Smoking cessation and lung cancer screening

Quantifying emphysema in lung screening computed tomography with robust automated lobe segmentation

Purpose

Anatomy-based quantification of emphysema in a lung screening cohort has the potential to improve lung cancer risk stratification and risk communication. Segmenting lung lobes is an essential step in this analysis, but leading lobe segmentation algorithms have not been validated for lung screening computed tomography (CT).

Approach

In this work, we develop an automated approach to lobar emphysema quantification and study its association with lung cancer incidence. We combine self-supervised training with level set regularization and finetuning with radiologist annotations on three datasets to develop a lobe segmentation algorithm that is robust for lung screening CT. Using this algorithm, we extract quantitative CT measures for a cohort (n = 1189 ) from the National Lung Screening Trial and analyze the multivariate association with lung cancer incidence.

Results

Our lobe segmentation approach achieved an external validation Dice of 0.93, significantly outperforming a leading algorithm at 0.90 (p < 0.01 ). The percentage of low attenuation volume in the right upper lobe was associated with increased lung cancer incidence (odds ratio: 1.97; 95% CI: [1.06, 3.66]) independent of PLCO m 2012 risk factors and diagnosis of whole lung emphysema. Quantitative lobar emphysema improved the goodness-of-fit to lung cancer incidence (χ 2 = 7.48 , p = 0.02 ).

Conclusions

We are the first to develop and validate an automated lobe segmentation algorithm that is robust to smoking-related pathology. We discover a quantitative risk factor, lending further evidence that regional emphysema is independently associated with increased lung cancer incidence. The algorithm is provided at https://github.com/MASILab/EmphysemaSeg.

Updated cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening for Australia, capturing differences in the health economic impact of NELSON and NLST outcomes

BACKGROUND

A national, lung cancer screening programme is under consideration in Australia, and we assessed cost-effectiveness using updated data and assumptions.

METHODS

We estimated the cost-effectiveness of lung screening by applying screening parameters and outcomes from either the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) or the NEderlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (NELSON) to Australian data on lung cancer risk, mortality, health-system costs, and smoking trends using a deterministic, multi-cohort model. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

The ICER for lung screening compared to usual care in the NELSON-based scenario was AU$39,250 (95% CI $18,150-108,300) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY); lower than the NLST-based estimate (ICER = $76,300, 95% CI $41,750-236,500). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, lung screening was cost-effective in 15%/60% of NELSON-like simulations, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,000/$50,000 per QALY, respectively, compared to 0.5%/6.7% for the NLST. ICERs were most sensitive to assumptions regarding the screening-related lung cancer mortality benefit and duration of benefit over time. The cost of screening had a larger impact on ICERs than the cost of treatment, even after quadrupling the 2006-2016 healthcare costs of stage IV lung cancer.

DISCUSSION

Lung screening could be cost-effective in Australia, contingent on translating trial-like lung cancer mortality benefits to the clinic.

Implementation of an Integrated Lung Cancer Prevention and Screening Program Using a Mobile Computed Tomography (CT) Unit in Brazil

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is the deadliest cancer worldwide and in Brazil. Despite strong evidence, lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in high-risk individuals is far from a reality in many countries, particularly in Brazil. Brazil has a universal public health system marked with important inequalities. One affordable strategy to increase the coverage of resources is to use mobile units.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the implementation and results of an innovative lung cancer prevention program that integrates tobacco cessation and lung cancer screening using a mobile CT unit.

METHODOLOGY

From May 2019 to Dec 2020, health professionals from 18 public primary health care units in Barretos, Brazil, were trained to offer smoking cessation counseling and treatment. Eligible high-risk participants of this program were also invited to perform lung cancer screening in a mobile LDCT unit that was specially conceived to be dispatched to the community. A detailed epidemiological questionnaire was administered to the LDCT participants.

