline screen. One thousand four hundred and seventy-seven (70%) patients identified as White, 286 (13%) declared another racial group, and 357 (17%) did not disclose their race. One hundred and nine (5%) patients identified as Hispanic and 165 (8%) patients did not state their ethnicity. There were 1113 (53%) former smokers, 748 (35%) current smokers, and 259 (12%) patients of unspecified smoking status. Median tobacco exposure was 30 pack years (range 0.15 to 240). Fifty-seven percent of patients had private or commercial insurance while 39% had Medicare as primary insurance (3 patients were unspecified). The distribution of baseline LungRADS scores was 0: < 1%, 1: 14%, 2: 71%, 3: 7%, 4A: 4%, 4B: 2%, and 4X: < 1%. Overall adherence was 31% with 0: 38%, 1: 21%, 2: 27%, 3: 46%, 4A: 68%, 4B: 80%, and 4X: 100%. Of the 1463 non-adherent patients, 528 completed a follow-up exam beyond the expected date while 935 did not have any follow-up before the end of the study. Patients who were over 65 at baseline screen (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.11, 1.61), former smokers (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.52), had Medicare insurance (OR = 1.35 95% CI: 1.12, 1.63), or had LungRADS 3/4 (referent: LR 1/2, OR = 4.29, 95% CI: 3.32, 5.55) were more likely to be adherent. Conclusions: Patient adherence to LungRADS recommendations at time of baseline screen in clinical practice is suboptimal, particularly among those with negative screens (LungRADS 1/2), with a non-adherence rate of > 70%. Baseline LungRADS scores, age, smoking status, and insurance are predictive of LCS non-adherence.

scholarly journals Utilizing Lung Cancer Risk Prediction Models to Promote Smoking Cessation: Two Randomized Controlled Trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 1196-1205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frances C. Sherratt ◽  
Michael W. Marcus ◽  
Jude Robinson ◽  
John K. Field
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Risk Model ◽  
Lung Cancer Risk ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Former Smokers

Purpose: The current project sought to examine whether delivery of lung cancer risk projections (calculated using the Liverpool Lung Project [LLP] risk model) predicted follow-up smoking status. Design: Two single-blinded randomized controlled trials. Setting: Stop Smoking Services in Liverpool (United Kingdom). Participants: Baseline current smokers (N = 297) and baseline recent former smokers (N = 216) were recruited. Intervention: Participants allocated to intervention groups were provided with personalized lung cancer risk projections, calculated using the LLP risk model. Measures: Baseline and follow-up questionnaires explored sociodemographics, smoking behavior, and lung cancer risk perceptions. Analysis: Bivariate analyses identified significant differences between randomization groups, and logistic regression models were developed to investigate the intervention effect on the outcome variables. Results: Lung cancer risk projections were not found to predict follow-up smoking status in the trial of baseline current smokers; however, they did predict follow-up smoking status in the trial of baseline recent former smokers (odds ratio: 1.91; 95% confidence interval: 1.03-3.55). Conclusion: The current study suggests that lung cancer risk projections may help maintain abstinence among individuals who have quit smoking, but the results did not provide evidence to suggest that lung cancer risk projections motivate current smokers to quit.

scholarly journals C-Reactive Protein and Risk of Lung Cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (16) ◽  
pp. 2719-2726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anil K. Chaturvedi ◽  
Neil E. Caporaso ◽  
Hormuzd A. Katki ◽  
Hui-Lee Wong ◽  
Nilanjan Chatterjee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Lung Cancer Risk ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Lung Carcinogenesis ◽  
C Reactive Protein ◽  
Baseline Serum ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Former Smokers

