Social determinants of health and US cancer screening interventions: A systematic review.

There remains a need to synthesize linkages between social determinants of health (SDOH) and cancer screening to reduce persistent inequities contributing to the US cancer burden. The authors conducted a systematic review of US-based breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening intervention studies to summarize how SDOH have been considered in interventions and relationships between SDOH and screening. Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed research articles published in English between 2010 and 2021. The Covidence software platform was used to screen articles and extract data using a standardized template. Data items included study and intervention characteristics, SDOH intervention components and measures, and screening outcomes. The findings were summarized using descriptive statistics and narratives. The review included 144 studies among diverse population groups. SDOH interventions increased screening rates overall by a median of 8.4 percentage points (interquartile interval, 1.8-18.8 percentage points). The objective of most interventions was to increase community demand (90.3%) and access (84.0%) to screening. SDOH interventions related to health care access and quality were most prevalent (227 unique intervention components). Other SDOH, including educational, social/community, environmental, and economic factors, were less common (90, 52, 21, and zero intervention components, respectively). Studies that included analyses of health policy, access to care, and lower costs yielded the largest proportions of favorable associations with screening outcomes. SDOH were predominantly measured at the individual level. This review describes how SDOH have been considered in the design and evaluation of cancer screening interventions and effect sizes for SDOH interventions. Findings may guide future intervention and implementation research aiming to reduce US screening inequities.

Multi-Cancer Early Detection: The New Frontier in Cancer Early Detection.

The new generation of cancer early detection tests holds remarkable promise for revolutionizing and changing the paradigm of cancer early detection. Dozens of cancer early detection tests are being developed and evaluated. Some are already commercialized and available for use, most as a complement to and not in place of existing recommended cancer screening tests. This review evaluates existing single- and multi-cancer early detection tests (MCEDs), discussing their performance characteristics including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy. It also critically looks at the potential harms that could result from these tests, including false positive and negative results, the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment, psychological and economic harms, and the risk of widening cancer inequities. We also review the large-scale, population-based studies that are being launched in the United States and United Kingdom to determine the impact of MCEDs on clinically relevant outcomes and implications for current practice.

Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium.

Timely follow-up for positive cancer screening results remains suboptimal, and the evidence base to inform decisions on optimizing the timeliness of diagnostic testing is unclear. This systematic review evaluated published studies regarding time to follow-up after a positive screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. The quality of available evidence was very low or low across cancers, with potential attenuated or reversed associations from confounding by indication in most studies. Overall, evidence suggested that the risk for poorer cancer outcomes rises with longer wait times that vary within and across cancer types, which supports performing diagnostic testing as soon as feasible after the positive result, but evidence for specific time targets is limited. Within these limitations, we provide our opinion on cancer-specific recommendations for times to follow-up and how existing guidelines relate to the current evidence. Thresholds set should consider patient worry, potential for loss to follow-up with prolonged wait times, and available resources. Research is needed to better guide the timeliness of diagnostic follow-up, including considerations for patient preferences and existing barriers, while addressing methodological weaknesses. Research is also needed to identify effective interventions for reducing wait times for diagnostic testing, particularly in underserved or low-resource settings. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:199-216. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Outcome of early detection approach in control of breast, cervical, and oral cancer: Experience from a rural cancer center in India.

In low- and middle-income countries most of the cancer patients attend the hospital at a late stage and treatment completion of these cases is challenging. The early detection program (EDP), in rural areas of Punjab state, India was initiated to identify breast, cervical, and oral cancer at an early stage by raising awareness and providing easy access to diagnosis and treatment. A total of 361 health education programs and 99 early detection clinics were organized. The symptomatic and self-interested (non-symptomatic individuals who opted for screening) cases visited the detection clinic. They were screened for breast, cervical, and/or oral cancer. Further diagnosis and treatment of screen-positive cases were carried out at Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital (HBCH), Sangrur. Community leaders and healthcare workers were involved in all the activities. The EDP, Sangrur removed barriers between cancer diagnosis and treatment with the help of project staff. From 2019 to 2023, a total of 221,317 populations were covered. Symptomatic and self-interested individuals attended the breast (1627), cervical (1601), and oral (1111) examinations. 46 breast (in situ-4.3%; localized-52.2%), 9 cervical (localized-77.8%), and 12 oral (localized-66.7%) cancer cases were detected, and treatment completion was 82.6%, 77.8%, and 50.0%, respectively. We compared cancer staging and treatment completion of cases detected through EDP with the cases attended HBCH from Sangrur district in 2018; the difference between two groups is statistically significant. Due to the early detection approach, there is disease down-staging and improvement in treatment completion. This approach is feasible and can be implemented to control these cancers in low- and middle-income countries.

