Cancer diagnosis and treatment in working-age adults: Implications for employment, health insurance coverage, and financial hardship in the United States.

The rising costs of cancer care and subsequent medical financial hardship for cancer survivors and families are well documented in the United States. Less attention has been paid to employment disruptions and loss of household income after a cancer diagnosis and during treatment, potentially resulting in lasting financial hardship, particularly for working-age adults not yet age-eligible for Medicare coverage and their families. In this article, the authors use a composite patient case to illustrate the adverse consequences of cancer diagnosis and treatment for employment, health insurance coverage, household income, and other aspects of financial hardship. They summarize existing research and provide nationally representative estimates of multiple aspects of financial hardship and health insurance coverage, benefit design, and employee benefits, such as paid sick leave, among working-age adults with a history of cancer and compare them with estimates among working-age adults without a history of cancer from the most recently available years of the National Health Interview Survey (2019-2021). Then, the authors identify opportunities for addressing employment and health insurance coverage challenges at multiple levels, including federal, state, and local policies; employers; cancer care delivery organizations; and nonprofit organizations. These efforts, when informed by research to identify best practices, can potentially help mitigate the financial hardship associated with cancer.

In-Clinic vs. Online Recruitment of Women with a History of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia or Cervical Cancer to a Smoking Cessation Trial: A Post-hoc Comparison of Participant Characteristics, Study Retention, and Cessation Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Recruiting special populations to smoking cessation trials is challenging and approaches beyond in-clinic recruitment may be beneficial. This secondary analysis of data from a smoking cessation RCT for individuals with a history of cervical cancer or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) explored differences associated with in-clinic vs. online recruitment. METHODS: Participants were recruited from clinics within a university-based NCI-designated cancer center (n=87) and online nationally via Facebook (n=115). Baseline measures included sociodemographics, smoking history, and cancer or CIN history. Study retention and smoking abstinence were assessed 12 months post-baseline. Group differences in baseline characteristics were evaluated. Retention and abstinence were evaluated while controlling for group differences and predictors. RESULTS: Participants recruited online (vs. in-clinic) had higher educational attainment (p=.01) and health literacy (p=.003). They were more likely to have CIN vs. cancer, to be further from the time of diagnosis, and to have completed active treatment (p values<.001). While controlling for these group differences and independent predictors, retention was higher among participants recruited online (log-likelihood χ2(1)=11.41, p<.001). There were no recruitment differences in self-reported (p=.90) or biochemically confirmed smoking abstinence (p=.18). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to individuals recruited in-person, individuals recruited online were more educated, had higher health literacy, and presented with a different clinical profile (i.e., more likely to have CIN vs. cancer and to have completed active treatment). There were few differences in participant characteristics between recruitment approaches, and no differences on any smoking-related variables. Online recruitment has the potential to improve enrollment of cancer survivors to smoking cessation trials. IMPLICATIONS: People with a history of CIN or cervical cancer recruited to a smoking cessation RCT online (vs. in-clinic) were more likely to have a diagnosis of CIN vs. cancer and were more educated and health literate. Participants recruited online were more likely to be retained in the study and there were no differences in smoking abstinence rates at 12-months. Incorporating online recruitment increased the reach of tobacco treatment efforts to a larger and more diverse sample. This could reduce the burden of tobacco-related disease, improve CIN and cancer treatment outcomes, and reduce secondary malignancies and morbidity among this underserved group.

Longitudinal varying coefficient single-index model with censored covariates.