Purpose Chronic inflammation could play a role in lung carcinogenesis, underscoring the potential for lung cancer prevention and screening. We investigated the association of circulating high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP, an inflammation biomarker) and CRP single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with prospective lung cancer risk. Patients and Methods We conducted a nested case-control study of 592 lung cancer patients and 670 controls with available prediagnostic serum and 378 patients and 447 controls with DNA within the screening arm of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (N = 77,464). Controls were matched to patients on age, sex, entry year, follow-up time, and smoking. We measured CRP levels in baseline serum samples and genotyped five common CRP SNPs. Results Elevated CRP levels were associated with increased lung cancer risk (odds ratio [OR], 1.98; 95% CI, 1.35 to 2.89; P-trend < .001 for fourth quartile [Q4, ≥ 5.6 mg/L] v Q1 [< 1.0 mg/L]). The CRP association did not differ significantly by histology, follow-up time, or smoking status, but was most apparent for squamous cell carcinomas (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.30 to 6.54), 2 to 5 years before lung cancer diagnosis (OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.39), and among former smokers (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.53 to 4.03) and current smokers (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.06 to 3.41). Although CRP SNPs and haplotypes were associated with CRP levels, they were not associated with lung cancer risk. Ten-year standardized absolute risks of lung cancer were higher with elevated CRP levels among former smokers (Q4: 2.55%; 95% CI, 1.98% to 3.27% v Q1: 1.39%; 95% CI, 1.07% to 1.81%) and current smokers (Q4: 7.37%; 95% CI, 5.81% to 9.33% v Q1: 4.03%; 95% CI, 3.01% to 5.40%). Conclusion Elevated CRP levels are associated with subsequently increased lung cancer risk, suggesting an etiologic role for chronic pulmonary inflammation in lung carcinogenesis.

Factors affecting patient adherence to lung cancer screening: A multisite analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 096914132095078
Author(s):  
Justin T Stowell ◽  
Anand K Narayan ◽  
Gary X Wang ◽  
Florian J Fintelmann ◽  
Efren J Flores ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Patient Adherence ◽  
Lung Cancer Screening ◽  
Smoking History ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Lung Cancers ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Multiple Variable

Objective To identify factors associated with delayed adherence to follow-up in lung cancer screening. Methods Utilizing a data warehouse and lung cancer screening registry, variables were collected from a referred sample of 3110 unique participants with follow-up CT during the study period (1 January 2016 to 17 October 2018). Adherence was defined as undergoing chest CT within 90 days and 30 days of the recommended time for follow-up and was determined using proportions and multiple variable logistic regression models across the American College of Radiology Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS®) categories. Results Of 1954 lung cancer screening participants (51.9% (1014/1954) males, 48.1% (940/1954) female; mean age 65.7 (range 45–87), smoking history median 40 pack-years, 60.2% and 44.5% did not follow-up within 30 and 90 days, respectively. Participants receiving Lung-RADS® category 1 or 2 presented later than those with Lung-RADS® category 3 at 90 days (coefficient −27.24, 95% CI −51.31, −3.16, p = 0.027). Participants with Lung-RADS® category 1 presented later than those with Lung-RADS® category 2 at both 90- and 30-days past due (OR 0.76 95% CI [0.59–0.97], p = 0.029 and OR 0.63 95% CI [0.48–0.83], p = 0.001, respectively). Conclusions Adherence to follow-up was higher among participants receiving more suspicious Lung-RADS® results at index screening CT and among those who had undergone more non-lung cancer screening imaging examinations prior to index lung cancer screening CT. These observations may inform strategies aimed at prospectively identifying participants at risk for delayed or nonadherence to prevent potential morbidity and mortality from incident lung cancers.

scholarly journals Long-Term Follow Up of an Occupational Cohort in Yunnan, People’s Republic of China: 20-Year Postscreening Follow Up and 8-Year Lung Cancer Screening

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 23-23
Author(s):  
Zheng Su ◽  
Meng-Na Wei ◽  
Ya-Guang Fan ◽  
Zhi-Wei Hu ◽  
Jian-Ning Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cancer Mortality ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Lung Cancer Screening ◽  
Lung Cancer Mortality ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China

