The Case for Patient Navigation in Lung Cancer Screening in Vulnerable Populations: A Systematic Review

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.

Increasing Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening Among Emergency Department Patients: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Lung cancer screening (LCS) decreases lung cancer mortality. Emergency department (ED) patients are at disproportionately high risk for lung cancer. The ED, therefore, is an optimal environment for interventions to promote LCS.

OBJECTIVES

Demonstrate the operational feasibility of identifying ED patients in need of LCS, referring them to LCS services, deploying a text message intervention to promote LCS, and conducting follow-up to determine LCS uptake.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized clinical trial to determine the feasibility and provide estimates of the preliminary efficacies of 1) basic referral for LCS and 2) basic referral plus a text messaging intervention, grounded in behavioral change theory, to promote uptake of LCS among ED patients. Participants aged 50 to 80, identified as eligible for LCS, were randomized to study arms and followed up at 150 days to assess interval LCS uptake (primary outcome), barriers to screening, and perceptions of the study interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 303 patients were surveyed, with 198 identified as eligible for LCS and subsequently randomized. Results indicated that 24% of participants with follow-up data received LCS (11% of the total randomized sample). Rates of screening at follow-up were similar across study arms. The intervention significantly improved normative perceptions of LCS (p = 0.015; Cohen's d = 0.45).

CONCLUSION

This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of ED-based interventions to increase uptake of LCS among ED patients. A scalable ED-based intervention that increases LCS uptake could reduce lung cancer mortality.

Patient Navigation for Lung Cancer Screening at a Health Care for the Homeless Program: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

People experiencing homelessness die of lung cancer at rates more than double those in the general population. Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality, but the circumstances of homelessness create barriers to LCS participation.

Objective

To determine whether patient navigation, added to usual care, improved LCS LDCT receipt at a large Health Care for the Homeless (HCH) program.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This parallel group, pragmatic, mixed-methods randomized clinical trial was conducted at Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program (BHCHP), a federally qualified HCH program that provides tailored, multidisciplinary care to nearly 10 000 homeless-experienced patients annually. Eligible individuals had a lifetime history of homelessness, had a BHCHP primary care practitioner (PCP), were proficient in English, and met the pre-2022 Medicare coverage criteria for LCS (aged 55-77 years, ≥30 pack-year history of smoking, and smoking within the past 15 years). The study was conducted between November 20, 2020, and March 29, 2023.

Intervention

Participants were randomized 2:1 to usual BHCHP care either with or without patient navigation. Following a theory-based, patient-centered protocol, the navigator provided lung cancer education, facilitated LCS shared decision-making visits with PCPs, assisted participants in making and attending LCS LDCT appointments, arranged follow-up when needed, and offered tobacco cessation support for current smokers.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was receipt of a 1-time LCS LDCT within 6 months after randomization, with between-group differences assessed by χ2 analysis. Qualitative interviews assessed the perceptions of participants and PCPs about the navigation intervention.

Results

In all, 260 participants (mean [SD] age, 60.5 [4.7] years; 184 males [70.8%]; 96 non-Hispanic Black participants [36.9%] and 96 non-Hispanic White participants [36.9%]) were randomly assigned to usual care with (n = 173) or without (n = 87) patient navigation. At 6 months after randomization, 75 participants in the patient navigation arm (43.4%) and 8 of those in the usual care-only arm (9.2%) had completed LCS LDCT (P < .001), representing a 4.7-fold difference. Interviews with participants in the patient navigation arm and PCPs identified key elements of the intervention: multidimensional social support provision, care coordination activities, and interpersonal skills of the navigator.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, patient navigation support produced a 4.7-fold increase in 1-time LCS LDCT completion among HCH patients in Boston. Future work should focus on longer-term screening participation and outcomes.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04308226.

Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST) pathway navigation study: a protocol for a nested randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effect of a pathway navigation intervention on lung cancer screening uptake

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death globally. In 2022 the UK National Screening Committee recommended the implementation of a national targeted lung cancer screening programme, aiming to improve early diagnosis and survival rates. Research studies and services internationally consistently observe socioeconomic and smoking-related inequalities in screening uptake. Pathway navigation (PN) is a process through which a trained pathway navigator guides people to overcome barriers to accessing healthcare services, including screening. This nested randomised controlled trial aims to determine whether a PN intervention results in more individuals participating in lung cancer screening compared with the usual written invitation within a previous non-responder population as part of the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A two-arm randomised controlled trial and process evaluation nested within the YLST. Participants aged 55-80 (inclusive) who have not responded to previous postal invitations to screening will be randomised by household to receive PN or usual care (a further postal invitation to contact the screening service for a lung health check) between March 2023 and October 2024. The PN intervention includes a postal appointment notification and prearranged telephone appointment, during which a pathway navigator telephones the participant, following a four-step protocol to introduce the offer and conduct an initial risk assessment. If eligible, participants are invited to book a low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening scan. All pathway navigators receive training from behavioural psychologists on motivational interviewing and communication techniques to elicit barriers to screening attendance and offer solutions.