RESULTS

Among the 233 screened participants, the majority were women (54.9%), and the average age was 62 years old. A total of 52.8% of participants showed high or very high nicotine dependence. After 1 year, 27.8% of participants who were involved in smoking cessation groups had quit smoking. The first LDCT round revealed that the majority of participants (83.7%) exhibited lung-Rads 1 or 2; 7.3% exhibited lung-Rads 3; 7.7% exhibited lung-Rads 4a; and 3% exhibited lung-Rads 4b or 4x. The three participants with lung-Rads 4b were further confirmed, and their surgery led to the diagnosis of early-stage cancer (1 case of adenocarcinoma and two cases of squamous cell carcinoma), leading to a cancer diagnosis rate of 12.8/1000.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate promising outcomes for an onsite integrative program enrolling high-risk individuals in a middle-income country. Evidence barriers and challenges remain to be overcome.

Attitudes towards the integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom: A qualitative study of individuals eligible to attend

INTRODUCTION

There is limited research exploring how smoking cessation treatment should be implemented into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom. This study aimed to understand attitudes and preferences regarding the integration of smoking cessation support within lung cancer screening from the perspective of those eligible.

METHODS

Thirty-one lung cancer screening eligible individuals aged 55-80 years with current or former smoking histories were recruited using community outreach and social media. Two focus groups (three participants each) and 25 individual telephone interviews were conducted. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes were generated: (1) bringing lung cancer closer to home, where screening was viewed as providing an opportunity to motivate smoking cessation, depending on perceived personal risk and screening result; (2) a sensitive approach to cessation with the uptake of cessation support considered to be largely dependent on screening practitioners' communication style and expectations of stigma and (3) creating an equitable service that focuses on ease of access as a key determinant of uptake, where integrating cessation within the screening appointment may sustain increased quit motivation and prevent loss to follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening was viewed positively by those eligible to attend. Screening appointments providing personalized lung health information may increase cessation motivation. Services should proactively support participants with possible fatalistic views regarding risk and decreased cessation motivation upon receiving a good screening result. To increase engagement in cessation, services need to be person-centred.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study has included patient and public involvement throughout, including input regarding study design, research materials, recruitment strategies and research summaries.

Smoking Cessation by Phone Counselling in a Lung Cancer Screening Program: A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study

Introduction

Smoking cessation integration within lung cancer screening programs is challenging. Currently, phone counselling is available across Canada for individuals referred by healthcare workers and by self-referral. We compared quit rates after phone counselling interventions between participants who self-refer, those referred by healthcare workers, and those referred by a lung cancer screening program.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of participants referred to provincial smoking cessation quit line in contemporaneous cohorts: self-referred participants, healthcare worker referred, and those referred by a lung cancer screening program if they were still actively smoking at the time of first contact. Baseline, covariates (sociodemographic information, smoking history, and history of mental health disorder) and quit intentions (stage of change, readiness for change, previous use of quit programs, and previous quit attempts) were compared among the three cohorts. Our primary outcome was defined as self-reported 30-day abstinence rates at 6 months. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify whether group assignment was associated with higher quit rates.

Results

Participants referred by a lung cancer screening program had low quit rates (12%, 95% CI: 5–19) at six months despite the use of phone counselling. Compared to patients who were self-referred to the smoking cessation phone helpline, individuals referred by a lung cancer screening program were much less likely to quit (adjusted OR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.17–0.8), whereas those referred by healthcare workers were twice as likely to quit (adjusted OR 2.16 (1.3–3.58)) even after adjustment for differences in smoking intensity and quit intentions.

Conclusions

Phone counselling alone has very limited benefit in a lung cancer screening program. Participants differ significantly from those who are otherwise referred by healthcare workers. This study underlines the importance of a dedicated and personalized tobacco treatment program within every lung cancer screening program. The program should incorporate best practices and encourage treatment regardless of readiness to quit.