It is of interest to health policy research to estimate the population-averaged longitudinal medical cost trajectory from initial cancer diagnosis to death, and understand how the trajectory curve is affected by patient characteristics. This research question leads to a number of statistical challenges because the longitudinal cost data are often non-normally distributed with skewness, zero-inflation, and heteroscedasticity. The trajectory is nonlinear, and its length and shape depend on survival, which are subject to censoring. Modeling the association between multiple patient characteristics and nonlinear cost trajectory curves of varying lengths should take into consideration parsimony, flexibility, and interpretation. We propose a novel longitudinal varying coefficient single-index model. Multiple patient characteristics are summarized in a single-index, representing a patient's overall propensity for healthcare use. The effects of this index on various segments of the cost trajectory depend on both time and survival, which is flexibly modeled by a bivariate varying coefficient function. The model is estimated by generalized estimating equations with an extended marginal mean structure to accommodate censored survival time as a covariate. We established the pointwise confidence interval of the varying coefficient and a test for the covariate effect. The numerical performance was extensively studied in simulations. We applied the proposed methodology to medical cost data of prostate cancer patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare-Linked Database.

Cost-Effectiveness of Population-Based Multigene Testing for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Prevention.

Importance: The current method of BRCA testing for breast and ovarian cancer prevention, which is based on family history, often fails to identify many carriers of pathogenic variants. Population-based genetic testing offers a transformative approach in cancer prevention by allowing for proactive identification of any high-risk individuals and enabling early interventions. Objective: To assess the lifetime incremental effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of population-based multigene testing vs family history-based testing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used a microsimulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of multigene testing (BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2) for all women aged 30 to 35 years compared with the current standard of care that is family history based. Carriers of pathogenic variants were offered interventions, such as magnetic resonance imaging with or without mammography, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy, to reduce cancer risk. A total of 2000 simulations were run on 1 000 000 women, using a lifetime time horizon and payer perspective, and costs were adjusted to 2022 US dollars. This study was conducted from September 1, 2020, to December 15, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), quantified as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Secondary outcomes included incremental cost, additional breast and ovarian cancer cases prevented, and excess deaths due to coronary heart disease (CHD). Results: The study assessed 1 000 000 simulated women aged 30 to 35 years in the US. In the base case, population-based multigene testing was more cost-effective compared with family history-based testing, with an ICER of $55 548 per QALY (95% CI, $47 288-$65 850 per QALY). Population-based multigene testing would be able to prevent an additional 1338 cases of breast cancer and 663 cases of ovarian cancer, but it would also result in 69 cases of excess CHD and 10 excess CHD deaths per million women. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses show that the probability that population-based multigene testing is cost-effective was 100%. When the cost of the multigene test exceeded $825, population-based testing was no longer cost-effective (ICER, $100 005 per QALY; 95% CI, $87 601-$11 6323). Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic analysis of population-based multigene testing, population-based testing was a more cost-effective strategy for the prevention of breast cancer and ovarian cancer when compared with the current family history-based testing strategy at the $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. These findings support the need for more comprehensive genetic testing strategies to identify pathogenic variant carriers and enable informed decision-making for personalized risk management.

Work Productivity Among Younger Breast Cancer Survivors: The Impact of Behavioral Interventions for Depression.

OBJECTIVES: The Pathways to Wellness randomized controlled trial found that 2 behavioral interventions, mindfulness awareness practices and survivorship education, reduced depressive symptoms in younger breast cancer survivors (BCSs) compared with wait-list control. This secondary analysis examines whether the interventions led to reduced loss of work productivity among younger BCSs and whether such reductions were mediated by reductions in depressive symptoms. METHODS: The Work Productivity and Activity Impairment scale was used to measure work productivity loss at 4 assessment time points. Correlates of productivity loss at enrollment were examined using multivariable linear regression. Differences in change over time in productivity loss between each intervention group and control were assessed using linear mixed models. Reduced depressive symptoms were tested as a mediator of reduced productivity loss. RESULTS: Of 247 trial participants, 199 were employed and included in the analyses. At enrollment, higher productivity loss was associated with chemotherapy receipt (P = .003), younger age (P = .021), more severe cognitive problems (P = .002), higher musculoskeletal pain severity (P = .002), more depressive symptoms (P = .016), and higher fatigue severity (P = .033). The mindfulness intervention led to significantly less productivity loss compared with control at all 3 postintervention assessment points (all P < .05), with about 54% of the effect mediated by reduction in depressive symptoms. Survivorship education was not associated with reduced loss of productivity. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that addressing depressive symptoms through behavioral interventions, such as mindfulness, may mitigate impacts on work productivity in younger BCSs.

