Race and sex differences in patient provider communication and awareness of lung cancer screening in the health information National Trends Survey, 2013-2017

Review of Interventions That Improve Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening: A Cataloging of Strategies That Have Been Shown to Work (or Not)

TOPIC IMPORTANCE

Lung cancer screening (LCS) has the potential to decrease mortality from lung cancer by 20%. Yet, more than a decade since LCS was established as an evidence-based practice, < 20% of the eligible population in the United States has been screened. This review focuses on critically appraising interventions that have been designed to increase the initial uptake of LCS, including how they address known barriers to LCS and their effectiveness in overcoming these barriers.

REVIEW FINDINGS

Studies were categorized based on the primary barriers that they addressed: (1) identifying eligible patients (including enhancing awareness through smoking history collection, outreach, and education), (2) shared decision-making-related interventions, and (3) patient navigation interventions. Four of the studies included multicomponent interventions, which often included patient navigation as one of the components. Overall, the effectiveness of the studies reviewed at improving LCS uptake generally was modest and was limited by the multilevel barriers that need to be overcome. Multicomponent interventions generally were more effective at improving LCS uptake, but most studies still had relatively low completion of screening.

SUMMARY

Improving uptake of LCS requires learning from prior interventions to design multilevel interventions that address barriers to LCS at key steps and identifying which components of these interventions are effective and generalizable.

Combined Breast and Lung Cancer Screening Among Dual-Eligible Women: A Descriptive Study

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is consistently the leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, yet lung cancer screening (LCS) rates remain low. By contrast, screening mammography rates are reliably high, suggesting that screening mammography can be a "teachable moment" to increase LCS uptake among dual-eligible women.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective survey study conducted at two academic institutions. Patients undergoing screening mammography were evaluated for LCS eligibility and offered enrollment in a pilot dual-cancer screening program. A series of surveys was administered to characterize participants' knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes about LCS before and after undergoing dual screening. Data were descriptively summarized.

RESULTS

Between August 2022 and July 2023, 54 LCS-eligible patients were enrolled. The study cohort was 100% female and predominantly White (81%), with a median age of 57 y and median of 36 pack-y of smoking. Survey results showed that 98% felt they were at risk for lung cancer, with most (80%) motivated by early detection of potential cancer. Regarding screening barriers, 58% of patients lacked knowledge about LCS eligibility and 47% reported concerns about screening cost. Prior to undergoing LCS, 87% of patients expressed interest in combined breast and lung screening. Encouragingly, after LCS, 84% were likely or very likely to undergo dual screening again and 93% found the shared decision-making visit helpful or very helpful.

CONCLUSIONS

Pairing breast and LCS is a feasible, acceptable intervention that, along with increasing patient and provider education about LCS, can increase LCS uptake and reduce lung cancer mortality.

Disparities in Lung Cancer: A Targeted Literature Review Examining Lung Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Survival Outcomes in the United States

BACKGROUND

Although incidence and mortality of lung cancer have been decreasing, health disparities persist among historically marginalized Black, Hispanic, and Asian populations. A targeted literature review was performed to collate the evidence of health disparities among these historically marginalized patients with lung cancer in the U.S.

METHODS

Articles eligible for review included 1) indexed in PubMed®, 2) English language, 3) U.S. patients only, 4) real-world evidence studies, and 5) publications between January 1, 2018, and November 8, 2021.

RESULTS

Of 94 articles meeting selection criteria, 49 publications were selected, encompassing patient data predominantly between 2004 and 2016. Black patients were shown to develop lung cancer at an earlier age and were more likely to present with advanced-stage disease compared to White patients. Black patients were less likely to be eligible for/receive lung cancer screening, genetic testing for mutations, high-cost and systemic treatments, and surgical intervention compared to White patients. Disparities were also detected in survival, where Hispanic and Asian patients had lower mortality risks compared to White patients. Literature on survival outcomes between Black and White patients was inconclusive. Disparities related to sex, rurality, social support, socioeconomic status, education level, and insurance type were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Health disparities within the lung cancer population begin with initial screening and continue through survival outcomes, with reports persisting well into the latter portion of the past decade. These findings should serve as a call to action, raising awareness of persistent and ongoing inequities, particularly for marginalized populations.

