Individual- and neighborhood-level characteristics of lung cancer screening participants undergoing telemedicine shared decision making.

BACKGROUND: Although lung cancer screening (LCS) for high-risk individuals reduces lung cancer mortality in clinical trial settings, many questions remain about how to implement high-quality LCS in real-world programs. With the increasing use of telemedicine in healthcare, studies examining this approach in the context of LCS are urgently needed. We aimed to identify sociodemographic and other factors associated with screening completion among individuals undergoing telemedicine Shared Decision Making (SDM) for LCS. METHODS: This retrospective study examined patients who completed Shared Decision Making (SDM) via telemedicine between May 4, 2020 - March 18, 2021 in a centralized LCS program. Individuals were categorized into Complete Screening vs. Incomplete Screening subgroups based on the status of subsequent LDCT completion. A multi-level, multivariate model was constructed to identify factors associated with incomplete screening. RESULTS: Among individuals undergoing telemedicine SDM during the study period, 20.6% did not complete a LDCT scan. Bivariate analysis demonstrated that Black/African-American race, Medicaid insurance status, and new patient type were associated with greater odds of incomplete screening. On multi-level, multivariate analysis, individuals who were new patients undergoing baseline LDCT or resided in a census tract with a high level of socioeconomic deprivation had significantly higher odds of incomplete screening. Individuals with a greater level of education experienced lower odds of incomplete screening. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk individuals undergoing telemedicine SDM for LCS, predictors of incomplete screening included low education, high neighborhood-level deprivation, and new patient type. Future research should focus on testing implementation strategies to improve LDCT completion rates while leveraging telemedicine for high-quality LCS.

Incidence and Management of Cardiothoracic Relevant Extrapulmonary Findings Found on Low-Dose Computed Tomography.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the incidence of extrapulmonary findings identified on low-dose computed tomography (CT) that may warrant evaluation by cardiothoracic surgeons and describe their management and referral patterns at our institution. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent low-dose CT through a centralized Lung Cancer Screening Program at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital between January 2018 and December 2022. An electronic medical record review was performed for patients with incidental findings. Demographic, workup, referral, and management data were collected. RESULTS: Of 2285 patients who underwent low-dose CT, 368 (16%) had an extrapulmonary finding that may have an indication for clinical evaluation by a cardiothoracic surgeon. The most common incidental finding was a hiatal hernia, with a prevalence of 6.3% (144 of 2285), followed by ascending thoracic aneurysms, with a prevalence of 3.6% (82 of 2285), and small pericardial effusions, with a prevalence of 1.2% (28 of 2285). Of the patients with symptomatic hiatal hernias, 29% (14 of 48) were referred to a cardiothoracic surgeon compared with only 6.25% (6 of 96) in the asymptomatic group. Of the patients with thoracic aneurysms, 48% (39 of 82) had aneurysms ≥4.2 cm. Of the ≥4.2 cm group, 18% (7 of 39) were monitored by a cardiothoracic surgeon compared with 11.6% (5 of 43) in patients with aneurysms <4.2 cm. CONCLUSIONS: Hiatal hernias and ascending thoracic aneurysms were the 2 most prevalent incidental findings identified on low-dose CT during lung cancer screening. We demonstrated potential gaps in hiatal hernia referral patterns. Referring patients with thoracic aneurysms to cardiothoracic surgeons may not be initially warranted.

Frequency of Statin Prescription Among Individuals with Coronary Artery Calcifications Detected Through Lung Cancer Screening.

Individuals eligible for lung cancer screening (LCS) are at risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) due to smoking history. Coronary artery calcifications (CAC), a common incidental finding on low-dose CT (LDCT) for LCS, is a predictor of cardiovascular events. Despite findings of high ASCVD risk and CAC, a substantial proportion of LCS patients are not prescribed primary preventive statin therapy for ASCVD. We assessed the frequency of statin prescription in LCS patients with moderate levels of CAC. Among 259 individuals with moderate CAC, 95% had ASCVD risk ≥ 7.5%. Despite this, 27% of patients were statin-free prior to LDCT and 21.2% remained statin-free after LDCT showing moderate CAC. Illustratively, while a substantial proportion of LCS patients are statin-eligible, many lack a statin prescription, even after findings of CAC burden. CAC reporting should be standardized, and interdisciplinary communication should be optimized to ensure that LCS patients are placed on appropriate preventive therapy.

Racial Differences in Lung Cancer Screening Beliefs and Screening Adherence.

BACKGROUND: One challenge in high-quality lung cancer screening (LCS) is maintaining adherence with annual and short-interval follow-up screens among high-risk individuals who have undergone baseline low-dose CT (LDCT). This study aimed to characterize attitudes and beliefs toward lung cancer and LCS and to identify factors associated with LCS adherence. METHODS: We administered a questionnaire to 269 LCS participants to assess attitudes and beliefs toward lung cancer and LCS. Clinical data including sociodemographics and screening adherence were obtained from the LCS Program Registry. RESULTS: African-American individuals had significantly greater lung cancer worries compared with Whites (6.10 vs. 4.66, P < .001). In making the decision to undergo LCS, African-American participants described screening convenience and cost as very important factors significantly more frequently than Whites (60% vs. 26.8%, P< .001 and 58.4% vs. 37.8%, P = .001; respectively). African-American individuals with greater than high school education had significantly higher odds of LCS adherence (aOR 2.55; 95% CI, 1.14-5.60) than Whites with less than high school education. Participants who described screening convenience and cost as "very important" had significantly lower odds of completing screening follow-up after adjusting for demographic and other factors (aOR 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33-0.97 and aOR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33-0.91, respectively). CONCLUSION: Racial differences in beliefs about lung cancer and LCS exist among African-American and White individuals enrolled in an LCS program. Cost, convenience, and low educational attainment may be barriers to LCS adherence, specifically among African-American individuals. IMPACT: More research is needed on how barriers can be overcome to improve LCS adherence.

The Case for Patient Navigation in Lung Cancer Screening in Vulnerable Populations: A Systematic Review.

Patient navigation has been proposed to combat cancer disparities in vulnerable populations. Vulnerable populations often have poorer cancer outcomes and lower levels of screening, adherence, and treatment. Navigation has been studied in various cancers, but few studies have assessed navigation in lung cancer. Additionally, there is a lack of consistency in metrics to assess the quality of navigation programs. The authors conducted a systematic review of published cancer screening studies to identify quality metrics used in navigation programs, as well as to recommend standardized metrics to define excellence in lung cancer navigation. The authors included 26 studies evaluating navigation metrics in breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate, and lung cancer. After reviewing the literature, the authors propose the following navigation metrics for lung cancer screening programs: (1) screening rate, (2) compliance with follow-up, (3) time to treatment initiation, (4) patient satisfaction, (5) quality of life, (6) biopsy complications, and (7) cultural competency.