Value of automated breast ultrasound in screening: Standalone and as a supplemental to digital breast tomosynthesis.

We aimed to determine the value of standalone and supplemental automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) in detecting cancers in an opportunistic screening setting with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and compare this combined screening method to DBT and ABUS alone in women older than 39 years with BI-RADS B-D density categories. In this prospective opportunistic screening study, 3466 women aged 39 or older with BI-RADS B-D density categories and with a mean age of 50 were included. The screening protocol consisted of DBT mediolateral-oblique views, 2D craniocaudal views, and ABUS with three projections for both breasts. ABUS was evaluated blinded to mammography findings. Statistical analysis evaluated diagnostic performance for DBT, ABUS, and combined workflows. Twenty-nine cancers were screen-detected. ABUS and DBT exhibited the same cancer detection rates (CDR) at 7.5/1000 whereas DBT + ABUS showed 8.4/1000, with ABUS contributing an additional CDR of 0.9/1000. Standalone ABUS outperformed DBT in detecting 12.5% more invasive cancers. DBT displayed better accuracy (95%) compared to ABUS (88%) and combined approach (86%). Sensitivities for DBT and ABUS were the same (84%), with DBT + ABUS showing a higher rate (94%). DBT outperformed ABUS in specificity (95% vs. 88%). DBT + ABUS exhibited a higher recall rate (14.89%) compared to ABUS (12.38%) and DBT (6.03%) (p < .001). Standalone ABUS detected more invasive cancers compared to DBT, with a higher recall rate. The combined approach showed a higher CDR by detecting one additional cancer per thousand.

Assessing the impact of increasing lung screening eligibility by relaxing the maximum years-since-quit threshold: A simulation modeling study.

BACKGROUND: In 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force expanded its lung screening recommendation to include persons aged 50-80 years who had ever smoked and had at least 20 pack-years of exposure and less than 15 years since quitting (YSQ). However, studies have suggested that screening persons who formerly smoked with longer YSQ could be beneficial. METHODS: The authors used two validated lung cancer models to assess the benefits and harms of screening using various YSQ thresholds (10, 15, 20, 25, 30, and no YSQ) and the age at which screening was stopped. The impact of enforcing the YSQ criterion only at entry, but not at exit, also was evaluated. Outcomes included the number of screens, the percentage ever screened, screening benefits (lung cancer deaths averted, life-years gained), and harms (false-positive tests, overdiagnosed cases, radiation-induced lung cancer deaths). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the effect of restricting screening to those who had at least 5 years of life expectancy. RESULTS: As the YSQ criterion was relaxed, the number of screens and the benefits and harms of screening increased. Raising the age at which to stop screening age resulted in additional benefits but with more overdiagnosis, as expected, because screening among those older than 80 years increased. Limiting screening to those who had at least 5 years of life expectancy would maintain most of the benefits while considerably reducing the harms. CONCLUSIONS: Expanding screening to persons who formerly smoked and have greater than 15 YSQ would result in considerable increases in deaths averted and life-years gained. Although additional harms would occur, these could be moderated by ensuring that screening is restricted to only those with reasonable life expectancy.

Risk model-based management for second primary lung cancer among lung cancer survivors through a validated risk prediction model.

