| Literature DB >> 36066893 |
Eman M Metwally1, M Patricia Rivera2,3, Danielle D Durham4, Lindsay Lane4, Pasangi Perera4, Derek Lamb4, Louise M Henderson1,4,5.
Abstract
Importance: Comorbidities characterize the underlying health status of individuals. In the context of lung cancer screening (LCS), lung-related comorbidities may influence the observed benefits and harms. Objective: To compare the characteristics of individuals undergoing LCS, the LCS examination result, the cancer detection rate (CDR), and the false-positive rate (FPR) in those with and without lung-related comorbidities. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 5 academic and community screening sites across North Carolina from January 1, 2014, to November 7, 2020. Participants included 611 individuals screened for lung cancer who completed a 1-page health history questionnaire. Exposures: Presence of at least 1 self-reported lung-related comorbidity, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, asthma, bronchiectasis, pulmonary fibrosis, silicosis, asbestosis, sarcoidosis, and tuberculosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The LCS examination result was determined from the radiologist's Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System assessment (negative, 1 or 2; positive, 3 or 4). The age-adjusted CDR and FPR were calculated per 100 LCS examinations, using binary logistic regression.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36066893 PMCID: PMC9449784 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.30146
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JAMA Netw Open ISSN: 2574-3805
Characteristics of Individuals Undergoing Lung Cancer Screening by Self-reported Lung-Related Comorbidity
| Characteristic | No. (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All (N = 611) | Self-reported lung-related comorbidity (n = 335) | No self-reported lung-related comorbidity (n = 276) | ||
| Age, y | ||||
| <54 | 13 (2.1) | 8 (2.4) | 5 (1.8) | <.01 |
| 55-59 | 146 (23.9) | 94 (28.1) | 52 (18.8) | |
| 60-64 | 181 (29.6) | 83 (24.8) | 98 (35.5) | |
| 65-69 | 120 (19.6) | 57 (17.0) | 63 (22.8) | |
| 70-74 | 114 (18.7) | 67 (20.0) | 47 (17.0) | |
| 75-80 | 37 (6.1) | 26 (7.8) | 11 (4.0) | |
| Sex | ||||
| Female | 303 (49.6) | 180 (53.7) | 123 (44.6) | .02 |
| Male | 308 (50.4) | 155 (46.3) | 153 (55.4) | |
| Race | ||||
| Black | 119 (19.9) | 47 (14.4) | 72 (26.5) | <.001 |
| White | 468 (78.3) | 275 (84.4) | 193 (71.0) | |
| Other | 11 (1.8) | 4 (1.2) | 7 (2.6) | |
| Missing | 13 (2.1) | 9 (2.7) | 4 (1.5) | |
| Smoking | ||||
| Current | 284 (46.8) | 147 (44.1) | 137 (50.0) | .16 |
| Former | 322 (53.0) | 185 (55.6) | 137 (50.0) | |
| Never | 1 (0.2) | 1 (0.3) | 0 | |
| Missing | 4 (0.7) | 2 (0.6) | 2 (0.7) | |
| Educational level | ||||
| <HS or HS graduate | 172 (39.2) | 108 (46.8) | 64 (30.8) | .001 |
| Some post-HS | 149 (33.9) | 78 (33.8) | 71 (34.1) | |
| College/professional | 118 (26.9) | 45 (19.5) | 73 (35.1) | |
| Missing | 172 (28.2) | 104 (31.0) | 68 (24.6) | |
| Residence | ||||
| Urban | 496 (81.2) | 269 (80.3) | 227 (82.2) | .54 |
| Rural | 115 (18.8) | 66 (19.7) | 49 (17.8) | |
| Insurance | ||||
| Medicare/Medicare Advantage | 375 (62.7) | 214 (64.9) | 161 (60.1) | .12 |
| Any Medicaid | 52 (8.7) | 32 (9.7) | 20 (7.5) | |
| Any private | 128 (21.4) | 59 (17.9) | 69 (25.7) | |
| Uninsured | 43 (7.2) | 25 (7.6) | 18 (6.7) | |
| Missing | 13 (2.1) | 5 (1.5) | 8 (2.9) | |
| Marital status | ||||
| Married | 292 (49.6) | 155 (48.0) | 137 (51.5) | .47 |
| Unmarried | 297 (50.4) | 168 (52.0) | 129 (48.5) | |
| Missing | 22 (3.6) | 12 (3.6) | 10 (3.6) | |
| BMI | ||||
| Underweight/normal | 184 (30.5) | 108 (32.4) | 76 (28.1) | .23 |
| Overweight/obese | 419 (69.5) | 225 (67.6) | 194 (71.9) | |
| Missing | 8 (1.3) | 2 (0.6) | 6 (2.2) | |
| Non–lung-related comorbidities | ||||
| Hypertension | 227 (37.2) | 127 (37.9) | 100 (36.2) | .67 |
| Diabetes | 128 (21.0) | 71 (21.2) | 57 (20.7) | .87 |
| Heart disease | 112 (18.3) | 69 (20.6) | 43 (15.6) | .11 |
| Prior cancer diagnosis | 109 (17.8) | 54 (16.1) | 55 (19.9) | .22 |
| HIV | 19 (3.1) | 7 (2.1) | 12 (4.3) | .11 |
| Stroke | 49 (8.0) | 24 (7.2) | 25 (9.1) | .39 |
| Family history of lung cancer | ||||
| Yes | 157 (37.9) | 95 (41.3) | 62 (33.7) | .08 |
| No | 257 (62.1) | 135 (58.7) | 122 (66.3) | |
| Missing | 197 (32.2) | 105 (31.3) | 92 (33.3) | |
| History of cancer | ||||
| Yes | 109 (17.8) | 54 (16.1) | 55 (19.9) | .22 |
| No | 502 (82.2) | 281 (83.9) | 221 (80.1) | |
| Prior lung biopsy or surgery | ||||
| Yes | 32 (5.2) | 22 (6.6) | 10 (3.6) | .10 |
| No | 579 (94.8) | 313 (93.4) | 266 (96.4) | |
| No. of lung cancer screening examinations | ||||
| 1 | 342 (56.0) | 175 (52.2) | 167 (60.5) | .15 |
| ≥2 | 269 (44.0) | 160 (41.8) | 109 (39.5) | |
| Emphysema on LDCT | 269 (44.0) | 178 (53.1) | 91 (33.0) | <.001 |
| CAC on LDCT | 382 (41.2) | 207 (43.0) | 175 (63.4) | .19 |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared); CAC, coronary artery calcification; HS, high school; LDCT, low-dose computed tomography.
