The Patient Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening and Health Disparities

Radiology referrals patterns in a free clinic setting

PURPOSE

To evaluate imaging referral completion rates in an urban, free clinic for underserved patients, including associated patient and imaging factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this IRB-approved single-center study, we retrospectively analyzed imaging referral orders associated with an urban, outpatient, free clinic from January 2017 to December 2022. Referrals were submitted to a tertiary academic center with the exception of a subset of ultrasound referrals that were processed onsite at a point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) clinic, and a proportion of mammography referrals completed within mobile imaging units. Associations between patient and imaging-specific factors - and referral completion rates - were further evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 882 referrals were submitted for 629 unique patients (average age, 48 years; 67 % female). Of total referrals, 424 (48 %) were successfully completed. Of the major represented modalities, ultrasound was completed at a rate of 59 % compared to x-rays which were completed at a rate of 45 % and mammography which was completed at a rate of 37 %. On-site imaging services, namely POCUS and mobile mammography, led to more successfully completed imaging (77 % combined success rate) than off-site services (p < 0.0001). Patients for whom "Unknown" was documented for race/ethnicity identification (14 % of submissions) and language preference (9 % of submissions) were least likely to have successful completion of their referral (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Low success rates of completion for imaging referrals from our free clinic indicate the need for further efforts to ensure high-quality imaging care for corresponding patient populations, with mobile and point-of-care imaging being of potential utility.

Racism, discrimination, medical mistrust, stigma, and lung cancer screening: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Lung cancer screening can reduce lung cancer-specific mortality, but it is widely underutilized, especially among minoritized populations that bear a disproportionate burden of lung cancer, such as Black Americans. Racism, discrimination, medical mistrust, and stigma contribute to lower uptake of preventive screenings in general, but the role these factors play in lung cancer screening is unclear. We therefore conducted a scoping review to synthesize the literature regarding how racism, discrimination, medical mistrust, and stigma relate to lung cancer screening.

DESIGN

Informed by PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we searched five databases for relevant literature, and two trained researchers independently reviewed articles for relevance. We conducted a narrative, descriptive analysis of included articles.

RESULTS

A total of 45 studies met our inclusion criteria. Most articles reported on medical mistrust or one of its cognates (e.g. trust and distrust, n = 37) and/or stigma (n = 25), with several articles focusing on multiple constructs. Few articles reported on racism (n = 3), and n = 1 article reported on discrimination. Results from empirical studies suggest that medical mistrust, distrust, and stigma may be barriers to lung cancer screening, whereas trust in health care providers may facilitate screening. The articles reporting on racism were commentaries calling attention to the impact of racism on lung cancer screening in Black populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, novel interventions are needed to promote trust and reduce mistrust, distrust, and stigma in lung cancer screening initiatives. Dedicated efforts are especially needed to understand and address the roles that racism and discrimination may play in lung cancer screening.

Healthcare disparities, screening, and molecular testing in the changing landscape of non-small cell lung cancer in the United States: a review

Inequitable access to care continues to hinder improvements in diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. This review describes healthcare disparities in the changing landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the United States, focusing on racial, ethnic, sex-based, and socioeconomic trends. Furthermore, strategies to address disparities, overcome challenges, and improve patient outcomes are proposed. Barriers exist across lung cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment regimens, varying by sex, age, race and ethnicity, geography, and socioeconomic status. Incidence and mortality rates of lung cancer are higher among Black men than White men, and incidences in young women are substantially greater than in young men. Disparities may be attributed to geographic differences in screening access, with correlating higher incidence and mortality rates in rural versus urban areas. Lower socioeconomic status is also linked to lower survival rates. Several strategies could help reduce disparities and improve outcomes. Current guidelines could improve screening eligibility by incorporating sex, race, and socioeconomic status variables. Patient and clinician education on screening guidelines and patient-level barriers to care are key, and biomarker testing is critical since ~ 70% of patients with NSCLC have an actionable biomarker. Timely diagnosis, staging, and comprehensive biomarker testing, including cell-free DNA liquid biopsy, may provide valuable treatment guidance for patients with NSCLC. Efforts to improve lung cancer screening and biomarker testing access, decrease bias, and improve education about screening and testing are needed to reduce healthcare disparities in NSCLC.

Interventions to Reduce Lung Cancer and COPD-Related Stigma: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Many individuals with lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) experience high levels of stigma, which is associated with psychological distress and delayed help-seeking.

PURPOSE

To identify interventions aimed at reducing the stigma of lung cancer or COPD and to synthesize evidence on their efficacy.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and CINAHL for relevant records until March 1, 2024. Studies were eligible if they described an intervention designed to reduce internalized or external stigma associated with COPD or lung cancer and excluded if they did not report empirical findings.

RESULTS

We identified 476 papers, 11 of which were eligible for inclusion. Interventions included educational materials, guided behavior change programs, and psychotherapeutic approaches. Interventions targeted people diagnosed with, or at high risk of developing COPD or lung cancer or clinical staff. No interventions that aimed to reduce stigma associated with lung cancer or COPD in the general community were identified. Most interventions yielded a statistically significant reduction in at least one measure of stigma or a decrease in qualitatively reported stigma.

CONCLUSIONS

The emerging literature on interventions to reduce stigma associated with lung cancer and COPD suggests that such interventions can reduce internalized stigma, but larger evaluations using randomized controlled trials are needed. Most studies were in the pilot stage and required further evaluation. Research is needed on campaigns and interventions to reduce stigma at the societal level to reduce exposure to external stigma amongst those with COPD and lung cancer.

Increasing Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening Among Emergency Department Patients: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Lung cancer screening (LCS) decreases lung cancer mortality. Emergency department (ED) patients are at disproportionately high risk for lung cancer. The ED, therefore, is an optimal environment for interventions to promote LCS.

