1
|
Li B, Zhang X. To establish a prognostic model of epidermal growth factor receptor mutated non-small cell lung cancer patients based on Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator regression. Eur J Cancer Prev 2024; 33:368-375. [PMID: 38189857 DOI: 10.1097/cej.0000000000000865] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is currently a shortage of effective diagnostic tools that are used for identifying long-term survival among non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. This research utilized the development of a prognostic model to assist clinicians in forecasting the survival over 24 months. METHODS In Phase III and IV those patients who were diagnosed with EGFR mutation from January 2018 to June 2022 were enrolled into the lung cancer group of Thoracic Surgery Department of Hebei Provincial People's Hospital. Long-run survival was stated as survival for 24 months after being diagnosed. A multivariate prognostic pattern was constructed by means of internal validation and binary logistic regression by bootstrapping. One nomogram was created with a view to boosting the explanation and applicability of the pattern. RESULTS A total of 603 patients with EGFR mutation were registered. Elements linked to the whole survival beyond 24 months were age (OR 6.15); female (OR 1.79); functional status (ECOG 0-1) (OR 5.26); Exon 20 insertion mutation deletion (OR 2.08); No central nervous system metastasis (OR 2.66), targeted therapy (OR 0.43); Immunotherapy (OR 0.24). The model has good internal validation. CONCLUSION Seven pretreatment clinicopathological variables predicted survival over 24 months. That pattern owns a great discriminative capability. It is hypothesized that this pattern is capable of assisting in selecting the optimal treatment sequence for NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bowen Li
- College of Research Province, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan City , Hebei Province, China
| | - Xiaopeng Zhang
- Second Department of Thoracic Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lang AE. Update on the National Cancer Institute's Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination Collaboration Trials. Chest 2024; 165:1302-1306. [PMID: 38852970 DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2023.12.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2023] [Revised: 12/11/2023] [Accepted: 12/12/2023] [Indexed: 06/11/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Adam Edward Lang
- Department of Pharmacy, James E. Van Zandt VA Medical Center, Altoona, PA; Department of Family Medicine and Population Health, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Murray RL, Alexandris P, Baldwin D, Brain K, Britton J, Crosbie PAJ, Gabe R, Lewis S, Parrott S, Quaife SL, Tam HZ, Wu Q, Beeken R, Copeland H, Eckert C, Hancock N, Lindop J, McCutchan G, Marshall C, Neal RD, Rogerson S, Quinn Scoggins HD, Simmonds I, Thorley R, Callister ME. Uptake and 4-week quit rates from an opt-out co-located smoking cessation service delivered alongside community-based low-dose computed tomography screening within the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial. Eur Respir J 2024; 63:2301768. [PMID: 38636970 PMCID: PMC11024392 DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01768-2023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Accepted: 03/01/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Up to 50% of those attending for low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer continue to smoke and co-delivery of smoking cessation services alongside screening may maximise clinical benefit. Here we present data from an opt-out co-located smoking cessation service delivered alongside the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST). METHODS Eligible YLST participants were offered an immediate consultation with a smoking cessation practitioner (SCP) at their screening visit with ongoing smoking cessation support over subsequent weeks. RESULTS Of 2150 eligible participants, 1905 (89%) accepted the offer of an SCP consultation during their initial visit, with 1609 (75%) receiving ongoing smoking cessation support over subsequent weeks. Uptake of ongoing support was not associated with age, ethnicity, deprivation or educational level in multivariable analyses, although men were less likely to engage (adjusted OR (ORadj) 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.89). Uptake was higher in those with higher nicotine dependency, motivation to stop smoking and self-efficacy for quitting. Overall, 323 participants self-reported quitting at 4 weeks (15.0% of the eligible population); 266 were validated by exhaled carbon monoxide (12.4%). Multivariable analyses of eligible smokers suggested 4-week quitting was more likely in men (ORadj 1.43, 95% CI 1.11-1.84), those with higher motivation to quit and previous quit attempts, while those with a stronger smoking habit in terms of cigarettes per day were less likely to quit. CONCLUSIONS There was high uptake for co-located opt-out smoking cessation support across a wide range of participant demographics. Protected funding for integrated smoking cessation services should be considered to maximise programme equity and benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Panos Alexandris