Engaging Patients in Smoking Cessation Treatment within the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: Lessons Learned from an NCI SCALE Trial

Offering smoking cessation treatment at lung cancer screening (LCS) will maximize mortality reduction associated with screening, but predictors of treatment engagement are not well understood. We examined participant characteristics of engagement in an NCI SCALE cessation trial. Eligible LCS patients (N = 818) were randomized to the Intensive arm (8 phone counseling sessions +8 weeks of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)) vs. Minimal arm (3 sessions + 2 weeks of NRT). Engagement was measured by number of sessions completed (none, some, or all) and NRT mailed (none vs. any) in each arm. In the Intensive arm, those with ≥some college (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.1, 4.0) and undergoing an annual scan (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.1, 4.2) engaged in some counseling vs. none. Individuals with higher nicotine dependence were more likely (OR = 2.8, 95% CI = 1.3, 6.2) to request NRT. In the Minimal arm, those with higher education (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.1, 3.9) and undergoing an annual scan (OR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.04, 3.8) completed some sessions vs. none. Requesting NRT was associated with more pack-years (OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.1, 3.5). Regardless of treatment intensity, additional strategies are needed to engage those with lower education, less intensive smoking histories, and undergoing a first scan. These efforts will be important given the broader 2021 LCS guidelines.

Improved motivation and readiness to quit shortly after lung cancer screening: Evidence for a teachable moment

BACKGROUND

For patients at high risk for lung cancer, screening using low-dose computed tomography (lung cancer screening [LCS]) is recommended. The purpose of this study was to examine whether screening may serve as a teachable moment for smoking-related outcomes.

METHODS

In a smoking-cessation trial, participants (N = 843) completed 2 phone interviews before randomization: before LCS (T0) and after LCS (T1). By using logistic and linear regression, the authors examined teachable moment variables (perceived risk, lung cancer worry) and outcomes (readiness, motivation, and cigarettes per day [CPD]).

RESULTS

Participants were a mean ± SD age of 63.7 ± 5.9 years, had 47.8 ± 7.1 pack-years of smoking, 35.2% had a high school diploma or General Educational Development (high school equivalency) degree or less, and 42.3% were undergoing their first scan. Between T0 and T1, 25.7% of participants increased readiness to quit, 9.6% decreased readiness, and 64.7% reported no change (P < .001). Motivation to quit increased (P < .05) and CPD decreased between assessments (P < .001), but only 1.3% self-reported quitting. Compared with individuals who reported no lung cancer worry/little worry, extreme worry was associated with readiness to quit in the next 30 days (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0) and with higher motivation (b = 0.83; P < .001) at T1. Individuals undergoing a baseline (vs annual) scan were more ready to quit in the next 30 days (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.5).

CONCLUSIONS

During the brief window between registering for LCS and receiving the results, the authors observed that very few participants quit smoking, but a significant proportion improved on readiness and motivation to quit, particularly among individuals who were undergoing their first scan and those who were extremely worried about lung cancer. These results indicate that providing evidence-based tobacco treatment can build upon this teachable moment.

Lung cancer screening implementation: Complexities and priorities

Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer death worldwide. The benefits of lung cancer screening to reduce mortality and detect early-stage disease are no longer in any doubt based on the results of two landmark trials using LDCT. Lung cancer screening has been implemented in the US and South Korea and is under consideration by other communities. Successful translation of demonstrated research outcomes into the routine clinical setting requires careful implementation and co-ordinated input from multiple stakeholders. Implementation aspects may be specific to different healthcare settings. Important knowledge gaps remain, which must be addressed in order to optimize screening benefits and minimize screening harms. Lung cancer screening differs from all other cancer screening programmes as lung cancer risk is driven by smoking, a highly stigmatized behaviour. Stigma, along with other factors, can impact smokers' engagement with screening, meaning that smokers are generally 'hard to reach'. This review considers critical points along the patient journey. The first steps include selecting a risk threshold at which to screen, successfully engaging the target population and maximizing screening uptake. We review barriers to smoker engagement in lung and other cancer screening programmes. Recruitment strategies used in trials and real-world (clinical) programmes and associated screening uptake are reviewed. To aid cross-study comparisons, we propose a standardized nomenclature for recording and calculating recruitment outcomes. Once participants have engaged with the screening programme, we discuss programme components that are critical to maximize net benefit. A whole-of-programme approach is required including a standardized and multidisciplinary approach to pulmonary nodule management, incorporating probabilistic nodule risk assessment and longitudinal volumetric analysis, to reduce unnecessary downstream investigations and surgery; the integration of smoking cessation; and identification and intervention for other tobacco related diseases, such as coronary artery calcification and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. National support, integrated with tobacco control programmes, and with appropriate funding, accreditation, data collection, quality assurance and reporting mechanisms will enhance lung cancer screening programme success and reduce the risks associated with opportunistic, ad hoc screening. Finally, implementation research must play a greater role in informing policy change about targeted LDCT screening programmes.