COPRIMARY OUTCOMES

The number undergoing initial telephone assessment of lung cancer risk. The number undergoing an LDCT screening scan.Secondary outcomes include demographic, clinical and risk parameters of people undergoing telephone risk assessment; the number of people eligible for screening following telephone risk assessment; the number of screen-detected cancers diagnosed; costs and a mixed-methods process evaluation.Descriptive analyses will be used to present numbers, proportions and quantitative components of the process evaluation. Primary comparisons of differences between groups will be made using logistic regression. Applied thematic analysis will be used to interpret qualitative data within a conceptual framework based on the COM-B framework. A health economic analysis of the PN intervention will also be conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is approved by the Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (18-NW-0012) and the Health Research Authority following the Confidentiality Advisory Group review. Results will be shared through peer-reviewed scientific journals, conference presentations and on the YLST website.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

ISRCTN42704678 and NCT03750110.

An alternating-intervention pilot trial on the impact of an informational handout on patient-reported outcomes and follow-up after lung cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality; however, poor understanding of results may impact patient experience and follow-up. We sought to determine whether an informational handout accompanying LCS results can improve patient-reported outcomes and adherence to follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective alternating intervention pilot trial of a handout to accompany LCS results delivery.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing LCS in a multisite program over a 6-month period received a mailing containing either: 1) a standardized form letter of LCS results (control) or 2) the LCS results letter and the handout (intervention).

INTERVENTION

A two-sided informational handout on commonly asked questions after LCS created through iterative mixed-methods evaluation with both LCS patients and providers.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes of 1)patient understanding of LCS results, 2)correct identification of next steps in screening, and 3)patient distress were measured through survey. Adherence to recommended follow-up after LCS was determined through chart review. Outcomes were compared between the intervention and control group using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

389 patients were eligible and enrolled with survey responses from 230 participants (59% response rate). We found no differences in understanding of results, identification of next steps in follow-up or distress but did find higher levels of knowledge and understanding on questions assessing individual components of LCS in the intervention group. Follow-up adherence was overall similar between the two arms, though was higher in the intervention group among those with positive findings (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in self-reported outcomes between the groups or overall follow-up adherence. Those receiving the intervention did report greater understanding and knowledge of key LCS components, and those with positive results had a higher rate of follow-up. This may represent a feasible component of a multi-level intervention to address knowledge and follow-up for LCS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05265897.

Patient navigation in women's health care for maternal health and noncancerous gynecologic conditions: a scoping review

PURPOSE

This study investigated the scope of patient navigation studies on women's health care for maternal health and noncancerous gynecologic conditions and aimed to report the characteristics of the identified patient navigation programs.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O'Malley's framework. Five electronic databases were searched for relevant studies published in English: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PsycInfo. There were no restrictions on the publication date and the search was completed in July 2023.

RESULTS

This scoping review included 14 studies, which collectively examined seven patient navigation programs. All selected studies were related to maternal health issues (e.g., perinatal health problems and contraception for birth spacing). Close to two-thirds of the patient navigation services were provided by women (n=9, 64.3%) and half by lay navigators (n=7, 50.0%). The majority incorporated the use of mobile health technologies (n=11, 78.6%). All of the patient navigation programs included in the review coordinated the necessary clinical and social support services to improve women's access to care.

CONCLUSION

Patient navigation appears to be in its nascent phase in the field of maternal health. The results of this study suggest that the implementation of patient navigation services could potentially improve access to care for socially disadvantaged women and families. Furthermore, providing patient navigation services that are specifically tailored to meet women's needs could improve the quality of maternity care.

Equitable implementation of lung cancer screening: avoiding its potential to mirror existing inequities among people who use tobacco

PURPOSE

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death, but the advent of lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomography offers a tremendous opportunity to improve lung cancer outcomes. Unfortunately, implementation of lung cancer screening has been hampered by substantial barriers and remains suboptimal. Specifically, the commentary emphasizes the intersectionality of smoking history and several important sociodemographic characteristics and identities that should inform lung cancer screening outreach and engagement efforts, including socioeconomic considerations (e.g., health insurance status), racial and ethnic identity, LGBTQ + identity, mental health history, military experience/veteran status, and geographic residence in addressing specific community risk factors and future interventions in efforts to make strides toward equitable lung cancer screening.

METHODS

Members of the Equitable Implementation of Lung Cancer Screening Interest Group with the Cancer Prevention and Control Network (CPCRN) provide a critical commentary based on existing literature regarding smoking trends in the US and lung cancer screening uptake to propose opportunities to enhance implementation and support equitable distribution of the benefits of lung cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

The present commentary utilizes information about historical trends in tobacco use to highlight opportunities for targeted outreach efforts to engage communities at high risk with information about the lung cancer screening opportunity. Future efforts toward equitable implementation of lung cancer screening should focus on multi-level implementation strategies that engage and work in concert with community partners to co-create approaches that leverage strengths and reduce barriers within specific communities to achieve the potential of lung cancer screening.