Women's Information Needs and Educational Preferences Regarding Lung Cancer Screening

Background: Physicians are less likely to discuss lung cancer screening (LCS) with women, and women have lower awareness of LCS availability. The objective of this qualitative study was to determine information needs, patient-provider communication barriers, and preferences for LCS education among women. Materials and Methods: Eight semistructured qualitative focus groups were conducted with 28 self-identified women meeting LCS eligibility criteria. Participants were recruited through a large health system, from a community-based LCS program, and through a national online database between October 2020 and March 2021. Focus groups were led by a trained moderator via Zoom. Audio recordings were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis by investigators. Results: LCS decision-making influences included: (1) Health care provider recommendation; (2) Self-advocacy; (3) Insurance coverage and cost; (4) Family; and (5) Interest in early detection. Participants preferred video and print materials, available at physician's office or shared by physician, without scare tactics or shaming about smoking, use clear language, with diverse participants and images. Preferred content focused on: (1) Benefits of early detection; (2) Lung cancer definition, statistics, and risk factors; (3) Benefits of quitting smoking; (4) Demonstration or explanation of how LCS is done; and (5) Availability of other tests and potential harms of screening. Conclusion: Women in our study had limited awareness of LCS and their eligibility and wanted recommendation and support for LCS from their health care providers. We identified addressable information needs about lung cancer and the screening process that can be used to improve LCS uptake in women and shared decision-making processes.

Patient-Provider Discussion About Lung Cancer Screening by Race and Ethnicity: Implications for Equitable Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

Physician-patient discussions regarding lung cancer screening (LCS) are uncommon and its racial and ethnic disparities are under-investigated. We examined the racial and ethnic disparities in the trends and frequency of LCS discussion among the LCS-eligible United States (US) population.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Health Information National Trends Survey from 2014 to 2020. LCS-eligible individuals were defined as adults aged 55 to 80 years old who have a current or former smoking history. We estimated the trends and frequency of LCS discussions and adjusted the probability of having an LCS discussion by racial and ethnic groups.

RESULTS

Among 2136 LCS-eligible participants (representing 22.7 million US adults), 12.9% (95% CI, 10.9%-15%) reported discussing LCS with their providers in the past year. The frequency of LCS discussion was lowest among non-Hispanic White participants (12.3%, 95% CI, 9.9%-14.7%) compared to other racial and ethnic groups (14.1% in Hispanic to 15.3% in non-Hispanic Black). A significant increase over time was only observed among non-Hispanic Black participants (10.1% in 2014 to 22.1% in 2020; P = .05) and non-Hispanic Whites (8.5% in 2014 to 14% in 2020; P = .02). In adjusted analyses, non-Hispanic Black participants (14.6%, 95% CI, 12.3%-16.7%) had a significantly higher probability of LCS discussion than non-Hispanic Whites (12.1%, 95% CI, 11.4%-12.7%).

CONCLUSION

Patient-provider LCS discussion was uncommon in the LCS-eligible US population. Non-Hispanic Black individuals were more likely to have LCS discussions than other racial and ethnic groups. There is a need for more research to clarify the discordance between LCS discussions and the actual screening uptake in this population.

Lung Cancer in Women: The Past, Present, and Future

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death for women in multiple countries including the United States. Women are exposed to unique risk factors that remain largely understudied such as indoor pollution, second-hand tobacco exposure, biological differences, gender differences in tolerability and response to therapy in lung cancer, and societal gender roles, that create distinct survivorship needs. Women continue to lack representation in lung cancer clinical trials and are typically treated with data generated from majority male patient study populations, which may be inappropriate to extrapolate and generalize to females. Current lung cancer treatment and screening guidelines do not incorporate sex-specific differences and physicians also often do not account for gender differences when choosing treatments or discussing survivorship needs. To best provide targeted treatment approaches, greater representation of women in lung cancer clinical trials and further research is necessary. Clinicians should understand the unique factors and consequences associated with lung cancer in women; thus, a holistic approach that acknowledges environmental and societal factors is necessary.

