Smoking is associated with pessimistic and avoidant beliefs about cancer: results from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership

Development and psychometric testing of the self-regulatory questionnaire for lung cancer screening (SRQ-LCS)

BACKGROUND

Research implicates psychological factors in low uptake of lung cancer screening. We developed and psychometrically tested a standardised measure of these psychological determinants in preparation for a prospective, longitudinal cohort study of screening uptake.

METHODS

Leventhal's Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation of Health and Illness provided the theoretical framework to generate the initial item pool. Items were refined during expert review and cognitive interviews which tested for face validity, redundancy, acceptability and comprehensibility. An online survey piloted the refined pool with 1500 current and former (quit ≤ 15 years) smokers aged 55-80. The response distributions, internal reliability and factor structure determined the final retained constructs. Regression analyses examined these constructs' associations with screening intention, smoking status and demographics.

RESULTS

The final measure included seven factor-derived subscales (consequences, personal control, treatment control, illness coherence, emotional representation, behavioural response and appraisal, risk perception) with Cronbach's alphas ranging from 0.59 to 0.91 and four single-item questions (response efficacy for smoking cessation, treatment intention, perceived stigma and lung cancer survival). Most constructs were associated with smoking status and screening intention (p's < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The Self-Regulatory Questionnaire for Lung Cancer Screening (SRQ-LCS) is an acceptable, reliable and valid measure for investigating the psychological determinants of screening uptake.

Smoking history and adherence to cancer-related recommendations in a primary care setting

Public health prevention efforts have led to overall reductions in mortality from screening-preventable cancers. We explored cancer screening behaviors of smokers, former smokers, and nonsmokers among patients of large primary care practices to discover the relationship between smoking status and previous adherence to the United States Preventive Services Task Force breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening recommendations. Our descriptive study of electronic medical record data included 6,029 established primary care patients. Multi-predictor log-binomial regression models yielded prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to determine associations between smoking status and the likelihood of nonadherence. All models were adjusted for race/ethnicity, age, insurance, primary care specialty, number of comorbidities, and sex. Smoking history was obtained from all participants in January 2020. Current smokers accounted for 4.8%, while 22.7% were former smokers, and 72.5% were never smokers. Current smokers (compared to never smokers) were 63% more likely to be mammogram nonadherent (PR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.31 to 2.02), 26% more likely to be Pap smear nonadherent (PR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.53), and 39% more likely to be colonoscopy nonadherent (PR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.66). Current smokers and former Powered by Editorial Manager and ProduXion Manager from Aries Systems Corporation smokers had on average 2.9 comorbidities while never smokers had on average 2.1 comorbidities. Our findings showed that current smokers experienced significantly lower rates of cancer screening compared to never smokers. Further research is needed to investigate and identify best practices for increasing cancer screening uptake in this population.

Duration of intervals in the care seeking pathway for lung cancer in Bangladesh: A journey from symptoms triggering consultation to receipt of treatment

Timeliness in seeking care is critical for lung cancer patients' survival and better prognosis. The care seeking trajectory of patients with lung cancer in Bangladesh has not been explored, despite the differences in health systems and structures compared to high income countries. This study investigated the symptoms triggering healthcare seeking, preferred healthcare providers (including informal healthcare providers such as pharmacy retailers, village doctors, and "traditional healers"), and the duration of intervals in the lung cancer care pathway of patients in Bangladesh. A cross-sectional study was conducted in three tertiary care hospitals in Bangladesh among diagnosed lung cancer patients through face-to-face interview and medical record review. Time intervals from onset of symptom and care seeking events were calculated and compared between those who sought initial care from different providers using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Among 418 study participants, the majority (90%) of whom were males, with a mean age of 57 ±9.86 years, cough and chest pain were the most common (23%) combination of symptoms triggering healthcare seeking. About two-thirds of the total respondents (60%) went to informal healthcare providers as their first point of contact. Living in rural areas, lower levels of education and lower income were associated with seeking care from such providers. The median duration between onset of symptom to confirmation of diagnosis was 121 days, between confirmation of diagnosis and initiation of treatment was 22 days, and between onset of symptom and initiation of treatment was 151 days. Pre-diagnosis durations were longer for those who had sought initial care from an informal provider (p<0.05). Time to first contact with a health provider was shorter in this study compared to other developed and developing countries but utilizing informal healthcare providers caused delays in diagnosis and initiation of treatment. Encouraging people to seek care from a formal healthcare provider may reduce the overall duration of the care seeking pathway.

Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices in a Midwest Urban Safety-Net Healthcare System

AIMS

Although colorectal cancer screening (CRC) using stool-based test is well-studied, evidence on fecal immunochemical test (FIT) patterns in a safety-net healthcare system utilizing opportunistic screening is limited. We studied the FIT completion rates and adenoma detection rate (ADR) of positive FIT-colonoscopy (FIT-C) in an urban safety-net system.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cross-sectional chart review on individuals ≥ 50 years who underwent CRC screening using FIT or screening colonoscopy, 09/01/2017-08/30/2018. Demographic differences in FIT completion were studied; ADR of FIT-C was compared to that of screening colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Among 13,427 individuals with FIT ordered, 7248 (54%) completed the stool test and 230 (48%) followed up a positive FIT with colonoscopy. Increasing age (OR 1.01, CI 1.01-1.02), non-Hispanic Blacks (OR 0.87, CI 0.80-0.95, p = 0.002), current smokers (OR 0.84, CI 0.77-0.92, p < 0.0001), those with Medicaid (OR 0.86, CI 0.77-0.96, p = 0.006), commercial insurance (OR 0.85, CI 0.78-0.94, p = 0.002), CCI score ≥ 3 (OR 0.82, CI 0.74-0.91, p < 0.0001), orders by family medicine providers (OR 0.87, CI 0.81-0.94, p < 0.0001) were associated with lower completion of stool test. Individuals from low median household income cities had lower follow-up of positive FIT, OR 0.43, CI 0.21-0.86, p = 0.017. ADR of FIT-C was higher than that of screening colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to CRC screening is low in safety-net systems employing opportunistic screening. Understanding demographic differences may allow providers to formulate targeted strategies in high-risk vulnerable groups.

The person behind the nodule: a narrative review of the psychological impact of lung cancer screening

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality globally, responsible for an estimated 1.76 million deaths worldwide in 2018 alone. Screening adults at high risk of lung cancer using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) significantly reduces lung cancer mortality by finding the disease at an early, treatable stage. Many countries are actively considering whether to implement screening for their high-risk populations in light of the recently published Dutch-Belgian trial 'NELSON'. In deciding whether to implement a national screening programme, policymakers must weigh up the evidence for the relative risks posed to the entire screened population, including the potential psychological burden. This narrative review aimed to critically summarise the evidence for both negative and positive psychological responses experienced throughout the LDCT screening pathway, to describe their magnitude, duration and clinical relevance, and to draw out different aspects of measurement design crucial to their interpretation. A further aim was to discuss the available evidence for individual differences in psychological response, as well as interventions designed to promote psychological well-being. In summary, there was no evidence that the LDCT screening process caused adverse psychological outcomes overall, although those receiving indeterminate and suspicious LDCT results did report clinically raised anxiety and lung cancer-specific distress in the short-term. There was early evidence that demographic factors, smoking status and screening-ineligibility could be associated with individual differences in propensity to experience distress. Qualitative data suggested health beliefs could be modifiable mediators of these individual differences, but their aetiology requires quantitative and prospective research. There was also some evidence of positive psychological responses that could be capitalised on, and of the potential for person-centred communication interventions to achieve this. Further research needs to be embedded in real-world LDCT lung cancer screening services and use condition-specific measures to monitor outcomes and test evidence-based communication interventions in promoting psychological well-being.