Lung cancer screening: targeting the hard to reach-a review

Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer death in the USA for both men and women, and also worldwide, it is the commonest cause of cancer death. The five-year survival rate for LC depends on the stage at which it is diagnosed. It is over 50% for cases detected in a localized stage but when the disease has spread to other organs, the five-year survival rate is only 5%. Unfortunately, only 16% of LC cases are diagnosed at an early stage. In 2013, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended annual LC screening with low dose chest computed tomography (CT) in adults aged 55 to 80 years who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years, based on the evidence from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) in the USA. When it comes to recruiting the target group for lung cancer screening (LCS), there are several barriers to overcome, such as whom exactly to include, where to find the target group, how to convince the target to participate or how to attract participants from all socioeconomic groups. The aim of this review is to find out what is already known about how the target group for LCS can be contacted and how participation can be improved, since uptake is a key issue in every (cancer) screening program. A review of the literature was conducted using ‘lung cancer screening and participation and uptake’ as search string. We searched in Web of Science and PubMed for reviews, systematic reviews and articles, published between 2015 and 2020. Compared to the target groups for screening in the long-running cancer screening programs of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer, there are several additional obstacles regarding defining, locating and recruiting of the target group for LCS. Shared decision-making is crucial when we want to reach the hard to reach for LCS and it should be improved, by educating primary care practitioners about LCS guidelines and providing them with the necessary tools, such as decision aids, to facilitate their job in this respect. Moreover, the information materials should be more tailored to specific groups who participate least.

Identification of an Immunologic Signature of Lung Adenocarcinomas Based on Genome-Wide Immune Expression Profiles

Background: Lung cancer is one of the most common types of cancer, and it has a poor prognosis. It is urgent to identify prognostic biomarkers to guide therapy. Methods: The immune gene expression profiles for patients with lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs) were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO). The relationships between the expression of 45 immune checkpoint genes (ICGs) and prognosis were analyzed. Additionally, the correlations between the expression of 45 biomarkers and immunotherapy biomarkers, including tumor mutation burden (TMB), mismatch repair defects, neoantigens, and others, were identified. Ultimately, prognostic ICGs were combined to determine immune subgroups, and the prognostic differences between these subgroups were identified in LUAD. Results: A total of 11 and nine ICGs closely related to prognosis were obtained from the GEO and TCGA databases, respectively. CD200R1 expression had a significant negative correlation with TMB and neoantigens. CD200R1 showed a significant positive correlation with CD8A, CD68, and GZMB, indicating that it may cause the disordered expression of adaptive immune resistance pathway genes. Multivariable Cox regression was used to construct a signature composed of four prognostic ICGs (IDO1, CD274, CTLA4, and CD200R1): Risk Score = -0.002* IDO1+0.031* CD274-0.069* CTLA4-0.517* CD200R1. The median Risk Score was used to classify the samples for the high- and low-risk groups. We observed significant differences between groups in the training, testing, and external validation cohorts. Conclusion: Our research provides a method of integrating ICG expression profiles and clinical prognosis information to predict lung cancer prognosis, which will provide a unique reference for gene immunotherapy for LUAD.