Trends in Lung Cancer Incidence and Mortality (1990-2019) in the United States: A Comprehensive Analysis of Gender and State-Level Disparities

PURPOSE

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. This study aims to analyze lung cancer incidence, mortality, and related statistics from 1990 to 2019, focusing on national- and state-level trends and exploring potential disparities between sexes.

METHODS

The Global Burden of Disease database was used to extract tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer mortality data from 1990 to 2019 for both males and females and across all states of the United States. Age-standardized incidence rates, age-standardized mortality rates, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and mortality-to-incidence indices (MIIs) were studied to assess for gender-based, geographic, and temporal disparities. Joinpoint regression analysis was performed to further evaluate trends.

RESULTS

The incidence of these cancers in the United States decreased between 1990 and 2019 by 23.35%, with a more significant decline in males (37.73%) than females (1.41%). Similarly, for mortality, a decrease was observed for both sexes combined (26.83%), but much more significantly for males (40.23%) than females (6.01%). The MIIs decreased overall, but there were variations across states. DALYs decreased for both sexes combined, with males experiencing a larger reduction, but an increase was noted in some states for females.

CONCLUSION

This analysis reveals diverse trends pertaining to the incidence, mortality, and disability burden associated with lung cancer by sex and states in the United States, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions to reduce disparities. These findings contribute to our understanding of the current landscape of lung cancer and can inform future strategies for prevention, early detection, and management.

Prevalence of hospitalized women at high-risk for developing lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer screening with low-dose computer tomography (CT) has been shown to reduce the lung cancer mortality in high-risk individuals by 20%. Despite the proven mortality benefit, the utilization of lung cancer screening among high-risk populations remains low.

OBJECTIVE

This study explores the prevalence of high-risk population for developing lung cancer among hospitalized women and evaluates the screening behavior toward other common cancers during a hospital stay.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study in which 248 cancer-free hospitalized women aged 50-75 years who reported current or prior smoking were enrolled during hospital admission at an academic center. A bedside survey was conducted to collect socio-demographic, cancer screening behavior, and medical comorbidities for the study patients. Unpaired t-test and Chi-square tests were used to compare characteristics and common cancer screening behavior by lung cancer risk stratification.

RESULTS

Forty-three percent of the hospitalized women were at intermediate to high-risk for developing lung cancer risk. Intermediate to high-risk women were more likely to be older, Caucasian, retired, or with a disability, and had higher comorbidity burden as compared to the low-risk group. Women at low and intermediate to high risk were equally non-adherent with breast (35% vs 31%, p = 0.59) and colorectal (32% vs 24%, p = 0.20) cancers screening guidelines. Only 38% of women from the intermediate to the high-risk group had a CT chest within the last year.

CONCLUSION

The study's findings suggest that almost half of the hospitalized women who report current or past smoking are at high-risk for developing lung cancer.

Research Priorities for Interventions to Address Health Disparities in Lung Nodule Management: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Lung nodules are common incidental findings, and timely evaluation is critical to ensure diagnosis of localized-stage and potentially curable lung cancers. Rates of guideline-concordant lung nodule evaluation are low, and the risk of delayed evaluation is higher for minoritized groups. Objectives: To summarize the existing evidence, identify knowledge gaps, and prioritize research questions related to interventions to reduce disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee was convened to review the evidence and identify key knowledge gaps in four domains: 1) research methodology, 2) patient-level interventions, 3) clinician-level interventions, and 4) health system-level interventions. A modified Delphi approach was used to identify research priorities. Results: Key knowledge gaps included 1) a lack of standardized approaches to identify factors associated with lung nodule management disparities, 2) limited data evaluating the role of social determinants of health on disparities in lung nodule management, 3) a lack of certainty regarding the optimal strategy to improve patient-clinician communication and information transmission and/or retention, and 4) a paucity of information on the impact of patient navigators and culturally trained multidisciplinary teams. Conclusions: This statement outlines a research agenda intended to stimulate high-impact studies of interventions to mitigate disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Research questions were prioritized around the following domains: 1) need for methodologic guidelines for conducting research related to disparities in nodule management, 2) evaluating how social determinants of health influence lung nodule evaluation, 3) studying approaches to improve patient-clinician communication, and 4) evaluating the utility of patient navigators and culturally enriched multidisciplinary teams to reduce disparities.