- Centre for Prevention, Detection and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - David Baldwin
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Kate Brain
- Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - John Britton
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Philip A J Crosbie
- Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Rhian Gabe
- Barts Clinical Trials Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Sarah Lewis
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Steve Parrott
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Samantha L Quaife
- Centre for Prevention, Detection and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Hui Zhen Tam
- Barts Clinical Trials Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Qi Wu
- York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Rebecca Beeken
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Harriet Copeland
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Claire Eckert
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Neil Hancock
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | | - Grace McCutchan
- Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | | | - Richard D Neal
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | | | - Harriet D Quinn Scoggins
- PRIME Centre Wales, Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Irene Simmonds
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Rebecca Thorley
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Matthew E Callister
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shoenbill KA, Goldstein AO. Better Together: Advancing Tobacco Use Treatment and Lung Cancer Screening. J Thorac Oncol 2024; 19:531-533. [PMID: 38582544 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2024.01.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2024] [Accepted: 01/19/2024] [Indexed: 04/08/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Kimberly A Shoenbill
- Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Program on Health and Clinical Informatics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Adam O Goldstein
- Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Cartmel B, Fucito LM, Bold KW, Neveu S, Li F, Rojewski AM, Gueorguieva R, O'Malley SS, Herbst RS, Toll BA. Effect of a Personalized Tobacco Treatment Intervention on Smoking Abstinence in Individuals Eligible for Lung Cancer Screening. J Thorac Oncol 2024; 19:643-649. [PMID: 37977486 PMCID: PMC10999350 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2023.11.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2023] [Revised: 11/07/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 11/19/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION To determine whether personalized gain-framed messaging and biomarker feedback related to tobacco cessation or reduction decrease smoking behavior in patients undergoing or eligible for lung cancer screening. METHODS Between 2016 and 2020, 188 patients were enrolled in a two-phase, sequential, randomized controlled trial. Phase 1 evaluated whether standard of care (SC) (five in-person counseling sessions and 8 weeks of nicotine patch) plus gain-framed messaging (GFM) versus SC would increase 8-week biochemically verified smoking cessation rates. In 143 participants randomized in phase 2, we tested whether feedback on smoking-related biomarkers would reduce 6-month self-reported number of cigarettes smoked per day compared with a no feedback control. Chi-square test and mixed effects repeated measures analyses were used to evaluate group differences. RESULTS Participants were 62.5 ± 5.6 (mean ± SD) years of age, had a 50.3 ± 21 pack-year smoking history, and were smoking 16.9 ± 9.9 cigarettes per day. At 8 weeks, there was no difference in quit rates between those randomized to SC plus GFM (n = 15 of 93, 16.1%) and those randomized to SC (n = 16 of 95, 16.8%), with p equals to 0.90. At the 6-month post-randomization follow-up, number of cigarettes smoked per day was similar in the feedback (least-squares mean = 7.5, 95% confidence interval: 6.0-9.1) and no feedback arms (7.7, 95% confidence interval: 6.2-9.3), with p equals to 0.87. CONCLUSIONS Gain-framed messaging and health feedback did not significantly improve quit rates relative to comprehensive standard of care. Nevertheless, the overall program achieved clinically meaningful smoking quit rates in this older high pack-year cohort, highlighting the importance of intensive tobacco treatment for patients undergoing lung cancer screening. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTERED WITH CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT02658032.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brenda Cartmel
- Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut; Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Connecticut.
