Literature DB >> 33433600

Evaluation of Revised US Preventive Services Task Force Lung Cancer Screening Guideline Among Women and Racial/Ethnic Minority Populations.

Thomas J Reese1, Chelsey R Schlechter2, Lindsey N Potter2, Kensaku Kawamoto1, Guilherme Del Fiol1, Cho Y Lam2,3, David W Wetter2,3.   

Abstract

Importance: Lung cancer incidence and mortality disproportionately affect women and racial/ethnic minority populations, yet screening guidelines for the past several years were derived from clinical trials of predominantly White men. To reflect current evidence, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has revised the eligibility criteria, which may help to ameliorate sex- and race/ethnicity-related disparities in lung cancer screening. Objective: To determine the changes associated with the revised USPSTF guideline for lung cancer screening eligibility among female, Black, and Hispanic populations using a large nationwide survey. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included respondents to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System who were 50 to 80 years of age with a smoking history in 19 states that used the optional lung cancer screening module. The change in eligibility among female, male, Black, Hispanic, and White participants was examined. Eligibility by sex and race/ethnicity was compared with a reference population. Data were collected from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018, and analyzed from May 8 to June 11, 2020. Exposures: Self-reported sex, race/ethnicity, age, and smoking history. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lung cancer screening eligibility using the revised USPSTF criteria. The previous criteria included current or past smokers (within 15 years) who were 55 to 80 years of age and had a smoking history of more than 30 pack-years. In the revised criteria, age was modified to 50 to 80 years; smoking history, to 20 pack-years.
Results: Among 40 869 respondents aged 50 to 80 years with a smoking history, 21 265 (52.0%) were women, 3430 (8.4%) were Black, and 1226 (30.0%) were Hispanic (mean [SD] age, 65.6 [7.9] years). The revised criteria increased eligibility for the following populations: men (29.4% to 38.3% [8.9% difference]; P < .001), women (25.9% to 36.4% [10.5% difference]; P < .001), White individuals (31.1% to 40.9% [9.8% difference]; P < .001), Black individuals (16.3% to 28.8% [12.5% difference]; P < .001), and Hispanic individuals (10.5% to 18.7% [8.2% difference]; P < .001). The odds of eligibility were lower for women compared with men (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.99; P = .04) and for Black (AOR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.33-0.56; P < .001) and Hispanic populations (AOR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.62-0.80; P < .001) compared with the White population. Conclusions and Relevance: The revised USPSTF guideline may likely increase lung cancer screening rates for female, Black, and Hispanic populations. However, despite these potential improvements, lung cancer screening inequities may persist without tailored eligibility criteria.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33433600      PMCID: PMC7804914          DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.33769

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Netw Open        ISSN: 2574-3805


  13 in total

1.  Racial disparities in eligibility for low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening among older adults with a history of smoking.

Authors:  Chien-Ching Li; Alicia K Matthews; Mantle M Rywant; Emily Hallgren; Raj C Shah
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 2.506

2.  Life-Gained-Based Versus Risk-Based Selection of Smokers for Lung Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Li C Cheung; Christine D Berg; Philip E Castle; Hormuzd A Katki; Anil K Chaturvedi
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Ethnic disparities in the treatment of stage I non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Juan P Wisnivesky; Thomas McGinn; Claudia Henschke; Paul Hebert; Michael C Iannuzzi; Ethan A Halm
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2005-02-25       Impact factor: 21.405

4.  Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening.

Authors:  Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Jonathan D Clapp; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Apparent underreporting of cigarette consumption among Mexican American smokers.

Authors:  E J Pérez-Stable; B V Marín; G Marín; D J Brody; N L Benowitz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Racial differences in the relationship between number of cigarettes smoked and nicotine and carcinogen exposure.

Authors:  Neal L Benowitz; Katherine M Dains; Delia Dempsey; Margaret Wilson; Peyton Jacob
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2011-05-05       Impact factor: 4.244

7.  Targeting of low-dose CT screening according to the risk of lung-cancer death.

Authors:  Anil K Chaturvedi; Hormuzd A Katki; Stephanie A Kovalchik; Martin Tammemagi; Christine D Berg; Neil E Caporaso; Tom L Riley; Mary Korch; Gerard A Silvestri
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors:  Virginia A Moyer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Evaluation of USPSTF Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines Among African American Adult Smokers.