Healthcare Access, Utilization, and Preventive Health Behaviors by Eligibility for Lung Cancer Screening

In 2013, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended low-dose computed tomography screening for smokers at high risk of lung cancer; however, use remains low. Efforts to promote lung cancer screening need to consider how receptive this population is to preventive healthcare and cancer screening. In addition, because of demonstrated heterogeneity in behaviors by smoking status, interventions may need to differ among eligible high-risk subgroups. To assess the engagement of high-risk smokers in other preventive healthcare behaviors, we examined healthcare use, including non-lung cancer screening, and healthcare provider discussions regarding screening by eligibility for lung cancer screening. We used the 2015 National Health Interview Survey to assess smoking history, healthcare use, cancer screening, vaccinations, and healthcare provider discussions regarding non-lung cancer screening. We calculated weighted prevalence estimates and prevalence ratios comparing eligible and ineligible current and former smokers to never smokers. Eligible current and former smokers had significantly different healthcare utilization and screening concordance compared to never smokers and to each other. Compared to never smokers, eligible current smokers were significantly less likely to be concordant with breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening while eligible former smokers were only less likely to be concordant with breast cancer screening. Eligible current smokers were less likely to report physician discussions about non-lung screening tests. Provider discussions about screening and engagement in preventive healthcare differed among current and former smokers eligible for lung cancer screening. Intervention efforts to increase lung cancer screening levels will likely need to differ as well.

Out of reach? Correlates of cervical cancer underscreening in women with varying levels of healthcare interactions in a United States integrated delivery system

One in five U.S. women with health insurance are underscreened for cervical cancer. We sought to identify whether underscreening correlates differed among women with different levels of health care interaction. Among women age 30-64 years who were members of an integrated U.S. health system, we used 2014-2015 electronic health record data to identify underscreened cases (≥3.4 years since last Papanicolaou (Pap) test, n=3352) and screening-adherent controls (<3.4 years since last Pap test, n=45,359) and extracted data on potential underscreening correlates (demographics, health history, and healthcare utilization). We calculated the odds of underscreening in the total population and by subgroups defined by healthcare visits and online health portal usage in the prior 12 months. Underscreening was associated with older age (50-64 vs. 30-39; odds ratio (OR)=1.6; 95%CI=1.4-1.8), current tobacco use (vs. never use; OR=2.1; 95%CI=1.8-2.2), higher BMI (≥35 kg/m² vs <25 kg/m², OR=2.0; 95%CI=1.8-2.3), screening non-adherence for colorectal cancer (OR=5.1; 95%CI=4.6-5.7) and breast cancer (OR=8.1, 95%CI=7.2-9.0), and having no recent visit with their primary care provider (PCP) nor recent health portal use (vs. recent PCP visit and portal use; OR=8.4, 95%CI=7.6-9.4). Underscreening correlates were similar between the total study population and within all healthcare interaction groups. Interaction with the healthcare system is associated with lower odds of underscreening, but sociodemographic and health status correlates are similar regardless of primary care visits or online portal use. These data support the need for additional interventions to reach insured women who remain underscreened for cervical cancer.

To do or not to do - a survey study on factors associated with participating in the Danish screening program for colorectal cancer

Background

Screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) exist in many countries, and with varying participation rates. The present study aimed at identifying socio-demographic factors for accepting a cost-free screening offer for CRC in Denmark, and to study if more people would accept the screening offer if the present fecal test was replaced by a blood test.

Methods

We used a cross-sectional survey design based on a representative group of 6807 Danish citizens aged 50–80 years returning a fully answered web-based questionnaire with socio-demographic data added from national registries. Data were analyzed in STATA and based on bivariate analyses followed by regression models.

Results

Danes in general have a high level of lifetime participation (+ 80%) in the national CRC screening program. The results of the stepwise logistic regression model to predict CRC screening participation demonstrated that female gender, higher age, higher income, and moderate alcohol intake were positively associated with screening participation, whereas a negative association was observed for higher educational attainment, obesity, being a smoker, and higher willingness to take health risks. Of the 1026 respondents not accepting the screening offer, 61% were willing to reconsider their initial negative response if the fecal sampling procedure were replaced by blood sampling.

