Lung Cancer Screening in Clinical Practice: A 5-Year Review of Frequency and Predictors of Lung Cancer in the Screened Population.

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to evaluate (1) frequency, type, and lung cancer stage in a clinical lung cancer screening (LCS) population and (2) the association between patient characteristics and Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System (Lung-RADS®) with lung cancer diagnosis. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled individuals undergoing LCS between January 1, 2015, and June 30, 2020. Individuals' sociodemographic characteristics, Lung-RADS scores, pathology-proven lung cancers, and tumor characteristics were determined via electronic health record and the health system's tumor registry. Associations between the outcome of lung cancer diagnosis within 1 year after LCS and covariates of sociodemographic characteristics and Lung-RADS score were determined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 3,326 individuals undergoing 5,150 LCS examinations, 102 (3.1%) were diagnosed with lung cancer within 1 year of LCS; most of these cancers were screen detected (97 of 102 [95.1%]). Over the study period, there were 118 total LCS-detected cancers in 113 individuals (3.4%). Most LCS-detected cancers were adenocarcinomas (62 of 118 [52%]), 55.9% (65 of 118) were stage I, and 16.1% (19 of 118) were stage IV. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of Lung-RADS in diagnosing lung cancer within 1 year of LCS were 93.1%, 83.8%, 10.6%, and 99.8%, respectively. On multivariable analysis controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, only Lung-RADS score was associated with lung cancer (odds ratio for a one-unit increase in Lung-RADS score, 4.68; 95% confidence interval, 3.87-5.78). CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of LCS-detected lung cancer and stage IV cancers was higher than reported in the National Lung Screening Trial. Although Lung-RADS was a significant predictor of lung cancer, the positive predictive value of Lung-RADS is relatively low, implying opportunity for improved nodule classification.

Historical Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening.

Lung cancer represents a large burden on society with a staggering incidence and mortality rate that has steadily increased until recently. The impetus to design an effective screening program for the deadliest cancer in the United States and worldwide began in 1950. It has taken more than 50 years of numerous clinical trials and continued persistence to arrive at the development of modern-day screening program. As the program continues to grow, it is important for clinicians to understand its evolution, track outcomes, and continually assess the impact and bias of screening on the medical, social, and economic systems.

Image quality of photon counting and energy integrating chest CT - Prospective head-to-head comparison on same patients.

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the image quality of high-resolution, low-dose photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT) with standard energy-integrating-detector CT (EID) on the same patients. METHOD: IRB-approved, prospective study; patients received same-day non-contrast CT on EID and PCD-CT (NAEOTOM Alpha, blinded) with clinical protocols. Four blinded radiologists evaluated subsegmental bronchial wall definition, noise, and overall image quality in randomized order (0 = worst; 100 = best). Cases were quantitatively compared using the average Global-Noise-Index (GNI), Noise-Power-Spectrum average frequency (fav), NPS frequency-peak (fpeak), Task-Transfer-Function-10%-frequency (f10) an adjusted detectability index (d'adj), and applied output radiation doses (CTDIvol). RESULTS: Sixty patients were prospectively imaged (27 men, mean age 67 ± 10 years, mean BMI 27.9 ± 6.5, 15.9-49.4 kg/m2). Subsegmental wall definition was rated significantly better for PCD-CT than EID (mean 71 [56-87] vs 60 [45-76]; P < 0.001), noise was rated higher for PCD-CT (48 [26-69] vs 34 [13-56]; P < 0.001). Overall image quality was rated significantly higher for PCD-CT than EID (66 [48-85] vs 61 [42-79], P = 0.008). Automated image quality measures showed similar differences for PCD-CT vs EID (mean GNI 70 ± 19 HU vs 26 ± 8 HU, fav 0.35 ± 0.02 vs 0.25 ± 0.02 mm-1, fpeak 0.07 ± 0.01 vs 0.09 ± 0.03 mm-1, f10 0.7 ± 0.08 vs 0.6 ± 0.1 mm-1, all p-values < 0.001). PCD-CT showed a 10% average d'adj increase (-49% min, 233% max). PCD-CT studies were acquired at significantly lower radiation doses than EID (mean CTDIvol 4.5 ± 2.1 vs 7.7 ± 3.2 mGy, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Though PCD-CT had higher measured and perceived noise, it offered equivalent or better diagnostic quality compared to EID at lower radiation doses, due to its improved resolution.

