Melissa A Clark1, Jeremy J Gorelick2, JoRean D Sicks2, Elyse R Park3, Amanda L Graham4, David B Abrams5, Ilana F Gareen6. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI; Center for Population Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Brown University, Providence, RI; Melissa_Clark@brown.edu. 2. Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI; 3. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Cancer Center and Mongan Institute for Health Policy, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; 4. Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies, American Legacy Foundation, Washington, DC; Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center/Cancer Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; 5. Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies, American Legacy Foundation, Washington, DC; Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center/Cancer Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD. 6. Department of Epidemiology, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI; Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI;
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Lung screening is an opportunity for smoking cessation and relapse prevention, but smoking behaviors may differ across screening results. Changes in smoking were evaluated among 18 840 current and former smokers aged 55-74 scheduled to receive three annual lung screenings. METHODS: Participants were randomized to low-dose computed tomography or single-view chest radiography in the American College of Radiology/National Lung Screening Trial. Outcome measures included point and sustained (6-month) abstinence and motivation to quit among smokers; and relapse among smokers who quit during follow-up, recent quitters (quit < 6 months), and long-term former smokers (quit ≥ 6 months). RESULTS: During five years of follow-up, annual point prevalence quit rates ranged from 11.6%-13.4%; 48% of current smokers reported a quit attempt and 7% of long-term former smokers relapsed. Any false positive screening result was associated with subsequent increased point (multivariable hazard ratio HR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.13, 1.35) and sustained (HR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.15, 1.43) abstinence among smokers. Recent quitters with ≥1 false positive screen were less likely to relapse (HR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.54, 0.96). Screening result was not associated with relapse among long-term former smokers or among baseline smokers who quit during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A false positive screen was associated with increased smoking cessation and less relapse among recent quitters. Consistently negative screens were not associated with greater relapse among long-term former smokers. Given the Affordable Care Act requires most health plans to cover smoking cessation and lung screening, the impact and cost-effectiveness of lung screening could be further enhanced with the addition of smoking cessation interventions.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Lung screening is an opportunity for smoking cessation and relapse prevention, but smoking behaviors may differ across screening results. Changes in smoking were evaluated among 18 840 current and former smokers aged 55-74 scheduled to receive three annual lung screenings. METHODS:Participants were randomized to low-dose computed tomography or single-view chest radiography in the American College of Radiology/National Lung Screening Trial. Outcome measures included point and sustained (6-month) abstinence and motivation to quit among smokers; and relapse among smokers who quit during follow-up, recent quitters (quit < 6 months), and long-term former smokers (quit ≥ 6 months). RESULTS: During five years of follow-up, annual point prevalence quit rates ranged from 11.6%-13.4%; 48% of current smokers reported a quit attempt and 7% of long-term former smokers relapsed. Any false positive screening result was associated with subsequent increased point (multivariable hazard ratio HR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.13, 1.35) and sustained (HR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.15, 1.43) abstinence among smokers. Recent quitters with ≥1 false positive screen were less likely to relapse (HR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.54, 0.96). Screening result was not associated with relapse among long-term former smokers or among baseline smokers who quit during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A false positive screen was associated with increased smoking cessation and less relapse among recent quitters. Consistently negative screens were not associated with greater relapse among long-term former smokers. Given the Affordable Care Act requires most health plans to cover smoking cessation and lung screening, the impact and cost-effectiveness of lung screening could be further enhanced with the addition of smoking cessation interventions.
Authors: Carlijn Michelle van der Aalst; Karien Anna Margaretha van den Bergh; Marc Christiaan Willemsen; Henricus Johannes de Koning; Robertus Johannes van Klaveren Journal: Thorax Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: C M van der Aalst; R J van Klaveren; K A M van den Bergh; M C Willemsen; H J de Koning Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2010-12-09 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Cynthia O Townsend; Matthew M Clark; James R Jett; Christi A Patten; Darrell R Schroeder; Liza M Nirelli; Stephen J Swensen; Richard D Hurt Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Mark S Walker; Damon J Vidrine; Ellen R Gritz; Randy J Larsen; Yan Yan; Ramaswamy Govindan; Edwin B Fisher Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2006-11-28 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; Jonathan D Clapp; Kathy L Clingan; Ilana F Gareen; David A Lynch; Pamela M Marcus; Paul F Pinsky Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-11-22 Impact factor: 13.506
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
Authors: Elyse R Park; Ilana F Gareen; Sandra Japuntich; Inga Lennes; Kelly Hyland; Sarah DeMello; JoRean D Sicks; Nancy A Rigotti Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Annette R Kaufman; Laura A Dwyer; Stephanie R Land; William M P Klein; Elyse R Park Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Hunter G Lindsay; Frederick S Wamboldt; Kristen E Holm; Barry J Make; John Hokanson; James D Crapo; Elizabeth A Regan Journal: Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis Date: 2021-07-28
Authors: Jordan M Neil; Caylin Marotta; Irina Gonzalez; Yuchiao Chang; Douglas E Levy; Amy Wint; Kimberly Harris; Saif Hawari; Elise Noonan; Grace Styklunas; Sydney Crute; Sydney E Howard; Joanne Sheppard; Inga T Lennes; Francine Jacobson; Efren J Flores; Jennifer S Haas; Elyse R Park; Nancy A Rigotti Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Lindsay Gressard; Amy S DeGroff; Thomas B Richards; Stephanie Melillo; Julia Kish-Doto; Christina L Heminger; Elizabeth A Rohan; Kristine Gabuten Allen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 3.295