Examining the Association between Abstinence from Smoking and Healthcare Costs Among Patients with Cancer.

Continuous tobacco use in cancer patients is linked to substantial healthcare costs due to increased risks and complications, whereas quitting smoking leads to improved treatment outcomes and cost reductions. Addressing the need for empirical evidence on the economic impact of smoking cessation, this study examined the association between smoking cessation and healthcare cost utilization among a sample of 930 cancer patients treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center's Tobacco Research and Treatment Program (TRTP). Applying conditional quantile regression and propensity scores to address confounding, our findings revealed that abstinence achieved through the TRTP significantly reduced the median cost during a 3-month period post-quitting by $1,095 (ß=-$1,095, p=0.007, 95%CI=[-$1,886, -$304]). Sensitivity analysis corroborated these conclusions, showing a pronounced cost reduction when outlier data were excluded. The long-term accrued cost savings from smoking cessation could potentially offset the cost of participation in the TRTP program, underscoring its cost-effectiveness. An important implication of this study is that by reducing smoking rates, healthcare systems can more efficiently allocate resources, enhance patient health outcomes, and lessen the overall cancer burden.

Disparity in initiation of checkpoint inhibitors among commercially insured and Medicare Advantage patients with metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of advanced melanoma, but racial disparities in melanoma outcomes continue. These inequities are not fully explained by individual factors. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the associations of neighborhood factors with the use of ICIs in metastatic melanoma. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of commercially insured US adults with metastatic melanoma diagnosed between January 2011 and December 2020. We examined the associations between the county-level percentage of population from racial and ethnic minority groups and the time from metastatic melanoma diagnosis to initiating ICIs using Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for patient characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 4,052 patients with metastatic melanoma, of which 49% used ICIs. We found that the adoption of ICIs in a county declined with increasing minority quintile (quintile 1: 52.4%, quintile 2: 50.4%, quintile 3: 50.1%, quintile 4: 45.8%, and quintile 5: 44.7%). The delay in ICI initiation also went up as the percentage of minorities in a county increased (log-rank test P = 0.03). Compared with the lowest quintile, the adjusted hazard ratio of ICI initiation of the second, third, fourth, and highest minority quintile was 0.94 (95% CI = 0.81-1.08), 0.88 (95% CI = 0.76-1.02), 0.81 (95% CI = 0.68-0.97), and 0.77 (95% CI = 0.66-0.91), respectively. Secondary analysis revealed that the slower initiation was driven by the counties with the highest percentage of Hispanic population (hazard ratio = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.61-0.89) in both Cox models and sensitivity analyses. High-minority counties correlated with metro areas, higher poverty levels, and a greater number of medical oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: We found that patients with metastatic melanoma living in counties with higher proportion of minorities, particularly of Hispanic origin, are more likely to experience delays in ICI treatment. This study provides important population-level data on neighborhood-level disparity in medication use. More research is needed on the underlying provider- and system-level factors that directly contributed to the lower use of cancer medicines in high-minority areas, which can help inform the development of evidence-based medication use strategies that can improve health outcomes and equity.