The Impact of Downstream Procedures on Lung Cancer Screening Adherence.

OBJECTIVE: (1) Evaluate downstream procedures after lung cancer screening (LCS), including imaging and invasive procedures, in screened individuals without screen-detected lung cancer. (2) Determine the association between repeat LCS and downstream procedures and patient characteristics. METHODS: Individuals receiving LCS between January 1, 2015, and November 30, 2020, from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database were included. Individuals with lung cancer after LCS were excluded. We determined frequency and costs of downstream procedures after LCS, including diagnostic imaging (chest CT, PET, or CT using fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose imaging) and invasive procedures (bronchoscopy, needle biopsy, thoracic surgery). A generalized estimating equation was used to model repeat LCS as a function of downstream procedures and patient characteristics. The primary outcome was repeat screening within 1 year of index LCS, and a secondary analysis evaluated the outcome of repeat screening with 2 years of index LCS. RESULTS: In all, 23,640 individuals receiving 30,521 LCS examinations were included in the primary analysis; 17.7% of LCS examinations (5,414 of 30,521) prompted downstream testing, with chest CT within 4 months being most common (9.1%, 2,769 of 30,521). At multivariable analysis adjusted for patient characteristics, the occurrence of a downstream diagnostic imaging test or invasive procedure was associated with a decreased likelihood of repeat annual LCS (adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.38, 0.34-0.44; adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.75, 0.63-0.90, respectively). DISCUSSION: Downstream imaging and invasive procedures after LCS are potential barriers to LCS adherence. Efforts to reduce false-positives at LCS and reduce patient costs from downstream procedures are likely necessary to ensure that downstream workup after LCS does not discourage screening adherence.

Significant Incidental Findings in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Importance: Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung screening has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality. Significant incidental findings (SIFs) have been widely reported in patients undergoing LDCT lung screening. However, the exact nature of these SIF findings has not been described. Objective: To describe SIFs reported in the LDCT arm of the National Lung Screening Trial and classify SIFs as reportable or not reportable to the referring clinician (RC) using the American College of Radiology's white papers on incidental findings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective case series study of 26 455 participants in the National Lung Screening Trial who underwent at least 1 screening examination with LDCT. The trial was conducted from 2002 to 2009, and data were collected at 33 US academic medical centers. Main Outcomes and Measures: Significant incident findings were defined as a final diagnosis of a negative screen result with significant abnormalities that were not suspicious for lung cancer or a positive screen result with emphysema, significant cardiovascular abnormality, or significant abnormality above or below the diaphragm. Results: Of 26 455 participants, 10 833 (41.0%) were women, the mean (SD) age was 61.4 (5.0) years, and there were 1179 (4.5%) Black, 470 (1.8%) Hispanic/Latino, and 24 123 (91.2%) White individuals. Participants were scheduled to undergo 3 screenings during the course of the trial; the present study included 75 126 LDCT screening examinations performed for 26 455 participants. A SIF was reported for 8954 (33.8%) of 26 455 participants who were screened with LDCT. Of screening tests with a SIF detected, 12 228 (89.1%) had a SIF considered reportable to the RC, with a higher proportion of reportable SIFs among those with a positive screen result for lung cancer (7632 [94.1%]) compared with those with a negative screen result (4596 [81.8%]). The most common SIFs reported included emphysema (8677 [43.0%] of 20 156 SIFs reported), coronary artery calcium (2432 [12.1%]), and masses or suspicious lesions (1493 [7.4%]). Masses included kidney (647 [3.2%]), liver (420 [2.1%]), adrenal (265 [1.3%]), and breast (161 [0.8%]) abnormalities. Classification was based on free-text comments; 2205 of 13 299 comments (16.6%) could not be classified. The hierarchical reporting of final diagnosis in NLST may have been associated with an overestimate of severe emphysema in participants with a positive screen result for lung cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: This case series study found that SIFs were commonly reported in the LDCT arm of the National Lung Screening Trial, and most of these SIFs were considered reportable to the RC and likely to require follow-up. Future screening trials should standardize SIF reporting.