OBJECTIVES

Demonstrate the operational feasibility of identifying ED patients in need of LCS, referring them to LCS services, deploying a text message intervention to promote LCS, and conducting follow-up to determine LCS uptake.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized clinical trial to determine the feasibility and provide estimates of the preliminary efficacies of 1) basic referral for LCS and 2) basic referral plus a text messaging intervention, grounded in behavioral change theory, to promote uptake of LCS among ED patients. Participants aged 50 to 80, identified as eligible for LCS, were randomized to study arms and followed up at 150 days to assess interval LCS uptake (primary outcome), barriers to screening, and perceptions of the study interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 303 patients were surveyed, with 198 identified as eligible for LCS and subsequently randomized. Results indicated that 24% of participants with follow-up data received LCS (11% of the total randomized sample). Rates of screening at follow-up were similar across study arms. The intervention significantly improved normative perceptions of LCS (p = 0.015; Cohen's d = 0.45).

CONCLUSION

This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of ED-based interventions to increase uptake of LCS among ED patients. A scalable ED-based intervention that increases LCS uptake could reduce lung cancer mortality.

Lung cancer screening provider recommendation and completion in black and White patients with a smoking history in two healthcare systems: a survey study

BACKGROUND

Annual lung cancer screening (LCS) with low dose CT reduces lung cancer mortality. LCS is underutilized. Black people who smoke tobacco have high risk of lung cancer but are less likely to be screened than are White people. This study reports provider recommendation and patient completion of LCS and colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) among patients by race to assess for utilization of LCS.

METHODS

3000 patients (oversampled for Black patients) across two healthcare systems (in Rhode Island and Minnesota) who had a chart documented age of 55 to 80 and a smoking history were invited to participate in a survey about cancer screening. Logistic regression analysis compared the rates of recommended and received cancer screenings.

RESULTS

1177 participants responded (42% response rate; 45% White, 39% Black). 24% of respondents were eligible for LCS based on USPSTF2013 criteria. One-third of patients eligible for LCS reported that a doctor had recommended screening, compared to 90% of patients reporting a doctor recommended CRCS. Of those recommended screening, 88% reported completing LCS vs. 83% who reported completion of a sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy. Black patients were equally likely to receive LCS recommendations but less likely to complete LCS when referred compared to White patients. There was no difference in completion of CRCS between Black and White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care providers rarely recommend lung cancer screening to patients with a smoking history. Systemic changes are needed to improve provider referral for LCS and to facilitate eligible Black people to complete LCS.

Disparities in Lung Cancer: A Targeted Literature Review Examining Lung Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Survival Outcomes in the United States

BACKGROUND

Although incidence and mortality of lung cancer have been decreasing, health disparities persist among historically marginalized Black, Hispanic, and Asian populations. A targeted literature review was performed to collate the evidence of health disparities among these historically marginalized patients with lung cancer in the U.S.

METHODS

Articles eligible for review included 1) indexed in PubMed®, 2) English language, 3) U.S. patients only, 4) real-world evidence studies, and 5) publications between January 1, 2018, and November 8, 2021.

RESULTS

Of 94 articles meeting selection criteria, 49 publications were selected, encompassing patient data predominantly between 2004 and 2016. Black patients were shown to develop lung cancer at an earlier age and were more likely to present with advanced-stage disease compared to White patients. Black patients were less likely to be eligible for/receive lung cancer screening, genetic testing for mutations, high-cost and systemic treatments, and surgical intervention compared to White patients. Disparities were also detected in survival, where Hispanic and Asian patients had lower mortality risks compared to White patients. Literature on survival outcomes between Black and White patients was inconclusive. Disparities related to sex, rurality, social support, socioeconomic status, education level, and insurance type were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Health disparities within the lung cancer population begin with initial screening and continue through survival outcomes, with reports persisting well into the latter portion of the past decade. These findings should serve as a call to action, raising awareness of persistent and ongoing inequities, particularly for marginalized populations.

Tax incidence for menthol cigarettes by race: Evidence from Nielsen Homescan data

We use Nielsen Homescan data to examine whether the incidence of cigarette taxes on menthol products varies with race. We find that taxes are shifted at significantly lower rates to Black smokers of menthol cigarettes than any other smokers. One possible explanation is that the industry targets price promotions to Black menthol smokers because they tend to be more responsive to cigarette prices relative to other smokers. We find evidence that Black smokers receive significantly more price discounts for menthol products than white menthol smokers. Our findings indicate that increasing cigarette taxes would effectively reduce menthol smoking among Black Americans because tax pass-through rate for Black menthol smokers is still substantially above zero.

Update on Lung Cancer Screening Guideline

Lung cancer screening has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality and is recommended for individuals meeting age and smoking history criteria. Despite the expansion of lung cancer screening guidelines in 2021, racial/ethnic and sex disparities persist. High-risk racial minorities and women are more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer at younger ages and have lower smoking histories when compared with White and male counterparts, resulting in higher rates of ineligibility for screening. Risk prediction models, biomarkers, and deep learning may help refine the selection of individuals who would benefit from screening.

Adapting Community Educational Programs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparing the Feasibility and Efficacy of a Lung Cancer Screening Educational Intervention by Mode of Delivery

Few eligible patients receive lung cancer screening. We developed the Lung AIR (awareness, information, and resources) intervention to increase community education regarding lung cancer screening. The intervention was designed as an in-person group intervention; however, the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated adapting the mode of delivery. In this study we examined intervention feasibility and efficacy overall and by mode of delivery (in-person group vs. one-on-one phone) to understand the impact of adapting community outreach and engagement strategies. Feasibility was examined through participant demographics. Efficacy was measured through pre/post knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about lung cancer screening, and intention to complete screening. We reached N = 292 participants. Forty percent had a household income below $35,000, 58% had a high school degree or less, 40% were Hispanic, 57% were Black, and 84% reported current or past smoking. One-on-one phone sessions reached participants who were older, had lower incomes, more current smoking, smoked for more years, more cigarettes per day, lower pre-intervention lung cancer screening knowledge, and higher pre-intervention fear and worry. Overall pre/post test scores show significant increases in knowledge, salience, and coherence, and reduced fear and worry. Participants in the one-on-one phone sessions had significantly higher increases in salience and coherence and intention to complete screening compared to participants in the in-person group sessions. The Lung AIR intervention is a feasible and effective community-based educational intervention for lung cancer screening. Findings point to differences in reach and efficacy of the community-based intervention by mode of delivery.