BACKGROUND: Recent therapeutic advances and screening technologies have improved survival among patients with lung cancer, who are now at high risk of developing second primary lung cancer (SPLC). Recently, an SPLC risk-prediction model (called SPLC-RAT) was developed and validated using data from population-based epidemiological cohorts and clinical trials, but real-world validation has been lacking. The predictive performance of SPLC-RAT was evaluated in a hospital-based cohort of lung cancer survivors. METHODS: The authors analyzed data from 8448 ever-smoking patients diagnosed with initial primary lung cancer (IPLC) in 1997-2006 at Mayo Clinic, with each patient followed for SPLC through 2018. The predictive performance of SPLC-RAT and further explored the potential of improving SPLC detection through risk model-based surveillance using SPLC-RAT versus existing clinical surveillance guidelines. RESULTS: Of 8448 IPLC patients, 483 (5.7%) developed SPLC over 26,470 person-years. The application of SPLC-RAT showed high discrimination area under the receiver operating characteristics curve: 0.81). When the cohort was stratified by a 10-year risk threshold of ≥5.6% (i.e., 80th percentile from the SPLC-RAT development cohort), the observed SPLC incidence was significantly elevated in the high-risk versus low-risk subgroup (13.1% vs. 1.1%, p < 1 × 10-6 ). The risk-based surveillance through SPLC-RAT (≥5.6% threshold) outperformed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines with higher sensitivity (86.4% vs. 79.4%) and specificity (38.9% vs. 30.4%) and required 20% fewer computed tomography follow-ups needed to detect one SPLC (162 vs. 202). CONCLUSION: In a large, hospital-based cohort, the authors validated the predictive performance of SPLC-RAT in identifying high-risk survivors of SPLC and showed its potential to improve SPLC detection through risk-based surveillance. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Lung cancer survivors have a high risk of developing second primary lung cancer (SPLC). However, no evidence-based guidelines for SPLC surveillance are available for lung cancer survivors. Recently, an SPLC risk-prediction model was developed and validated using data from population-based epidemiological cohorts and clinical trials, but real-world validation has been lacking. Using a large, real-world cohort of lung cancer survivors, we showed the high predictive accuracy and risk-stratification ability of the SPLC risk-prediction model. Furthermore, we demonstrated the potential to enhance efficiency in detecting SPLC using risk model-based surveillance strategies compared to the existing consensus-based clinical guidelines, including the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Impact of lung cancer screening on stage migration and mortality among the national Veterans Health Administration population with lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite randomized trials demonstrating a mortality benefit to low-dose computed tomography screening to detect lung cancer, uptake of lung cancer screening (LCS) has been slow, and the benefits of screening remain unclear in clinical practice. METHODS: This study aimed to assess the impact of screening among patients in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) health care system diagnosed with lung cancer between 2011 and 2018. Lung cancer stage at diagnosis, lung cancer-specific survival, and overall survival between patients with cancer who did and did not receive screening before diagnosis were evaluated. We used Cox regression modeling and inverse propensity weighting analyses with lead time bias adjustment to correlate LCS exposure with patient outcomes. RESULTS: Of 57,919 individuals diagnosed with lung cancer in the VA system between 2011 and 2018, 2167 (3.9%) underwent screening before diagnosis. Patients with screening had higher rates of stage I diagnoses (52% vs. 27%; p ≤ .0001) compared to those who had no screening. Screened patients had improved 5-year overall survival rates (50.2% vs. 27.9%) and 5-year lung cancer-specific survival (59.0% vs. 29.7%) compared to unscreened patients. Among screening-eligible patients who underwent National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-concordant treatment, screening resulted in substantial reductions in all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.92; p = .003) and lung-specific mortality (aHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50-0.74; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: While LCS uptake remains limited, screening was associated with earlier stage diagnoses and improved survival. This large national study corroborates the value of LCS in clinical practice; efforts to widely adopt this vital intervention are needed.

Intervention recommendations to improve uptake of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening among individuals living with serious mental illness.

PURPOSE: Few efforts have been made to inform intervention design for increasing the uptake of cancer screening in individuals living with serious mental illness (ILSMI), who have lower cancer screening rates than the general population. This qualitative study explored ILSMI's and their care team member's (CTM) recommendations on the design of a breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening intervention for ILSMI. METHODS: Twenty-five ILSMI (mean age: 71.4 years; 60% female) and 15 CTM (mean age: 45.3 years; 80% female) were recruited through purposive sampling. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were used to collect participants' intervention suggestions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and imported into NVivo. Content analysis and the constant comparison method were used to analyze interview data. RESULTS: ILSMI and CTMs provided several salient recommendations. ILSMI should receive disease-specific, logistical, and screening education, and primary care staff should receive education on psychopathology. Mental health providers and patient navigators should be considered as the primary interventionist. The intervention should be delivered where ILSMI receive medical or mental health services, receive community and government services, and/or via various digital media. The intervention should improve the collaboration, communication, and coordination between primary and mental health care. Findings also pointed to the implementation of trauma-informed cancer care and integrated care models comprising mental health care and primary cancer care. CONCLUSION: These findings bring the skills, knowledge, and expertise of ILSM and their care team to intervention design for increasing colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening in ILSMI attending an intensive outpatient program.

