Analysis of Eligibility for Lung Cancer Screening by Race After 2021 Changes to US Preventive Services Task Force Screening Guidelines

National enrollment of lung cancer clinical trials is disproportionate based on race and health care access

OBJECTIVE

Despite declining lung cancer mortality in the United States, survival differences remain among racial and ethnic minorities in addition to those with limited health care access. Improvements in lung cancer treatment can be obtained through clinical trials, yet there are disparities in clinical trial enrollment of other cancer types. This study aims to evaluate disparities in lung cancer clinical trial enrollment to inform future enrollment initiatives.

METHODS

We analyzed patients with non-small cell lung cancer from the National Cancer Database (2004-2018), categorizing them as enrolled or not enrolled in clinical trials based on "rx_summ_other" data element. Clinical, demographic, and institutional factors associated with trial enrollment were assessed using bivariate and multivariate analysis, adjusting for institutional-level clustering.

RESULTS

A total of 1924 (0.12%) patients with lung cancer were enrolled in clinical trials. Enrolled patients were predominantly non-Hispanic White (82%), with greater socioeconomic status, treated at academic programs (67%), and had private insurance (42%) or Medicare (44%). They also traveled further for treatment compared with unenrolled patients (56 vs 27 miles, P < .001). After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, lung cancer trial enrollment was significantly less likely among Black (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-0.7, P < .001) and Hispanic (0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-0.9, P = .01) patients. Patients with Medicaid or uninsured, in the lowest socioeconomic status group, and those treated at community-based cancer programs were the least likely to enroll.

CONCLUSIONS

Enrollment in lung cancer trials disproportionally excludes minority patients, those in the lowest socioeconomic status, community cancer programs, and the underinsured. These disparities in demographic and access for trial participation show a need for improved enrollment strategies.

Innovations in Early Lung Cancer Detection: Tracing the Evolution and Advancements in Screening

Lung cancer mortality rates, particularly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), continue to present a significant global health challenge, and the adoption of lung cancer screening remains limited, often influenced by inequities in access to healthcare. Despite clinical evidence demonstrating the efficacy of annual screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and recommendations from medical organizations including the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the national lung cancer screening uptake remains around 5% among eligible individuals. Advancements in the clinical management of NSCLC have recently become more personalized with the implementation of blood-based biomarker testing. Extensive research into tumor-derived cell-free DNA (cfDNA) through fragmentation offers a novel method for improving early lung cancer detection. This review assesses the screening landscape, explores obstacles to lung cancer screening, and discusses how a plasma whole genome fragmentome test (pWGFrag-Lung) can improve lung cancer screening participation and adherence.

Early Detection and Interception of Lung Cancer

Recent advances in lung cancer treatment have led to dramatic improvements in 5-year survival rates. And yet, lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality, in large part, because it is often diagnosed at an advanced stage, when cure is no longer possible. Lung cancer screening (LCS) is essential for intercepting the disease at an earlier stage. Unfortunately, LCS has been poorly adopted in the United States, with less than 5% of eligible patients being screened nationally. This article will describe the data supporting LCS, the obstacles to LCS implementation, and the promising opportunities that lie ahead.

Disparities across the continuum of lung cancer care: a review of recent literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Health disparities have long been noted in lung cancer incidence and survival and persist across the continuum of care. Understanding the gaps in care that arise from disparities in lung cancer risk, screening, treatment, and survivorship are essential to guiding efforts to achieve equitable care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature continues to show that Black people, women, and people who experience socioeconomic disadvantage or live in rural areas experience disparities throughout the spectrum of lung cancer care. Contributing factors include structural racism, lower education level and health literacy, insurance type, healthcare facility accessibility, inhaled carcinogen exposure, and unmet social needs. Promising strategies to improve lung cancer care equity include policy to reduce exposure to tobacco smoke and harmful pollutants, more inclusive lung cancer screening eligibility criteria, improved access and patient navigation in lung cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment, more deliberate offering of appropriate surgical and medical treatments, and improved availability of survivorship and palliative care.

