RATIONALE: Understanding the quality of life of lung cancer screening program participants, and the impact of program participation on quality of life and healthcare use, will help in the assessment of the value of screening. OBJECTIVES: Determine the quality of life of participants in a lung cancer screening study and assess the effect of an abnormal screening finding on quality of life and healthcare use. METHODS: Quality-of-life measures and data on the use of healthcare services were collected prospectively during a randomized controlled lung cancer screening trial using chest radiography with computer-aided detection. Comparisons of baseline measures were made with U.S. population norms for the EuroQol 5-Dimension index. The impact of receiving a message of the presence of a lung nodule was assessed for all measures. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1,424 subjects participated. Twenty-five actionable nodules were reported. Baseline EuroQol 5-Dimension index scores were higher than U.S. population norms (P < 0.0001). The EuroQol 5-Dimension index score and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire symptom score showed a significant change toward poorer quality of life after notification of the presence of a lung nodule (0.940 vs. 0.877, P = 0.022, and 25.7 vs. 34.0, P = 0.005, respectively). Chest imaging within 6 months of the screening examination occurred more frequently in those notified of a lung nodule (25.5 vs. 9.3%, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Those who choose to enter a lung cancer screening program have a high baseline quality of life. The report of an abnormal screening finding can lower the quality of life and lead to increased chest imaging. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01663155).
RCT Entities:
RATIONALE: Understanding the quality of life of lung cancer screening program participants, and the impact of program participation on quality of life and healthcare use, will help in the assessment of the value of screening. OBJECTIVES: Determine the quality of life of participants in a lung cancer screening study and assess the effect of an abnormal screening finding on quality of life and healthcare use. METHODS: Quality-of-life measures and data on the use of healthcare services were collected prospectively during a randomized controlled lung cancer screening trial using chest radiography with computer-aided detection. Comparisons of baseline measures were made with U.S. population norms for the EuroQol 5-Dimension index. The impact of receiving a message of the presence of a lung nodule was assessed for all measures. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1,424 subjects participated. Twenty-five actionable nodules were reported. Baseline EuroQol 5-Dimension index scores were higher than U.S. population norms (P < 0.0001). The EuroQol 5-Dimension index score and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire symptom score showed a significant change toward poorer quality of life after notification of the presence of a lung nodule (0.940 vs. 0.877, P = 0.022, and 25.7 vs. 34.0, P = 0.005, respectively). Chest imaging within 6 months of the screening examination occurred more frequently in those notified of a lung nodule (25.5 vs. 9.3%, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Those who choose to enter a lung cancer screening program have a high baseline quality of life. The report of an abnormal screening finding can lower the quality of life and lead to increased chest imaging. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01663155).
Authors: Lisa Sanderson Cox; Matthew M Clark; James R Jett; Christi A Patten; Darrell R Schroeder; Liza M Nirelli; Stephen J Swensen; Richard D Hurt Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Janneke P C Grutters; Manuela A Joore; Erwin M Wiegman; Johannes A Langendijk; Dirk de Ruysscher; Monique Hochstenbag; Anita Botterweck; Philippe Lambin; Madelon Pijls-Johannesma Journal: Thorax Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: Phillip L Ross; Benjamin Littenberg; Paul Fearn; Peter T Scardino; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Michael W Kattan Journal: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Date: 2003 Impact factor: 2.188
Authors: K A M van den Bergh; M L Essink-Bot; G J J M Borsboom; E Th Scholten; M Prokop; H J de Koning; R J van Klaveren Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-11-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Marc R Freiman; Jack A Clark; Christopher G Slatore; Michael K Gould; Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz; Renda Soylemez Wiener Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 15.609