| | - Lisa M Fucito
- Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale-New Haven, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Krysten W Bold
- Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Susan Neveu
- Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Fangyong Li
- Department of Biostatistics, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Alana M Rojewski
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina
| | - Ralitza Gueorguieva
- Department of Biostatistics, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Stephanie S O'Malley
- Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Roy S Herbst
- Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Medical Oncology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Benjamin A Toll
- Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina; MUSC Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Alaniz-Cantú EI, Goodwin K, Smith L, Acosta E, Chávez-Iñiguez A, Evans MJ, Gaitán M, Lei F, Yousefi-Nooraie R, Fiscella KA, Rivera MP, Cupertino AP, Cartujano-Barrera F. Understanding the perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action for lung cancer screening among Latinos: A qualitative study. Front Oncol 2024; 14:1365739. [PMID: 38571494 PMCID: PMC10987732 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1365739] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2024] [Accepted: 03/11/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction Rates of lung cancer screening among Latinos remain low. The purpose of the study was to understand the perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action for lung cancer screening among Latinos. Methods Participants (N=20) were recruited using community-based recruitment strategies. Eligibility criteria included: 1) self-identified as Hispanic/Latino, 2) spoke English and/or Spanish, and 3) met the USA Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening. Interviews were conducted in Spanish and English, audio recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Using the health belief model, a qualitative theoretical analysis was used to analyze the interviews. Results Participants' mean age was 58.3 years old (SD=5.8), half of the participants were female, 55% had completed high school or lower educational level, and 55% reported speaking more Spanish than English. All participants were currently smoking. Fourteen participants (70%) were unaware of lung cancer screening, and eighteen (90%) did not know they were eligible for lung cancer screening. Regarding lung cancer screening, participants reported multiple perceived benefits (e.g., smoking cessation, early detection of lung cancer, increased survivorship) and barriers (e.g., fear of outcomes, cost, lung cancer screening not being recommended by their clinician). Lastly, multiple cues to actions for lung cancer screening were identified (e.g., family as a cue to action for getting screened). Conclusions Most Latinos who were eligible for lung cancer screening were unaware of it and, when informed, they reported multiple perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action. These factors provide concrete operational strategies to address lung cancer screening among Latinos.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edgar I. Alaniz-Cantú
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Kalese Goodwin
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - London Smith
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Eliany Acosta
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Arlette Chávez-Iñiguez
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Mary Jo Evans
- Imaging Population Health Programs, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Marcela Gaitán
- National Alliance for Hispanic Health, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Fang Lei
- School of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - Reza Yousefi-Nooraie
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Kevin A. Fiscella
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - M. Patricia Rivera
- Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Ana Paula Cupertino
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
- Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Williams PJ, Philip KEJ, Buttery SC, Perkins A, Chan L, Bartlett EC, Devaraj A, Kemp SV, Addis J, Derbyshire J, Chen M, Polkey MI, Laverty AA, Hopkinson NS. Immediate smoking cessation support during lung cancer screening: long-term outcomes from two randomised controlled trials. Thorax 2024; 79:269-273. [PMID: 37875371 DOI: 10.1136/thorax-2023-220367] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2023] [Accepted: 09/24/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immediate smoking cessation interventions delivered alongside targeted lung health checks (TLHCs) to screen for lung cancer increase self-reported abstinence at 3 months. The impact on longer term, objectively confirmed quit rates remains to be established. METHODS We followed up participants from two clinical trials in people aged 55-75 years who smoked and took part in a TLHC. These randomised participants in the TLHC by day of attendance to either usual care (UC) (signposting to smoking cessation services) or an offer of immediate smoking cessation support including pharmacotherapy. In the QuLIT1 trial, this was delivered face to face and in QuLIT2, it was delivered remotely. Follow-up was conducted 12 months after the TLHC by telephone interview with subsequent biochemical verification of smoking cessation using exhaled CO. RESULTS 430 people were enrolled initially (115 in QuLIT1 and 315 in QuLIT2), with 4 deaths before 12 months leaving 426 (62.1±5.27 years old and 48% women) participants for analysis. At 12 months, those randomised to attend on smoking cessation support intervention days had higher quit rates compared with UC adjusted for age, gender, deprivation, and which trial they had been in; self-reported 7-day point prevalence (20.0% vs 12.8%; adjusted OR (AOR)=1.78; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.89) and CO-verified quits (12.1% vs 4.7%; AOR=2.97; 95% CI 1.38 to 6.90). Those in the intervention arm were also more likely to report having made a quit attempt (30.2% vs UC 18.5%; AOR 1.90; 95% CI 1.15 to 3.15). CONCLUSION Providing immediate smoking cessation support alongside TLHC increases long term, biochemically confirmed smoking abstinence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN12455871.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Parris J Williams
