Annual or biennial lung cancer CT screening?

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Patterns of Lung Cancer Screening Among Physicians in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer remains the primary cause of death connected to cancer on a worldwide scale. Obtaining a deep understanding of the knowledge, attitudes, and behavior patterns of doctors is essential for developing successful strategies to improve lung cancer screening. This study aims to identify the attitudes, beliefs, referral practices, and knowledge of lung cancer screening among physicians in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted from July to December 2023 to investigate the attitudes, beliefs, referral practices, and knowledge of lung cancer screening, and adherence to lung cancer screening recommendations among physicians in Saudi Arabia. Internal medicine, family medicine, and pulmonology physicians of all levels (consultants, senior registrars, and residents) who are currently practicing medicine in Saudi Arabia formed the study population. This study employed a previously developed questionnaire. Binary logistic regression analysis was employed to identify factors that indicate a better degree of knowledge and a positive attitude toward lung cancer screening.

RESULTS

This study involved a total of 96 physicians. The study participants demonstrated a significant degree of understanding regarding lung cancer screening, with an average knowledge score of 5.8 (SD: 1.7) out of 8, equivalent to 72.5% of the highest possible score. The accuracy rate for knowledge items varied from 44.8% to 91.7%. The study participants had a moderately favorable attitude toward lung cancer screening, as shown by a mean attitude score of 14.4 (SD: 3.7) out of a maximum possible score of 30, which corresponds to 48.0% of the highest achievable score. Around 36.5% of the survey participants reported engaging in the practice of discussing the results of lung cancer screening with patients. The primary obstacles frequently cited were challenges in patient scheduling, insufficient time to discuss lung cancer screening during clinic appointments, and patient refusal, constituting 59.4%, 53.1%, and 53.1% of the identified barriers, respectively. Physicians in Saudi Arabia, particularly those employed in private hospitals, demonstrated a higher level of knowledge of lung cancer screening compared to others (p < 0.05). In contrast, individuals with 11-15 years of experience were shown to have a 78.0% lower likelihood of being educated about lung cancer screening compared to their counterparts (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The study's results indicate that there is a need for the development of specialized educational initiatives aimed at Saudi Arabian physicians, particularly those with 11 to 15 years of experience who exhibit a limited understanding of lung cancer screening. Utilizing programs that provide continuing medical education would aid in their education. There is a need to facilitate communication between physicians and patients. It is critical to address the identified issues, such as streamlining the appointment scheduling process and ensuring patients have sufficient time during clinic visits. Furthermore, it is critical for the success of nationwide screening initiatives to foster collaboration between the public and private healthcare sectors.

LC-MS/MS Based Volatile Organic Compound Biomarkers Analysis for Early Detection of Lung Cancer

(1) Background: lung cancer is the world's deadliest cancer, but early diagnosis helps to improve the cure rate and thus reduce the mortality rate. Annual low-dose computed tomography (LD-CT) screening is an efficient lung cancer-screening program for a high-risk population. However, LD-CT has often been characterized by a higher degree of false-positive results. To meet these challenges, a volatolomic approach, in particular, the breath volatile organic compounds (VOCs) fingerprint analysis, has recently received increased attention for its application in early lung cancer screening thanks to its convenience, non-invasiveness, and being well tolerated by patients. (2) Methods: a LC-MS/MS-based volatolomics analysis was carried out according to P/N 5046800 standard based breath analysis of VOC as novel cancer biomarkers for distinguishing early-stage lung cancer from the healthy control group. The discriminatory accuracy of identified VOCs was assessed using subject work characterization and a random forest risk prediction model. (3) Results: the proposed technique has good performance compared with existing approaches, the differences between the exhaled VOCs of the early lung cancer patients before operation, three to seven days after the operation, as well as four to six weeks after operation under fasting and 1 h after the meal were compared with the healthy controls. The results showed that only 1 h after a meal, the concentration of seven VOCs, including 3-hydroxy-2-butanone (TG-4), glycolaldehyde (TG-7), 2-pentanone (TG-8), acrolein (TG-11), nonaldehyde (TG-19), decanal (TG-20), and crotonaldehyde (TG-22), differ significantly between lung cancer patients and control, with the invasive adenocarcinoma of the lung (IAC) having the most significant difference. (4) Conclusions: this novel, non-invasive approach can improve the detection rate of early lung cancer, and LC-MS/MS-based breath analysis could be a promising method for clinical application.

Identification of Candidates for Longer Lung Cancer Screening Intervals Following a Negative Low-Dose Computed Tomography Result

Lengthening the annual low-dose computed tomography (CT) screening interval for individuals at lowest risk of lung cancer could reduce harms and improve efficiency. We analyzed 23 328 participants in the National Lung Screening Trial who had a negative CT screen (no ≥4-mm nodules) to develop an individualized model for lung cancer risk after a negative CT. The Lung Cancer Risk Assessment Tool + CT (LCRAT+CT) updates "prescreening risk" (calculated using traditional risk factors) with selected CT features. At the next annual screen following a negative CT, risk of cancer detection was reduced among the 70% of participants with neither CT-detected emphysema nor consolidation (median risk = 0.2%, interquartile range [IQR] = 0.1%-0.3%). However, risk increased for the 30% with CT emphysema (median risk = 0.5%, IQR = 0.3%-0.8%) and the 0.6% with consolidation (median = 1.6%, IQR = 1.0%-2.5%). As one example, a threshold of next-screen risk lower than 0.3% would lengthen the interval for 57.8% of screen-negatives, thus averting 49.8% of next-screen false-positives among screen-negatives but delaying diagnosis for 23.9% of cancers. Our results support that many, but not all, screen-negatives might reasonably lengthen their CT screening interval.