Disparities in lung cancer

Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among men and women in the United States. Despite a substantial decline in lung cancer incidence and mortality across all races in the last few decades, medically underserved racial and ethnic minority populations continue to carry the greatest burden of disease throughout the lung cancer continuum. Black individuals experience a higher incidence of lung cancer due to lower rates of low-dose computed tomography screening, which translate into advanced disease stage at diagnosis and poorer survival outcomes compared with White individuals. With respect to treatment, Black patients are less likely to receive gold standard surgery, have access to biomarker testing or high-quality treatment compared with White patients. The reasons for those disparities are multifactorial and include socioeconomic (eg, poverty, lack of health insurance, and inadequate education), and geographic inequalities. The objective of this article is to review the sources of racial and ethnic disparities in lung cancer, and to propose recommendations to help address them.

Assessment of Barriers and Challenges to Screening, Diagnosis, and Biomarker Testing in Early-Stage Lung Cancer

Management of lung cancer has transformed over the past decade and is no longer considered a singular disease as it now has multiple sub-classifications based on molecular markers. The current treatment paradigm requires a multidisciplinary approach. One of the most important facets of lung cancer outcomes however relies on early detection. Early detection has become crucial, and recent effects have shown success in lung cancer screening programs and early detection. In this narrative review, we evaluate low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening and how this screening modality may be underutilized. The barriers to broader implementation of LDCT screening is also explored as well as approaches to address these barriers. Current developments in diagnosis, biomarkers, and molecular testing in early-stage lung cancer are evaluated as well. Improving approaches to screening and early detection can ultimately lead to improved outcomes for patients with lung cancer.

Lung cancer screening in rural primary care practices in Colorado: time for a more team-based approach?

BACKGROUND

Despite lung cancer being a leading cause of death in the United States and lung cancer screening (LCS) being a recommended service, many patients eligible for screening do not receive it. Research is needed to understand the challenges with implementing LCS in different settings. This study investigated multiple practice members and patient perspectives impacting rural primary care practices related to LCS uptake by eligible patients.

METHODS

This qualitative study involved primary care practice members in multiple roles (clinicians n = 9, clinical staff n = 12 and administrators n = 5) and their patients (n = 19) from 9 practices including federally qualified and rural health centers (n = 3), health system owned (n = 4) and private practices (n = 2). Interviews were conducted regarding the importance of and ability to complete the steps that may result in a patient receiving LCS. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis with immersion crystallization then organized using the RE-AIM implementation science framework to illuminate and organize implementation issues.

RESULTS

Although all groups endorsed the importance of LCS, all also struggled with implementation challenges. Since assessing smoking history is part of the process to identify eligibility for LCS, we asked about these processes. We found that smoking assessment and assistance (including referral to services) were routine in the practices, but other steps in the LCS portion of determining eligibility and offering LCS were not. Lack of knowledge about screening and coverage, patient stigma, and resistance and practical considerations such as distance to LCS testing facilities complicated completion of LCS compared to screening for other types of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited uptake of LCS results from a range of multiple interacting factors that cumulatively affect consistency and quality of implementation at the practice level. Future research should consider team-based approaches to conduct of LCS eligibility and shared decision making.

How We Got Here: The Legacy of Anti-Black Discrimination in Radiology

Current disparities in the access to diagnostic imaging for Black patients and the underrepresentation of Black physicians in radiology, relative to their representation in the general U.S. population, reflect contemporary consequences of historical anti-Black discrimination. These disparities have existed within the field of radiology and professional medical organizations since their inception. Explicit and implicit racism against Black patients and physicians was institutional policy in the early 20th century when radiology was being developed as a clinical medical field. Early radiology organizations also embraced this structural discrimination, creating strong barriers to professional Black radiologist involvement. Nevertheless, there were numerous pioneering Black radiologists who advanced scholarship, patient care, and diversity within medicine and radiology during the early 20th century. This work remains important in the present day, as race-based health care disparities persist and continue to decrease the quality of radiology-delivered patient care. There are also structural barriers within radiology affecting workforce diversity that negatively impact marginalized groups. Multiple opportunities exist today for antiracism work to improve quality of care and to apply standards of social justice and health equity to the field of radiology. An initial step is to expand education on the disparities in access to imaging and health care among Black patients. Institutional interventions include implementing community-based outreach and applying antibias methodology in artificial intelligence algorithms, while systemic interventions include identifying national race-based quality measures and ensuring imaging guidelines properly address the unique cancer risks in the Black patient population. These approaches reflect some of the strategies that may mutually serve to address health care disparities in radiology. ^© RSNA, 2023 See the invited commentary by Scott in this issue. Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

Impact of U.S. Preventive Services Task Force lung cancer screening update on drivers of disparities in screening eligibility

BACKGROUND

In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) updated its recommendation to expand lung cancer screening (LCS) eligibility and mitigate disparities. Although this increased the number of non-White individuals who are eligible for LCS, the update's impact on drivers of disparities is less clear. This analysis focuses on racial disparities among Black individuals because members of this group disproportionately share late-stage lung cancer diagnoses, despite typically having a lower intensity smoking history compared to non-Hispanic White individuals.