Lung Cancer Screening in People With HIV: A Mixed-Methods Study of Patient and Provider Perspectives

INTRODUCTION

People with HIV are at higher risk of lung cancer; however, there is limited research on attitudes, barriers, and facilitators to lung cancer screening in people with HIV. The objective of this study was to understand the perspectives on lung cancer screening among people with HIV and their providers.

METHODS

Surveys of people with HIV and HIV-care providers were complemented by qualitative focus groups and interviews designed to understand the determinants of lung cancer screening in people with HIV. Participants were recruited through an academic HIV clinic in Seattle, WA. Qualitative guides were developed by integrating the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Tailored Implementation of Chronic Diseases checklist. Themes that emerged from thematic analyses of qualitative data were compared with surveys in joint displays. All study components were conducted between 2021 and 2022.

RESULTS

Sixty-four people with HIV completed surveys, and 43 participated in focus groups. Eleven providers completed surveys, and 10 were interviewed for the study. Themes from joint displays show overall enthusiasm for lung cancer screening among people with HIV and their providers, particularly with a tailored and evidence-based approach. Facilitators in this population may include longstanding engagement with providers and health systems and an emphasis on survivorship through preventive healthcare interventions. People with HIV may also face barriers acknowledged by providers, including a high level of medical comorbidities and competing issues such as substance abuse, mental health concerns, and economic instability.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals that people with HIV and their providers have overall enthusiasm toward screening. However, tailored interventions may be needed to overcome specific barriers, including complex decision making in the setting of medical comorbidity and patient competing issues.

Disparities Across the Continuum of Lung Cancer Care

Despite the overall decline in lung cancer incidence and mortality, minority populations continue to bear a higher disease burden. Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States and disproportionately impacts minority populations. Social determinants of health-including low-socioeconomic status, lack of health insurance, and access to health care- disproportionately impact racial, ethnic, and rural populations resulting in direct consequences on lung cancer disparities.

Assessing Barriers and Facilitators to Lung Cancer Screening: Initial Findings from a Patient Navigation Intervention

Low-dose computed tomography-based lung cancer screening represents a complex clinical undertaking that could require multiple referrals, appointments, and time-intensive procedures. These steps may pose difficulties and raise concerns among patients, particularly minority, under-, and uninsured populations. The authors implemented patient navigation to identify and address these challenges. They conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of telephone-based navigation for lung cancer screening in an integrated, urban safety-net health care system. Following standardized protocols, bilingual (Spanish and English) navigators educated, motivated, and empowered patients to traverse the health system. Navigators made systematic contact with patients, recording standardized call characteristics in a study-specific database. Call type, duration, and content were recorded. Univariable and multivariable multinomial logistic regression was performed to investigate associations between call characteristics and reported barriers. Among 225 patients (mean age 63 years, 46% female, 70% racial/ethnic minority) assigned navigation, a total of 559 barriers to screening were identified during 806 telephone calls. The most common barrier categories were personal (46%), provider (30%), and practical (17%). System (6%) and psychosocial (1%) barriers were described by English-speaking patients, but not by Spanish-speaking patients. Over the course of the lung cancer screening process, provider-related barriers decreased 80% (P = 0.008). The authors conclude that patients undergoing lung cancer screening frequently report personal and health care provider-related barriers to successful participation. Barrier types may differ among patient populations and over the course of the screening process. Further understanding of these concerns may increase screening uptake and adherence. Clinical Trial Registration number: (NCT02758054).

Examining ACCURE's Nurse Navigation Through an Antiracist Lens: Transparency and Accountability in Cancer Care

There are persistent disparities in the delivery of cancer treatment, with Black patients receiving fewer of the recommended cancer treatment cycles than their White counterparts on average. To enhance racial equity in cancer care, innovative methods that apply antiracist principles to health promotion interventions are needed. The parent study for the current analysis, the Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity (ACCURE) intervention, was a system-change intervention that successfully eliminated the Black-White disparity in cancer treatment completion among patients with early-stage breast and lung cancer. The intervention included specially trained nurse navigators who leveraged real-time data to follow-up with patients during their treatment journeys. Community and academic research partners conducted thematic analysis on all clinical notes (n = 3,251) written by ACCURE navigators after each contact with patients in the specialized navigation arm (n = 162). Analysis was informed by transparency and accountability, principles adapted from the antiracist resource Undoing Racism and determined as barriers to treatment completion through prior research that informed ACCURE. We identified six themes in the navigator notes that demonstrated enhanced accountability of the care system to patient needs. Underlying these themes was a process of enhanced data transparency that allowed navigators to provide tailored patient support. Themes include (1) patient-centered advocacy, (2) addressing system barriers to care, (3) connection to resources, (4) re-engaging patients after lapsed treatment, (5) addressing symptoms and side effects, and (6) emotional support. Future interventions should incorporate transparency and accountability mechanisms and examine the impact on racial equity in cancer care.