PURPOSE There is no long-term, population-based cohort screening evidence for lung cancer in China. This study aimed to evaluate whether increased screening rounds could reduce mortality as a result of lung cancer. METHODS We conducted a one-armed, prospective lung cancer screening cohort study with chest radiography and sputum cytology in Yunnan, People’s Republic of China, from 1992 to 1999. A total of 9,295 tin miners age 40 years or older were enrolled in this study and follow up ended on December 31, 2018. We stratified patients into 4 subgroups on the basis of screening rounds—1-2, 3-4, 5-6, or 7-8 rounds within 8 years—and selected 1-2 screening rounds within 8 years as the control group. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the effect of screening rounds on mortality were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS Of participants, 831 (8.9%) were lost to follow up, and 4,517 patients died, 1,600 from cancer (1,135 from lung cancer), 1,519 from circulatory system diseases, and 619 from respiratory diseases. Participants who received 7-8 screening rounds within 8 years had reduced lung cancer mortality by 46% (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.63 in all age groups. For those who received 5-6 screening rounds within 8 years, the benefit of reduction was mostly observed in patients older than age 52 years (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.77), and there was no effect among those age 52 years or younger (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.07). In contrast, only for those patients age 52 years or younger did 3-4 screening rounds within 8 years decrease mortality from lung cancer (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.87). CONCLUSION We showed that increased screening rounds could reduce lung cancer mortality in a high-risk population, but the effect is influenced by age group. The optimal screening strategy for different age groups needs additional investigation.

Completion of lung cancer screening after a baseline order for LDCT at five diverse health systems.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10506-10506
Author(s):  
Christine Neslund-Dudas ◽  
Amy Tang ◽  
Elizabeth Alleman ◽  
Jennifer Elston Lafata ◽  
Stacey A. Honda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Health System ◽  
Black Men ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Lung Cancer Screening ◽  
Smoking History ◽  
Former Smokers

10506 Background: In 2014 and 2015, the Affordable Care Act required coverage of, and CMS began reimbursing for lung cancer screening (LCS). Previous studies have shown that when new screening tests or treatments become available, disparities in disease outcomes often increase due to those with fewer resources having less access and greater barriers to care. African American men have historically had higher incidence of and death due to lung cancer than white males in the U.S., raising concerns regarding access to LCS and the potential for increases in disparities in lung cancer. We aimed to determine whether individual or neighborhood level factors were associated with completion of a baseline screening after an order for LCS low dose CT (LDCT) was placed. Methods: In a retrospective study conducted within the five health systems of the Lung Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR) Consortium, we determined adherence to baseline LDCT after a health care provider placed an order for LCS (January 2014 through June 2019). Follow-up was available through September 2019. Patients of interest for this analysis were current or former smokers, age 55 to 80 with a 30+ pack-year smoking history. Smoking history and other individual level variables were determined through electronic medical records. Neighborhood factors were derived from the 2010 Census and multivariable logistic regression was used. Results: Of the 13,920 patients that had at least one order for a baseline LCS exam, 14.1% were non-Hispanic Black, 70.3% were non-Hispanic White, and 15.7% were of other or unknown race. Overall, 61.2% of patients completed a LDCT within 90 days and 71.9% completed a scan by the end of follow-up. Completion of a baseline scan differed by health system (LDCT at 90-days, range 51% - 84%, p<0.0001) and increased in general across scan year (range 49.1%-66.0%, p <0.001). In multivariate logistic regression models, males (aOR=1.15, 95% CI 1.07-1.23, p=<0.0001), former smokers (aOR=1.31, 95% CI 1.21-1.40, p <0.0001), and those with a prior history of any cancer (aOR=1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.32, p=0.03) were more likely to complete LDCT. Blacks were marginally less likely to have completed a baseline LDCT (aOR=0.90, 95% CI 0.81-1.00, p=0.06) within 90 days of an order. Sex modified the associations of race on completion of orders (p=0.08) (Black men aOR=0.81, 95% CI 0.70-0.94, p=0.006 ; Black women aOR=0.99, 95% CI 0.86-1.14, p=0.89). Conclusions: This multisite study indicates Black men in particular may have a lower likelihood of completing a baseline LCS after an order for screening is placed. As lung cancer screening programs move forward, attention should be given to factors associated with reduced uptake and adherence of screening to ensure disparities in lung cancer outcomes do not persist and increase. Provider and health system factors that may impact LCS uptake should be explored in future studies.