Lung Screening Benefits and Challenges: A Review of The Data and Outline for Implementation

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, accounting for almost a fifth of all cancer-related deaths. Annual computed tomographic lung cancer screening (CTLS) detects lung cancer at earlier stages and reduces lung cancer-related mortality among high-risk individuals. Many medical organizations, including the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, recommend annual CTLS in high-risk populations. However, fewer than 5% of individuals worldwide at high risk for lung cancer have undergone screening. In large part, this is owing to delayed implementation of CTLS in many countries throughout the world. Factors contributing to low uptake in countries with longstanding CTLS endorsement, such as the United States, include lack of patient and clinician awareness of current recommendations in favor of CTLS and clinician concerns about CTLS-related radiation exposure, false-positive results, overdiagnosis, and cost. This review of the literature serves to address these concerns by evaluating the potential risks and benefits of CTLS. Review of key components of a lung screening program, along with an updated shared decision aid, provides guidance for program development and optimization. Review of studies evaluating the population considered "high-risk" is included as this may affect future guidelines within the United States and other countries considering lung screening implementation.

Clinician Variation in Ordering and Completion of Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening in a Safety-Net Medical System

BACKGROUND

Less than 5% of eligible individuals in the United States undergo lung cancer screening. Variation in clinicians' participation in lung cancer screening has not been determined.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied medical providers who ordered ≥ 1 low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening from February 2017 through February 2019 in an integrated safety-net healthcare system. We analyzed associations between provider characteristics and LDCT orders and completion using chi-square, Fisher exact, and Student t tests, as well as ANOVA and multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among an estimated 194 adult primary care physicians, 144 (74%) ordered at least 1 LDCT, as did 39 specialists. These 183 medical providers ordered 1594 LDCT (median, 4; interquartile range, 2-9). In univariate and multivariate models, family practice providers (P < .001) and providers aged ≥ 50 years (P = .03) ordered more LDCT than did other clinicians. Across providers, the median proportion of ordered LDCT that were completed was 67%. The total or preceding number of LDCT ordered by a clinician was not associated with the likelihood of LDCT completion.

CONCLUSION

In an integrated safety-net healthcare system, most adult primary care providers order LDCT. The number of LDCT ordered varies widely among clinicians, and a substantial proportion of ordered LDCT are not completed.

E-cigarette and hookah adoption patterns: Is the harm reduction theory just so much smoke?

AIMS

This paper explores inter-generational changes in consumers smoking product uptake and use patterns after the introduction of e-cigarettes and hookahs.

DESIGN

Item Response Theory (IRT) is used to analyze the Health Information National Trends Survey sponsored by the Food and Drug Administration (HINTS-FDA). The survey was fielded in 2015. IRT allows the pattern of product use to be described and help assess whether the new tobacco products (i.e., e-cigarettes, hookahs) serve as gateway to other products or act in harm reduction modality.

FINDINGS

The results indicate that the new product alternatives have changed the how tobacco products are adopted in the U.S. In particular, younger respondents were more likely to have engaged in cigar, e-cigarette and water-pipe use than the older cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of nicotine products previously unavailable in the U.S is creating new modes for smoking initiation in the age groups most likely to begin a new habit. There is little evidence that smokers in the older HINTS cohorts are using the e-cigarette as a smoking cessation tool. The rise of cigar use in the younger cohort may indicate that legal products are being mixed with illicit substances (i.e., 'blunting').

Low-Dose CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Evidence from 2 Decades of Study

Lung cancer remains the overwhelmingly greatest cause of cancer death in the United States, accounting for more annual deaths than breast, prostate, and colon cancer combined. Accumulated evidence since the mid to late 1990s, however, indicates that low-dose CT screening of high-risk patients enables detection of lung cancer at an early stage and can reduce the risk of dying from lung cancer. CT screening is now a recommended clinical service in the United States, subject to guidelines and reimbursement requirements intended to standardize practice and optimize the balance of benefits and risks. In this review, the evidence on the effectiveness of CT screening will be summarized and the current guidelines and standards will be described in the context of knowledge gained from lung cancer screening studies. In addition, an overview of the potential advances that may improve CT screening will be presented, and the need to better understand the performance in clinical practice outside of the research trial setting will be discussed. © RSNA, 2020.

Provider-Patient Discussions About Smoking and the Impact of Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines: NHIS 2011-2015

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines for treating tobacco use and lung cancer screening guidelines recommend smoking cessation counseling to current smokers by health care professionals.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine the contemporary patterns of current smokers' discussions about smoking with their health care professionals in the USA.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We conducted an observational study of 30,132 current smokers (weighted sample 40,126,006) for the years 2011 to 2015 using data from the National Health Interview Survey.