Impact of state telehealth policies on telehealth use among patients with newly diagnosed cancer.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth restrictions were relaxed under the COVID-19 public health emergency. We examined telehealth use before and during the pandemic among patients with newly diagnosed cancers and the association between state policies and telehealth use. METHODS: The study cohort was constructed from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart and included patients with lymphoma, female breast cancer, colorectal cancer, prostate cancer, and lung cancer diagnosed between March 1, 2019, and March 31, 2021. We performed an interrupted time series analysis to examine the trend of cancer-related telehealth use within 1 month of diagnosis relative to the timing of the COVID-19 public health emergency and multivariable logistic regressions to examine factors-specifically, state parity laws and regulations on cross-state practice-associated with telehealth. RESULTS: Of 110 461 patients, the rate of telehealth use peaked at 33.4% in April 2020, then decreased to 12% to 15% between September 2020 and March 2021. Among the 53 982 patients diagnosed since March 2020, telehealth use was statistically significantly lower for privately insured patients residing in states with coverage-only parity or no or unspecified parity than those in states with coverage and payment parity (adjusted rate = 20.2%, 19.1%, and 23.3%, respectively). The adjusted rate was lower for patients in states with cross-state telehealth policy limitations than for those in states without restrictions (14.9% vs 17.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth use by patients diagnosed with cancer during the pandemic was higher among those living in states with more generous parity and less restrictive rules for cross-state practice. Policy makers contemplating whether to permanently relax certain telehealth policies must consider the impact on vulnerable patient populations who can benefit from telehealth.

Financial Outcomes of "Bagging" Oncology Drugs Among Privately Insured Patients With Cancer.

This cohort study examines the difference in per-patient per-month costs between drugs distributed under "bagging," a drug delivery model that requires patients to obtain physician-administered medications via pharmacies, and traditional buy-and-bill practice.

Impact of functional disability on health-care use and medical costs among cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors with a disability are among the most vulnerable in health status and financial hardship, but no prior research has systematically examined how disability modifies health-care use and costs. This study examined the association between functional disability among cancer survivors and their health-care utilization and medical costs. METHODS: We generated nationally representative estimates using the 2015-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Outcomes included use of 6 service types (inpatient, outpatient, office-based physician, office-based nonphysician, emergency department, and prescription) and medical costs of aggregate services and by each of 6 service types. The primary independent variable was a categorical variable for the total number of functional disabilities. We employed multivariable generalized linear models and 2-part models, adjusting for sociodemographics and health conditions and accounting for survey design. RESULTS: Among cancer survivors (n = 9359; weighted n = 21 046 285), 38.8% reported at least 1 disability. Compared with individuals without a disability, cancer survivors with 4 or more disabilities experienced longer hospital stays (adjusted average marginal effect = 1.14 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.55 to 1.73), more visits to an office-based physician (average marginal effect = 1.43 visits, 95% CI = 0.51 to 2.35), and a greater number of prescriptions (average marginal effect = 12.1 prescriptions, 95% CI = 9.27 to 15.0). Their total (average marginal effect = $9537, 95% CI = $5713 to $13 361) and out-of-pocket (average marginal effect = $639, 95% CI = $79 to $1199) medical costs for aggregate services were statistically significantly higher. By type, disability in independent living was most strongly associated with greater costs for aggregate services. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors with a disability experienced greater health-care use and higher costs. Cancer survivorship planning for health care and financial stability should consider the patients' disability profile.

Outcomes after thymectomy in non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis.

Background: Guidelines by the myasthenia gravis (MG) Foundation of America suggest patients aged 18 to 50 years with non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis (NTMG) benefit from thymectomy. Our objective was to investigate utilization of thymectomy in NTMG patients outside the confines of a clinical trial. Methods: From the Optum de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Claims Database (2007 to 2021), we identified patients diagnosed with MG between 18-50 years old. We then selected patients who received a thymectomy within 12 months of MG diagnosis. Outcomes included use of steroids, non-steroidal immunosuppressive agents (NSIS), and rescue therapy (plasmapheresis or intravenous immunoglobulin), as well as NTMG-related emergency department (ED) visits and hospital admissions. These outcomes were compared in the 6-months before and after thymectomy. Results: A total of 1,298 patients met our inclusion criteria, of whom 45 (3.47%) received a thymectomy, performed via minimally invasive surgery in 53.3% of cases (n=24). In comparing the pre- to post-operative period, we noted that steroid use increased (53.33% to 66.67%, P=0.034), NSIS use remained stable, and use of rescue therapy decreased (44.44% to 24.44%, P=0.007). Costs associated with steroid and NSIS use remained stable. However, the mean costs of rescue therapy decreased (from $13,243.98 to $8,486.26, P=0.035). Hospital admissions and ED visits related to NTMG remained stable. There were 2 readmissions within 90 days (4.44%) associated with thymectomy. Conclusions: Patients with NTMG undergoing thymectomy experienced less need for rescue therapy following resection, albeit with increased rates of steroid prescriptions. Thymectomy is infrequently performed in this patient population despite acceptable postsurgical outcomes.