SUMMARY

Given ongoing disparities in lung cancer care, research to determine best practices for narrowing these gaps and to guide policy change are an essential focus of future lung cancer research.

Pack-Year Smoking History: An Inadequate and Biased Measure to Determine Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility

PURPOSE

Pack-year smoking history is an imperfect and biased measure of cumulative tobacco exposure. The use of pack-year smoking history to determine lung cancer screening eligibility in the current US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guideline may unintentionally exclude many high-risk individuals, especially those from racial and ethnic minority groups. It is unclear whether using a smoking duration cutoff instead of a smoking pack-year cutoff would improve the selection of individuals for screening.

METHODS

We analyzed 49,703 individuals with a smoking history from the Southern Community Cohort Study (SCCS) and 22,126 individuals with a smoking history from the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS) to assess eligibility for screening under the USPSTF guideline versus a proposed guideline that replaces the ≥20-pack-year criterion with a ≥20-year smoking duration criterion.

RESULTS

Under the USPSTF guideline, only 57.6% of Black patients with lung cancer in the SCCS would have qualified for screening, whereas a significantly higher percentage of White patients with lung cancer (74.0%) would have qualified (P < .001). Under the proposed guideline, the percentage of Black and White patients with lung cancer who would have qualified for screening increased to 85.3% and 82.0%, respectively, eradicating the disparity in screening eligibility between the groups. In the BWHS, using a 20-year smoking duration cutoff instead of a 20-pack-year cutoff increased the percentage of Black women with lung cancer who would have qualified for screening from 42.5% to 63.8%.

CONCLUSION

Use of a 20-year smoking duration cutoff instead of a 20-pack-year cutoff greatly increases the proportion of patients with lung cancer who would qualify for screening and eliminates the racial disparity in screening eligibility between Black versus White individuals; smoking duration has the added benefit of being easier to calculate and being a more precise assessment of smoking exposure compared with pack-year smoking history.

Computational and experimental microfluidics: Total analysis system for mixing, sorting, and concentrating particles and cells

Body fluids can potentially indicate the presence of non-small cancer cells. Studying these fluids is an emerging field that could be crucial for cancer detection and monitoring treatment effectiveness. Meanwhile, the examination of fluids on a microscopic level is part of the field of microfluidics. This study focuses on the development of a total analysis system that consists of various interconnected structures that are designed to mix, classify, concentrate, and isolate particles in fluids that mimic the behavior of cancer and normal cells. Using the COMSOL Multiphysics software, the device's performance was optimized to use a pressure input of 35 kPa for water or serum and 29.4 kPa for a mixture of liquid and serum samples, which are the optimal pressure inputs. The numerical models were validated by experiments using two types of polystyrene particles, with diameters of 5 and 20 μm. Moreover, the developed system was applied to monitor the behavior of red blood cells. The microfluidic chip is capable of addressing several challenges through visual detections, including mixing tests of two fluids with similar densities, proper particle size classification using Dean flow fractionation, and single-step recovery of large, labeled particles. Finally, the collected particles were examined using an environmental scanning electron microscope to determine their size, and the results demonstrated that successful size separation was achieved, with particles around 20 μm completely separated from the smaller ones.

Does the revised LDCT lung cancer screening guideline bridge the racial disparities gap: Results from the health and retirement study

PURPOSE

This study examined racial/ethnic disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility rates using 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and the revised 2021 guidelines.

METHODS

The study utilized a retrospective and cross-sectional research design by analyzing data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). N = 2,823 respondents aged 50-80 who self-reported current smoking were included in the analyses. Binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine the changed status of LDCT screening eligibility based on the revised 2021 guidelines by race/ethnicity after adjusting for respondent demographics.