Conclusion

The CRC screening program intends to include the entire population within a certain at-risk age group. However, individual factors (e.g. sex, age obesity, smoking, risk aversity) appear to significantly affect willingness to participate in the screening program. From a preventive perspective, our findings indicate the need for a more targeted approach trying to reach these groups.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-020-06023-6.

Determining the perception of a lung cancer screening programme among high-risk patients in a tertiary referral centre, Kuala Lumpur

Background:

Lung cancer is the second most common cause of cancer-related death and the third most common cancer in Malaysia. The rising prevalence of lung cancer suggests the need to consider disease screening for early detection, especially in the high-risk population, as it offers the best chance of cure.

Objectives:

The study aims to determine the willingness of high-risk respondents to participate in a lung cancer screening programme if made available to them, and to determine their attitude towards lung cancer screening and explore factors that might affect participation in a screening programme.

Method:

This is a cross-sectional, descriptive study over 6 months conducted in adult patients attending medical clinics in Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC) using face-to-face administered questionnaires.

Results:

In total 180 respondents were analysed. There were 177 (98.3%) males. Mean age was 59.8 ± 9.1 years. Of the respondents, 138 (76.7%) had poor knowledge about cancer screening. Former smokers comprised 119 (66.1%) of the participants, and 61 (33.9%) were current smokers. In total, 141 (78.3%) respondents indicated willingness to participate in a lung cancer screening programme. Out of this group, 68 (48.2%) respondents were unwilling to pay for the procedure. Only 18 (12.8%) were unwilling to undergo lung cancer treatment if detected early.

Conclusions:

Awareness about general cancer screening is low. Our study showed that when informed of their high-risk status, respondents were willing to participate in lung cancer screening. There should be more health programmes to promote and raise awareness about lung cancer.

Health and health belief factors associated with screening and help-seeking behaviours for breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the European evidence

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to identify health or health belief factors associated with mammography attendance or with self-initiated medical help-seeking for breast cancer symptoms among women in Europe.

METHODS

Five databases were searched for articles published between 2005 and 2018. Meta-analyses were conducted for 13 factors related to screening attendance and two factors associated with help-seeking behaviour. Where there were too few studies to include in the meta-analysis, a narrative synthesis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Sixty-five studies were included. Never having had cervical screening (d = -.72, p < .001) and higher perceived barriers to mammography (d = -.40, p < .001) were associated with lower levels of screening attendance. Possessing health insurance (d = .49, p < .001), greater perceived benefits (d = .31, p < .001) and motivation (d = .36, p = .003) towards screening, and higher perceived seriousness (d = .24, p = .019) and susceptibility (d = .20, p = .024) towards breast cancer were associated with a higher level of screening attendance. Presenting with a non-lump symptom was associated with a longer time to presentation (d = .32, p < .001). The narrative synthesis revealed that previous benign breast disease was associated with a higher level of screening attendance but with a longer time to presentation.

CONCLUSIONS

The review identified key similarities in factors associated with screening and help-seeking behaviours which offer scope for combined interventions aimed at women that target both behaviours. Furthermore, the review highlighted that fewer studies have focused on help-seeking behaviour, despite two thirds of breast cancer cases being self-detected. Future research should further examine predictors of help-seeking behaviour including a focus on modifiable factors, such as BMI, and physical activity.

Engaging high-risk groups in early lung cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study of symptom presentation and intervention preferences among the UK's most deprived communities

OBJECTIVES

People at high-risk for lung cancer-current/former smokers, aged 40+ years, with serious lung comorbidity (ie, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and living in highly deprived areas-are more likely to delay symptom presentation. This qualitative study aimed to understand the influences on early presentation with lung cancer symptoms in high-risk individuals and intervention preferences.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 37 high-risk individuals (without a cancer diagnosis), identified through seven GP practices in socioeconomically deprived areas of England, Scotland and Wales (most deprived 20%). A symptom attribution task was used to explore lung symptom perception and help seeking, developed using Leventhal's Common Sense Model. Four focus groups with 16 high-risk individuals and 12 local stakeholders (healthcare professionals and community partners) were conducted to explore preferences for an intervention to promote early lung cancer symptom presentation. Data were synthesised using Framework analysis.