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Respiratory Medicine, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK
- NIHR Respiratory BRU, Royal Brompton Hospital and National Heart and Lung Institute, London, UK
| | - Keir E J Philip
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Sara C Buttery
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Respiratory Medicine, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK
- NIHR Respiratory BRU, Royal Brompton Hospital and National Heart and Lung Institute, London, UK
| | - Alexis Perkins
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Respiratory Medicine, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK
- NIHR Respiratory BRU, Royal Brompton Hospital and National Heart and Lung Institute, London, UK
| | - Ley Chan
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Respiratory Medicine, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK
| | - Emily C Bartlett
- Respiratory Medicine, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK
- Radiology, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Anand Devaraj
- Respiratory Medicine, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK
- Radiology, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Samuel V Kemp
- Respiratory Medicine, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, London, UK
| | - James Addis
- Radiology, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Jane Derbyshire
- West London Cancer Alliance, Royal Marsden Partners, London, UK
| | - Michelle Chen
- West London Cancer Alliance, Royal Marsden Partners, London, UK
| | - Michael I Polkey
- NIHR Respiratory BRU, Royal Brompton Hospital and National Heart and Lung Institute, London, UK
| | - Anthony A Laverty
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London School of Public Health, London, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Verdone JE, Marciniak ET, Deepak J. Tobacco treatment in the setting of lung cancer screening. Curr Opin Pulm Med 2024; 30:3-8. [PMID: 37933671 DOI: 10.1097/mcp.0000000000001030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Lung cancer screening by low-dose CT is an increasingly implemented preventive medicine tool. Screening for lung cancer is incomplete without addressing problematic tobacco use, the greatest modifiable risk factor in the development of lung cancer. This review describes recent work related to lung cancer screening and treatment of tobacco use in that context. RECENT FINDINGS Implementation of lung cancer screening demonstrates socioeconomic disparities in terms of adherence to screening as well as likelihood of successful tobacco dependence treatment. Active tobacco dependence is a common comorbidity for patients undergoing lung cancer screening. The optimal implementation of tobacco dependence treatment in the context of lung cancer screening is still an area of active investigation. SUMMARY Treatment of tobacco dependence at time of lung cancer screening is a major opportunity for clinicians to intervene to reduce the major modifiable risk factor for lung cancer, tobacco use. Providing comprehensive tobacco dependence treatment is most effective using combination pharmacologic and behavioral interventions. Practices providing comprehensive treatment will benefit from accurate documentation for billing and coding and supplementing with external resources such as state Quit Lines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James E Verdone
- Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Kotti T, Katsampouris E, Ruparel M, McEwen A, Dickson JL, Duffy SW, Waller J, Janes SM, Quaife SL. A randomised controlled trial testing acceptance of practitioner-referral versus self-referral to stop smoking services within the Lung Screen Uptake Trial. Addiction 2023; 118:2007-2013. [PMID: 37331722 PMCID: PMC10952744 DOI: 10.1111/add.16269] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2022] [Accepted: 05/04/2023] [Indexed: 06/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Optimising smoking cessation (SC) referral strategies within lung cancer screening (LCS) could significantly reduce lung cancer mortality. This study aimed to measure acceptance of referral to SC support by either practitioner-referral or self-referral among participants attending a hospital-based lung health check appointment for LCS as part of the Lung Screen Uptake Trial. DESIGN Single-blinded two-arm randomised controlled trial. SETTING England. PARTICIPANTS Six hundred forty-two individuals ages 60 to 75 years, who self-reported currently smoking or had a carbon monoxide reading over 10 ppm during the lung health check appointment. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive either a contact information card for self-referral to a local stop smoking service (SSS) (self-referral, n = 360) or a SSS referral made on their behalf by the nurse or trial practitioner (practitioner-referral, n = 329). MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome was acceptance of the practitioner-referral (defined as participants giving permission for their details to be shared with the local SSS) compared with acceptance of the self-referral (defined as participants taking the physical SSS contact information card to refer themselves to the local SSS). FINDINGS Half (49.8%) accepted the practitioner-made referral to a local SSS, whereas most (88.5%) accepted the self-referral. The odds of accepting the practitioner-referral were statistically significantly lower (adjusted odds ratio = 0.10; 95% confidence interval = 0.06-0.17) than the self- referral. In analyses stratified by group, greater quit confidence, quit attempts and Black ethnicity were associated with increased acceptance within the practitioner-referral group. There were no statistically significant interactions between acceptance by referral group and any of the participants' demographic or smoking characteristics. CONCLUSIONS Among participants in hospital-based lung cancer screening in England who self-reported smoking or met a carbon monoxide cut-off, both practitioner-referral and self-referral smoking cessation strategies were highly accepted. Although self-referral was more frequently accepted, prior evidence suggests practitioner-referrals increase quit attempts, suggesting practitioner-referrals should be the first-line strategy within lung cancer screening, with self-referral offered as an alternative.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theodora Kotti