Disparities in lung cancer

Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among men and women in the United States. Despite a substantial decline in lung cancer incidence and mortality across all races in the last few decades, medically underserved racial and ethnic minority populations continue to carry the greatest burden of disease throughout the lung cancer continuum. Black individuals experience a higher incidence of lung cancer due to lower rates of low-dose computed tomography screening, which translate into advanced disease stage at diagnosis and poorer survival outcomes compared with White individuals. With respect to treatment, Black patients are less likely to receive gold standard surgery, have access to biomarker testing or high-quality treatment compared with White patients. The reasons for those disparities are multifactorial and include socioeconomic (eg, poverty, lack of health insurance, and inadequate education), and geographic inequalities. The objective of this article is to review the sources of racial and ethnic disparities in lung cancer, and to propose recommendations to help address them.

Lirette S, Yang CC, Mundra E, Woods WC, Otts J, Doherty M, Panter P, Howard C, Ridgway M, Allbright R. The Influence of Patient and System Factors on the Radiotherapy Treatment Time in the Treatment of Non-metastatic Cervical Cancer Patients in a Rural and Resource-Lean State’s Safety-Net Hospital: Benefits of Strategic Planning

Objective To decrease radiotherapy treatment time (RTT), measured from the day of initiation of radiotherapy to the day of its completion, specific strategies were initiated in early 2020 in the only academic safety-net medical center in a rural, resource-lean state. The factors that can succeed and those that need further improvements were analyzed in this initial assessment phase of our efforts to shorten the RTT. Methods This is an analysis of 28 cervix cancer patients treated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided brachytherapy (February 2020-November 2021). The relationship between independent and dependent variable were analyzed by simple linear regression, and p-values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant. SPSS software version 28.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Results Two RTT groups (≤ 60 (32.1%) vs. > 60 days {67.9%}) with median RTT of 68 days (range, 51 to 106 days) were analyzed. Caucasians represented 66.7% of the RTT ≤ 60 days group. Four 'issues' were identified that increased the RTT: non-compliance, learning curve (early days of implementation of MRI-guided brachytherapy in the department), stage IV comorbidities, and with more than one issue mentioned; 77.8% with no issues had ≤ 60 days RTT vs. 26.3% for the > 60 days group. The breakdown of the no-issues factor by calendar year showed the RTT of ≤ 60 days was achieved higher in 2021 (85.7% vs. 20.0%; p=0.023) compared to 2020. For this entire cohort, the RTT of ≤ 60 days was achieved higher in 2021 (50.0% vs. 8.3%; p=0.019) compared to 2020. Data also showed improvement in RTT of ≤ 60 days for every sequential six months. 'Non-compliance' and 'learning curve' were the most important factors among patients having the longest RTTs. Conclusion The RTT can be further decreased. As a result of this preliminary analysis of the our strategic planning approach of 'circular' "See it," "Own it," "Solve it," and "Do it" and go back to the first step again, we plan to implement the following strategies in the immediate future to shorten the RTTs further and, in turn, improve our overall outcomes (local/regional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival): (a) Interdigitate MRI-guided brachytherapy during external beam radiotherapy (EBRT); patients who can not get the interdigitated brachytherapy procedures performed during the course of EBRT for any reason will receive two brachytherapy procedures per week; (c) attempt to add a cervix cancer care navigator to our staff to help patients having social issues, thus leading to compliance problems; (d) finally, in a year or two after these new strategic implementations, the RTT data will be reanalyzed.

Impact of U.S. Preventive Services Task Force lung cancer screening update on drivers of disparities in screening eligibility

BACKGROUND

In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) updated its recommendation to expand lung cancer screening (LCS) eligibility and mitigate disparities. Although this increased the number of non-White individuals who are eligible for LCS, the update's impact on drivers of disparities is less clear. This analysis focuses on racial disparities among Black individuals because members of this group disproportionately share late-stage lung cancer diagnoses, despite typically having a lower intensity smoking history compared to non-Hispanic White individuals.

METHODS

We used data from the National Health Interview Survey to examine the impact of the 2021 eligibility criteria on racial disparities by factors such as education, poverty, employment history, and insurance status. We also examined preventive care use and reasons for delaying medical care.

RESULTS

When comparing Black individuals and non-Hispanic White individuals, our analyses show significant differences in who would be eligible for LCS: Those who do not have a high school diploma (28.7% vs. 17.0%, p = 0.002), are in poverty (26.2% vs. 14.9%, p < 0.001), and have not worked in the past 12 months (66.5% vs. 53.9%, p = 0.009). Further, our analyses also show that more Black individuals delayed medical care due to not having transportation (11.1% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001) compared to non-Hispanic White individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that despite increasing the number of Black individuals who are eligible for LCS, the 2021 USPSTF recommendation highlights ongoing socioeconomic disparities that need to be addressed to ensure equitable access.

Impact of Comprehensive Health Insurance on Quality of Life in Low-Income Hispanic Men with Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of the transition from IMPACT, a disease-focused treatment program, to comprehensive health insurance under Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on general and prostate cancer-specific quality of life (QoL) on a cohort of previously uninsured low-income men. We hypothesize that general QoL would improve and prostate cancer-specific QoL would remain the same after the transition to comprehensive health insurance.

