Rachel Broadbent1,2,3, Louise Gorman4, Christopher J Armitage2,5,6, John Radford7, Kim Linton7. 1. Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK. 2. NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. 3. The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. 4. NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Centre for Mental Health and Safety, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. 5. Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. 6. Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK. 7. Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (HLS) are at excess risk of lung cancer as a consequence of HL treatment. HLS without a heavy smoking history are currently unable to access lung cancer screening (LCS) programmes aimed at ever smokers, and there is an unmet need to develop a targeted LCS programme. In this study we prospectively explored HLS perspectives on a future LCS programme, including motivating factors and potential barriers to participation, with the aim of identifying ways to optimise uptake in a future programme. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with HLS, aged 18-80 and lymphoma-free for ≥5 years, selected from a clinical database (ADAPT). Participants provided informed consent. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Despite awareness of other late effects, most participants were unaware of their excess risk of lung cancer. Most were willing to participate in a future LCS programme, citing the potential curability of early-stage lung cancer and reassurance as motivating factors, whilst prior experience of healthcare was a facilitator. Whilst the screening test (a low dose CT scan) was considered acceptable, radiation risk was a concern for some and travel and time off work were potential barriers to participation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that most HLS would participate in a future LCS programme, motivated by perceived benefits. Their feedback identified a need to develop educational materials addressing lung cancer risk and concerns about screening, including radiation risk. Such materials could be provided upon an invitation to LCS. Uptake in a future programme may be further optimized by offering flexible screening appointments close to home.
BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (HLS) are at excess risk of lung cancer as a consequence of HL treatment. HLS without a heavy smoking history are currently unable to access lung cancer screening (LCS) programmes aimed at ever smokers, and there is an unmet need to develop a targeted LCS programme. In this study we prospectively explored HLS perspectives on a future LCS programme, including motivating factors and potential barriers to participation, with the aim of identifying ways to optimise uptake in a future programme. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with HLS, aged 18-80 and lymphoma-free for ≥5 years, selected from a clinical database (ADAPT). Participants provided informed consent. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Despite awareness of other late effects, most participants were unaware of their excess risk of lung cancer. Most were willing to participate in a future LCS programme, citing the potential curability of early-stage lung cancer and reassurance as motivating factors, whilst prior experience of healthcare was a facilitator. Whilst the screening test (a low dose CT scan) was considered acceptable, radiation risk was a concern for some and travel and time off work were potential barriers to participation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that most HLS would participate in a future LCS programme, motivated by perceived benefits. Their feedback identified a need to develop educational materials addressing lung cancer risk and concerns about screening, including radiation risk. Such materials could be provided upon an invitation to LCS. Uptake in a future programme may be further optimized by offering flexible screening appointments close to home.
Authors: Rachel Broadbent; Louise Gorman; Christopher J Armitage; John Radford; Kim Linton Journal: Health Expect Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: U Pastorino; M Silva; S Sestini; F Sabia; M Boeri; A Cantarutti; N Sverzellati; G Sozzi; G Corrao; A Marchianò Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Mark Corkum; Jill A Hayden; George Kephart; Robin Urquhart; Coralynne Schlievert; Geoffrey Porter Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2013-05-05 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Janet E Tonge; Melanie Atack; Phil A Crosbie; Phil V Barber; Richard Booton; Denis Colligan Journal: Health Expect Date: 2018-10-05 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Rachel Broadbent; Louise Gorman; Christopher J Armitage; John Radford; Kim Linton Journal: Health Expect Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 3.377