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Evangelos Katsampouris
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and DentistryQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Mamta Ruparel
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, Division of MedicineUniversity College LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Andy McEwen
- National Centre for Smoking Cessation and TrainingDorchesterUnited Kingdom
| | - Jennifer L. Dickson
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, Division of MedicineUniversity College LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Stephen W. Duffy
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and DentistryQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Jo Waller
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical SciencesKing’s College LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Samuel M. Janes
- Lungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, Division of MedicineUniversity College LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Samantha L. Quaife
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and DentistryQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUnited Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Evans WK, Tammemägi MC, Walker MJ, Cameron E, Leung YW, Ashton S, de Loë J, Doyle W, Bornais C, Allie E, Alkema K, Bravo CA, McGarry C, Rey M, Truscott R, Darling G, Rabeneck L. Integrating Smoking Cessation Into Low-Dose Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening: Results of the Ontario, Canada Pilot. J Thorac Oncol 2023; 18:1323-1333. [PMID: 37422265 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2023.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2022] [Revised: 06/26/2023] [Accepted: 07/02/2023] [Indexed: 07/10/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Low-dose computed tomography screening in high-risk individuals reduces lung cancer mortality. To inform the implementation of a provincial lung cancer screening program, Ontario Health undertook a Pilot study, which integrated smoking cessation (SC). METHODS The impact of integrating SC into the Pilot was assessed by the following: rate of acceptance of a SC referral; proportion of individuals who were currently smoking cigarettes and attended a SC session; the quit rate at 1 year; change in the number of quit attempts; change in Heaviness of Smoking Index; and relapse rate in those who previously smoked. RESULTS A total of 7768 individuals were recruited predominantly through primary care physician referral. Of these, 4463 were currently smoking and were risk assessed and referred to SC services, irrespective of screening eligibility: 3114 (69.8%) accepted referral to an in-hospital SC program, 431 (9.7%) to telephone quit lines, and 50 (1.1%) to other programs. In addition, 4.4% reported no intention to quit and 8.5% were not interested in participating in a SC program. Of the 3063 screen-eligible individuals who were smoking at baseline low-dose computed tomography scan, 2736 (89.3%) attended in-hospital SC counseling. The quit rate at 1 year was 15.5% (95% confidence interval: 13.4%-17.7%; range: 10.5%-20.0%). Improvements were also observed in Heaviness of Smoking Index (p < 0.0001), number of cigarettes smoked per day (p < 0.0001), time to first cigarette (p < 0.0001), and number of quit attempts (p < 0.001). Of those who reported having quit within the previous 6 months, 6.3% had resumed smoking at 1 year. Furthermore, 92.7% of the respondents reported satisfaction with the hospital-based SC program. CONCLUSIONS On the basis of these observations, the Ontario Lung Screening Program continues to recruit through primary care providers, to assess risk for eligibility using trained navigators, and to use an opt-out approach to referral for cessation services. In addition, initial in-hospital SC support and intensive follow-on cessation interventions will be provided to the extent possible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William K Evans
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Martin C Tammemägi
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Health Sciences, Brock University, St Catharines, Ontario, Canada
| | - Meghan J Walker
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Erin Cameron
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Yvonne W Leung
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; College of Professional Studies, Northeastern University-Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sara Ashton
- Administration, Lakeridge Health, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Julie de Loë
- Health Promotion Screening Program, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Wanda Doyle
- Health Promotion Screening Program, Champlain Regional Cancer Program, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Chantal Bornais
- Health Promotion Screening Program, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ellen Allie
- Health Promotion Screening Program, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Koop Alkema
- Cancer Screening Program, Northeast Cancer Centre - Health Sciences North, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
| | - Caroline A Bravo
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Caitlin McGarry
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Michelle Rey
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rebecca Truscott
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Gail Darling
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Linda Rabeneck