METHODS

We assessed and compared general QoL using the RAND SF-12v2™ (12-Item Short Form Survey, version 2) and prostate cancer-specific QoL using the UCLA PCI (Prostate Cancer Index) one year before, at, and one year after the transition between 30 men who transitioned to comprehensive insurance (newly insured/Medicaid group) and 54 men who remained in the prostate cancer program (uninsured/IMPACT group). We assessed the independent effects of Medicaid coverage on QoL outcomes using repeated-measures regression.

RESULTS

Our cohort was composed primarily of Hispanic men (82%). At transition, patient demographics and clinical characteristics were similar between the groups. General and prostate cancer-specific QoL did not differ between the groups and remained stable over time, Radical prostatectomy as primary treatment and shorter time since treatment were associated with worse urinary and sexual function across both groups and over all three time points.

CONCLUSION

Those who transitioned to full-scope insurance and those who remained in the free prostate cancer-focused treatment program had stable general and prostate cancer-specific QoL. High-touch navigation aspects of a disease-focused program may have contributed to stability in outcomes.

Lung Cancer Screening

Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer death in the United States and globally with the majority of lung cancer cases attributable to cigarette smoking. Given the high societal and personal cost of a diagnosis of lung cancer including that most cases of lung cancer when diagnosed are found at a late stage, work over the past 40 years has aimed to detect lung cancer earlier when curative treatment is possible. Screening trials using chest radiography and sputum failed to show a reduction in lung cancer mortality however multiple studies using low dose CT have shown the ability to detect lung cancer early and a survival benefit to those screened. This review will discuss the history of lung cancer screening, current recommendations and screening guidelines, and implementation and components of a lung cancer screening program.

Hospitalization as an opportunity to engage underserved individuals in shared decision-making for lung cancer screening: results from two randomized pilot trials

PURPOSE

Medicare requires tobacco dependence counseling and shared decision-making (SDM) for lung cancer screening (LCS) reimbursement. We hypothesized that initiating SDM during inpatient tobacco treatment visits would increase LCS among patients with barriers to proactively seeking outpatient preventive care.

METHODS

We collected baseline assessments and performed two pilot randomized trials at our safety-net hospital. Pilot 1 tested feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a nurse practitioner initiating SDM for LCS during hospitalization (Inpatient SDM). We collected qualitative data on barriers encountered during Pilot 1. Pilot 2 added a community health worker (CHW) to address barriers to LCS completion (Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation). For both studies, preliminary efficacy was an intention-to-treat analysis of LCS completion at 3 months between intervention and comparator (furnishing of LCS decision aid only) groups.

RESULTS

Baseline assessments showed that patients preferred in-person LCS discussions versus self-reviewing materials; overall 20% had difficulty understanding written information. In Pilot 1, 4% (2/52) in Inpatient SDM versus 2% (1/48, comparator) completed LCS (p = 0.6), despite 89% (89/100) desiring LCS. Primary care providers noted that competing priorities and patient factors (e.g., social barriers to keeping appointments) prevented the intervention from working as intended. In Pilot 2, 50% (5/10) in Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation versus 9% (1/11, comparator) completed LCS (p < 0.05). Many patients were ineligible due to recent diagnostic chest CT (Pilot 1: 255/659; Pilot 2: 239/527).

CONCLUSIONS

Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation shows promise to improve LCS rates among underserved patients who smoke, but feasibility is limited by recent diagnostic chest CT among inpatients. Implementing CHW-navigation in other clinical settings may facilitate LCS for underserved patients.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03276806 (8 September 2017); NCT03793894 (4 January 2019).

What makes for successful patient navigation implementation in cancer prevention and screening programs using an evaluation and sustainability framework

BACKGROUND

Integrating patient navigation into cancer prevention and early detection efforts has been effective in increasing cancer screening rates for the medically underserved. Few publications have focused on how cancer screening interventions in the primary care setting using patient navigation as a primary strategy are implemented, adapted, and sustained. In 2006, the University of Colorado Cancer Center established a statewide colorectal cancer screening program to reduce disparities and improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for the medically underserved in partnership with the safety net system. The program, known as the Colorado Cancer Screening Program (CCSP), has provided navigation into preventive screening for more than 35,000 patients.

METHODS

To evaluate sustainability and implementation, the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model was used to examine the implementation and impact. To complement this model, the CCSP adapted the Program Sustainability Framework and Clinical Sustainability Framework and Assessment Tools to measure the capacity of participating clinics to sustain the program beyond grant funding.

RESULTS

The domains most frequently targeted for improvement in the sustainability plans were Workflow Integration (8 clinics), Communication, Planning, and Implementation (8 clinics), and Funding Stability (5 clinics). Activities in the implementation plans included revising workflows for efficiencies, incorporating quality improvement strategies, and building a business case for patient navigation.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this sustainability planning process provide insight about program outcomes, satisfaction, and illustrate that although funding remains one of the key sustainability questions, many clinic systems have prioritized other specific domains to continue sustainability beyond grant funding.

Evaluating the sustainability of patient navigation programs in oncology by length of existence, funding, and payment model participation

BACKGROUND

For this study, the authors examined whether specific programmatic factors were associated with the sustainability of patient navigation programs.