MAIN MEASURES

Our main outcome was the proportion of current smokers who had discussions about smoking with their health care professionals. We used the Cochran-Armitage trend test to evaluate the temporal trends in current smokers' discussions about smoking, and used a multivariable logistic model to determine the predictors of discussions about smoking, controlling for smokers' demographics, health status, and receipts of lung cancer screening.

KEY RESULTS

Our study found the proportion of current smokers who had discussions about smoking with their health care professionals increased from 51.3% in 2011 to 55.4% in 2015 (P-trend < 0.0001). However, about 15% of current smokers who underwent lung cancer screening did not have or could not recall discussions about smoking with their health care professionals. In multivariable analyses and sensitivity analysis, the predictors of discussions about smoking were being a heavy smoker, receipt of lung cancer screening, being non-Hispanic white, having a physician office visit in the past year, being diagnosed with respiratory conditions, having fair or poor health, and having insurance coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrated a steady but slow increase in current smokers' discussions about smoking with their health care professionals in recent years, especially among heavy smokers. More than 40% of current smokers did not have or could not recall any discussions about smoking with their health care professionals.

Smoking Cessation in the ITALUNG Lung Cancer Screening: What Does “Teachable Moment” Mean?

Background

Changes in smoking habits and predictors of smoking cessation were examined in the randomized ITALUNG lung cancer screening trial.

Methods

In three centers, eligible smokers or ex-smokers (55–69 years, ≥20 pack-years in the last 10 years) were randomized to receive annual invitation for low-dose computed tomography for 4 years or usual care. At invitation, subjects received written information for a free smoking cessation program. Quitting outcome was assessed at year 4.

Results

Among participants who completed baseline assessments and year 4 screening, higher quitting (20.8% vs. 16.7%, p = .029) and lower relapse (6.41% vs. 7.56%, p = .50) rates were observed in the active screening group as compared to the usual-care control group. Corresponding figures in the intention-to-treat analysis were as follows: 16.04% versus 14.64% (p = .059) and 4.88% versus 6.43% (p = .26). Quitting smoking was significantly associated to male gender, lower pack-years, and having pulmonary nodules at baseline. Center-specific analyses showed a threefold statistically significant higher probability to quit associated with participating in the smoking cessation program. A subsample of smokers of the scan group from one center showed higher quitting rates over 12-month follow-up as compared to matched controls from the general population who underwent the same smoking cessation program.

Conclusions

Consistently with previous reports, in the ITALUNG trial, screened subjects showed significantly higher quit rates than controls, and higher quit rates were associated with both the presence of pulmonary nodules and participating in a smoking cessation program. Maximal effect on quitting outcome was observed with the participation in the smoking cessation program.

Implications

Participating in lung cancer screening promotes smoking cessation. An effective “teachable moment” may be achieved when the smoking cessation intervention is structured as integral part of the screening clinical visits and conducted by a dedicated team of health care professionals. Standardized guidelines for smoking cessation interventions in lung cancer screening are needed.

Smoking cessation behaviors among older U.S. adults

Smoking cessation is a critical component of cancer prevention among older adults (age ≥ 65 years). Understanding smoking cessation behaviors among older adults can inform clinical and community efforts to increase successful cessation. We provide current, national prevalence estimates for smoking cessation behaviors among older adults, including interest in quitting, quitting attempts, quitting successes, receiving advice to quit from a healthcare provider, and use of evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments. The 2015 National Health Interview Survey and Cancer Control Supplement were used to estimate cigarette smoking status and cessation behaviors among older US adults across selected socio-demographic and health characteristics. We found that four in five older adults who had ever smoked cigarettes had quit and more than half who currently smoked were interested in quitting but fewer than half made a past-year quit attempt. Two-thirds of older adults said that a healthcare provider advised them to quit smoking, but just over one-third who tried to quit used evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments and only one in 20 successfully quit in the past year. Prevalence estimates for smoking cessation behaviors were similar across most characteristics. Our study demonstrates that few older adults, across most levels of characteristics examined, successfully quit smoking, underscoring the importance of assisting smoking cessation efforts. Healthcare providers can help older adults quit smoking by offering or referring evidence-based cessation treatments. States and communities can implement population-based interventions including tobacco price increases, comprehensive smoke-free policies, high-impact tobacco education media campaigns, and barrier-free access to evidence-based tobacco cessation counseling and medications.