- Clinical Institutes and Quality Programs, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Fu SS, Rothman AJ, Vock DM, Lindgren BR, Almirall D, Begnaud A, Melzer AC, Schertz KL, Branson M, Haynes D, Hammett P, Joseph AM. Optimizing Longitudinal Tobacco Cessation Treatment in Lung Cancer Screening: A Sequential, Multiple Assignment, Randomized Trial. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2329903. [PMID: 37615989 PMCID: PMC10450571 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.29903] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2023] [Accepted: 07/11/2023] [Indexed: 08/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Nearly half of the 14.8 million US adults eligible for lung cancer screening (LCS) smoke cigarettes. The optimal smoking cessation program components for the LCS setting are unclear. Objective To assess the effect of adding a referral to prescription medication therapy management (MTM) to the tobacco longitudinal care (TLC) program among patients eligible for LCS who smoke and do not respond to early tobacco treatment and to assess the effect of decreasing the intensity of TLC among participants who do respond to early treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants This randomized clinical trial included patients who currently smoked cigarettes daily and were eligible for LCS. Recruitment took place at primary care centers and LCS programs at 3 large health systems in the US and began in October 2016, and 18-month follow-up was completed April 2021. Interventions (1) TLC comprising intensive telephone coaching and combination nicotine replacement therapy for 1 year with at least monthly contact; (2) TLC with MTM, MTM offered pharmacist-referral for prescription medications; and (3) Quarterly TLC, intensity of TLC was decreased to quarterly contact. Intervention assignments were based on early response to tobacco treatment (abstinence) that was assessed either 4 weeks or 8 weeks after treatment initiation. Main outcomes and Measures Self-reported, 6-month prolonged abstinence at 18-month. Results Of 636 participants, 228 (35.9%) were female, 564 (89.4%) were White individuals, and the median (IQR) age was 64.3 (59.6-68.8) years. Four weeks or 8 weeks after treatment initiation, 510 participants (80.2%) continued to smoke (ie, early treatment nonresponders) and 126 participants (19.8%) had quit (ie, early treatment responders). The 18 month follow-up survey response rate was 83.2% (529 of 636). Across TLC groups at 18 months follow-up, the overall 6-month prolonged abstinence rate was 24.4% (129 of 529). Among the 416 early treatment nonresponders, 6-month prolonged abstinence for TLC with MTM vs TLC was 17.8% vs 16.4% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.13; 95% CI, 0.67-1.89). In TLC with MTM, 98 of 254 participants (39%) completed at least 1 MTM visit. Among 113 early treatment responders, 6-month prolonged abstinence for Quarterly TLC vs TLC was 24 of 55 (43.6%) vs 34 of 58 (58.6%) (aOR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.25-1.17). Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, adding referral to MTM with TLC for participants who did not respond to early treatment did not improve smoking abstinence. Stepping down to Quarterly TLC among early treatment responders is not recommended. Integrating longitudinal tobacco cessation care with LCS is feasible and associated with clinically meaningful quit rates. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02597491.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven S. Fu
- Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota
- Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | | | - David M. Vock
- Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | - Bruce R. Lindgren
- Biostatistics Core, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | - Daniel Almirall
- Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
| | - Abbie Begnaud
- Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | - Anne C. Melzer
- Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota
- Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | | | - Mariah Branson
- Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - David Haynes
- Institute for Health Informatics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | - Patrick Hammett
- Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota
- Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | - Anne M. Joseph
- Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Grech J. A telephone-based smoking cessation intervention for individuals with COVID-19: A randomized controlled feasibility study. Tob Prev Cessat 2023; 9:23. [PMID: 37426625 PMCID: PMC10326861 DOI: 10.18332/tpc/165826] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2022] [Revised: 04/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/30/2023] [Indexed: 07/11/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Increasing evidence suggests that a diagnosis of a respiratory health condition, such as COVID-19, can prompt a smoker to quit, providing an opportunity to promote and support smoking cessation. However, mandatory quarantine, because of a COVID-19 infection, may stimulate an increase in smoking, making such efforts seem inappropriate or ineffective. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of a telephone-based smoking cessation intervention for smokers with COVID-19 in Malta. METHODS An experimental design with a mixed-methods approach was adopted. Participants (n=80) were recruited from a COVID-19 testing center and equally randomized to the intervention (advised to quit and offered three or four telephone-based smoking cessation support sessions) and control (no intervention) groups. Both groups were asked about their smoking habits at baseline and at follow-up at 1 month and at 3 months. The participants in the intervention group were invited to provide feedback on the intervention using questionnaires and by holding interviews. RESULTS Participants were recruited at a rate of 74.1% between March and April 2022. Most participants were female (58.8%), with a mean age of 41.6 years who smoked about 13 cigarettes per day. The majority (75%) accepted the offered smoking cessation support, receiving an average of two to three sessions. Findings indicate that the participants were satisfied with the support, finding it useful for attempting to quit. More participants in the intervention group reported a serious quitting attempt and a 7-day point prevalence abstinence at any point during the first month. However, 7-day point prevalence abstinence rates did not differ at the follow-up at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS The study suggests that providing smoking cessation support to individuals with COVID-19 is feasible and well-received. However, the findings suggest that the intervention's impact may have been brief. Thus, further research is recommended before conducting a conclusive trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph Grech
