ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Incidentally Detected Indeterminate Pulmonary Nodule.

Incidental pulmonary nodules are common. Although the majority are benign, most are indeterminate for malignancy when first encountered making their management challenging. CT remains the primary imaging modality to first characterize and follow-up incidental lung nodules. This document reviews available literature on various imaging modalities and summarizes management of indeterminate pulmonary nodules detected incidentally. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

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.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Lung Cancer Screening: 2022 Update.

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality for men and women in the United States. Screening for lung cancer with annual low-dose CT is saving lives, and the continued implementation of lung screening can save many more. In 2015, the CMS began covering annual lung screening for those who qualified based on the original United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lung screening criteria, which included patients 55 to 77 year of age with a 30 pack-year history of smoking, who were either currently using tobacco or who had smoked within the previous 15 years. In 2021, the USPSTF issued new screening guidelines, decreasing the age of eligibility to 80 years of age and pack-years to 20. Lung screening remains controversial for those who do not meet the updated USPSTF criteria, but who have additional risk factors for the development of lung cancer. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

The Impact of Adjuvant Hemithoracic Radiation on Outcomes in Patients With Stage I-III Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: A Dual Registry Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes associated with receipt of adjuvant radiation in patients after surgery for MPM are poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to use 2 registries to compare the outcomes of patients receiving adjuvant radiation or no radiation after definitive surgery for pathologic stage I-III MPM. METHODS: Patients with resected pathologic stage I-III MPM were identified from the Duke University registry (1996-2016) and National Cancer Database (NCDB) (2004-2015). The primary outcome was overall survival. Propensity score-matched and landmark subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 212 institutional and 1615 NCDB patients met criteria. In both cohorts, patients who underwent radiation were more likely to have margin-negative resection and more advanced pathologic stage. At a landmark time of 4.4 and 4.7 months from surgery, Duke [hazard ratio (HR) 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-2.11] and NCDB patients (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.81-1.17) who received adjuvant radiation did not experience improved survival compared to those who did not receive radiation in multivariable analysis. Duke patients who received radiation had similar incidence of recurrence and time to both overall recurrence and ipsilateral recurrence (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.43-1.77) compared to those who did not. Duke patients experienced 100 grade 1/2, 21 grade 3/4, and one grade 5 toxicity events during radiation. CONCLUSIONS: In this dual registry analysis of patients with resected stage I-III MPM, the receipt of adjuvant hemithoracic radiation was not associated with improved survival compared to no radiation.

Surgical Evaluation in Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is used to treat stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in nonsurgical candidates, although guidelines specify that inoperability be determined in multidisciplinary fashion. We characterized NSCLC patients treated with SBRT undergoing thoracic surgical evaluation (TSUe) and quantified TSUe's impact on time to treatment, receipt of diagnostic staging procedures, and health care costs. METHODS: Adults with newly diagnosed NSCLC undergoing SBRT were identified in the MarketScan all-payer claims database (2014-2018). TSUe was defined as an outpatient encounter with a thoracic surgeon or multispecialty group. Time to treatment and total costs in the 6 months preceding treatment were examined using multivariable regression by receipt of TSUe, adjusting for demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: Of 1894 patients, 36.3% (n = 687) underwent TSUe. Compared with patients without TSUe, these patients were younger (mean age, 73.6 vs 76.3 years) and more likely to undergo invasive biopsy/staging procedures (90% vs 82%) or pulmonary function testing (80.6% vs 69.5%). Patients undergoing TSUe had a median time to treatment of 64 days (interquartile range, 43-98 days), compared with 44 days (interquartile range, 29-70 days) for no TSUe. Adjusted time to treatment was 43% longer (incident rate ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.32-1.54; P < .001) with TSUe. Patients undergoing TSUe also incurred 30% higher costs (adjusted cost ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.20-1.41; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with early-stage NSCLC undergoing SBRT as primary treatment, a minority are evaluated by a thoracic surgeon. Because they have a longer time to treatment, more invasive diagnostic procedures, and higher costs, this represents a targetable gap to make workup protocols more efficient.