Information Provision, Decision Self-efficacy, and Decisional Conflict in Adopting Health Behaviors Among Patients Treated for Colorectal Cancer: A Cross-sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Health promotion is necessary to mitigate the negative consequences of colorectal cancer and its treatment. Rates of behavior modification are low in populations of cancer patients. Studies are needed to determine the factors, such as decisional conflict, which influence adoption of healthy behaviors following a cancer diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of information provision, decision self-efficacy, and decisional conflict on the adoption of healthy behaviors among patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study focused on 251 patients with colorectal cancer in South Korea. Information provision, decision self-efficacy, and decisional conflict were measured using validated instruments. Patients rated their decisional conflict related to the adoption of behaviors that include regular exercise and a balanced diet.

RESULTS

Most participants (73%) reported low satisfaction with the amount of information received. Of the participants, 64% had low decision self-efficacy, and 80% experienced decisional conflict. The perception of a higher level of information provision was associated with greater decision self-efficacy (odds ratio, 4.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.61-13.35). Higher decision self-efficacy was associated with lower decisional conflict (odds ratio, 5.19; 95% confidence interval, 2.33-11.59).

CONCLUSION

Receiving adequate information is important for promoting patients' confidence in making decisions about their health and reducing decisional conflict in the adoption of healthy lifestyle changes following a cancer diagnosis.

IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

Oncology nurses should assess patient information needs and promote decision self-efficacy, thus empowering patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer to make lifestyle decisions that improve their health and quality of life.

Stigma in Early-Stage Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

The phenomenon of lung cancer stigma has been firmly established in the literature. However, studies have predominantly focused on patients with advanced disease, whose experiences may differ from patients with earlier stage, surgically resectable lung cancer and an improved prognosis.

PURPOSE

The objective of the study was to examine the stigma experienced in a Canadian population with early-stage, resectable lung cancer.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer were enrolled at a tertiary thoracic surgery clinic. The 25-item Lung Cancer Stigma Inventory (LCSI) was self-administered by patients to quantitatively measure experiences of lung cancer stigma. LCSI results informed the development of a semi-structured focus group and individual interviews.

RESULTS

Of the 53 participants completing the survey, 38 (72%) met established LCSI score threshold, indicating a clinically meaningful level of stigma. No significant relationship was found between total LCSI scores and any demographic variable. Analysis of qualitative data revealed multiple themes related to experiences of lung cancer stigma. The major themes were classified into four categories: impact of the association between lung cancer and smoking, societal attitudes and assumptions, personal choices in relation to diagnosis, and experiences related to care.

CONCLUSIONS

A surgical population of patients with predominantly early-stage lung cancer experienced lung cancer stigma at a high incidence and a level similar to previously studied populations with more advanced disease. The qualitative results support the quantitative findings that respondents experienced more internal stigma than either perceived stigma from others or constrained disclosure related to their diagnosis.

miRNA-199a-5p/SLC2A1 axis regulates glucose metabolism in non-small cell lung cancer

Lung cancer is acknowledged as a common cancer with high morbidity and mortality. MicroRNAs (miRNAs), kind of non-coding single-stranded RNA molecules, can be used in cancer clinical treatments. In this research, miR-199a-5p was seen lowly expressed in NSCLC sera samples. miR-199a-5p suppressed the cell proliferation, migration and arrested cell cycle in NSCLC cell lines. The results showed that SLC2A1 (glucose transporter 1, GLUT1) was a direct target of miR-199a-5p. Downregulation of SLC2A1 could not only inhibit cell proliferation, migration and cell cycle, but also promote cell apoptosis. The data suggests that miR-199a-5p can inhibit glucose metabolism in NSCLC by targeting SLC2A1.This study proves that miR-199a-5p / SLC2A1 can play an essential role in the development of NSCLC by targeting SLC2A1. It puts forward a new approach for clinical treatments of NSCLC.