Ending Tobacco Use Through Interactive Tailored Messaging for Cambodian People With HIV (Project EndIT): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of smoking remains high in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including the Southeast Asian nation of Cambodia. Smoking is especially hazardous for people with HIV. In Cambodia, approximately 43%-65% of men with HIV and 3%-5% of women with HIV smoke cigarettes. Thus, there is a critical need for cost-effective smoking cessation interventions for Cambodian people with HIV. This paper describes the design, methods, and data analysis plans for a randomized controlled trial assessing the efficacy of a theory-based mobile health smoking cessation intervention in Cambodian people with HIV. OBJECTIVE: This 2-group randomized controlled trial compares the efficacy of a mobile health-based automated messaging (AM) intervention versus standard care (SC) in facilitating smoking cessation among Cambodian people with HIV. METHODS: Cambodian people with HIV who currently smoke and are receiving antiretroviral treatment (target, N=800) will be randomized to (1) SC or (2) the AM intervention. SC participants will receive brief advice to quit smoking, written self-help materials, nicotine patches, and will complete weekly app-delivered dietary assessments for 26 weeks. AM participants will receive all SC components (but will complete smoking-related weekly assessments instead of dietary assessments), in addition to a fully automated tailored messaging program driven by the weekly assessments to facilitate smoking cessation. In the Phase-Based Model of smoking cessation, the cessation process is partitioned into 4 phases: motivation, preparation (precessation), cessation (quit date to 2 weeks post quit), and maintenance (up to 6 months post quit). Our AM program targets processes within these phases, including increasing motivation to quit, enhancing self-efficacy, obtaining social support, skills to cope with nicotine withdrawal symptoms and stress, and skills to maintain abstinence. All participants will complete baseline and 3-, 6-, and 12-month in-person follow-up assessments. The primary outcome is biochemically confirmed abstinence at 12 months, with 3- and 6-month abstinence as secondary outcomes. Potential mediators and moderators underlying treatment effects will be explored, and cost-effectiveness will be assessed. RESULTS: This study was approved by all relevant domestic and international institutional and ethical review boards. Participant recruitment commenced in January 2023. Data collection is expected to conclude by the end of 2025. CONCLUSIONS: By demonstrating the greater efficacy and cost-effectiveness of AM relative to SC, this study has the potential to transform HIV care in Cambodia and prevent tobacco-related diseases. Furthermore, it may be adapted for use in other Cambodian populations and in other low- and middle-income countries. Ultimately, the AM approach to smoking cessation could greatly improve public health in the developing world and beyond. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05746442; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05746442. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/48923.

Current Trends in the Utilization of Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Among Women With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: The clinical benefit of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for early-stage breast cancer (BC) remains controversial. We examined trends and the associated factors of preoperative breast MRI use. METHODS: This study cohort, constructed from Optum Clinformatics database, included women with early-stage BC who had a cancer surgery between March 1, 2008, and December 31, 2020. Preoperative breast MRI was performed between the date of BC diagnosis and index surgery. Multivariable logistic regressions, one for elderly (65 years and older) and the other for non-elderly patients (younger than 65 years), were performed to examine factors associated with the use of preoperative MRI. RESULTS: Among 92,077 women with early-stage BC, the crude rate of preoperative breast MRI increased from 48% in 2008 to 60% in 2020 for nonelderly and from 27% to 34% for elderly women. For both age groups, non-Hispanic Blacks were less likely (odds ratio [OR]; 95% CI, younger than 65 years: 0.75, 0.70 to 0.81; 65 years and older: 0.77, 0.72 to 0.83) to receive preoperative MRI than non-Hispanic White patients. Across Census divisions, the highest adjusted rate was observed in Mountain division (OR compared with New England; 95% CI, younger than 65 years: 1.45, 1.27 to 1.65; 65 years and older: 2.42, 2.16 to 2.72). Other factors included younger age, fewer comorbidities, family history of BC, axillary node involvement, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for both age groups. CONCLUSION: The use of preoperative breast MRI has steadily increased. Aside from clinical factors, age, race/ethnicity, and geographic location were associated with preoperative MRI use. This information is important for future implementation or deimplementation strategies of preoperative MRI.