METHODS

We used data from the National Health Interview Survey to examine the impact of the 2021 eligibility criteria on racial disparities by factors such as education, poverty, employment history, and insurance status. We also examined preventive care use and reasons for delaying medical care.

RESULTS

When comparing Black individuals and non-Hispanic White individuals, our analyses show significant differences in who would be eligible for LCS: Those who do not have a high school diploma (28.7% vs. 17.0%, p = 0.002), are in poverty (26.2% vs. 14.9%, p < 0.001), and have not worked in the past 12 months (66.5% vs. 53.9%, p = 0.009). Further, our analyses also show that more Black individuals delayed medical care due to not having transportation (11.1% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001) compared to non-Hispanic White individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that despite increasing the number of Black individuals who are eligible for LCS, the 2021 USPSTF recommendation highlights ongoing socioeconomic disparities that need to be addressed to ensure equitable access.

A Cross-Sectional Study on the Acceptability of Implementing a Lung Cancer Screening Program in Belgium

Lung cancer is the most common and deadliest cancer in the world, and its incidence is expected to grow. Nonetheless, this growth can be contained through smoking cessation programs and effective lung cancer screening programs. In 2018, Belgium had the seventh highest incidence of lung cancer in the world, with lung cancer incidence accounting for 11.8% of all cancers diagnosed and 23.8% of all cancer-related deaths that same year. The aims of this study were to determine the overall acceptability of a lung cancer screening program in the Flemish population and to determine the main factors that would influence the overall acceptability of such a program. A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was performed in the Flemish population and distributed online and on paper. The results are presented with the variables of interest and the main outcome, i.e., the acceptability of participating in such a program if implemented. Odds ratios were used to compare acceptability between subgroups. A multivariate regression model was used to determine the key factors that would have the largest impact on the level of acceptability and, thus, on the possible efficiency of such a program. This study estimated that acceptability of participating in a lung cancer screening program was 92%. Irrespective of the smoking status, levels of acceptability were higher than 89%. The key factors which could significantly influence the acceptability of a lung cancer screening program were individuals with low education, low protective factor knowledge and total knowledge, and lung cancer screening reimbursement, which were significantly associated with acceptability (0.01, 0.001, 0.01, and 0.05 respectively). Low protective factor knowledge decreased the log odds of acceptability 3.08-fold. In conclusion, the acceptability of implementing a lung cancer screening program in Flanders seems to be extremely high and would be well received by all. When implementing such a program, policymakers should aim for it to be reimbursed, campaigns should be gender-specific, focused on those with lower educational and socioeconomic status, and there should be investment in increasing total knowledge about lung cancer and knowledge about protective factors.

Racial Disparities in Adherence to Annual Lung Cancer Screening and Recommended Follow-Up Care: A Multicenter Cohort Study

Rationale: Black patients receive recommended lung cancer screening (LCS) follow-up care less frequently than White patients, but it is unknown if this racial disparity persists across both decentralized and centralized LCS programs. Objectives: To determine adherence to American College of Radiology Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) recommendations among individuals undergoing LCS at either decentralized or centralized programs and to evaluate the association of race with LCS adherence. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients receiving LCS at five heterogeneous U.S. healthcare systems. We calculated adherence to annual LCS among patients with a negative baseline screen (Lung-RADS 1 or 2) and recommended follow-up care among those with a positive baseline screen (Lung-RADS 3, 4A, 4B, or 4X) stratified by type of LCS program and evaluated the association between race and adherence using multivariable modified Poisson regression. Results: Of the 6,134 total individuals receiving LCS, 5,142 (83.8%) had negative baseline screens, and 992 (16.2%) had positive baseline screens. Adherence to both annual LCS (34.8% vs. 76.1%; P < 0.001) and recommended follow-up care (63.9% vs. 74.6%; P < 0.001) was lower at decentralized compared with centralized programs. Among individuals with negative baseline screens, a racial disparity in adherence was observed only at decentralized screening programs (interaction term, P < 0.001). At decentralized programs, Black race was associated with 27% reduced adherence to annual LCS (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.84), whereas at centralized programs, no effect by race was observed (aRR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.05). In contrast, among those with positive baseline screens, there was no significant difference by race for adherence to recommended follow-up care by type of LCS program (decentralized aRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81-1.11; centralized aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93; interaction term, P = 0.176). Conclusions: In this large multicenter study of individuals screened for lung cancer, adherence to both annual LCS and recommended follow-up care was greater at centralized screening programs. Black patients were less likely to receive annual LCS than White patients at decentralized compared with centralized LCS programs. Our results highlight the need for further study of healthcare system-level mechanisms to optimize longitudinal LCS care.

Stigma in Early-Stage Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

The phenomenon of lung cancer stigma has been firmly established in the literature. However, studies have predominantly focused on patients with advanced disease, whose experiences may differ from patients with earlier stage, surgically resectable lung cancer and an improved prognosis.

PURPOSE

The objective of the study was to examine the stigma experienced in a Canadian population with early-stage, resectable lung cancer.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer were enrolled at a tertiary thoracic surgery clinic. The 25-item Lung Cancer Stigma Inventory (LCSI) was self-administered by patients to quantitatively measure experiences of lung cancer stigma. LCSI results informed the development of a semi-structured focus group and individual interviews.

RESULTS

Of the 53 participants completing the survey, 38 (72%) met established LCSI score threshold, indicating a clinically meaningful level of stigma. No significant relationship was found between total LCSI scores and any demographic variable. Analysis of qualitative data revealed multiple themes related to experiences of lung cancer stigma. The major themes were classified into four categories: impact of the association between lung cancer and smoking, societal attitudes and assumptions, personal choices in relation to diagnosis, and experiences related to care.

CONCLUSIONS

A surgical population of patients with predominantly early-stage lung cancer experienced lung cancer stigma at a high incidence and a level similar to previously studied populations with more advanced disease. The qualitative results support the quantitative findings that respondents experienced more internal stigma than either perceived stigma from others or constrained disclosure related to their diagnosis.