RESULTS

Our study found substantial increases in screening eligibility rates across racial and ethnic groups when comparing the original and revised guidelines. The largest increase was observed among Black people (174%), Hispanics (152%), those in the other category (118%), and Whites who smoke (80.8%). When comparing original screening guidelines to revised guidelines, Whites who smoke had the highest percentage of changes from "not eligible" to "eligible" (28.3%), followed by individuals in the "other" category (28.1%), Black people (23.2%) and Hispanics who smoke (18.3%) (p < 0.001). Binary logistic regression results further showed that Black people who smoke (OR = 0.71, p = 0.001), as well as Hispanics who smoke (OR=0.54, p < 0.001), were less likely to change from not eligible to eligible for screening compared to Whites who smoke after adopting the revised screening guidelines. Based on the absolute differences in screening eligibility rates between Whites and other racial/ethnic groups, the disparities may have widened under the new guidelines, particularly with larger absolute differences observed between Whites, Black people, and Hispanics.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights racial/ethnic disparities in LDCT screening eligibility among people who currently smoke. While the revised USPSTF guidelines increased screening eligibility for racial and ethnic minorities, they did not eliminate these disparities and may have widened under the new guidelines. Targeted interventions and policies are necessary to address barriers faced by underrepresented populations and promote equitable access to lung cancer screening.

Factors associated with adherence to provider referrals for lung cancer screening with low dose computed tomography before and during COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer has been the leading cause of American deaths from cancer. Although Medicare started covering lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in 2015, the uptake of LDCT-LCS remains low. This study examines the changes in adherence to provider referrals for LDCT-LCS and the factors at patient, provider, and health system levels that influence the completion rate of LDCT-LCS orders before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Our study examined electronic health record data (December 2013 - December 2020) from a large, community-based clinical healthcare delivery system in California. We plotted monthly trends in the frequency of LDCT-LCS orders and completion rate and compared the annual LDCT-LCS completion rate between LCS-eligible, LCS-ineligible, and unknown eligibility groups. We then explored multilevel factors associated with the completion of LDCT-LCS orders using hierarchical generalized linear models.

RESULTS

There was an increase in LDCT-LCS orders (N = 12,469) from 2013 to 2019, followed by a sharp decline in March 2020 due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Thereafter, LDCT-LCS orders slowly increased again in June 2020. The completion rate of LDCT-LCS increased from 0% in December 2013 to approximately 70% in 2018-2019 but declined to 50-60% in 2020 during the pandemic. Ineligible patients had lower completion rates of LDCT-LCS. Patients who were new to the healthcare system, Black, received the LDCT-LCS order in the first few years after Medicare coverage (2016 or 2017), during the pandemic, had major comorbidities, and smoked less than 30 pack-years were less likely to complete an order. Patients were more likely to complete LDCT-LCS orders if they were younger, received the LDCT-LCS order from a physician (vs. nonphysician provider), from family medicine or other specialties (vs. internal medicine), or saw a provider with more experience in LDCT-LCS.

CONCLUSIONS

The beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic largely decreased the volume of LDCT-LCS orders, but rates have since been slowing recovering. Future interventions to improve lung cancer screening should consider doing more targeted outreach to new patients and Black patients as well as providing additional education to nonphysician practitioners and those providers with lower rates of LDCT-LCS referral orders.

Cross-sectional review of US websites providing lung cancer screening recommendations following the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force updates

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death worldwide and an urgent public health priority. Early detection by low-dose CT (LDCT) screening and treatment of lung cancer has been shown to reduce mortality but uptake remains dismal, particularly among historically underserved groups. Following the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) expansion of its eligibility criteria to address inequities in utilization, efforts are needed to ensure dissemination of updated health information through digital means such as websites.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate whether online websites have been updated to reflect the recent USPSTF guidelines that expanded the recommended age and smoking pack-years for lung cancer screening.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we identified websites that provide information on lung cancer screening guidelines on May 24, 2022, approximately one year after the emergence of the updated USPSTF guidelines. The websites were assessed for recommended age to begin lung cancer screening and smoking pack-year quantity.

RESULTS

Our study found that a lag in dissemination of updated lung cancer screening information exists. Approximately 1 year after the USPSTF guidelines were updated, 17-32% of websites providing information on lung cancer screening guidelines had not been updated.