Prostate-specific antigen testing rates in high-risk populations: results from the All of Us Research Program.

BACKGROUND: Early detection of prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) remains controversial and disparities in the receipt of prostate cancer screening persist in the US. We sought to examine disparities in PSA testing rates among groups with higher prostate cancer risk and differential access to healthcare. METHODS: We identified a cohort of 37,706 males within the All of Us Research Program without a history of prostate cancer between the ages of 40 and 85 at time of enrollment (2017-2021). Incidence rate ratios (IRR) for the number of PSA tests received during follow-up through December 2021 were estimated using age- and multivariable-adjusted negative binomial regression models. PSA testing frequencies in the cohort were compared with population-based estimates from the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). RESULTS: A total of 6,486 males (17.2%) received at least one PSA test over the course of follow-up. In multivariable-adjusted models, non-Hispanic Black males received PSA tests at a 17% lower rate (IRR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.76, 0.90) than non-Hispanic White males. Higher educational attainment, higher annual income, having self-/employer-purchased insurance, having a spouse or domestic partner, and having a family history of prostate cancer were all associated with higher rates of PSA testing. The proportion of males ages 55 to 69 who received a PSA test within two years was lower in All of Us (12.4%, 95% CI 11.8-13.0%) relative to population-based estimates from the BRFSS (35.2%, 95% CI 34.2-36.3%). CONCLUSION: Absolute PSA testing rates in All of Us were lower than population-based estimates, but associations with PSA testing in the cohort mirrored previously reported disparities in prostate cancer screening. These findings highlight the importance of addressing barriers to care in order to reduce disparities in cancer screening.

Association between the social vulnerability index and breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening rates in Rhode Island.

BACKGROUND: Cancer screening is effective in reducing the burden of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers, but not all communities have appropriate access to these services. In this study, we aimed to identify under-resourced communities by assessing the association between the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) with screening rates for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers in ZIP-code tabulation areas (ZCTAs) in Rhode Island. METHODS: This study leveraged deidentified health insurance claims data from HealthFacts RI, the state's all-payer claims database, to calculate screening rates for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers using Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set measures. We used spatial autoregressive Tobit models to assess the association between the SVI, its four domains, and its 15 component variables with screening rates in 2019, accounting for spatial dependencies. RESULTS: In 2019, 73.2, 65.0, and 66.1% of eligible individuals were screened for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively. For every 1-unit increase in the SVI, screening rates for breast and colorectal cancer were lower by 0.07% (95% CI 0.01-0.08%) and 0.08% (95% CI 0.02-0.15%), respectively. With higher scores on the SVI's socioeconomic domain, screening rates for all three types of cancers were lower. CONCLUSION: The SVI, especially its socioeconomic domain, is a useful tool for identifying areas that are under-served by current efforts to expand access to screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer. These areas should be prioritized for new place-based partnerships that address barriers to screening at the individual and community level.

Avoiding lead-time bias by estimating stage-specific proportions of cancer and non-cancer deaths.

PURPOSE: Understanding how stage at cancer diagnosis influences cause of death, an endpoint that is not susceptible to lead-time bias, can inform population-level outcomes of cancer screening. METHODS: Using data from 17 US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries for 1,154,515 persons aged 50-84 years at cancer diagnosis in 2006-2010, we evaluated proportional causes of death by cancer type and uniformly classified stage, following or extrapolating all patients until death through 2020. RESULTS: Most cancer patients diagnosed at stages I-II did not go on to die from their index cancer, whereas most patients diagnosed at stage IV did. For patients diagnosed with any cancer at stages I-II, an estimated 26% of deaths were due to the index cancer, 63% due to non-cancer causes, and 12% due to a subsequent primary (non-index) cancer. In contrast, for patients diagnosed with any stage IV cancer, 85% of deaths were attributed to the index cancer, with 13% non-cancer and 2% non-index-cancer deaths. Index cancer mortality from stages I-II cancer was proportionally lowest for thyroid, melanoma, uterus, prostate, and breast, and highest for pancreas, liver, esophagus, lung, and stomach. CONCLUSION: Across all cancer types, the percentage of patients who went on to die from their cancer was over three times greater when the cancer was diagnosed at stage IV than stages I-II. As mortality patterns are not influenced by lead-time bias, these data suggest that earlier detection is likely to improve outcomes across cancer types, including those currently unscreened.