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey explored navigation programmatic factors associated with 3 measures of sustainability: 1) length of program existence, 2) reliance on sustainable funding, and 3) participation in alternative payment models. In total, 750 patient navigators or program administrators affiliated with oncology navigation programs in clinical-based and community-based settings completed the survey between April and July 2019.

RESULTS

Associations were observed between both accreditation and work setting and measures of program sustainability. Accredited programs and larger, more resourced clinical institutions were particularly likely to exhibit multiple measures of sustainability. The results also identified significant gaps at the programmatic level in data collection and reporting among navigation programs, but no association was observed between programmatic data collection/reporting and sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

Navigation is not currently a reimbursable service and has historically been viewed as value-added in oncology settings. Therefore, factors associated with sustainability are critical to understand how to build a framework for successful navigation programs within the current system and also to develop the case for potential reimbursement in the future.

Navigation programs relevant for African American men with prostate cancer: a scoping review protocol

BACKGROUND

The excess incidence and mortality due to prostate cancer that impacts African American men constitutes the largest of all cancer disparities. Patient navigation is a patient-centered healthcare system intervention to eliminate barriers to timely, high-quality care across the cancer continuum and improves health outcomes among vulnerable patients. However, little is known regarding the extent to which navigation programs include cultural humility to address prostate cancer disparities among African American men. We present a scoping review protocol of an in-depth examination of navigation programs in prostate cancer care-including navigation activities/procedures, training, and management-with a special focus on cultural context and humility for African American men to achieve health equity.

METHODS

We will conduct comprehensive searches of the literature in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL Complete, using keywords and index terms (Mesh and Emtree) within the three main themes: prostate cancer, patient navigation, and African American men. We will also conduct a search of the gray literature, hand-searching, and reviewing references of included papers and conference abstracts. In a two-phase approach, two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts, and full-text based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. All study designs will be included that present detailed data about the elements of navigation programs, including intervention content, navigator training, and/or management. Data will be extracted from included studies, and review findings will be synthesized and summarized.

DISCUSSION

A scoping review focused on cultural humility in patient navigation within the context of eliminating disparities in PCa care among African American men does not yet exist. This review will synthesize existing evidence of patient navigation programs for African American prostate cancer patients and the inclusion of cultural humility. Results will inform the development and implementation of future programs to meet the unique needs of vulnerable prostate cancer patients in safety net settings.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021221412.

Referring patients with suspected lung cancer: a qualitative study with primary healthcare professionals in Ireland

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death globally. Most cases are diagnosed late. Primary healthcare professionals are often the first point of contact for symptoms of concern. This study explored primary healthcare professionals’ experience of referring individuals with signs and symptoms suggestive of lung cancer along the appropriate healthcare pathway and explored strategies to help primary healthcare professionals detect lung cancer early. Focus groups and individual interviews were conducted with 36 general practitioners, community pharmacists, practice nurses, and public health nurses. Data were analysed thematically. Participants identified typical lung cancer signs and symptoms such as cough and coughing up blood (i.e., haemoptysis) as triggers for referral. Atypical/non-specific signs and symptoms such as back pain, pallor, and abnormal blood tests were perceived as difficult to interpret. Participants often refrained from using the word ‘cancer’ during conversations with patients. Ireland’s Rapid Access Lung Clinics were perceived as underused, with some general practitioners referring patients to these clinics only when clear and definitive lung cancer signs and symptoms are noted. Lack of communication and the resulting disruption in continuity of care for patients with suspected lung cancer were highlighted as healthcare system flaws. Education on early referral can be in the form of communications from professional organizations, webinars, interdisciplinary meetings, education by lung specialists, and patient testimonials. Lung cancer referral checklists and algorithms should be simple, clear, and visually appealing, either developed as standalone tools or embedded into existing primary care software/programmes.

Referring high-risk individuals for lung cancer screening: A systematic review of interventions with healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review described the effect of interventions aimed at helping Healthcare Professionals refer high-risk individuals for lung cancer screening. Primary outcomes included: patient outcomes such as lung cancer detection, screening for lung cancer, lung cancer treatments received and lung cancer mortality. Healthcare professionals' knowledge and awareness of lung cancer screening served as secondary outcomes.

METHODS

Experimental studies published between January 2016 and 2021 were included. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycARTICLES, PsycInfo and Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and the level of evidence was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network grading system.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included. Nurse navigation, electronic prompts for lung cancer screening and shared decision-making helped improve patient outcomes. Specialist screenings yielded more significant incidental findings and a higher percentage of Lung-RADS 1 results (i.e. no nodules/definitely benign nodules), while Primary Care Physician screenings were associated with higher numbers of Lung-RADS 2 results (i.e. benign nodules with a very low likelihood to becoming malignant). An increase in Healthcare Professionals' knowledge and awareness of lung cancer screening was achieved using group-based learning compared to lecture-based education delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of Nurse navigation is evident, as are the benefits of adequate training, shared decision-making, as well as a structured, clear and well-understood referral processes supported by the use of electronic system-incorporated prompts.