The evolving landscape of sex-based differences in lung cancer: a distinct disease in women

In stark contrast to a few decades ago when lung cancer was predominantly a disease of men who smoke, incidence rates of lung cancer in women are now comparable to or higher than those in men and are rising alarmingly in many parts of the world. Women face a unique set of risk factors for lung cancer compared to men. These include exogenous exposures including radon, prior radiation, and fumes from indoor cooking materials such as coal, in addition to endogenous exposures such as oestrogen and distinct genetic polymorphisms. Current screening guidelines only address tobacco use and likely underrepresent lung cancer risk in women. Women were also not well represented in some of the landmark prospective studies that led to the development of current screening guidelines. Women diagnosed with lung cancer have a clear mortality benefit compared to men even when other clinical and demographic characteristics are accounted for. However, there may be sex-based differences in outcomes and side effects of systemic therapy, particularly with chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Ongoing research is needed to better investigate these differences to address the rapidly changing demographics of lung cancer worldwide.

Worry About the Future Health Issues of Smoking and Intention to Screen for Lung Cancer With Low-Dose Computed Tomography

BACKGROUND

Early diagnosis of lung cancer is key to improving the long-term prognosis for many individuals. Still, utilization rates of lung cancer screening (LCS) remain low.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between worry about future health issues of smoking and intention to undergo recommended LCS with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) within the next 3 months.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted using the Qualtrics Panel to recruit adult smokers between ages 54 and 75 years, with no history of lung cancer, and at least 30-pack-year smoking history (n = 152). The survey gathered demographic, socioeconomic, and psychographic information, including intention to screen for lung cancer with LDCT and worry about the future health issues of smoking. Data were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Approximately 43.0% were White, 21.7% were Black, and 60.0% were female. Most (86.0%) reported intentions to undergo recommended LCS with LDCT in the next 3 months. More than one-third (32.0%) reported moderately/very worried about the future health issues of smoking. Smokers who were moderately/very worried had 20% (P = .022) higher odds of reporting an intention to undergo LCS with LDCT than those who were not at all or a little worried.

CONCLUSIONS

Most eligible adults reported intentions to undergo LCS with LDCT. Our study also highlights sex, racial, and socioeconomic differences in LCS behavior.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The study findings provide an opportunity for healthcare providers to have in-depth discussions about the benefits of LCS with those who express worry about future health issues of smoking.

Exosomal lncRNA FOXD3-AS1 upregulates ELAVL1 expression and activates PI3K/Akt pathway to enhance lung cancer cell proliferation, invasion, and 5-fluorouracil resistance