Examining Tobacco Treatment Perceptions and Barriers among Black versus Non-Black Adults Attending Lung Cancer Screening

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends annual lung cancer screening for patients at high risk based on age and smoking history. Understanding the characteristics of patients attending lung cancer screening, including potential barriers to quitting smoking, may inform ways to engage these high-risk patients in tobacco treatment and address health disparities. Patients attending lung cancer screening who currently smoke cigarettes completed a survey at Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale-New Haven (N = 74) and the Medical University of South Carolina (N = 73) at the time of their appointment. The survey assessed demographics, smoking history, and perceptions and concerns about quitting smoking.

Patients were 55 to 76 years old (mean = 63.3, SD = 5.3), N = 64 (43.5%) female, and N = 31 (21.1%) non-Hispanic Black. Patients smoked 16.3 cigarettes per day on average (SD = 9.2) and rated interest in quitting smoking in the next month as moderate (mean = 5.6, SD = 3.1, measured from 0 = "very definitely no" to 10 = "very definitely yes"). The most frequently endorsed concerns about quitting smoking were missing smoking (70.7%), worry about having strong urges to smoke (63.9%), and concerns about withdrawal symptoms (59.9%). In comparison with other races/ethnicities, Black patients were less likely to report concerns about withdrawal symptoms and more likely to report smoking less now and perceiving no need to quit. Findings identified specific barriers for tobacco treatment and differences by race/ethnicity among patients attending lung cancer screening, including concerns about withdrawal symptoms and perceived need to quit. Identifying ways to promote tobacco treatment is important for reducing morbidity and mortality among this high-risk population.

PREVENTION RELEVANCE

The current study examines patient characteristics and tobacco treatment perceptions and barriers among patients attending lung cancer screening who continue to smoke cigarettes that may help inform ways to increase treatment engagement and address tobacco-related health disparities to reduce morbidity and mortality from smoking.

Increasing uptake to a lung cancer screening programme: building with communities through co-design

Background

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death in the UK. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening has been shown to identify lung cancer at an earlier stage. A risk stratified approach to LDCT referral is recommended. Those at higher risk of developing lung cancer (aged 55 + , smoker, deprived area) are least likely to participate in such a programme and, therefore, it is necessary to understand the barriers they face and to develop pathways for implementation in order to increase uptake.

Methods

A 2-phased co-design process was employed to identify ways to further increase opportunity for uptake of a lung cancer screening programme, using a risk indicator for LDCT referral, amongst people who could benefit most. Participants were members of the public at high risk from developing lung cancer and professionals who may provide or signpost to a future lung cancer screening programme. Phase 1: interviews and focus groups, considering barriers, facilitators and pathways for provision. Phase 2: interactive offline booklet and online surveys with professionals. Qualitative data was analysed thematically, while descriptive statistics were conducted for quantitative data.

Results

In total, ten barriers and eight facilitators to uptake of a lung cancer screening programme using a biomarker blood test for LDCT referral were identified. An additional four barriers and four facilitators to provision of such a programme were identified. These covered wider themes of acceptability, awareness, reminders and endorsement, convenience and accessibility. Various pathway options were evidenced, with choice being a key facilitator for uptake. There was a preference (19/23) for the provision of home test kits but 7 of the 19 would like an option for assistance, e.g. nurse, pharmacist or friend. TV was the preferred means of communicating about the programme and fear was the most dominant barrier perceived by members of the public.

Conclusion

Co-design has provided a fuller understanding of the barriers, facilitators and pathways for the provision of a future lung cancer screening programme, with a focus on the potential of biomarker blood tests for the identification of at-risk individuals. It has also identified possible solutions and future developments to enhance uptake, e.g. Embedding the service in communities, Effective communication, Overcoming barriers with options. Continuing the process to develop these solutions in a collaborative way helps to encourage the personalised approach to delivery that is likely to improve uptake amongst groups that could benefit most.

Lung cancer screening decisional needs among African American smokers of lower socioeconomic status

OBJECTIVES

Adherence to most evidence-based cancer screenings is lower among African Americans due to system- and individual-level factors that contribute to persistent disparities. Given the recommendation for low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening among individuals at high risk for lung cancer, we sought to describe aspects of decision-making for LDCT among African Americans and to examine associations between select components of decision-making and screening-related intentions.

DESIGN

African Americans (N = 119) with a long-term smoking history, aged 55-80 years, and without lung cancer were recruited to participate in a cross-sectional survey. We measured knowledge, awareness, decisional conflict, preferences, and values related to lung cancer screening.

RESULTS

The majority of the study population was of lower socioeconomic status (67.2% had an annual income of ≤$20,000) and long-term current (79%) smokers. Participants had a median 20 pack-years smoking history. Most participants (65.8%) had not heard of LDCT and the total lung cancer screening knowledge score was M = 7.1/15.0 (SD = 1.8). Participants with higher scores on the importance of the pros and cons of screening expressed greater likelihood of talking with a doctor, family, and friends about screening (p's < .10).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings have implications for addressing the decisional needs of lower socioeconomic African American current and former smokers to promote informed decision-making for LDCT.