Socioeconomic disparities in immunotherapy use among advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients: analysis of the National Cancer Database.

Socioeconomic and racial disparities exist in access to care among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the United States. Immunotherapy is a widely established treatment modality for patients with advanced-stage NSCLC (aNSCLC). We examined associations of area-level socioeconomic status with receipt of immunotherapy for aNSCLC patients by race/ethnicity and cancer facility type (academic and non-academic). We used the National Cancer Database (2015-2016), and included patients aged 40-89 years who were diagnosed with stage III-IV NSCLC. Area-level income was defined as the median household income in the patient's zip code, and area-level education was defined as the proportion of adults aged ≥ 25 years in the patient's zip code without a high school degree. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using multi-level multivariable logistic regression. Among 100,298 aNSCLC patients, lower area-level education and income were associated with lower odds of immunotherapy treatment (education: aOR 0.71; 95% CI 0.65, 0.76 and income: aOR 0.71; 95% CI 0.66, 0.77). These associations persisted for NH-White patients. However, among NH-Black patients, we only observed an association with lower education (aOR 0.74; 95% CI 0.57, 0.97). Across all cancer facility types, lower education and income were associated with lower immunotherapy receipt among NH-White patients. However, among NH-Black patients, this association only persisted with education for patients treated at non-academic facilities (aOR 0.70; 95% CI 0.49, 0.99). In conclusion, aNSCLC patients residing in areas of lower educational and economic wealth were less likely to receive immunotherapy.

Repeat Annual Lung Cancer Screening After Baseline Screening Among Screen-Negative Individuals: No-Cost Coverage Is Not Enough.

PURPOSE: Adherence to lung cancer screening (LCS) is central to effective screening. The authors evaluated the likelihood of repeat annual LCS in a national commercially insured population and associations with individual characteristics, insurance characteristics, and annual out-of-pocket cost (OOPC) burden. METHODS: Using claims data from an employer-insured population (Clinformatics), individuals 55 to 80 years of age undergoing LCS between January 1, 2015, to September 30, 2019, with "negative" LCS were included. Repeat LCS was defined as low-dose chest CT occurring 10 to 15 months after the preceding LCS. Analysis was conducted over a 6-year period. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between repeat LCS and individual characteristics, insurance characteristics, and total OOPC incurred by the individual in the year of the index LCS, even if unrelated to LCS. RESULTS: Of 14,943 individuals with negative LCS, 4,561 (30.5%) underwent repeat LCS. Likelihood of repeat LCS was decreased for men (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.97), Hispanic ethnicity (aOR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.97), and indemnity insurance plans (aOR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.25-0.53). Relative to New England, individuals in nearly all US geographic regions were less likely to undergo repeat LCS. Finally, individuals with total OOPC in the highest two quartiles were less likely to undergo repeat LCS (aOR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.77-0.92] for OOPC >$1,069.02-$2,475.09 vs $0-$351.82; aOR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.68-0.82] for OOPC >$2,475.09 vs $0-$351.82). CONCLUSIONS: Although federal policies facilitate LCS without cost sharing, individuals incurring high OOPC, even when unrelated to LCS, are less likely to undergo repeat LCS. Future policy design should consider the permeative burden of OOPC across the health continuum on preventive services use.

Coronary Artery Calcium Evaluation Using New Generation Photon-counting Computed Tomography Yields Lower Radiation Dose Compared With Standard Computed Tomography.

ABSTRACT: Prospective head-to-head comparison of coronary calcium scores between standard computed tomography (CT) and photon-counting CT show no significant differences, while photon-counting CT administers substantially lower radiation dose.

Racial and ethnic inequities of palliative care use among advanced Non-Small cell lung cancer patients in the US.