Long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) FOXD3-AS1 expression is upregulated in lung cancer; however, its effect and mechanism on 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) resistance remain unclear. In this study, we determined the effects of FOXD3-AS1-enriched exosomes derived from lung cancer cells on the proliferation, invasion, and 5-FU resistance of lung cancer cells. Online bioinformatics database analysis showed that FOXD3-AS1 was upregulated in lung cancer progression. Real-time quantitative PCR results confirmed that FOXD3-AS1 expression was upregulated in lung cancer tissues and cell lines, and FOXD3-AS1 was greatly enriched in lung cancer cell-derived exosomes. ELAV-like RNA-binding protein 1 (ELAVL1) was identified as an RNA-binding protein of FOXD3-AS1. The lung cancer cell-derived exosomes promoted A549 cell proliferation and invasion and inhibited apoptosis caused by 5-FU, and transfection of si-FOXD3-AS1 or si-ELAVL1 in exosome-incubated A549 cells reversed these effects. Moreover, exosome-incubated A549 cells were co-transfected with si-FOXD3-AS1 and pcDNA-ELAVL1, showing the same cell proliferation, invasion, and 5-FU resistance as those of A549 cells treated with lung cancer cell-derived exosomes alone. Mechanistic studies identified that lung cancer cell-derived exosomes activated the PI3K/Akt pathway, and transfection of si-FOXD3-AS1 or treatment with the PI3K inhibitor LY294002 reversed the activation of the PI3K/Akt axis induced by exosomes. In conclusion, our study revealed that lung cancer cell-derived exosomal FOXD3-AS1 upregulated ELAVL1 expression and activated the PI3K/Akt pathway to promote lung cancer progression. Our findings provide a new strategy for lung cancer treatment.

Lung cancer mortality in Europe and the USA between 2000 and 2017: an observational analysis

BACKGROUND

The lung is the most common site for cancer and has the highest worldwide cancer-related mortality. Our study reports and compares trends in lung cancer mortality in the USA and 26 European countries.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Lung cancer mortality data were extracted for males and females for each of the years 2000-2017 from the World Health Organization (WHO) Mortality and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) WONDER databases. Lung cancer mortality trends were compared using Joinpoint regression analysis, and male-to-female mortality ratios were calculated.

RESULTS

Down-trending lung cancer mortality rates were observed in males in all countries except Cyprus and Portugal between 2000 and 2017. In females, increasing mortality rates were observed in 22 of the 27 countries analysed. Latvia had the highest estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) in male mortality (-9.6%) between 2013 and 2015. In the USA, EAPCs were -5.1% for males and -4.2% for females between 2014 and 2017. All countries had an overall decrease in the ratio of male-to-female lung cancer mortality. The most recent observation of median male-to-female mortality was 2.26 (IQR 1.92-4.05). The countries with the greatest current sex disparity in lung cancer mortality were Lithuania (5.51) and Latvia (5.00).

CONCLUSION

Between 2000 and 2017, lung cancer mortality rates were decreasing for males in Europe and the USA, whereas increasing lung cancer mortality rates were generally observed in females. There is a persistent but decreasing sex-mortality gap, with men having persistently greater lung cancer mortality but with rates decreasing faster than women.

Racial Differences in Lung Cancer Screening Beliefs and Screening Adherence

BACKGROUND

One challenge in high-quality lung cancer screening (LCS) is maintaining adherence with annual and short-interval follow-up screens among high-risk individuals who have undergone baseline low-dose CT (LDCT). This study aimed to characterize attitudes and beliefs toward lung cancer and LCS and to identify factors associated with LCS adherence.

METHODS

We administered a questionnaire to 269 LCS participants to assess attitudes and beliefs toward lung cancer and LCS. Clinical data including sociodemographics and screening adherence were obtained from the LCS Program Registry.

RESULTS

African-American individuals had significantly greater lung cancer worries compared with Whites (6.10 vs. 4.66, P < .001). In making the decision to undergo LCS, African-American participants described screening convenience and cost as very important factors significantly more frequently than Whites (60% vs. 26.8%, P< .001 and 58.4% vs. 37.8%, P = .001; respectively). African-American individuals with greater than high school education had significantly higher odds of LCS adherence (aOR 2.55; 95% CI, 1.14-5.60) than Whites with less than high school education. Participants who described screening convenience and cost as "very important" had significantly lower odds of completing screening follow-up after adjusting for demographic and other factors (aOR 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33-0.97 and aOR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33-0.91, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Racial differences in beliefs about lung cancer and LCS exist among African-American and White individuals enrolled in an LCS program. Cost, convenience, and low educational attainment may be barriers to LCS adherence, specifically among African-American individuals.

IMPACT

More research is needed on how barriers can be overcome to improve LCS adherence.