The Effect of Center Esophagectomy Volume on Outcomes in Clinical Stage I to III Esophageal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the threshold annualized esophagectomy volume that is associated with improved survival, oncologic resection, and postoperative outcomes. BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy at high-volume centers is associated with improved outcomes; however, the definition of high-volume remains debated. METHODS: The 2004 to 2016 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage I to III esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy. Center esophagectomy volume was modeled as a continuous variable using restricted cubic splines. Maximally selected ranks were used to identify an inflection point of center volume and survival. Survival was compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 13,493 patients met study criteria. Median center esophagectomy volume was 8.2 (interquartile range: 3.2-17.2) cases per year. On restricted cubic splines, inflection points were identified at 9 and 30 cases per year. A multivariable Cox model was constructed modeling annualized center surgical volume as a continuous variable using 3 linear splines and inflection points at 9 and 30 cases per year. On multivariable analysis, increasing center volume up to 9 cases per year was associated with a substantial survival benefit (hazard ratio: 0.97, 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.98, P ≤0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with undergoing surgery at a high-volume center (>9 cases per year) included private insurance, care at an academic center, completion of high school education, and greater travel distance. CONCLUSIONS: This National Cancer Database study utilizing multivariable analysis and restricted cubic splines suggests the threshold definition of a high-volume esophagectomy center as one that performs at least 10 operations a year.

Multi-institutional Care in Clinical Stage II and III Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Management of clinical stage II or III esophageal cancer requires multidisciplinary care. Multi-institutional care has been associated with worse survival in other malignant diseases. This study aimed to determine the impact of multi-institutional care on survival in patients with stage II or III esophageal cancer. METHODS: The 2004 to 2016 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage II or III esophageal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation therapy followed by surgical resection. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: multi-institutional or single-institution care. Survival between groups was compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with multi-institutional care. RESULTS: Overall, 11 399 patients met study criteria: 6569 (57.6%) received multi-institutional care and 4,830 (42.4%) received care at a single institution. In a multivariable analysis, factors associated with multi-institutional care were later year of diagnosis, greater distance from treating facility, residence in an urban or rural setting (vs metro), and residence in states without Medicaid expansion. Care at a single institution was associated with Black race, lack of insurance, and treatment at higher-volume or academic centers. Despite these differences, patients who received multi-institutional care had survival comparable to that in patients who received care at a single institution (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92-1.03; P = .30). CONCLUSIONS: In this National Cancer Database analysis, multi-institutional care was not associated with inferior overall survival. As complex cancer care becomes more regionalized, patients may consider receiving part of their cancer care closer to home, whereas traveling to surgical centers of excellence should be encouraged.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Lung Cancer Screening, Version 1.2022.

The NCCN Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening recommend criteria for selecting individuals for screening and provide recommendations for evaluation and follow-up of lung nodules found during initial and subsequent screening. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening.

The Impact of Adjuvant Therapy on Survival After Esophagectomy for Node-negative Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a survival benefit in high risk T2-4a, pathologically node-negative distal esophageal adenocarcinoma. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is minimal literature to substantiate the NCCN guidelines recommending adjuvant therapy for patients with distal esophageal adenocarcinoma and no pathologic evidence of nodal disease. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify adult patients with pT2-4aN0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent definitive surgery (2004-2015) and had characteristics considered high risk by the NCCN. Patients were stratified by receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation. The primary outcome was overall survival, which was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards models. A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was also performed to compare survival between the groups. RESULTS: Four hundred three patients met study criteria: 313 (78%) without adjuvant therapy and 90 who received adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation (22%). In both unadjusted and multivariable analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation was not associated with a significant survival benefit compared to no adjuvant therapy. In a subgroup analysis of 335 patients without high risk features by NCCN criteria, adjuvant chemotherapy was not independently associated with a survival benefit. CONCLUSION: In this analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation was not associated with a significant survival benefit in completely resected, pathologically node-negative distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, independent of presence of high risk characteristics. The risks and benefits of adjuvant therapy should be weighed before offering it to patients with completely resected pT2-4aN0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma.