Community-based lung cancer screening adherence to Lung-RADS recommendations.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10540-10540
Author(s):  
Roger Kim ◽  
Katharine A. Rendle ◽  
Christine Neslund-Dudas ◽  
Robert T. Greenlee ◽  
Andrea N. Burnett-Hartman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Family Income ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Lung Cancer Screening ◽  
System Level ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Former Smokers

10540 Background: In the NLST and NELSON trials, most low-dose CT (LDCT) screen-detected lung cancers were not diagnosed during the first round of screening, suggesting that longitudinal adherence to lung cancer screening (LCS) recommendations is key. Adherence was as high as 95% in clinical trials, but limited data exist regarding LCS adherence in clinical practice. We aimed to determine adherence to Lung-RADS recommendations among community-based patients undergoing LCS. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients screened for lung cancer at healthcare systems within the Lung Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR) Consortium. We included 55-80 year-old current or former smokers who received a baseline (T0) LDCT with a Lung-RADS score between January 1, 2015 and September 30, 2017 and excluded patients who were diagnosed with lung cancer prior to the T0 scan. Over a 24-month period, we calculated the proportion of patients adherent to Lung-RADS recommendations and evaluated associations with patient-level (age, sex, race, ethnicity, smoking status, body mass index, Elixhauser comorbidities, year of T0 scan, and Lung-RADS score) and census tract (median family income, level of education) data, using multivariable logistic regression with mixed effects to account for site variability. Results: Of the 6,723 patients in our cohort (median age 65 years [IQR 60-69]; 45.1% female; 73.0% white; 59.0% current smokers), 5,583 (83.0%) had Lung-RADS 1 or 2 T0 scans, 733 (10.9%) Lung-RADS 3, 274 (4.1%) Lung-RADS 4A, and 133 (2.0%) Lung-RADS 4B or 4X. Overall, 55.2% (3,709/6,723) of patients were adherent (Table). In the final multivariable model, Black patients had reduced adherence compared to white patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.94), while greater adherence was observed in former smokers compared to current smokers (aOR 1.33, 95% 1.19-1.49). Compared to individuals with a negative T0 scan (Lung-RADS 1 or 2), those with Lung-RADS 3 (aOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.31-1.86), 4A (aOR 1.63, 95% CI 1.24-2.15), or 4B/4X (aOR 3.59, 95% CI 2.30-5.60) T0 scans had greater odds of adherence. Conclusions: In the largest study of real-world patients receiving LCS to date, adherence to Lung-RADS recommendations is lower than previously observed in clinical trials. Our results highlight the need for further study of system-level mechanisms to improve longitudinal LCS adherence rates.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Self-reported and cotinine-verified smoking and increased risk of incident hearing loss

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Woncheol Lee ◽  
Yoosoo Chang ◽  
Hocheol Shin ◽  
Seungho Ryu
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Status ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Urinary Cotinine ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Former Smokers ◽  
Never Smokers ◽  
Time Varying Covariates ◽  
New Onset

AbstractWe examined the associations of smoking status and urinary cotinine levels, an objective measure of smoking, with the development of new-onset HL. This cohort study was performed in 293,991 Korean adults free of HL who underwent a comprehensive screening examination and were followed for up to 8.8 years. HL was defined as a pure-tone average of thresholds at 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 kHz ≥ 25 dB in both ears. During a median follow-up of 4.9 years, 2286 participants developed new-onset bilateral HL. Self-reported smoking status was associated with an increased risk of new-onset bilateral HL. Multivariable-adjusted HRs (95% CIs) for incident HL comparing former smokers and current smokers to never-smokers were 1.14 (1.004–1.30) and 1.40 (1.21–1.61), respectively. Number of cigarettes, pack-years, and urinary cotinine levels were consistently associated with incident HL. These associations were similarly observed when introducing changes in smoking status, urinary cotinine, and other confounders during follow-up as time-varying covariates. In this large cohort of young and middle-aged men and women, smoking status based on both self-report and urinary cotinine level were independently associated with an increased incidence of bilateral HL. Our findings indicate smoking is an independent risk factor for HL.