•

Smoking cessation among older adults (age ≥ 65 years) is key to cancer prevention.

•

More than half of older adults who currently smoked were interested in quitting.

•

Only one in 20 older adults successfully quit smoking in the past year.

•

Only a third of older adults who tried to quit used a proven cessation treatment.

•

Clinical and community efforts can boost successful cessation among older adults.

A Brief Report of Smoking Behaviors in Patients with Incidental Pulmonary Nodules: Associations with Communication and Risk Perception

Introduction:

Incidental pulmonary nodules (IPNs) are commonly found on routine chest imaging. Little is known about smoking behaviors among patients with IPNs or characteristics of patient-clinician communication that may contribute to these behaviors. We assessed the association of patient characteristics and communication quality with smoking behaviors and stage of change for tobacco cessation among patients with IPNs.

Materials and methods:

Prospective, repeated-measures, cohort study of current smokers and past-year quitters with IPNs treated within the Veterans Affairs Portland Health Care System. Eligible patients had newly reported, incidental nodules <3 cm planned for non-urgent computed tomography (CT) follow-up. Our primary outcomes were changes in amount smoked and stage of change for tobacco cessation throughout the follow-up period. We used multivariable-adjusted generalized estimating equations for analyses.

Results:

We identified 37 current smokers and 9 recent quitters. By the final visit, 8 of 36 (22%) baseline smokers had quit and 2 of 7 (29%) recent quitters had resumed smoking. Of 40 respondents, 23 (58%) reported receiving any tobacco treatment (recommendation to quit, medication, and/or behavioral treatment) at least once during follow-up. We found no significant associations of high-quality communication, patient distress, self-perceived risk of lung cancer, and self-reported clinician-recommended smoking cessation interventions with decrease in amount smoked or positive stage of change.

Conclusions:

Many smokers and recent quitters with IPNs quit during follow-up, though nearly half reported no quit support. We found no association between communication quality or quit support and decreased smoking. The intensity of tobacco treatment offered may have been insufficient to affect behavior.

Capitalizing on a teachable moment: Development of a targeted self-help smoking cessation intervention for patients receiving lung cancer screening

OBJECTIVE

The goal of the current study was to develop and examine the feasibility and acceptability of a self-help smoking cessation intervention targeted to the teachable moment of smokers undergoing low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a multi-phase qualitative approach, including focus groups (N = 15) and learner verification interviews (N = 16) to develop a targeted intervention for patients receiving a LDCT screening, by extending and modifying a previously validated, self-help intervention. The new intervention was then tested in a feasibility study for acceptability and receptivity by smokers (N = 18) receiving a LDCT screening.

RESULTS

The main themes that emerged from the focus group findings included a need to address the counterproductive thoughts regarding a negative lung screen result, the desire to enjoy a healthy and smoke-free retirement, the need to increase self-efficacy regarding smoking cessation, and the desire to see statistics regarding survival after quitting smoking. Learner verification findings showed that participants responded favorably to most booklet and pamphlet changes. Minor changes were made to improve comprehension and enhance self-efficacy. Formative findings led to the development of a new initial booklet titled, "Lung Cancer Screening & Quitting Smoking: Taking Control of Your Health," as well as modifications of the existing self-help cessation intervention. The intervention was designed to be initiated at the LDCT appointment, prior to receipt of scan results, and with minimal disruption of clinic work-flow. Results from the feasibility study indicated that acceptability and satisfaction with the new intervention were high.

CONCLUSION

A validated self-help smoking-cessation intervention was modified for smokers receiving LDCT screening for lung cancer based on formative research guided by the teachable moment concept. The new intervention is ready for testing in a randomized controlled trial.