The effect of mailed outreach on FIT completion among patients aged 45-50 in a safety net healthcare system.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer screening is recommended starting at age 45, but there has been little research on strategies to promote screening in patients younger than 50. METHODS: An outreach program quasi-randomly assigned patients aged 45-50 without recent fecal immunochemical test (FIT), colonoscopy or contraindications to screening to two intervention arms: electronic outreach with email and text (electronic outreach only) versus electronic outreach plus mailed outreach with FIT, an instructional letter and a prepaid return envelope (mailed + electronic outreach). In response to known disparities in screening uptake, all Black patients were assigned to receive mailed + electronic outreach. RESULTS: Among patients quasi-randomly assigned to an intervention (non-Black patients), the 180-day FIT completion rate was 18.8% in the electronic outreach only group (n = 1,318) and 25.0% in the mailed + electronic outreach group (n = 1,364) (difference 6.2% [95% CI 3.0, 9.4]). FIT completion was 16.6% among Black patients (n = 469), 8.4% (95% CI 4.1, 12.6) lower than among non-Black patients also assigned to mailed + electronic outreach. CONCLUSION: Among patients aged 45-50, mailed + electronic outreach had a greater effect on FIT completion than electronic outreach alone. Crossover between intervention groups likely lead to an underestimation of the effect of mailed outreach.

Machine Learning for Early Discrimination Between Lung Cancer and Benign Nodules Using Routine Clinical and Laboratory Data.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer poses a global health threat necessitating early detection and precise staging for improved patient outcomes. This study focuses on developing and validating a machine learning-based risk model for early lung cancer screening and staging, using routine clinical data. METHODS: Two medical center, observational, retrospective studies were conducted, involving 2312 lung cancer patients and 653 patients with benign nodules. Machine learning techniques, including differential analysis and feature selection, were employed to identify key factors for modeling. The study focused on variables such as nodule density, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), age, and lifestyle habits. The Logistic Regression model was utilized for early diagnoses, and the XGBoost model was utilized for staging based on selected features. RESULTS: For early diagnoses, the Logistic Regression model achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.716 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.607-0.826), with 0.703 sensitivity and 0.654 specificity. The XGBoost model excelled in distinguishing late-stage from early-stage lung cancer, exhibiting an AUC of 0.913 (95% CI 0.862-0.963), with 0.909 sensitivity and 0.814 specificity. These findings highlight the model's potential for enhancing diagnostic accuracy and staging in lung cancer. CONCLUSION: This study introduces a novel machine learning-based risk model for early lung cancer screening and staging, leveraging routine clinical information and laboratory data. The model shows promise in enhancing accuracy, mitigating overdiagnosis, and improving patient outcomes.

The association between organised colorectal cancer screening strategies and reduction of its related mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To assess the long-term association between organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies and CRC-relate mortality. METHODS: We systematically reviewed studies on organised CRC screening through PubMed, Ovid Medline, Embase and Cochrane from the inception. We retrieved characteristics of organised CRC screening from included literature and matched mortality (over 50 years) of those areas from the International Agency for Research on Cancer in May 2023. The variations of mortality were reported via the age-standardised mortality ratio. A random-effects model was used to synthesis results. RESULTS: We summarised 58 organised CRC screening programmes and recorded > 2.7 million CRC-related deaths from 22 countries where rollout screening programmes were performed. The CRC screening strategy with faecal tests (guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT) or faecal immunochemical tests (FIT)) or colonoscopy as the primary screening offer was associated with a 41.8% reduction in mortality, which was higher than those offered gFOBT (4.4%), FIT (16.7%), gFOBT or FIT (16.2%), and faecal tests (gFOBT or FIT) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (16.7%) as primary screening test. The longer duration of screening was associated with a higher reduction in the pooled age-standardised mortality ratio. In particular, the pooled age-standardised mortality ratio became non-significant when the screening of FIT was implemented for less than 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: A CRC screening programme running for > 5 years was associated with a reduction of CRC-related mortality. Countries with a heavy burden of CRC should implement sustainable, organised screening providing a choice between faecal tests and colonoscopy as a preferred primary test.