The lived experience during the peri-diagnostic period of breast cancer: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the existing research that investigates the lived experience during the peri-diagnostic period of breast cancer.

METHODS

Nine databases were searched for relevant literature between January 2007 and April 2019. Data were extracted and categorized using deductive and inductive approaches.

RESULTS

A majority of the 66 studies included used qualitative methods to retrospectively explore the treatment decision making process of female breast cancer patients. Patients experienced uncertainty, emotional distress, and a need for more information from providers and relied on social support and family guidance during this period.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review show that the burdens experienced during the peri-diagnostic period parallel those in later periods of cancer care. However, these burdens are prompted by different circumstances. More research is needed to explore the lived experience during this period through the use of mixed-methods and by recruiting a diverse sample with regards to role in the breast cancer experience, age, gender, race, and ethnicity.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Interventions positioned at earlier points in the breast cancer experience should provide informational support, which could be delivered through shared decision making models. Additional support could be facilitated by patient navigation programs and health information technology.

Patient navigation to promote lung cancer screening in a community health center for people experiencing homelessness: Protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is a major cause of death among people experiencing homelessness, with mortality rates more than double those in the general population. Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) could reduce lung cancer deaths in this population, although the circumstances of homelessness present multiple barriers to LCS LDCT completion. Patient navigation is a promising strategy for overcoming these barriers.

METHODS

The Investigating Navigation to Help Advance Lung Equity (INHALE) Study is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of patient navigation for LCS among individuals receiving primary care at Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program (BHCHP). Three hundred BHCHP patients who meet Medicare/Medicaid criteria for LCS will be randomized 2:1 to usual care with (n = 200) or without (n = 100) LCS navigation. Following a structured, theory-based protocol, the patient navigator assists with each step in the LCS process, providing lung cancer education, facilitating shared decision-making visits with primary care providers (PCPs), assisting in making and attending LCS LDCT appointments, arranging follow-up when needed, and offering tobacco cessation support for smokers. The primary outcome is receipt of LCS LDCT at 6 months. Using a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach, qualitative interviews with participants and PCPs will aid in interpreting and contextualizing the trial results.

DISCUSSION

This trial will produce the first experimental evidence on patient navigation for cancer screening in a homeless health care setting. Results could inform cancer health equity efforts at the 299 Health Care for the Homeless programs that serve over 900,000 patients annually in the US.

Lung Cancer Screening by Race and Ethnicity in an Integrated Health System in Hawaii

Importance

Racial and ethnic differences in lung cancer screening (LCS) completion and follow-up may be associated with lung cancer incidence and mortality rates among high-risk populations. Aggregation of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander racial and ethnic groups may mask the true underlying disparities in screening uptake and diagnostic follow-up, creating barriers for targeted, preventive health care.

Objective

To examine racial and ethnic differences in LCS completion and follow-up rates in a multiethnic population.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based cohort study was conducted at a health maintenance organization in Hawaii. LCS program participants were identified using electronic medical records from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. Study eligibility requirements included being aged 55 to 79 years, a 30 pack-year smoking history, a current smoker or having quit within the past 15 years, at least 5 years past any lung cancer diagnosis and treatment, and cancer free. Data analysis was performed from June 2019 to October 2020.

Exposure

Eligible for LCS.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Screening rates were analyzed by self-reported race and ethnicity and completion of a low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) test. Diagnostic follow-up results were based on the Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) staging system.

Results

A total of 1030 eligible LCS program members had an order placed; their mean (SD) age was 65.5 (5.8) years, and 633 (61%) were men. The largest racial and ethnic groups were non-Hispanic White (381 participants [37.0%]), Native Hawaiian or part Native Hawaiian (186 participants [18.1%]), and Japanese (146 participants [14.2%]). Men and Filipino, Chinese, Japanese, and non-Hispanic White individuals had a higher proportion of screen orders for LDCT compared with women and individuals of the other racial and ethnic groups. The overall LCS completion rate was 81% (838 participants). There was a 14% to 15% screening completion rate gap among groups. Asian individuals had the highest screening completion rate (266 participants [86%]) followed by Native Hawaiian (149 participants [80%]) and non-Hispanic White individuals (305 participants [80%]), Pacific Islander (50 participants [79%]) individuals, and individuals of other racial and ethnic groups (68 participants [77%]). Within Asian subgroups, Korean (31 participants [94%]) and Japanese (129 participants [88%]) individuals had the highest completion rates followed by Chinese individuals (28 participants [82%]) and Filipino individuals (78 participants [79%]). Of the 54 participants with Lung-RADS stage 3 disease, 93% (50 participants) completed a 6-month surveillance LDCT test; of 37 individuals with Lung-RADS stage 4 disease, 35 (97%) were followed-up for additional procedures.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study found racial and ethnic disparities in LCS completion rates after disaggregation of Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Asian individuals and their subgroups. These findings suggest that future research is needed to understand factors that may be associated with LCS completion and follow-up behaviors among these racial and ethnic groups.