BACKGROUND: With early intervention, palliative care (PC) can improve quality of life and increase survival among advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer (aNCSLC) patients. However, PC is often offered late in the cancer treatment course and is underused. We characterized racial/ethnic inequities and the role of healthcare access in PC use among patients with aNSCLC. METHODS: We used data from the 2004-2016 National Cancer Database, including adults aged 18-90 years with aNSCLC (stage 3 or 4 at diagnosis; n = 803,618). Based on the NCCN guidelines, PC includes non-curative surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, pain management, or any combination of non-curative care. We examined PC use by sociodemographic and health care-level characteristics. To evaluate the independent associations of race/ethnicity and health care access characteristics with PC, we estimated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Covariate adjustment sets varied by exposure determined using directed acyclic graphs. RESULTS: Our population was 55% male and 77% non-Hispanic/Latinx (NH)-White, with a mean age of 68 years. Overall, 19% of patients with aNSCLC used PC. Compared to NH-White patients, NH-Black (aOR:0.91,95% CI:0.89-0.93) and Hispanic/Latinx (aOR:0.80,95% CI:0.77-0.83) patients were less likely to use PC, whereas Indigenous (AI/AN) (aOR:1.18,95% CI:1.06-1.31) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (aOR:2.08,95% CI:1.83-2.36) patients were more likely. Overall, compared to the privately-insured, uninsured (aOR:1.19,95% CI:1.11-1.28) and Medicaid-insured patients (aOR:1.19,95% CI:1.14-1.25) were more likely to use PC. CONCLUSION: PC is underutilized among NH-Black and Hispanic/Latinx patients with aNSCLC. Insurance type may play a role in PC use among patients with aNSCLC.

Prospective Multisite Cohort Study to Evaluate Shared Decision-Making Utilization Among Individuals Screened for Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the frequency, components of, and factors associated with shared decision-making (SDM) discussions according to electronic health record (EHR) documentation among individuals undergoing lung cancer screening (LCS). METHODS: A prospective observational cohort study was conducted of individuals undergoing LCS between February 2015 and June 2020 at four LCS centers. The primary outcome was EHR-documented SDM, defined using Medicare-designated components. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to examine predictors of EHR-documented SDM. A secondary outcome was agreement of individual's self-report of SDM and EHR-documented SDM, evaluated using Cohen's κ statistic. RESULTS: Among screened individuals, 41.9% (243 of 580) had EHR-documented SDM, and 71.1% (295 of 415) had self-reported SDM. Decision aids were used in 55.6% of EHR-documented SDM encounters (135 of 243), and 21.8% of documented SDM encounters (53 of 243) included all Medicare-designated components. SDM was documented more frequently in individuals with body mass index ≥ 25 versus <25 kg/m2 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-2.52) and in currently versus formerly smoking individuals (aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.02-2.32). Nonpulmonary referring clinicians were less likely to document SDM than pulmonary clinicians (internal medicine: aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18-0.53; family medicine: aOR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.04-0.14; other specialties: aOR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.03-0.21). In a subset of 415 individuals, there was little agreement between individual self-report of SDM and EHR-documented SDM (κ = 0.184), with variation in agreement on the basis of referring clinician specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Although EHR-documented SDM occurred in fewer than half of individuals undergoing LCS, self-reported SDM rates were higher, suggesting that SDM may be underdocumented in the EHR. In addition, EHR-documented SDM was more likely in individuals with higher body mass index and those referred for LCS by pulmonary clinicians. These findings indicate areas for improvement in the implementation and documentation of SDM.

Total and Out-of-Pocket Costs of Procedures After Lung Cancer Screening in a National Commercially Insured Population: Estimating an Episode of Care.

OBJECTIVE: Consequences of lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose chest CT in clinical settings, including procedures, costs, and complications, are incompletely understood. We evaluated downstream invasive procedures after LCS, total and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs of these procedures, and correlates of procedural rates and costs. METHODS: Using the Clinformatics Data Mart, we retrospectively included patients between ages 55 and 79 years receiving LCS between 2015 and 2017. The types and frequency of downstream invasive procedures (including needle biopsy, bronchoscopy, surgery, and cytology) were described. Treating the LCS examination and downstream procedures as a single LCS episode, we described the per-episode total costs (insurance reimbursement + OOP costs of LCS and downstream procedures) and OOP costs. Correlates of costs were determined using linear and logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 6,268 patients received at least one low-dose chest CT; 462 patients (7.4%) received at least one procedure within 12 months after LCS (needle biopsy 69.0%, cytology 23.6%, bronchoscopy 18.6%, surgery 23.8%). Women and patients ≥65 years were more likely to receive a downstream procedure. Ninety-three patients (20.1%) were diagnosed with lung cancer after LCS. The total cost of managing this population of lung screeners was $5,060,511.04, with an average per-episode total cost of $740.06. The aggregate OOP costs to this population of lung screeners was $427,069.74, with an average per-episode OOP cost of $62.46. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of invasive procedures after LCS in a commercially insured population exceeded those of clinical trials. Considering LCS and associated downstream procedures as an episode of care results in modest OOP cost.