The Relationship Between Lymph Node Ratio and Survival Benefit With Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Node-positive Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the ratio of positive lymph nodes to total assessed lymph nodes (LNR) is an indicator of cancer burden in esophageal adenocarcinoma and may identify patients who may most benefit from AC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to discern whether there is a threshold LNR above which AC is associated with a survival benefit in this population. METHODS: The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was queried for patients who underwent upfront, complete resection of pT1-4N1-3M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma. The primary outcome, overall survival, was examined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models employing an interaction term between LNR and AC. RESULTS: A total of 1733 patients were included: 811 (47%) did not receive AC whereas 922 (53%) did. The median LNR was 20% (interquartile range 9-40). In a multivariable Cox model, the interaction term between LNR and receipt of AC was significant (P = 0.01). A plot of the interaction demonstrated that AC was associated with improved survival beyond a LNR of about 10%-12%. In a sensitivity analysis, the receipt of AC was not associated with improved survival in patients with LNR <12% (hazard ratio 1.02; 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.44) but was associated with improved survival in those with LNR ≥12% (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of patients with upfront, complete resection of node-positive esophageal adenocarcinoma, AC was associated with improved survival for LNR ≥12%. LNR may be used as an adjunct in multidisciplinary decision-making about adjuvant therapies in this patient population.

Tumor Size, Histology, and Survival After Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy and Sublobar Resection in Node-negative Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although SABR is increasingly emerging as an alternative to surgery for node-negative non-small cell lung cancer, there is poor understanding of patients who may most benefit SABR compared to surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relationship between tumor size and the comparative outcomes of SABR and sublobar resection in patients with node-negative non-small cell lung cancer. RESULTS: A total of 59,949 patients met study criteria: 19,888 (33%) underwent SABR, 33,052 (55%) wedge resection, and 7009 (12%) segmental resection. In multivariable regression, a significant 3-way interaction was found between histology, tumor size, and type of treatment. After stratification by histology, a significant interaction between tumor size and treatment was preserved for patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma. Sublobar resection was associated with greater survival compared to SABR for tumor sizes greater than 6 and 8 mm for patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, respectively. SABR was associated with similar survival compared to sublobar resection for patients with papillary and large cell histology. CONCLUSIONS: In this National Cancer Database analysis, sublobar resection was associated with greater survival compared to SABR for lesions >6or 8 mm in patients with adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma; however, SABR was associated with similar survival compared to sublobar resection in patients with aggressive tumors including papillary and large cell histology. Histologic diagnosis in patients with even small tumors may enable better treatment selection in those who cannot tolerate lobectomy.

Impact of Time to Endoscopic Resection on Outcomes for Stage I Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection (ER) is the preferred treatment for superficial esophageal cancer; however, a safe time frame for performing ER has not been established. This study evaluated the period in which ER can be performed for patients with stage I esophageal adenocarcinoma without compromising outcomes. METHODS: The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with cT1 N0 M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent upfront ER. The primary outcome was overall survival, which was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. The secondary outcome was rate of margin-positive resection, which was evaluated using a multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 983 patients met study criteria. The median time from diagnosis to ER was 34 days (interquartile range, 5-70 days). Patients in the highest quartile of time to ER were more likely to be treated at a high-volume center and at a center different from that of diagnosis compared with those in the lowest quartile. Increasing time to ER was not independently associated with survival (adjusted hazard ratio per 10 days, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.05; P = .32) or margin-positive resection (odds ratio per 10 days 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-1.06; P = .60). CONCLUSIONS: In this National Cancer Database analysis, increasing time to endoscopic resection, up to 180 days from diagnosis, was not associated with worsened survival or increased odds of margin-positive resection in patients with cT1 N0 M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma. Given these findings, patients may be afforded time to be seen in specialty centers without risk of tumor progression.