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

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

Addressing Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility and Healthcare Access. An Official American Thoracic Society Statement

Background: There are well-documented disparities in lung cancer outcomes across populations. Lung cancer screening (LCS) has the potential to reduce lung cancer mortality, but for this benefit to be realized by all high-risk groups, there must be careful attention to ensuring equitable access to this lifesaving preventive health measure.Objectives: To outline current knowledge on disparities in eligibility criteria for, access to, and implementation of LCS, and to develop an official American Thoracic Society statement to propose strategies to optimize current screening guidelines and resource allocation for equitable LCS implementation and dissemination.Methods: A multidisciplinary panel with expertise in LCS, implementation science, primary care, pulmonology, health behavior, smoking cessation, epidemiology, and disparities research was convened. Participants reviewed available literature on historical disparities in cancer screening and emerging evidence of disparities in LCS.Results: Existing LCS guidelines do not consider racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and sex-based differences in smoking behaviors or lung cancer risk. Multiple barriers, including access to screening and cost, further contribute to the inequities in implementation and dissemination of LCS.Conclusions: This statement identifies the impact of LCS eligibility criteria on vulnerable populations who are at increased risk of lung cancer but do not meet eligibility criteria for screening, as well as multiple barriers that contribute to disparities in LCS implementation. Strategies to improve the selection and dissemination of LCS in vulnerable groups are described.

Increasing Cancer Screening Rates in Primary Care

Screening for cancer has contributed to substantial reductions in death from several cancers and is one of the most cost-effective preventive interventions in all of health care. In the United States, primary care clinicians, their clinical teams, and the systems in which they work are primarily responsible for ensuring that screening occurs. In order to achieve the highest possible population-wide screening rates, primary care clinicians must embrace the responsibility to screen their entire enrolled patient population, institute several overarching general approaches to screening, and implement a combination of evidence-based interventions.

Development and outcomes of a comprehensive multidisciplinary incidental lung nodule and lung cancer screening program

BACKGROUND

Appropriate management of lung nodules detected incidentally or through lung cancer screening can increase the rate of early-stage diagnoses and potentially improve treatment outcomes. However, the implementation and management of comprehensive lung nodule programs is challenging.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective report describes the development and outcomes of a comprehensive lung nodule program at a community practice in Tennessee. Computed tomography (CT) scans potentially revealing incidental lung nodules were identified by a computerized search. Incidental or screening-identified lung nodules that were enlarging or not seen in prior scans were entered into a nodule database and guideline-based review determined whether to conduct a diagnostic intervention or radiologic follow-up. Referral rates, diagnosis methods, stage distribution, treatment modalities, and days to treatment are reported.

RESULTS

The number of patients with lung nodules referred to the program increased over 2 years, from 665 patients in Year 1 to 745 patients in Year 2. Most nodules were incidental (62-65%). Nodules identified with symptoms (15.2% in Year 1) or through screening (12.6% in Year 1) were less common. In Year 1, 27% (182/665) of nodules required a diagnostic intervention and 18% (121/665) were malignant. Most diagnostic interventions were image-guided bronchoscopy (88%) or percutaneous biopsy (9%). The proportion of Stage I-II cancer diagnoses increased from 23% prior to program implementation to 36% in Year 1 and 38% in Year 2. In screening cases, 71% of patients completed follow-up scans within 18 months. Only 2% of Year 1 patients under watchful waiting required a diagnostic intervention, of which 1% received a cancer diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study reports outcomes over the first 2 years of a lung cancer screening and incidental nodule program. The results show that the program was successful, given the appropriate level of data management and oversight. Comprehensive lung nodule programs have the potential to benefit the patient, physician, and hospital system.

Disparities in Hospice Utilization for Older Cancer Patients Living in the Deep South

CONTEXT

Hospice utilization is an end-of-life quality indicator. The Deep South has known disparities in palliative care that may affect hospice utilization.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the association among Deep South patient and hospital characteristics and hospice utilization.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluated patient and hospital characteristics associated with hospice among Medicare cancer decedents aged ≥65 years in 12 southeastern cancer centers between 2012 and 2015. We examined patient-level characteristics (age, race, gender, cancer type, and received patient navigation) and hospital-level characteristics (board-certified palliative physician, inpatient palliative care beds, and hospice ownership). Outcomes included hospice (within 90 vs. three days of death). Relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs evaluated the association between patient- and hospital-level characteristics and hospice outcomes using generalized log-linear models with Poisson distribution and robust variance estimates.

RESULTS

Of 12,725 cancer decedents, 4142 (33%) did not utilize hospice. "No hospice" was associated with nonwhite (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.17-1.32) and nonnavigated patients (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.10-1.25), and those at a hospital with inpatient palliative care beds (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.10-1.21). "Late hospice" (20%; n = 1458) was associated with being male (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.19-1.44) and seen at a hospital without inpatient palliative care beds (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospice utilization differed by patient and hospital characteristics. Patients who were nonwhite, and nonnavigated, and hospitals with inpatient palliative care beds, were associated with no hospice. Research should focus on ways to improve hospice utilization in Deep South older cancer patients.