Characteristics of individuals collected during the screening visit.
Includes Asian individuals and those who selected more than one race.
Missing is not included in the column percentages or χ2 calculations.
Current vs former smokers.
Individuals could report more than one comorbid condition.
Figure. Distribution of Lung-Related Comorbidities Among 335 Individuals
COPD indicates chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Radiologic Findings and Screening Outcomes of Screening Examinations of Those With vs Without Self-reported Lung-Related Comorbidities
| Characteristics | No. (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All examinations (N = 971) | Self-reported lung-related comorbidity (n = 556) | No self-reported lung-related comorbidity (n = 415) | ||
| Lung-RADS | ||||
| Baseline | ||||
| No. | 429 | 231 | 198 | |
| Negative | 370 (86.2) | 194 (84.0) | 176 (88.9) | .14 |
| Positive | 59 (13.8) | 37 (16.0) | 22 (11.1) | |
| Subsequent | ||||
| No. | 542 | 325 | 217 | |
| Negative | 479 (88.4) | 285 (87.7) | 194 (89.4) | .54 |
| Positive | 63 (11.6) | 40 (12.3) | 23 (10.6) | |
| Lung cancer | ||||
| No. of individuals | 17 | 9 | 8 | |
| CDR per 100 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 1.9 | .73 |
| False-positive | ||||
| No. of individuals | 105 | 68 | 37 | |
| FPR per 100 | 11.2 | 13.0 | 9.3 | .16 |
Abbreviations: CDR, cancer detection rate; FPR, false-positive rate; Lung-RADS, Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System.
Number of screening examinations; some individuals had more than 1 examination.
Calculated per 100 screening examinations using age-adjusted binary logistic regression.
Characteristics of Individuals With Screen-Detected Lung Cancer
| Characteristic | No. (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Total (N = 17) | Self-reported lung-related comorbidity (n = 9) | No self-reported lung-related comorbidity (n = 8) | |
| Age, y | |||
| <65 | 11 (64.7) | 6 (66.7) | 5 (62.5) |
| ≥65 | 6 (35.3) | 3 (33.3) | 3 (37.5) |
| Sex | |||
| Male | 9 (52.9) | 7 (77.8) | 2 (25.0) |
| Female | 8 (47.1) | 2 (22.2) | 6 (75.0) |
| Race | |||
| White | 12 (70.6) | 7 (77.8) | 5 (62.5) |
| Black | 5 (29.4) | 2 (22.2) | 3 (37.5) |
| Examination type | |||
| Baseline | 13 (76.5) | 7 (77.8) | 6 (75.0) |
| Subsequent | 4 (23.5) | 2 (22.2) | 2 (25.0) |
| Lung-RADS assessment | |||
| 3 | 1 (5.9) | 1 (11.1) | 0 |
| 4A | 7 (41.2) | 5 (55.6) | 2 (25.0) |
| 4B | 5 (29.4) | 2 (22.2) | 3 (37.5) |
| 4X | 4 (23.5) | 1 (11.1) | 3 (37.5) |
| Histopathologic findings | |||
| NSCLC | 14 (82.4) | 8 (88.9) | 6 (75.0) |
| Neuroendocrine tumor | 2 (11.8) | 1 (11.1) | 1 (12.5) |
| Adenoid cystic carcinoma | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 1 (12.5) |
| Staging | |||
| I | 13 (81.3) | 8 (88.9) | 5 (71.4) |
| II | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| III | 1 (6.3) | 0 | 1 (14.3) |
| IV | 1 (6.3) | 1 (11.1) | 0 |
| Limited-stage SCLC | 1 (6.3) | 0 | 1 (14.3) |
| Missing | 1 (5.9) | 0 | 1 (12.5) |
Abbreviations: Lung-RADS, Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System; NSCLC, non–small cell lung cancer; SCLC, small-cell lung cancer.
Assessment scale: 3, probably benign; 4A, suspicious; and 4B or 4X, highly suspicious.
Percentages based on the number of responses vs the full cohort; missing values are reported as the number and percentage missing and are not included in the column percentages or χ2 calculations.