Racial Differences in Survival Among Advanced-stage Non-small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Who Received Immunotherapy: An Analysis of the US National Cancer Database (NCDB).

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death among men and women in the United States, with significant racial disparities in survival. It is unclear whether these disparities persist upon equal utilization of immunotherapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between race and all-cause mortality among non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who received immunotherapy. We obtained data from the 2016 National Cancer Database on patients diagnosed with advanced-stage (III-IV) NSCLC from 2015 to 2016. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) by race/ethnicity. A total of 2940 patients were included. Non-Hispanic (NH)-Black patients had a lower risk of death relative to NH-White patients (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.98) after adjusting for sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment factors. Formal tests of interaction evaluating race with Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score and race with area-level median income were nonsignificant. However, in stratified analyses, NH-Black versus NH-White patients had a lower risk of death in models adjusted for sociodemographic factors among those with at least 1 comorbidity (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.57, 0.97), and those living in regions within the 2 lowest quartiles of median income (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.99). Among advanced-stage NSCLC patients who received immunotherapy, NH-Black patients experienced higher survival compared with NH-White patients. We urge the implementation of policies and interventions that seek to equalize access to care as a means of addressing differences in overall NSCLC survival by race.

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

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.

Immunotherapy Utilization Among Patients With Metastatic NSCLC: Impact of Comorbidities.

In patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), the extent to which immunotherapy utilization rate varies by comorbidities is unclear. Using the National Cancer Database from 2015 to 2016, we assessed the association between levels of comorbidity and immunotherapy utilization among mNSCLC patients. Burden of comorbidities was ascertained based on the modified Charlson-Deyo score and categorized as an ordinal variable (0, 1, and ≥2). Immunotherapy utilization was determined based on registry data. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the comorbidity score while adjusting for sociodemographic factors, histopathologic subtype, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, insurance, facility type, and other cancer history. Subgroup analyses were conducted by age and race/ethnicity. Overall, of the 89,030 patients with mNSCLC, 38.6% (N=34,382) had the comorbidity score of ≥1. Most patients were non-Hispanic white (82.3%, N=73,309) and aged 65 years and above (63.2%, N=56,300), with the mean age of 68.4 years (SD=10.6). Only 7.0% (N=6220) of patients received immunotherapy during 2015-2106. Patients with a comorbidity score of ≥2 had a significantly lower rate of immunotherapy utilization versus those without comorbidities (aOR=0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93; P-trend<0.01). In subgroup analysis by age, association patterns were similar among patients younger than 65 and those aged 65-74 years. There were no significant differences in subgroup analysis by race/ethnicity, although statistical significance was only observed for white patients (comorbidity score ≥2 vs. 0: aOR=0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.93; P-trend<0.01). In conclusion, mNSCLC patients with a high burden of comorbidities are less likely to receive immunotherapy.

Cardiovascular Risk in the Lung Cancer Screening Population: A Multicenter Study Evaluating the Association Between Coronary Artery Calcification and Preventive Statin Prescription.