RESULTS

Individual and area level indicators of deprivation confirmed that interview participants were highly deprived. Interviews. Preoccupation with managing 'treatable' short-term conditions (chest infections), led to avoidance of acting on 'inevitable and incurable' long-term conditions (lung cancer). Feeling judged and unworthy of medical help because of their perceived social standing or lifestyle deterred medical help seeking, particularly when difficult life circumstances and traumatic events led to tobacco and alcohol addiction. Focus groups. Participants recommended multifaceted interventions in community venues, with information about lung cancer symptoms and the benefits of early diagnosis, led by a trained and non-judgemental facilitator.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was novel in engaging a high-risk population to gain an in-depth understanding of the broader contextual influences on lung cancer symptom presentation. Perceived lack of health service entitlement and complex lives facilitated avoidance of recognising and presenting with lung cancer symptoms. Community-based interventions have the potential to empower disadvantaged populations to seek medical help for lung symptoms.

Cancer Screening Patterns Among Current, Former, and Never Smokers in the United States, 2010-2015

IMPORTANCE

National guidelines recommend screening for several cancer types, yet screening rates remain below target. To date, cancer screening patterns by smoking status, a major cancer risk factor, are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess cancer screening patterns among individuals who never smoked (never smokers), formerly smoked (former smokers), and currently smoke (current smokers) in the United States.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study assessed data from the National Health Interview Survey years 2010, 2013, and 2015. Adult participants (aged ≥18 years) who had never reported a cancer diagnosis were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from August 1, 2018, through February 1, 2019.

EXPOSURES

Receipt of cancer screening, including colonoscopy, mammography, prostate-specific antigen testing, and Papanicolaou test per the US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Multivariable logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% CIs for undergoing cancer screening by smoking status. Among participants who received a specific screening test, AORs and 95% CIs of receiving the test within guideline-recommended intervals were also assessed.

RESULTS

Among 83 176 participants (45 851 [55.1%] women; mean [SD] age, 47 [18] years), 51 014 (61.3%) were never smokers; 17 235 (20.7%), former smokers; and 14 927 (17.9%), current smokers. Compared with never smokers, current smokers were less likely to ever have received a colonoscopy (43.8% vs 57.7%; AOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.68-0.82; P < .001), mammogram (88.8% vs 93.3%; AOR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.87; P = .001), or prostate-specific antigen test (46.1% vs 60.8%; AOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.90; P = .001). Among those who had ever received a specific screening test, current smokers were less likely to have undergone colonoscopy (92.1% vs 95.1%; AOR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.96; P = .02), mammography (62.4% vs 79.4%; AOR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.45-0.60; P < .001), or Papanicolaou test (80.9% vs 90.8%; AOR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.56-0.67; P < .001) within the recommended time frame compared with never smokers. Former smokers were more likely than never smokers to undergo any of the screening studies evaluated, with the exception of prostate-specific antigen screening (colonoscopy, 65.2% vs 57.7%; AOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.12-1.30; P < .001; mammography, 95.7% vs 93.3%; AOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.07-1.70; P = .01; Papanicolaou test, 97.6% vs 91.4%; AOR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.93-3.26; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that current smokers appeared to be less likely to receive guideline-concordant screening studies for breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer compared with never smokers. Further research is needed to identify barriers to screening among current smokers with the goal of increasing acceptance and uptake of cancer screening among this population at high risk of cancer.

Are smokers less likely to seek preventive healthcare measures in Italy?