Disparities in Lung Cancer: miRNA Isoform Characterization in Lung Adenocarcinoma

Despite the development of targeted therapeutics, immunotherapy, and strategies for early detection, lung cancer carries a high mortality. Further, significant racial disparities in outcomes exist for which the molecular drivers have yet to be fully elucidated. The growing field of Epitranscriptomics has introduced a new layer of complexity to the molecular pathogenesis of cancer. RNA modifications can occur in coding and non-coding RNAs, such as miRNAs, possibly altering their gene regulatory function. The potential role for such modifications as clinically informative biomarkers remains largely unknown. Here, we concurrently profiled canonical miRNAs, shifted isomiRs (templated and non-templated), and miRNAs with single-point modification events (RNA and DNA) in White American (W) and Black or African American (B/AA) lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) patients. We found that while most deregulated miRNA isoforms were similar in W and B/AA LUAD tissues compared to normal adjacent tissues, there was a subgroup of isoforms with deregulation according to race. We specifically investigated an edited miRNA, miR-151a-3p with an A-to-I editing event at position 3, to determine how its altered expression may be associated with activation of divergent biological pathways between W and B/AA LUAD patients. Finally, we identified distinct race-specific miRNA isoforms that correlated with prognosis for both Ws and B/AAs. Our results suggested that concurrently profiling canonical and non-canonical miRNAs may have potential as a strategy for identifying additional distinct biological pathways and biomarkers in lung cancer.

Social Disparities in Lung Cancer Risk and Screening

Significant disparities exist in lung cancer incidence and screening. Geographic, racial, gender, and socioeconomic disparities affect lung cancer incidence. As the leading cause of lung cancer, smoking varies among different racioethnic groups, genders, and socioeconomic statuses. In addition, environmental pollutants, such as radon, industrial toxins, and air pollution, are significant risk factors for lung cancer development that is disproportionately seen in working-class communities, as well as underserved and disabled populations. Lung cancer incidence depends on diagnosis. Literature examining lung cancer incidence and screening disparities have its limitations, as most studies are methodologically limited and do not adjust for important risk factors.

Using Prediction Models to Reduce Persistent Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Draft 2020 USPSTF Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines

We examined whether draft 2020 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lung cancer screening recommendations "partially ameliorate racial disparities in screening eligibility" compared with the 2013 guidelines, as claimed. Using data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey, USPSTF-2020 increased eligibility by similar proportions for minorities (97.1%) and Whites (78.3%). Contrary to the intent of USPSTF-2020, the relative disparity (differences in percentages of model-estimated gainable life-years from National Lung Screening Trial-like screening by eligible Whites vs minorities) actually increased from USPSTF-2013 to USPSTF-2020 (African Americans: 48.3%-33.4% = 15.0% to 64.5%-48.5% = 16.0%; Asian Americans: 48.3%-35.6% = 12.7% to 64.5%-45.2% = 19.3%; Hispanic Americans: 48.3%-24.8% = 23.5% to 64.5%-37.0% = 27.5%). However, augmenting USPSTF-2020 with high-benefit individuals selected by the Life-Years From Screening with Computed Tomography (LYFS-CT) model nearly eliminated disparities for African Americans (76.8%-75.5% = 1.2%) and improved screening efficiency for Asian and Hispanic Americans, although disparities were reduced only slightly (Hispanic Americans) or unchanged (Asian Americans). The draft USPSTF-2020 guidelines increased the number of eligible minorities vs USPSTF-2013 but may inadvertently increase racial and ethnic disparities. LYFS-CT could reduce disparities in screening eligibility by identifying ineligible people with high predicted benefit regardless of race and ethnicity.

Redlining, structural racism, and lung cancer screening disparities

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to understand the effect of historical redlining (preclusion from home loans and wealth-building for Black Americans) and its downstream factors on the completion of lung cancer screening in Boston.

METHODS

Patients within our institution were identified as eligible for lung cancer screening on the basis of the United State Preventive Service Task Force criteria and patient charts were reviewed to determine if patients completed low-dose computed tomography screening. Individual addresses were geocoded and overlayed with original 1930 Home Owner Loan Corporation redlining vector files. Structural equation models were used to estimate the odds of screening for Black and White patients, interacted with sex, in redlined and nonredlined areas.

RESULTS

Black patients had a 44% lower odds of screening compared with White (odds ratio [OR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52-0.85). With race as a mediator, Black patients in redlined areas were 61% less likely to undergo screening than White patients (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.64). Similarly, in redlined areas Black women had 61% (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.21-0.73) and Black men 47% (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.98) lower odds of screening compared with White men in redlined areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite higher rates of lung cancer screening in redlined areas, Black race mediated worse screening rates in these areas, suggesting racist structural factors contributing to the disparities in lung cancer screening completion among Black and White patients. Furthermore, these disparities were more apparent in Black women, suggesting that racial and gender intersectional discrimination are important in lung cancer screening completion.

The role of education on Cancer amenable mortality among non-Hispanic blacks & non-Hispanic whites in the United States (1989-2018)

Background

Cancer mortality in the U.S. has fallen in recent decades; however, individuals with lower levels of education experienced a smaller decline than more highly educated individuals. This analysis aimed to measure the influence of education lower than a high school diploma, on cancer amenable mortality among Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) and Non-Hispanic Blacks (NHB) in the U.S. from 1989 to 2018.

Methods

We analyzed data from 8.2 million death certificates of men and women who died from cancer between 1989 and 2018. We examined 5-year and calendar period intervals, as well as annual percent changes (APC). APC was adjusted for each combination of sex, educational level, and race categories (8 models) to separate the general trend from the effects of age.

Results

Our study demonstrated an increasing mortality gap between the least and the most educated NHW and NHB males and females who died from all cancers combined and for most other cancer types included in this study. The gap between the least and the most educated was broader among NHW males and females than among NHB males and females, respectively, for most malignancies.

Conclusions

In summary, we reported an increasing gap in the age-adjusted cancer mortality among the most and the least educated NHW and NHB between 25 and 74 years of age. We demonstrated that although NHB exhibited the greatest age-adjusted mortality rates for most cancer locations, the gap between the most and the least educated was shown for NHW.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08633-7.

