Racial and socioeconomic disparities in lung cancer screening in the United States: A systematic review.

Nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces NSCLC mortality; however, a lack of diversity in LCS studies may limit the generalizability of the results to marginalized groups who face higher risk for and worse outcomes from NSCLC. Identifying sources of inequity in the LCS pipeline is essential to reduce disparities in NSCLC outcomes. The authors searched 3 major databases for studies published from January 1, 2010 to February 27, 2020 that met the following criteria: 1) included screenees between ages 45 and 80 years who were current or former smokers, 2) written in English, 3) conducted in the United States, and 4) discussed socioeconomic and race-based LCS outcomes. Eligible studies were assessed for risk of bias. Of 3721 studies screened, 21 were eligible. Eligible studies were evaluated, and their findings were categorized into 3 themes related to LCS disparities faced by Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals: 1) eligibility; 2) utilization, perception, and utility; and 3) postscreening behavior and care. Disparities in LCS exist along racial and socioeconomic lines. There are several steps along the LCS pipeline in which Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals miss the potential benefits of LCS, resulting in increased mortality. This study identified potential sources of inequity that require further investigation. The authors recommend the implementation of prospective trials that evaluate eligibility criteria for underserved groups and the creation of interventions focused on improving utilization and follow-up care to decrease LCS disparities.

Structural Racism and Lung Cancer Risk: A Scoping Review.

Importance: Structural racism is associated with persistent inequities in health and health outcomes in the US for racial and ethnic minority groups. This review summarizes how structural racism contributes to differential population-level exposure to lung cancer risk factors and thus disparate lung cancer risk across different racial and ethnic groups. Observations: A scoping review was conducted focusing on structural racism and lung cancer risk for racial and ethnic minority groups. The domains of structural racism evaluated included housing and built environment, occupation and employment, health care, economic and educational opportunity, private industry, perceived stress and discrimination, and criminal justice involvement. The PubMed, Embase, and MedNar databases were searched for English-language studies in the US from January 1, 2010, through June 30, 2022. The review demonstrated that racial and ethnic minority groups are more likely to have environmental exposures to air pollution and known carcinogens due to segregation of neighborhoods and poor housing quality. In addition, racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to have exposures to pesticides, silica, and asbestos secondary to higher employment in manual labor occupations. Furthermore, targeted marketing and advertisement of tobacco products by private industry were more likely to occur in neighborhoods with more racial and ethnic minority groups. In addition, poor access to primary care services and inequities in insurance status were associated with elevated lung cancer risk among racial and ethnic minority groups. Lastly, inequities in tobacco use and cessation services among individuals with criminal justice involvement had important implications for tobacco use among Black and Hispanic populations. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that structural racism must be considered as a fundamental contributor to the unequal distribution of lung cancer risk factors and thus disparate lung cancer risk across different racial and ethnic groups. Additional research is needed to better identify mechanisms contributing to inequitable lung cancer risk and tailor preventive interventions.

Liquid Biopsy Screening for Early Detection of Lung Cancer: Current State and Future Directions.

Liquid biopsy (LB) is clinically utilized to detect minute amounts of genetic material or protein shed by cancer cells, most commonly cell free DNA (cfDNA), as a noninvasive precision oncology tool to assess genomic alterations to guide cancer therapy or to detect the persistence of tumor cells after therapy. LB is also being developed as a multi-cancer screening assay. The use of LB holds great promise as a tool to detect lung cancer early. Although lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) substantially reduces lung cancer mortality in high-risk individuals, the ability of current LCS guidelines to reduce the public health burden of advanced lung cancer through early detection has been limited. LB may be an important tool to improve early lung cancer detection among all populations at risk for lung cancer. In this systematic review, we summarize the test characteristics, including sensitivity and specificity of individual tests, as they pertain to the detection of lung cancer.  We also address critical questions in the use of liquid biopsy for early detection of lung cancer including: 1. How might liquid biopsy be used to detect lung cancer early; 2. How accurate is liquid biopsy in detecting lung cancer early; and 3. Does liquid biopsy perform as well in never and light-smokers compared with current and former smokers.

The impact of income and education on lung cancer screening utilization, eligibility, and outcomes: a narrative review of socioeconomic disparities in lung cancer screening.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer deaths in the US and worldwide. In particular, vulnerable populations such as those of low socioeconomic status (SES) are at the highest risk for and suffer the highest mortality from NSCLC. Although lung cancer screening (LCS) has been demonstrated to be a powerful tool to lower NSCLC mortality, it is underutilized by eligible smokers, and disparities in screening are likely to contribute to inequities in NSCLC outcomes. It is imperative that we collect and analyze LCS data focused on individuals of low socioeconomic position to identify and address barriers to LCS utilization and help close the gaps in NSCLC mortality along socioeconomic lines. Toward this end, this review aims to examine published studies that have evaluated the impact of income and education on LCS utilization, eligibility, and outcomes. We searched the PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and CINAHL Plus databases for all studies published from January 1, 2010, to October 21, 2020, that discussed socioeconomic-based LCS outcomes. The review reveals that income and education have impact on LCS utilization, eligibility, false positive rates and smoking cessation attempts; however, there is a lack of studies evaluating the impact of SES on LCS follow-up, stage at diagnosis, and treatment. We recommend the intentional inclusion of lower SES participants in LCS studies in order to clarify appropriate eligibility criteria, risk-based metrics and outcomes in this high-risk group. We also anticipate that low SES smokers and their providers will require increased support and education regarding smoking cessation and shared decision-making efforts.