scholarly journals ELIGIBILITY FOR LOW-DOSE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY LUNG CANCER SCREENING IN OLDER ASIAN AMERICAN SMOKERS

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S189-S189
Author(s):  
Chien-Ching Li ◽  
Kelsey Choi ◽  
Alicia Matthews ◽  
Raj Shah
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Asian American ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Lung Cancer Screening ◽  
Lung Cancer Mortality ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Low Dose Computed Tomography

Abstract Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in Asian Americans. Low-dose computed tomography lung cancer (LDCT) screening is an effective way to decrease lung cancer mortality. This study aimed to examine the difference in LDCT screening eligibility among Asian American subgroups. The National Health Interview Survey data (2006-2016) was analyzed. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guideline was used to determine the LDCT eligibility. A higher and statistically significant proportion of current Filipino smokers (35.4%) met LDCT screening eligibility criteria compared to Chinese (26.5%) and other Asian smokers (22.7%) (p=0.02). Hierarchical logistic regression results further showed that Filipino were more likely to meet LDCT screening criteria than other Asian while adjusting demographics (OR=1.87; p=0.01). The differences in LDCT screening eligibility no longer existed after additionally adjusting socioeconomic factors as well as perceived health status. Future targeted outreach and intervention research is needed for Filipinos with lower socioeconomic status.

scholarly journals Impact of 5-Year Endoscopic Surveillance Intervals with Biopsy following Endoscopic Papillectomy for Ampullary Adenoma

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
Hoonsub So ◽  
Sung Woo Ko ◽  
Seung Hwan Shin ◽  
Eun Ha Kim ◽  
Do Hyun Park
Keyword(s):  
Patient Adherence ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Endoscopic Biopsy ◽  
Endoscopic Surveillance ◽  
Adherence Rate ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Ampullary Adenoma ◽  
Endoscopic Papillectomy ◽  
Routine Biopsy

Background: Endoscopic snare papillectomy (ESP) has been established as a safe and effective treatment for ampullary adenomas. However, little is known about the optimal post-procedure follow-up period and the role of routine endoscopic surveillance biopsy following ESP. We aimed to evaluate patient adherence to a 5-year endoscopic surveillance and routine biopsy protocol after ESP of ampullary adenoma. Methods: We reviewed our prospectively collected database (n = 98), all members of which underwent ESP for ampullary lesions from January 2011 to December 2016, for the evaluation of long-term outcomes. The primary outcome was the rate of patient adherence to 5-year endoscopic surveillance following ESP. The secondary outcomes were the diagnostic yield of routine endoscopic biopsy, recurrence rate, and adverse events after endoscopic surveillance in the 5-year follow-up (3-month, 6-month, and every 1 year). Results: A total of 19 patients (19.4%) experienced recurrence during follow-up, all of these patients experienced recurrence within 3 years of the procedure (median 217 days, range 69–1083). The adherence rate for patients with sporadic ampullary adenoma were 100%, 93.5%, and 33.6% at 1, 3, and 5 years after ESP, respectively. The diagnostic yield of routine endoscopic biopsy without macroscopic abnormality was 0.54%. Pancreatitis occurred in four patients (4%, 3 mild, 1 moderate) after surveillance endoscopic biopsy without macroscopic abnormality. Conclusions: Given the low 5-year adherence rate and diagnostic yield of routine endoscopic biopsy with risk of pancreatitis, optimal surveillance intervals according to risk stratification (low grade vs. high grade adenoma/intramucosal adenocarcinoma) may be required to improve patient adherence, and routine biopsy without macroscopic abnormality may not be recommended.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document