Paul F Pinsky1, Yan Kwan Lau2, Chyke A Doubeni3. 1. Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD. Electronic address: pp4f@nih.gov. 2. Department of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 3. Department of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Center for Health Equity and Community Engagement Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Criteria for low-dose CT scan lung cancer screening vary across guidelines. Knowledge of the eligible pool across demographic groups can enable policy and programmatic decision-making, particularly for disproportionately affected populations. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the eligibility rates for low-dose CT scan screening according to sex and race or ethnicity and how do these rates relate to corresponding lung cancer incidence rates? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study using data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey adult and cancer control supplement files. In addition to eligibility rates, the ratio of the eligibility rate to the lung cancer incidence rate in a given population group (eligibility to incidence [E-I] ratio) also was determined. Guidelines assessed were: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and US Preventive Services Task Force current or with expansion of age and smoking or quit thresholds. We also assessed a risk model (PLCOM2012 risk model). RESULTS: Total numbers eligible based on current guidelines ranged from 8.3 to 13.3 million, representing 8.3% to 13.4% of the US population 50 to 80 years of age, and up to 17.5 million with expanded criteria. Overall eligibility rates on average were about 10 percentage points higher for men than women. For both men and women, and both overall and among ever smokers, non-Hispanic Whites had the highest eligibility rates across all guidelines, followed generally by non-Hispanic Blacks, and then Asians and Hispanics. Among both men and women, non-Hispanic Whites had the highest E-I ratios across all guidelines; non-Hispanic Black men had higher lung cancer incidence, but 30% to 50% lower E-I ratios, than non-Hispanic White men. INTERPRETATION: Screening eligibility rates vary widely across guidelines, with disparities evident in E-I ratios, including among non-Hispanic Black men, despite higher lung cancer burden. Consideration of smoking duration in risk assessment criteria may address current disparities.
BACKGROUND: Criteria for low-dose CT scan lung cancer screening vary across guidelines. Knowledge of the eligible pool across demographic groups can enable policy and programmatic decision-making, particularly for disproportionately affected populations. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the eligibility rates for low-dose CT scan screening according to sex and race or ethnicity and how do these rates relate to corresponding lung cancer incidence rates? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study using data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey adult and cancer control supplement files. In addition to eligibility rates, the ratio of the eligibility rate to the lung cancer incidence rate in a given population group (eligibility to incidence [E-I] ratio) also was determined. Guidelines assessed were: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and US Preventive Services Task Force current or with expansion of age and smoking or quit thresholds. We also assessed a risk model (PLCOM2012 risk model). RESULTS: Total numbers eligible based on current guidelines ranged from 8.3 to 13.3 million, representing 8.3% to 13.4% of the US population 50 to 80 years of age, and up to 17.5 million with expanded criteria. Overall eligibility rates on average were about 10 percentage points higher for men than women. For both men and women, and both overall and among ever smokers, non-Hispanic Whites had the highest eligibility rates across all guidelines, followed generally by non-Hispanic Blacks, and then Asians and Hispanics. Among both men and women, non-Hispanic Whites had the highest E-I ratios across all guidelines; non-Hispanic Black men had higher lung cancer incidence, but 30% to 50% lower E-I ratios, than non-Hispanic White men. INTERPRETATION: Screening eligibility rates vary widely across guidelines, with disparities evident in E-I ratios, including among non-Hispanic Black men, despite higher lung cancer burden. Consideration of smoking duration in risk assessment criteria may address current disparities.
Authors: Matthijs Oudkerk; Anand Devaraj; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Thomas Henzler; Helmut Prosch; Claus P Heussel; Gorka Bastarrika; Nicola Sverzellati; Mario Mascalchi; Stefan Delorme; David R Baldwin; Matthew E Callister; Nikolaus Becker; Marjolein A Heuvelmans; Witold Rzyman; Maurizio V Infante; Ugo Pastorino; Jesper H Pedersen; Eugenio Paci; Stephen W Duffy; Harry de Koning; John K Field Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Summer S Han; Eric Chow; Kevin Ten Haaf; Iakovos Toumazis; Pianpian Cao; Mehrad Bastani; Martin Tammemagi; Jihyoun Jeon; Eric J Feuer; Rafael Meza; Sylvia K Plevritis Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Peter J Mazzone; Gerard A Silvestri; Sheena Patel; Jeffrey P Kanne; Linda S Kinsinger; Renda Soylemez Wiener; Guy Soo Hoo; Frank C Detterbeck Journal: Chest Date: 2018-02-17 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Richard Wender; Elizabeth T H Fontham; Ermilo Barrera; Graham A Colditz; Timothy R Church; David S Ettinger; Ruth Etzioni; Christopher R Flowers; G Scott Gazelle; Douglas K Kelsey; Samuel J LaMonte; James S Michaelson; Kevin C Oeffinger; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Daniel C Sullivan; William Travis; Louise Walter; Andrew M D Wolf; Otis W Brawley; Robert A Smith Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2013-01-11 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Olaide Y Raji; Stephen W Duffy; Olorunshola F Agbaje; Stuart G Baker; David C Christiani; Adrian Cassidy; John K Field Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2012-08-21 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Kevin Ten Haaf; Jihyoun Jeon; Martin C Tammemägi; Summer S Han; Chung Yin Kong; Sylvia K Plevritis; Eric J Feuer; Harry J de Koning; Ewout W Steyerberg; Rafael Meza Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: M Patricia Rivera; Hormuzd A Katki; Nichole T Tanner; Matthew Triplette; Lori C Sakoda; Renda Soylemez Wiener; Roberto Cardarelli; Lisa Carter-Harris; Kristina Crothers; Joelle T Fathi; Marvella E Ford; Robert Smith; Robert A Winn; Juan P Wisnivesky; Louise M Henderson; Melinda C Aldrich Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Iakovos Toumazis; Koen de Nijs; Pianpian Cao; Mehrad Bastani; Vidit Munshi; Kevin Ten Haaf; Jihyoun Jeon; G Scott Gazelle; Eric J Feuer; Harry J de Koning; Rafael Meza; Chung Yin Kong; Summer S Han; Sylvia K Plevritis Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 33.006
Authors: Debra P Ritzwoller; Rafael Meza; Nikki M Carroll; Erica Blum-Barnett; Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; Robert T Greenlee; Stacey A Honda; Christine Neslund-Dudas; Katharine A Rendle; Anil Vachani Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-10-01
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
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