Authors:  Melinda C Aldrich; Sarah F Mercaldo; Kim L Sandler; William J Blot; Eric L Grogan; Jeffrey D Blume
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 31.777

10.  Differences in exposure to toxic and/or carcinogenic volatile organic compounds between Black and White cigarette smokers.

Authors:  Dorothy K Hatsukami; Eric C Donny; Gideon St Helen; Neal L Benowitz; Jennifer Ko; Peyton Jacob; Steven E Gregorich; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable; Sharon E Murphy; Stephen S Hecht
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2019-08-12       Impact factor: 5.563

View more
  10 in total

1.  Lung cancer screening use and implications of varying eligibility criteria by race and ethnicity: 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data.

Authors:  Randi M Williams; Tengfei Li; George Luta; Min Qi Wang; Lucile Adams-Campbell; Rafael Meza; Martin C Tammemägi; Kathryn L Taylor
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Deep Disparities Persist in Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility.

Authors:  Paula M Jacobs; Sanya A Springfield
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Race & sex disparities related to low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening eligibility criteria: A lung cancer cases review.

Authors:  Randi M Williams; Samuel A Kareff; Paul Sackstein; Tina Roy; George Luta; Chul Kim; Kathryn L Taylor; Martin C Tammemägi
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 6.081

4.  Optimal Lung Cancer Screening Criteria Among Persons Living With HIV.

Authors:  Subhashini A Sellers; Andrew Edmonds; Catalina Ramirez; Sushma K Cribbs; Igho Ofotokun; Laurence Huang; Alison Morris; Meredith C Mccormack; Ken M Kunisaki; Gypsyamber D'souza; M Patricia Rivera; M Bradley Drummond; Adaora A Adimora
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 3.771

5.  A Feasible Path to Reductions in Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening?

Authors:  Debra P Ritzwoller
Journal:  JNCI Cancer Spectr       Date:  2022-05-02

6.  Implementing lung cancer screening in primary care: needs assessment and implementation strategy design.

Authors:  Thomas J Reese; Chelsey R Schlechter; Heidi Kramer; Polina Kukhareva; Charlene R Weir; Guilherme Del Fiol; Tanner Caverly; Rachel Hess; Michael C Flynn; Teresa Taft; Kensaku Kawamoto
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2022-02-16       Impact factor: 3.626

7.  Inaccuracies in electronic health records smoking data and a potential approach to address resulting underestimation in determining lung cancer screening eligibility.

Authors:  Polina V Kukhareva; Tanner J Caverly; Haojia Li; Hormuzd A Katki; Li C Cheung; Thomas J Reese; Guilherme Del Fiol; Rachel Hess; David W Wetter; Yue Zhang; Teresa Y Taft; Michael C Flynn; Kensaku Kawamoto
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 7.942

8.  National Cancer Institute Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination Trials Brief Report: Baseline Characteristics and Comparison With the U.S. General Population of Lung Cancer Screening-Eligible Patients.

Authors:  Rafael Meza; Jihyoun Jeon; Evelyn Jimenez-Mendoza; Yoonseo Mok; Pianpian Cao; Kristie L Foley; Caroline Chiles; Jamie S Ostroff; Paul M Cinciripini; Jennifer Minnix; Nancy A Rigotti; Jennifer S Haas; Kathryn Taylor; Randi M Williams; Benjamin A Toll; Anne M Joseph
Journal:  JTO Clin Res Rep       Date:  2022-06-03

9.  Lung Cancer Diagnosed Through Screening, Lung Nodule, and Neither Program: A Prospective Observational Study of the Detecting Early Lung Cancer (DELUGE) in the Mississippi Delta Cohort.

Authors:  Raymond U Osarogiagbon; Wei Liao; Nicholas R Faris; Meghan Meadows-Taylor; Carrie Fehnel; Jordan Lane; Sara C Williams; Anita A Patel; Olawale A Akinbobola; Alicia Pacheco; Amanda Epperson; Joy Luttrell; Denise McCoy; Laura McHugh; Raymond Signore; Anna M Bishop; Keith Tonkin; Robert Optican; Jeffrey Wright; Todd Robbins; Meredith A Ray; Matthew P Smeltzer
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 50.717

10.  Comorbidity Profiles and Lung Cancer Screening among Older Adults: U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2017-2019.

Authors:  Shailesh Advani; Dongyu Zhang; Martin Tammemagi; Tomi Akinyemiju; Michael K Gould; Gerard A Silvestri; Dejana Braithwaite
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2021-11
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.