A transversal cross-sectional study of factors related to HPV vaccination status and cancer screening participation among French women aged 25-40.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, uterine cervical cancer (UCC) was the 12th most common cancer among women in France and the 4th worldwide. French health authorities wanted to increase Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccination and screening rates. There were still many barriers to these measures among young women, their families, and health professionals and teachers. Between 2014 and 2019, international studies found inconsistent effects of HPV vaccination on UCC screening. In 2022, a survey was conducted among women aged 25 to 40 in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region to assess participation 1) in HPV vaccination and its barriers, 2) in UCC screening as a function of HPV vaccination status. METHODS: Data were collected using an anonymous online questionnaire distributed by QR code in 80 general practices randomly selected in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region between January and June 2022. Results were analyzed bivariately using the Chi2 test, multivariately when numbers allowed, and in age subgroups (sensitivity analysis). RESULTS: 407 complete questionnaires (for 602 participating women) were analyzed. In our sample, 41% of women aged 25 to 40 in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region were vaccinated against HPV viruses in 2022. The risk factors for non-vaccination, after multivariable adjustment, were: the periods of eligibility for vaccination in the early days of French vaccination (2007-2012: odds ratio OR = 0.04 [95% CI, 0.02-0.09]; 2012-2017: OR = 0.5 [0.3-0.8]), information received from non-medical sources (OR = 0.3 [0.2-0.6]), and absence of information about vaccination (OR = 0.12 [0.05-0.27]). In our sample, 90% of women were screened for UCC. In bivariate analysis, women at risk of not being screened were those who were youngest, had been vaccinated against HPV, were not heterosexual, lived alone, had gynecological follow-up by their general practitioner, and did not have regular gynecological follow-up. Sensitivity analysis showed that the only risk factor significantly correlated with non-screening regardless of age group was lack of regular gynecological follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in HPV vaccination and UCC screening is improved by medical education and gynecological follow-up. This multicenter study, limited by the relative youth of vaccination in France, should be repeated after 2037 to assess the possible effect of vaccination on screening.

Exploring shared decision-making needs in lung cancer screening among high-risk groups and health care providers in China: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The intricate balance between the advantages and risks of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) impedes the utilization of lung cancer screening (LCS). Guiding shared decision-making (SDM) for well-informed choices regarding LCS is pivotal. There has been a notable increase in research related to SDM. However, these studies possess limitations. For example, they may ignore the identification of decision support and needs from the perspective of health care providers and high-risk groups. Additionally, these studies have not adequately addressed the complete SDM process, including pre-decisional needs, the decision-making process, and post-decision experiences. Furthermore, the East-West divide of SDM has been largely ignored. This study aimed to explore the decisional needs and support for shared decision-making for LCS among health care providers and high-risk groups in China. METHODS: Informed by the Ottawa Decision-Support Framework, we conducted qualitative, face-to-face in-depth interviews to explore shared decision-making among 30 lung cancer high-risk individuals and 9 health care providers. Content analysis was used for data analysis. RESULTS: We identified 4 decisional needs that impair shared decision-making: (1) LCS knowledge deficit; (2) inadequate supportive resources; (3) shared decision-making conceptual bias; and (4) delicate doctor-patient bonds. We identified 3 decision supports: (1) providing information throughout the LCS process; (2) providing shared decision-making decision coaching; and (3) providing decision tools. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers valuable insights into the decisional needs and support required to undergo LCS among high-risk individuals and perspectives from health care providers. Future studies should aim to design interventions that enhance the quality of shared decision-making by offering LCS information, decision tools for LCS, and decision coaching for shared decision-making (e.g., through community nurses). Simultaneously, it is crucial to assess individuals' needs for effective deliberation to prevent conflicts and regrets after arriving at a decision.