OBJECTIVE: Coronary artery calcification (CAC) is a marker of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), the leading cause of death in individuals receiving lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT. Our purpose was to determine the proportion of the LCS population eligible for primary ASCVD preventive statin therapy by American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, assess statin prescription rates among statin-eligible individuals, and determine associations of CAC on downstream statin prescribing within 90 days of LCS. METHODS: Individuals receiving LCS between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018, across three centers were retrospectively enrolled. Statin eligibility in individuals without pre-existing ASCVD was determined by 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines: (1) low-density lipoprotein ≥190 mg/dL, (2) diabetes, or (3) ASCVD risk score ≥7.5%. CAC presence and severity (mild, moderate, heavy) were extracted from LCS reports. Variation in statin prescription rates and associations between CAC and statin prescription were determined using mixed-effects logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 5,495 individuals receiving LCS, 31.4% (1,724 of 5,495) had pre-existing ASCVD. Of the remaining 3,771 individuals, 73.6% were statin eligible (2,777 of 3,771). However, most lacked statin prescription (60.5%, 1,681 of 2,777). CAC was associated with downstream statin prescribing (adjusted odds ratio = 2.60, 95% confidence interval: 1.12-6.02), with a higher likelihood of statin prescribing with increasing CAC severity (adjusted odds ratio = 2.21, 95% confidence interval: 1.35-3.60). CONCLUSION: Although most of the LCS population is eligible for guideline-directed statin therapy, statins are underprescribed in this group. Radiologist reporting of CAC at LCS reflects a potential opportunity to raise awareness of ASCVD risk and improve preventive statin prescribing.

Changes in Current Procedural Terminology Coding and Its Effect on Specialty-Level Utilization of Musculoskeletal Ultrasound.

PURPOSE: Concerns regarding increasing utilization of non-vascular extremity ultrasound (US) imaging led to the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) Editorial Panel separating a singular billing code into distinct comprehensive and focused examination codes with differential reimbursement. We explore this policy change's temporal association with utilization. METHODS: Using Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files, we identified all nonvascular extremity US services billed for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries between 1994 and 2017. These included generic (CPT code 76880 from 1994 to 2010), complete (code 76881 from 2011 to 2017), and limited (code 76882 from 2011 to 2017) examinations. Annual utilization per 100,000 beneficiaries was computed and stratified by billing specialty. Compound annual growth rates were calculated. RESULTS: Radiologists and podiatrists were the top 2 billing specialties for nonvascular extremity US examinations. From 1994 to 2010, radiologist services increased 6.1% annually. Following the 2011 code separation, radiologists' utilization increased 2.7% annually for complete and 12.3% for limited exams. Between 1994 and 2017, radiologists' market share decreased 72.8% to 40.4%. From 1994 to 2010, podiatrist services increased 87.1% annually. Following the code separation, podiatrists' annual utilization growth stabilized 0.4% for complete and 0.6% for limited exams. Podiatrists' market share was 9.1% in 2001, peaked at 31.3% in 2009, and declined to 14.3% in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Prior rapid growth in extremity nonvascular US for podiatrists slowed considerably following CPT code separation in 2011. Subsequent service growth has largely been related to less costly, focused examinations performed by radiologists. Further study may help better understand how CPT coding changes alter imaging utilization more broadly.

Utilization of Lung Cancer Screening in the Medicare Fee-for-Service Population.

BACKGROUND: A number of organizations, including the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), recommend lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT (LDCT) imaging for high-risk current and former smokers. In 2015, Medicare issued a decision to cover LCS as a preventive health benefit; however, utilization by the Medicare population has not been thoroughly examined. RESEARCH QUESTION: Our objective was to evaluate the early use of LCS in the Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) population and determine the relationship(s) among beneficiary sociodemographic characteristics, geographic location, and use. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study used 100% Medicare FFS claims files for Medicare beneficiaries receiving LCS between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016. We estimated the LCS-eligible Medicare population using population and smoking data from the US Census Bureau and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We assessed variation in LCS rates by beneficiary characteristics and geography, using univariate and multivariate regression, the latter also including how interactions between geographic location and race/ethnicity influence screening. RESULTS: A total of 103,892 Medicare FFS beneficiaries received LCS in 2016, comprising 4.1% (95% CI, 3.9%-4.3%) of the estimated LCS-eligible Medicare population. Accounting for the interactions between race/ethnicity and US region, nonwhite (black, Hispanic) beneficiaries in all US regions were screened with lower frequency than white beneficiaries (P < .001). Screening rates in the Northeast were significantly higher than in other regions (adjusted rate ratio [95% CI] of Northeast relative to South: 1.83 [1.36-2.46]). INTERPRETATION: The early adoption of LCS among Medicare beneficiaries was low. Our results suggest geographic and racial disparities in screening use, with populations in the South and those of nonwhite race/ethnicity being screened with lower frequency. Further work is needed to improve LCS uptake and ensure consistent use by all at-risk populations.