2020 Women in Thoracic Surgery Update on the Status of Women in Cardiothoracic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Women in Thoracic Surgery (WTS) has previously reported on the status of women in cardiothoracic (CT) surgery. We sought to provide a 10-year update on women in CT surgery. METHODS: An anonymous research electronic data capture survey link was emailed to female diplomats of the American Board of Thoracic Surgery. Survey questions queried respondents regarding demographics, training, accolades, practice details, and career satisfaction. The survey link was open for 30 days. Results were compared with The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2019 workforce survey. Descriptive analyses were performed using frequency and proportions. Comparisons were performed using Student's t tests, Fisher's exact tests, and χ2 tests. RESULTS: Of 354 female diplomats, 309 were contacted and 176 (57%) responded. The majority of respondents were aged 36 to 50 years (59%), white (67.4%), and had graduated from traditional-track programs (91.4%). Most respondents reported practicing in an urban (64%) and academic setting (73.1%). 36.4% and 23.9% reported a general thoracic and adult cardiac practice (22.7% mixed practice, 9.6% congenital). Fifty percent of respondents reported salaries between $400,000 and $700,000 annually; 37.7% reported salaries less than 90% of their male colleagues; 21.6% of respondents in academia are full professor; 53.4% reported having a leadership role. Whereas 74.1% would pursue a career in CT surgery again, only 27.3% agreed that CT surgery is a healthy and positive environment for women. CONCLUSIONS: The number of women in CT surgery has steadily increased. Although women are rising in academic rank and into leadership positions, salary disparities and the CT surgery work environment remain important issues in achieving a diverse work force.

Perioperative outcomes of pulmonary resection after neoadjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Pembrolizumab is a programmed death receptor-1 masking antibody approved for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. This Phase 2 study (NCT02818920) of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab in non-small cell lung cancer had a primary end point of safety and secondary end points of efficacy and correlative science. METHODS: Patients with untreated clinical stage IB to IIIA non-small cell lung cancer were enrolled. Two cycles of pembrolizumab (200 mg) were administered before surgery. Standard adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation were encouraged but not required. Four cycles of adjuvant pembrolizumab were provided. RESULTS: Of 35 patients enrolled, 30 received neoadjuvant pembrolizumab and 25 underwent lung resection. Only 1 patient had a delay before surgery attributed to pembrolizumab; this was due to thyroiditis. All patients underwent anatomic resection and mediastinal lymph node dissection; the majority (18/25%, 72%) of patients underwent lobectomy. Of the 25 patients, 23 had an initial minimally invasive approach (92%); 5 of these were converted to thoracotomy (21.7%). R0 resection was achieved in 22 patients (88%), and major pathologic response was observed in 7 of 25 patients (28%). The most common postoperative adverse event was atrial fibrillation, affecting 6 of 25 patients (24%). Median chest tube duration and length of stay were 3 and 4 days, respectively. One patient required readmission to the hospital within 30 days. There was no mortality within 90 days of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, pembrolizumab was safe and well tolerated in the neoadjuvant setting, and its use was not associated with excess surgical morbidity or mortality. Minimally invasive approaches are feasible in this patient population, but may be more challenging than in cases without neoadjuvant immunotherapy. Pathologic response was higher than typically observed with standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Social Disparities in Lung Cancer Risk and Screening.

Significant disparities exist in lung cancer incidence and screening. Geographic, racial, gender, and socioeconomic disparities affect lung cancer incidence. As the leading cause of lung cancer, smoking varies among different racioethnic groups, genders, and socioeconomic statuses. In addition, environmental pollutants, such as radon, industrial toxins, and air pollution, are significant risk factors for lung cancer development that is disproportionately seen in working-class communities, as well as underserved and disabled populations. Lung cancer incidence depends on diagnosis. Literature examining lung cancer incidence and screening disparities have its limitations, as most studies are methodologically limited and do not adjust for important risk factors.

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.

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.