CONCLUSION

Routine monitoring of websites that provide information on lung cancer screening can help reduce misinformation, improve uptake of lung cancer screening, and prevent delays in diagnostic evaluation which disproportionally affects traditionally underserved populations.

Changes in Stage at Presentation among Lung and Breast Cancer Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic altered access to healthcare by decreasing the number of patients able to receive preventative care and cancer screening. We hypothesized that, given these changes in access to care, radiologic screening for breast and lung cancer would be decreased, and patients with these cancers would consequently present at later stages of their disease.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of 2017 to September 2021 UMass Memorial Tumor Registry data for adult breast and lung cancer patients. Changes in stage at presentation of breast and lung cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic were measured, defined as before and during COVID-19.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant changes in the overall stage of presentation before or during the COVID-19 pandemic for either breast or lung cancer patients. Analysis of case presentation and stage during periods of COVID-19 surges that occurred during the time of this study compared with prepandemic data demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in overall presentation of breast cancer patients in the first surge, with no other statistically significant changes in breast cancer presentation. A nonstatistically significant decrease in lung cancer presentation was seen during the initial surge of COVID-19. There was also a statistically significant increase in early-stage presentation of lung cancer during the second and third COVID-19 surges.

CONCLUSIONS

In the 2 years after the COVID-19 pandemic, we were not able to demonstrate stage migration at presentation of breast and lung cancer patients to later stages despite decreases in overall presentation during the initial 2 years of the COVID pandemic. An increase in early-stage lung cancer during the second and third surges is interesting and could be related to increased chest imaging for COVID pneumonia.

Secondary prevention and treatment innovation of early stage non-small cell lung cancer: Impact on diagnostic-therapeutic pathway from a multidisciplinary perspective

Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, mostly because the lack of a screening program so far. Although smoking cessation has a central role in LC primary prevention, several trials on LC screening through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in a high risk population showed a significant reduction of LC related mortality. Most trials showed heterogeneity in terms of selection criteria, comparator arm, detection nodule method, timing and intervals of screening and duration of the follow-up. LC screening programs currently active in Europe as well as around the world will lead to a higher number of early-stage Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) at the diagnosis. Innovative drugs have been recently transposed from the metastatic to the perioperative setting, leading to improvements in terms of resection rates and pathological responses after induction chemoimmunotherapy, and disease free survival with targeted agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors. The present review summarizes available evidence about LC screening, highlighting potential pitfalls and benefits and underlining the impact on the diagnostic therapeutic pathway of NSCLC from a multidisciplinary perspective. Future perspectives in terms of circulating biomarkers under evaluation for patients' risk stratification as well as a focus on recent clinical trials results and ongoing studies in the perioperative setting will be also presented.

Expanding the Reach and Grasp of Lung Cancer Screening

Low-dose computer tomographic (LDCT) lung cancer screening reduces lung cancer-specific and all-cause mortality among high-risk individuals, but implementation has been challenging. Despite health insurance coverage for lung cancer screening in the United States since 2015, fewer than 10% of eligible persons have participated; striking geographic, racial, and socioeconomic disparities were already evident, especially in the populations at greatest risk of lung cancer and, therefore, most likely to benefit from screening; and adherence to subsequent testing is significantly lower than that reported in clinical trials, potentially reducing the realized benefit. Lung cancer screening is a covered health care benefit in very few countries. Obtaining the full population-level benefit of lung cancer screening will require improved participation of already eligible persons (the grasp of screening) and improved eligibility criteria that more closely match up with the full spectrum of persons at risk (the reach of screening), irrespective of smoking history. We used the socioecological framework of health care to systematically review implementation barriers to lung cancer screening and discuss multilevel solutions. We also discussed guideline-concordant management of incidentally detected lung nodules as a complementary approach to early lung cancer detection that can extend the reach and strengthen the grasp of screening. Furthermore, we discussed ongoing efforts in Asia to explore the possibility of LDCT screening in populations in whom lung cancer risk is relatively independent of smoking. Finally, we summarized innovative technological solutions, including biomarker selection and artificial intelligence strategies, to improve the safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening in diverse populations.