Examining lung cancer screening utilization with public-use data: Opportunities and challenges

Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography is recommended for high-risk smokers who meet specific eligibility criteria. Current guidelines suggest that eligible adults with a heavy smoking history will benefit from annual low dose computed tomography but due to several associated risks (e.g., false-positives, radiation exposure, overdiagnosis) a shared decision-making consultation is required by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and endorsed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force. In order to examine potential for tracking LCS uptake, adherence, and patient-provider communication at a national level, we reviewed four regularly publicly available national surveys (National Health Interview Survey [NHIS], Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System [BRFSS], National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey [NHANES], and Health Information National Trends Survey [HINTS]) to assess available data; an overview of 37 publications using these sources is also provided. The results show that none of the surveys include items that fully assess current LCS guidelines. Implications for future research-including the potential to examine factors associated with LCS uptake and patient-provider communication-are addressed.

How clinician-patient communication affects trust in health information sources: Temporal trends from a national cross-sectional survey

Background

Understanding patients’ trust in health information sources is critical to designing work systems in healthcare. Patient-centered communication during the visit might be a major factor in shaping patients’ trust in information sources.

Objective

The purpose of this paper is to explore relationships between patient ratings of clinician communication during the visit and patient trust in health information sources.

Methodology

We conducted a secondary analysis of the nationally-representative Health Information National Trends Surveys; HINTS4 Cycle1 (2011), HINTS4 Cycle4 (2014), and HINTS5 Cycle1 (2017), and HINTS5 Cycle2 (2018). We created a composite score of patient-centered communication from five questions and dichotomized at the median. We created multivariable logistic regression models to see how patient-centered communication influenced trust in different information sources across cycles. Consecutively, we used hierarchical analysis for aggregated data.

Results

We analyzed data from 14,425 individuals. In the adjusted logistic models for each cycle and the hierarchical model, clinicians’ perceived patient-centered communication skills were significantly associated with increased trust in the clinicians as an information source.

Conclusion

Clinicians still represent an essential source of trustworthy information reinforced by patient-centered communication skills. Given that trust helps build healing relationships that lead to better healthcare outcomes, communication sets an essential foundation to establish necessary trust. Interpreting information from the internet sources for patients is likely to remain a vital clinician function.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Screening: Challenges and Opportunities

Cancer is a leading cause of death in the United States and across the globe. Cancer screening is an effective preventive measure that can reduce cancer incidence and mortality. While cancer screening is integral to cancer control and prevention, due to the COVID-19 outbreak many screenings have either been canceled or postponed, leaving a vast number of patients without access to recommended health care services. This disruption to cancer screening services may have a significant impact on patients, health care practitioners, and health systems. In this paper, we aim to offer a comprehensive view of the impact of COVID-19 on cancer screening. We present the challenges COVID-19 has exerted on patients, health care practitioners, and health systems as well as potential opportunities that could help address these challenges.

Promoting Clinical Conversations about Lung Cancer Screening: Exploring the Role of Perceived Online Social Support

The perceived availability of online social support may contribute to patient-provider conversations about lung cancer screening. This study examines how the perceived availability of instrumental and emotional online social support is associated with patient-provider communication about lung cancer screening among adults who meet U.S. Preventive Services Taskforce (USPSTF) eligibility criteria and live with a COPD diagnosis. In April 2018, 575 adults completed an online survey after being recruited from a large southeastern academic medical center's broad research registry and website listing. Nearly half of the participants were 55-to-80 years old (41%), a current or former smoker who had quit smoking within the past 15 years (42%), and reported a smoking prevalence of 30 pack years or more (PPY; 41%). Results demonstrate that having a COPD diagnosis, identifying as male, and being a current or former tobacco smoker resulted in greater odds of having a clinical conversation about lung cancer screening. Conversely, meeting the 30 PPY smoking and 55-to-80 age thresholds lowered the odds of having these conversations. A high degree of instrumental and emotional online social support was associated with a greater incidence of annual patient-provider conversations about screening. This combination of perceived online social support was especially useful for patients with COPD.