Reducing Health Disparities in Radiology Through Social Determinants of Health: Lessons From the COVID-19 Pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the disproportionate morbidity and mortality borne by racial minorities, patients of lower socioeconomic status, and patients lacking health insurance reflect the critical role of social determinants of health, which are manifestations of entrenched structural inequities. In radiology, social determinants of health lead to disparate use of imaging services through multiple intersecting contributors, on both the provider and patient side, affecting diagnosis and treatment. Disparities on the provider side include ordering of initial or follow-up imaging studies and providing standard-of-care interventional procedures, while patient factors include differences in awareness of screening exams and confidence in the healthcare system. Disparate utilization of mammography and lung cancer screening lead to delayed diagnosis, while differential provision of minimally invasive interventional procedures contributes to differential outcomes related to treatment. Interventions designed to mitigate social determinants of health could help to equalize the healthcare system. Here we review disparities in access and health outcomes in radiology. We investigate underlying contributing factors in order to identify potential policy changes that could promote more equitable health in radiology.

The Impact of Residential Racial Segregation on Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treatment and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite decreases in lung cancer incidence, racial disparities in diagnosis and treatment persist. Residential segregation and structural racism have effects on socioeconomic status for black people, affecting healthcare access. This study aims to determine the impact of residential segregation on racial disparities in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment and mortality.

METHODS

Patient data were obtained from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database for black and white patients diagnosed with NSCLC from 2004-2016 in the 100 most populous counties. Regression models were built to assess outcomes of interest - stage at diagnosis and surgical resection of disease. Predicted margins assessed impact of index of dissimilarity (IoD) on these disparities. Competing risk regressions for black and white patients in highest and lowest quartiles of IoD were used to assess cancer-specific mortality.

RESULTS

Our cohort had 193,369 white and 35,649 black patients. Black patients were more likely to be diagnosed at advanced stage than white patients with increasing IoD. With increasing IoD, black patients were less likely to undergo surgical resection than white. Disparities were eliminated at low IoD. Black patients at high IoD had lower cancer-specific survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients were more likely to present at advanced disease, were less likely to receive surgery for early stage, and had higher cancer-specific mortality at higher IoD. Our findings highlight the impact of structural racism and residential segregation on NSCLC outcomes. Solutions to these disparities must come from policy reforms to reverse residential segregation and deleterious socioeconomic effects of discriminatory policies.

Non-Coding RNAs in Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy: Focus on Lung Cancer

Over the last several decades, clinical evaluation and treatment of lung cancers have largely improved with the classification of genetic drivers of the disease, such as EGFR, ALK, and ROS1. There are numerous regulatory factors that exert cellular control over key oncogenic pathways involved in lung cancers. In particular, non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) have a diversity of regulatory roles in lung cancers such that they have been shown to be involved in inducing proliferation, suppressing apoptotic pathways, increasing metastatic potential of cancer cells, and acquiring drug resistance. The dysregulation of various ncRNAs in human cancers has prompted preclinical studies examining the therapeutic potential of restoring and/or inhibiting these ncRNAs. Furthermore, ncRNAs demonstrate tissue-specific expression in addition to high stability within biological fluids. This makes them excellent candidates as cancer biomarkers. This review aims to discuss the relevance of ncRNAs in cancer pathology, diagnosis, and therapy, with a focus on lung cancer.

Public Health Foundations for Radiology Resident Education: Healthcare Disparities in Radiology

Increasing recognition within the medical literature and by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has been attributed to the need for enhanced resident education on concepts related to public health and health equity. Despite increasing documentation of pervasive inequalities within the scope of radiology, dedicated curricula designed to improve cultural competency and understanding of healthcare disparities among radiology trainees remains sparse. With relatively fewer patient interactions, radiology trainees are particularly susceptible to insufficient contextual awareness of how socioeconomic factors influence patient health and behaviors, physician recommendations, and ultimately clinical outcomes. The purpose of this article is to provide a high-yield background of foundational health equity and disparity concepts for radiology trainees, from which additional educational curricula may be derived. Specifically, this article will discuss the fundamental socioeconomic factors known to contribute to discrepant access and use of imaging services, followed by areas in radiology with well-documented disparities of which trainees should be aware. Lastly, previous and current strategies for addressing disparities in radiology will be discussed with the ultimate goal of stimulating trainee participation and the development of novel approaches.

Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) Outcomes in an Equal Access Military Setting

Introduction Lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a first-line treatment for early-stage lung cancer in non-surgical candidates or those who refuse surgery. We compared our institutional outcomes from a unique patient population with decreased barriers to care with a recently published prospective series. Materials and methods  We retrospectively reviewed all patients who received definitive lung SBRT at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center from 2015 to 2020. All patients underwent a positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) and all were presented at a multidisciplinary tumor board. Patients were treated on a Trubeam linear accelerator (LINAC)-based system with daily cone-beam CT. The results were qualitatively compared to outcomes from prospective studies including RTOG 0236 and RTOG 0618. Results A total of 105 patients with 114 lesions were included. Median age was 77 years and 54.7% had ≥ 40-pack year smoking history. 36.8% did not have pathologic confirmation. With a median follow-up of 24 months, three-year local control (LC), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 92.4%, 81.0%, and 80.0%, respectively. Rates of Grade 1 and 2 toxicity were 21.9% and 6.7% and no patients experienced Grade ≥ 3 toxicity. Conclusions In our military setting with universal coverage and routine multidisciplinary care, lung SBRT provides outcomes comparable to prospective studies conducted at high-volume academic centers. More than one-third of patients were treated empirically without pathologic confirmation of disease, demonstrating a difference between clinical trials and community practice. Further investigation is warranted to integrate multidisciplinary management and achieve equal access to care to bridge existing health disparities in the community setting.