Incorporating Cost Measures Into the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System: Implications for Oncologists.

PURPOSE: The Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is currently the only federally mandated value-based payment model for oncologists. The weight of cost measures in MIPS has increased from 0% in 2017 to 30% in 2022. Given that cost measures are specialty-agnostic, specialties with greater costs of care such as oncology may be unfairly affected. We investigated the implications of incorporating cost measures into MIPS on physician reimbursements for oncologists and other physicians. METHODS: We evaluated physicians scored on cost and quality in the 2018 MIPS using the Doctors and Clinicians database. We used multivariable Tobit regression to identify physician-level factors associated with cost and quality scores. We simulated composite MIPS scores and payment adjustments by applying the 2022 cost-quality weights to the 2018 category scores and compared changes across specialties. RESULTS: Of 168,098 identified MIPS-participating physicians, 5,942 (3.5%) were oncologists. Oncologists had the lowest cost scores compared with other specialties (adjusted mean score, 58.4 for oncologists v 71.0 for nononcologists; difference, -12.66 [95% CI, -13.34 to -11.99]), while quality scores were similar (82.9 v 84.2; difference, -1.31 [95% CI, -2.65 to 0.03]). After the 2022 cost-quality reweighting, oncologists would receive a 4.3-point (95% CI, 4.58 to 4.04) reduction in composite MIPS scores, corresponding to a four-fold increase in magnitude of physician penalties ($4,233.41 US dollars [USD] in 2018 v $18,531.06 USD in 2022) and greater reduction in exceptional payment bonuses compared with physicians in other specialties (-42.8% [95% CI, -44.1 to -41.5] for oncologists v -23.6% [95% CI, -23.8 to -23.4] for others). CONCLUSION: Oncologists will likely be disproportionally penalized after the incorporation of cost measures into MIPS. Specialty-specific recalibration of cost measures is needed to ensure that policy efforts to promote value-based care do not compromise health care quality and outcomes.

A protocol for a cluster randomized trial of care delivery models to improve the quality of smoking cessation and shared decision making for lung cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Patients eligible for lung cancer screening (LCS) are those at high risk of lung cancer due to their smoking histories and age. While screening for LCS is effective in lowering lung cancer mortality, primary care providers are challenged to meet beneficiary eligibility for LCS from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, including a patient counseling and shared decision-making (SDM) visit with the use of patient decision aid(s) prior to screening. METHODS: We will use an effectiveness-implementation type I hybrid design to: 1) identify effective, scalable smoking cessation counseling and SDM interventions that are consistent with recommendations, can be delivered on the same platform, and are implemented in real-world clinical settings; 2) examine barriers and facilitators of implementing the two approaches to delivering smoking cessation and SDM for LCS; and 3) determine the economic implications of implementation by assessing the healthcare resources required to increase smoking cessation for the two approaches by delivering smoking cessation within the context of LCS. Providers from different healthcare organizations will be randomized to usual care (providers delivering smoking cessation and SDM on site) vs. centralized care (smoking cessation and SDM delivered remotely by trained counselors). The primary trial outcomes will include smoking abstinence at 12-weeks and knowledge about LCS measured at 1-week after baseline. CONCLUSION: This study will provide important new evidence about the effectiveness and feasibility of a novel care delivery model for addressing the leading cause of lung cancer deaths and supporting high-quality decisions about LCS. GOV PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: NCT04200534 TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT04200534.