Literature DB >> 27130469

Psychological Burden Associated With Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.

Geena X Wu1, Dan J Raz1, Laura Brown2, Virginia Sun3.   

Abstract

Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose radiation computed tomography (LDCT) reduces mortality and is recommended for high-risk current and former smokers. Several potential harms associated with LCS have been identified, including the potential for psychological burden. To summarize the current state of the scientific knowledge on psychological burden associated with LCS, we performed a systematic search of the contemporary quantitative and qualitative research literature. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that evaluated the effect of LCS with LDCT on psychological burden and health-related quality of life assessed using validated and nonvalidated measures. PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO, and Scopus were searched for English language articles published between 2004 and January 2015. Data abstraction and quality assessment were conducted by 2 independent reviewers. Thirteen studies were included that met our inclusion criteria. Overall, results were variable with some studies reporting worse psychological burden for patients with indeterminate results at prescreening, after screening, and at short-term follow-up (<6 months after screen). These adverse effects diminished or resolved at long-term follow-up (> 6 months after screen). LCS might be associated with short-term adverse psychological burden, particularly after a false positive result. However, these adverse effects diminished over time. The amount of current evidence is small, with limitations in study design and use of outcome measures. More high-quality research is needed to determine the frequency, duration, and overall magnitude of LCS-related psychological burden in nonclinical trial settings.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anxiety; Health-related quality of life; Low-dose computed tomography; Psychological distress; Shared decision-making

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27130469      PMCID: PMC5606246          DOI: 10.1016/j.cllc.2016.03.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Lung Cancer        ISSN: 1525-7304            Impact factor:   4.785


  29 in total

1.  The Psychological Effects of Lung Cancer Screening on Heavy Smokers: Another Reason for Concern.

Authors:  Russell P Harris
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 21.873

2.  Consequences of screening in lung cancer: development and dimensionality of a questionnaire.

Authors:  John Brodersen; Hanne Thorsen; Svend Kreiner
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  Informed decision making does not affect health-related quality of life in lung cancer screening (NELSON trial).

Authors:  Karien A M van den Bergh; Marie-Louise Essink-Bot; Rob J van Klaveren; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2010-06-26       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 4.  The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review.

Authors:  J Brett; C Bankhead; B Henderson; E Watson; J Austoker
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.894

5.  Long-term effects of lung cancer computed tomography screening on health-related quality of life: the NELSON trial.

Authors:  K A M van den Bergh; M L Essink-Bot; G J J M Borsboom; E T Scholten; R J van Klaveren; H J de Koning
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2010-12-09       Impact factor: 16.671

6.  Baseline characteristics of participants in the randomized national lung screening trial.

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

7.  Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography.

Authors:  John Brodersen; Volkert Dirk Siersma
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

8.  Psychosocial consequences of allocation to lung cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Louise Mosborg Aggestrup; Mie Sara Hestbech; Volkert Siersma; Jesper Holst Pedersen; John Brodersen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Impact of lung cancer screening results on participant health-related quality of life and state anxiety in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Authors:  Ilana F Gareen; Fenghai Duan; Erin M Greco; Bradley S Snyder; Phillip M Boiselle; Elyse R Park; Dennis Fryback; Constantine Gatsonis
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-07-25       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Short-term health-related quality of life consequences in a lung cancer CT screening trial (NELSON).

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

View more
  23 in total

1.  Lung cancer screening primer: Key information for primary care providers.

Authors:  Anna N Wilkinson; Stephen Lam
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 3.275

2. 

Authors:  Anna N Wilkinson; Stephen Lam
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Pulmonary nodule segmentation based on REMU-Net.

Authors:  Dongjie Li; Shanliang Yuan; Gang Yao
Journal:  Phys Eng Sci Med       Date:  2022-07-25

Review 4.  Impact of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening on lung cancer-related mortality.

Authors:  Asha Bonney; Reem Malouf; Corynne Marchal; David Manners; Kwun M Fong; Henry M Marshall; Louis B Irving; Renée Manser
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-08-03

5.  Evaluation of benefits and harms of adaptive screening schedules for lung cancer: A microsimulation study.

Authors:  Pianpian Cao; Jihyoun Jeon; Rafael Meza
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2022-08-22       Impact factor: 1.687

6.  Long-term positive psychological outcomes in an Australian pancreatic cancer screening program.

Authors:  R S O'Neill; B Meiser; S Emmanuel; D B Williams; A Stoita
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 2.375

7.  Pilot study of a video intervention to reduce anxiety and promote preparedness for lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Dan J Raz; Rebecca A Nelson; Jae Y Kim; Virginia Sun
Journal:  Cancer Treat Res Commun       Date:  2018-04-23

8.  Lung cancer: progression of heat shock protein 70 in association with flap endonuclease 1 protein.

Authors:  Chandra Sekhar Kathera; Jiang Longwei; Avilala Janardhan; Lihong Qin; Qi Zhang; Wu Lan; Jia Shaochang; Zhigang Guo
Journal:  3 Biotech       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 2.406

Review 9.  The Role of Imaging in Health Screening: Screening for Specific Conditions.

Authors:  David H Ballard; Kirsteen R Burton; Nikita Lakomkin; Shannon Kim; Prabhakar Rajiah; Midhir J Patel; Parisa Mazaheri; Gary J Whitman
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 3.173

10.  To Expand the Evidence Base About Harms from Tests and Treatments.

Authors:  Deborah Korenstein; Russell Harris; Adam G Elshaug; Joseph S Ross; Daniel J Morgan; Richelle J Cooper; Hyung J Cho; Jodi B Segal
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2021-01-21       Impact factor: 6.473

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.