Narrowing the Gap: Imaging Disparities in Radiology

It may seem unlikely that the field of radiology perpetuates disparities in health care, as most radiologists never interact directly with patients, and racial bias is not an obvious factor when interpreting images. However, a closer look reveals that imaging plays an important role in the propagation of disparities. For example, many advanced and resource-intensive imaging modalities, such as MRI and PET/CT, are generally less available in the hospitals frequented by people of color, and when they are available, access is impeded due to longer travel and wait times. Furthermore, their images may be of lower quality, and their interpretations may be more error prone. The aggregate effect of these imaging acquisition and interpretation disparities in conjunction with social factors is insufficiently recognized as part of the wide variation in disease outcomes seen between races in America. Understanding the nature of disparities in radiology is important to effectively deploy the resources and expertise necessary to mitigate disparities through diversity and inclusion efforts, research, and advocacy. In this article, the authors discuss disparities in access to imaging, examine their causes, and propose solutions aimed at addressing these disparities.

Lung Screening Benefits and Challenges: A Review of The Data and Outline for Implementation

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, accounting for almost a fifth of all cancer-related deaths. Annual computed tomographic lung cancer screening (CTLS) detects lung cancer at earlier stages and reduces lung cancer-related mortality among high-risk individuals. Many medical organizations, including the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, recommend annual CTLS in high-risk populations. However, fewer than 5% of individuals worldwide at high risk for lung cancer have undergone screening. In large part, this is owing to delayed implementation of CTLS in many countries throughout the world. Factors contributing to low uptake in countries with longstanding CTLS endorsement, such as the United States, include lack of patient and clinician awareness of current recommendations in favor of CTLS and clinician concerns about CTLS-related radiation exposure, false-positive results, overdiagnosis, and cost. This review of the literature serves to address these concerns by evaluating the potential risks and benefits of CTLS. Review of key components of a lung screening program, along with an updated shared decision aid, provides guidance for program development and optimization. Review of studies evaluating the population considered "high-risk" is included as this may affect future guidelines within the United States and other countries considering lung screening implementation.

Analyzing the Time From Discovery to Definitive Surgical Therapy for Lung Cancer Based on Referral Patterns

OBJECTIVE

Surgery for early stage non-small cell lung cancer can be curative. A delay from diagnosis to surgery can lead to increased mortality. Our objective was to determine if referring patients to specialists before a thoracic surgeon caused a delay in definitive treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of patients who had surgery for non-small cell lung cancer by a single surgeon at our institution from 2013 to 2016. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those who saw a specialist before a thoracic surgeon and patients who were referred directly to a surgeon once the pulmonary nodule was identified on computed tomography (CT). The time from initial CT to resection was compared. Secondary analysis compared private insurance versus Medicare/Medicaid. Percentage of patients upstaged was compared.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between groups when comparing time from CT to surgery (79.88 vs. 79.90 d; P=0.58). There was a significant decrease in time from CT to surgery for patients with private insurance compared with Medicare/Medicaid patients (66.05 vs. 86.99 d; P=0.03) and fewer private insurance patients were upstaged (22.9% vs. 31.8%; P=0.32). More patients who saw a different specialist first were upstaged compared with patients sent directly to thoracic surgery (32.6% vs. 22.2%; P=0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

When comparing time from CT detection of a lung nodule to surgery, no significant difference was found between patients sent to nonthoracic specialists first and those referred directly to a thoracic surgeon. There was a significant decrease in time from CT to surgery for patients with private insurance compared with Medicare/Medicaid.

Image quality and clinical usefulness of automatic tube current modulation technology in female chest computed tomography screening

The study was aimed to evaluate the image quality and radiation dose during female chest computed tomography (CT) screening using organ-based tube current modulation technology X-ray combined applications to reduce exposure (XCARE).Five hundred sixty female individuals undergoing chest CT scan were prospectively enrolled and divided into 4 groups based on body mass index (BMI). Then they were randomly and equally divided into control and experimental subgroup and respectively accepted conventional low-dose and XCARE technology spiral CT scan with same parameters. Signal-to-noise ratio and contrast-to-noise ratio were calculated. The quality of the images was evaluated by 2 radiologists using a 5-point scale.Among experimental subgroups of the 4 BMI groups, Signal-to-noise ratios, CT dose index of volume, dose-length product, effective dose, and contrast-to-noise ratio all displayed significant differences, as well as in control subgroups (P < .001). Both the experimental and control subgroups showed an increasing trend in radiation dose with the increasing of BMI. Parameters of image quality and radiation dose displayed no significant differences between control and experimental subgroups in the 4 groups. In multiple linear regression analysis, age and scanning protocol were not associated with radiation dose (P > .05), while BMI was significantly associated with increased CT dose index of volume (P < .05). The display of the lesions for the patients in the control and experimental subgroups of the 4 groups with different BMIs exhibited no statistically significant difference.The same image quality and radiation dose can be obtained using XCARE technology compared to conventional chest CT scans, which can be used regularly in female patients.Advances in knowledge: Using automatic tube current modulation technology to reduce exposure in breast. In this study, we sought a radiation protection method for sensitive tissue in chest CT screening.

Patient-centered Radiology: Overview and Opportunities in Cardiothoracic Imaging

Radiology is unique compared with most other medical specialties in that care can sometimes be delivered without speaking to or touching the patient. Although radiologists have increasingly become involved in patient safety, quality improvement, informatics, and advocacy, they must still work harder than other medical specialties to be considered "patient-facing." While cardiothoracic radiologists have likely experienced fewer opportunities to directly interface with patients, shared decision-making with patients around lung cancer screening and radiation dose optimization are both excellent examples of patient-centered and family-centered care in cardiothoracic imaging. Many cardiothoracic examinations necessitate medication administration or customized breath-holds not required of other examinations and create an opportunity for discussion between cardiothoracic radiologists and patients. Opportunities to increase the patient-centered focus in radiology exist at every interface between the radiology practice and the patient. Implementing the principles of patient-centered and family-centered care in a radiology department or practice requires the participation and engagement of all stakeholders, including patients.