Low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening as a teachable moment for smoking cessation among African American smokers: A feasibility study

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening may be a teachable moment for smoking cessation among African Americans. African Americans have been understudied within the context of LDCT and smoking cessation. The study objective was to evaluate the feasibility of recruiting African Americans to a future longitudinal trial and to obtain sample size estimates for that trial. Participants (N = 18) were African Americans eligible for LDCT screening who completed a questionnaire at three time points. Self-efficacy and intention to quit smoking were compared. The results of the current study show that it is feasible to recruit African Americans eligible for LDCT.

The importance of incorporating smoking cessation into lung cancer screening

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States (U.S.) and is the second most common non-skin cancer among men and women, accounting for about 30% of cancer-related deaths. There is clear and accumulating evidence that continued tobacco use has multiple adverse effects on cancer treatment outcomes, including greater probability of recurrence, second primary malignancies, reduced survival, greater symptom burden, and poorer quality of life (QOL). Recent findings suggest an avenue to significantly mitigate the impact of smoking on lung cancer mortality rates through the use of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening. Based on the reviewed evidence (type B), the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines of 2015 recommend screening combined with smoking cessation interventions for high-risk heavy smokers and recent quitters. These practice changes offer opportunities to develop novel smoking cessation strategies tailored to highly specific settings that aim to amplify the survivorship gains expected from screening alone. However, there is a paucity of research and data that speaks to the feasibility and efficacy of providing smoking cessation treatment specifically within the context of the LDCT lung cancer screening environment. While some studies have attempted to characterize the parameters within which smoking cessation interventions should be implemented in this context, further research is needed to explore relevant factors such as the format, components, and timing of interventions, as well as the influence of risk perceptions and results of the screening itself on motivation and ability to quit smoking.

Stakeholder Research Priorities for Smoking Cessation Interventions within Lung Cancer Screening Programs. An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

RATIONALE

Smoking cessation counseling in conjunction with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening is recommended in multiple clinical practice guidelines. The best approach for integrating effective smoking cessation interventions within this setting is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize evidence, identify research gaps, prioritize topics for future research, and propose standardized tools for use in conducting research on smoking cessation interventions within the LDCT lung cancer screening setting.

METHODS

The American Thoracic Society convened a multistakeholder committee with expertise in tobacco dependence treatment and/or LDCT screening. During an in-person meeting, evidence was reviewed, research gaps were identified, and key questions were generated for each of three research domains: (1) target population to study; (2) adaptation, development, and testing of interventions; and (3) implementation of interventions with demonstrated efficacy. We also identified standardized measures for use in conducting this research. A larger stakeholder panel then ranked research questions by perceived importance in an online survey. Final prioritization was generated hierarchically on the basis of average rank assigned.

RESULTS

There was little consensus on which questions within the population domain were of highest priority. Within the intervention domain, research to evaluate the effectiveness in the lung cancer screening setting of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions shown to be effective in other contexts was ranked highest. In the implementation domain, stakeholders prioritized understanding strategies to identify and overcome barriers to integrating smoking cessation in lung cancer screening settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This statement offers an agenda to stimulate research surrounding the integration and implementation of smoking cessation interventions with LDCT lung cancer screening.

Recommendations from the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) regarding computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Europe

In order to provide recommendations regarding implementation of computed tomography (CT) screening in Europe the ESTS established a working group with eight experts in the field. On a background of the current situation regarding CT screening in Europe and the available evidence, ten recommendations have been prepared that cover the essential aspects to be taken into account when considering implementation of CT screening in Europe. These issues are: (i) Implementation of CT screening in Europe, (ii) Participation of thoracic surgeons in CT screening programs, (iii) Training and clinical profile for surgeons participating in screening programs, (iv) the use of minimally invasive thoracic surgery and other relevant surgical issues and (v) Associated elements of CT screening programs (i.e. smoking cessation programs, radiological interpretation, nodule evaluation algorithms and pathology reports). Thoracic Surgeons will play a key role in this process and therefore the ESTS is committed to providing guidance and facilitating this process for the benefit of patients and surgeons.