- Institute of Applied Sciences, Malta College of Arts, Science & Technology, Paola, Malta
- Department for Health Regulation, Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Directorate, Ministry for Health, Pieta, Malta
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Adams SJ, Stone E, Baldwin DR, Vliegenthart R, Lee P, Fintelmann FJ. Lung cancer screening. Lancet 2023; 401:390-408. [PMID: 36563698 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01694-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 89.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2022] [Revised: 07/26/2022] [Accepted: 08/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Randomised controlled trials, including the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) and the NELSON trial, have shown reduced mortality with lung cancer screening with low-dose CT compared with chest radiography or no screening. Although research has provided clarity on key issues of lung cancer screening, uncertainty remains about aspects that might be critical to optimise clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. This Review brings together current evidence on lung cancer screening, including an overview of clinical trials, considerations regarding the identification of individuals who benefit from lung cancer screening, management of screen-detected findings, smoking cessation interventions, cost-effectiveness, the role of artificial intelligence and biomarkers, and current challenges, solutions, and opportunities surrounding the implementation of lung cancer screening programmes from an international perspective. Further research into risk models for patient selection, personalised screening intervals, novel biomarkers, integrated cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessments, smoking cessation interventions, and artificial intelligence for lung nodule detection and risk stratification are key opportunities to increase the efficiency of lung cancer screening and ensure equity of access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Scott J Adams
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Emily Stone
- Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales and Department of Lung Transplantation and Thoracic Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - David R Baldwin
- Respiratory Medicine Unit, David Evans Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | | | - Pyng Lee
- Division of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, National University Hospital and National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Florian J Fintelmann
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Cao P, Smith L, Mandelblatt JS, Jeon J, Taylor KL, Zhao A, Levy DT, Williams RM, Meza R, Jayasekera J. Cost-Effectiveness of a Telephone-Based Smoking Cessation Randomized Trial in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2022; 6:pkac048. [PMID: 35818125 PMCID: PMC9382714 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkac048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2022] [Revised: 06/17/2022] [Accepted: 06/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are limited data on the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in lung cancer screening settings. We conducted an economic analysis embedded in a national randomized trial of 2 telephone counseling cessation interventions. METHODS We used a societal perspective to compare the short-term cost per 6-month bio-verified quit and long-term cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Trial data were used to micro-cost intervention delivery, and the data were extended to a lifetime horizon using an established Cancer Intervention Surveillance and Modeling Network lung cancer model. We modeled the impact of screening accompanied by 8 weeks vs 3 weeks of telephone counseling (plus nicotine replacement) vs screening alone based on 2021 screening eligibility. Lifetime downstream costs (2021 dollars) and effects (life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) saved were discounted at 3%. Sensitivity analyses tested the effects of varying quit rates and costs; all analyses assumed nonrelapse after quitting. RESULTS The costs for delivery of the 8-week vs 3-week protocol were $380.23 vs $144.93 per person, and quit rates were 7.14% vs 5.96%, respectively. The least costly strategy was a 3-week counseling approach. An 8-week (vs 3-week) counseling approach increased costs but gained QALYs for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4029 per QALY. Screening alone cost more and saved fewer QALYs than either counseling strategy. Conclusions were robust in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS Telephone-based cessation interventions with nicotine replacement are considered cost-effective in the lung screening setting. Integrating smoking cessation interventions with lung screening programs has the potential to maximize long-term health benefits at reasonable costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pianpian Cao
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Laney Smith
- Department of Oncology, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Jeanne S Mandelblatt
- Department of Oncology, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Jihyoun Jeon
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Kathryn L Taylor
- Department of Oncology, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Amy Zhao
- Department of Oncology, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - David T Levy
- Department of Oncology, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Randi M Williams
- Department of Oncology, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Rafael Meza
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Jinani Jayasekera
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|