Multiple myeloma: unplanned diagnostic pathways and association with risk factors and survival - a nationwide register-based cohort study in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma often presents with vague and non-specific symptoms. Many patients are diagnosed in unplanned rather than elective (planned) diagnostic pathways. This study investigates the diagnosis of multiple myeloma in unplanned pathways and the association with patient characteristics, disease profile, and survival. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide register-based study, including all patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma in Denmark in 2014-2018. Patients were categorised as diagnosed in an unplanned pathway if registered with an acute admission within 30 days prior to the multiple myeloma diagnosis and no other previously registered pathway to this diagnosis. Unplanned pathways were compared to all other pathways combined. RESULTS: We included 2,213 patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma, hereof 32% diagnosed in an unplanned pathway. Comorbidity, no prior cancer diagnosis, a history of few visits to the general practitioner (GP), multiple myeloma complications at diagnosis, high-risk cytogenetics, and advanced cancer stage were associated with a higher probability of being diagnosed in an unplanned pathway. For example, 24.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): 21.8-27.0) of patients with low comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score 0) were diagnosed in an unplanned pathway as were 50.9% (95% CI: 45.6-56.1) of patients with high comorbidity (CCI score 3+). For patients with dialysis need at the time of diagnosis the probability was 66.0% (95% CI 54.2-77.8) and 30.9% (95% CI: 28.9-32.9) for patients with no dialysis need. Patients diagnosed in an unplanned pathway had inferior survival (hazard ratio 1.44 (95% CI: 1.26-1.64)). However, this association was not seen in analyses restricted to patients surviving for more than three years. CONCLUSIONS: High comorbidity level, few usual GP visits, advanced disease status at diagnosis, and complications were associated with diagnosis in an unplanned pathway. Further, patients diagnosed in an unplanned pathway had inferior survival. Promoting earlier diagnosis and preventing unplanned pathways may help improve survival in multiple myeloma.

Impact of the Sars-Cov-2 outbreak on the initial clinical presentation of new solid cancer diagnoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic might have delayed cancer diagnosis and management. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the initial tumor stage of new cancer diagnoses before and after the pandemic. METHODS: We systematically reviewed articles that compared the tumor stage of new solid cancer diagnoses before and after the initial pandemic waves. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to compare the rate of metastatic tumors and the distribution of stages at diagnosis. Subgroup analyses were performed by primary tumor site and by country. RESULTS: From 2,013 studies published between January 2020 and April 2022, we included 58 studies with 109,996 patients. The rate of metastatic tumors was higher after the COVID-19 outbreak than before (pooled OR: 1.29 (95% CI, 1.06-1.57), I2: 89% (95% CI, 86-91)). For specific cancers, common ORs reached statistical significance for breast (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.07-2.12)) and gynecologic (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.04-2.18)) cancers, but not for other cancer types. According to countries, common OR (95% CI) reached statistical significance only for Italy: 1.55 (1.01-2.39) and Spain:1.14 (1.02-1.29). Rates were comparable for stage I-II versus III-IV in studies for which that information was available, and for stages I-II versus stage III in studies that did not include metastatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite inter-study heterogeneity, our meta-analysis showed a higher rate of metastatic tumors at diagnosis after the pandemic. The burden of social distancing policies might explain those results, as patients may have delayed seeking care.

Colonoscopy Quality Measures and Adherence to Follow-up Guidelines Among Endoscopists Participating in a United States Endoscopy Registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Colonoscopy screening can substantially reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Colonoscopies may achieve maximum benefit when they are performed with high quality and accompanied by follow-up recommendations that adhere to clinical guidelines. This study aimed to determine to what extent endoscopists met targets for colonoscopy quality from 2016 through 2019 (the most recent years prior to the COVID-19 pandemic). METHODS: We examined measures of colonoscopy quality and recommended follow-up intervals in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium, a large nationwide endoscopy registry. The analysis included over 2.5 million outpatient screening colonoscopies in average risk adults aged 50-75 years. RESULTS: At least 90% of endoscopists met performance targets for adequate bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, and adenoma detection rate. However, nonadherence to guidelines for follow-up intervals was common. For patients with no colonoscopy findings, 12.0% received a follow-up interval recommendation of ≤5 years instead of the guideline-recommended 10 years. For patients with 1-2 small tubular adenomas, 13.5% received a follow-up interval recommendation of ≤3 years instead of the guideline-recommended 5-10 years. For patients with small sessile serrated polyps, 30.7% received a follow-up interval recommendation of ≤3 years instead of the guideline-recommended 5 years. Some patients with higher risk findings received a follow-up interval recommendation of ≥5 years instead of the guideline-recommended 3 years, including 18.2% of patients with advanced serrated lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Additional attention may be needed to achieve more consistent adherence to guidelines for colonoscopy follow-up recommendations.