Smoking cessation is the key cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention action for smokers; however, smokers can still benefit from earlier diagnosis. This study aims to investigate behaviours towards cancer and CVD prevention by smoking habits in Italy. The study relies on data from a large Italian population-based survey carried out in 2013 on a sample of 119 073 individuals. We studied the relationship between smoking habits and the participation in cancer (cervical, breast and colorectal) screening programmes, or CVD prevention (performing cholesterol, blood pressure and glycaemia exams) using a multilevel logistic regression model. Only 11.4, 40.1 and 8.0% of the subsamples attended cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening, respectively, whereas CVD prevention registered higher attendance: 83.3, 66.4 and 58.1%, respectively, for cholesterol, blood pressure and glycaemia. Smokers were less likely to undergo Pap smear compared with nonsmokers [odds ratio (OR): 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57-0.87], whereas former smokers showed a higher attendance for breast and colorectal cancer screening (OR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.14-1.37 for breast, OR: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.07-1.38 for colorectal cancer). Former smokers were also more likely to perform CVD prevention. Moreover, CVD prevention was inversely related to smoking (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.74-0.96 for cholesterol; OR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.79-0.93 for blood pressure; OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.54-0.69 for glycaemia). Particular attention should be paid to involve smokers in prevention checks. Research aimed at understanding smokers' pessimistic attitudes, which may determine smokers' prevention avoidance, and at improving smokers' engagement with prevention is needed and may help increase the reach of supported smoking-cessation programmes.

"To know or not to know…?" Push and pull in ever smokers lung screening uptake decision-making intentions

BACKGROUND

In the United States, lung cancer screening aims to detect cancer early in nonsymptomatic current and former smokers. A lung screening pilot service in an area of high lung cancer incidence in the United Kingdom has been designed based on United States trial evidence. However, our understanding of acceptability and reasons for lung screening uptake or decline in a United Kingdom nontrial context are currently limited.

OBJECTIVE

To explore with ever smokers the acceptability of targeted lung screening and uptake decision-making intentions.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using semistructured focus groups and inductive thematic analysis to explore acceptability and uptake decision-making intentions with people of similar characteristics to lung screening eligible individuals.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-three participants (22 ex-smokers; 11 smokers) men and women, smokers and ex-smokers, aged 50-80 were recruited purposively from community and health settings in Manchester, England.

RESULTS

Lung screening was widely acceptable to participants. It was seen as offering reassurance about lung health or opportunity for early detection and treatment. Participant's desire to know about their lung health via screening was impacted by perceived benefits; emotions such as worry about a diagnosis and screening tests; practicalities such as accessibility; and smoking-related issues including perceptions of individual risk and smoking stigma.

DISCUSSION

Decision making was multifaceted with indications that current smokers faced higher participation barriers than ex-smokers. Reducing participation barriers through careful service design and provision of decision support information will be important in lung screening programmes to support informed consent and equitable uptake.

Development of Protocol for Korean Lung Cancer Screening Project (K-LUCAS) to Evaluate Effectiveness and Feasibility to Implement National Cancer Screening Program

Purpose

To reduce lung cancer mortality, lung cancer screening was recommended using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) to high-risk population. A protocol for multicenter lung cancer screening pilot project was developed to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of lung cancer screening to implement National Cancer Screening Program in Korea.

Materials and Methods

Multidisciplinary expert committee was comprised to develop a standardized protocol for Korean Lung Cancer Screening Project (K-LUCAS). K-LUCAS is a population-based single arm trial that targets high-risk population aged 55-74 years with at least 30 pack-year smoking history. LDCT results are reported by Lung-RADS suggested by American Radiology Society. Network-based system using computer-aided detection program is prepared to assist reducing diagnostic errors. Smoking cessation counselling is provided to all currently smoking participants. A small pilot test was conducted to check the feasibility and compliance of the protocols for K-LUCAS.

Results

In pilot test, 256 were participated. The average age of participants was 63.2 years and only three participants (1.2%) were female. The participants had a smoking history of 40.5 pack-year on average and 53.9% were current smokers. Among them, 86.3% had willing to participate in lung cancer screening again. The average willingness to quit smoking among current smokers was 12.7% higher than before screening. In Lung-RADS reports, 10 (3.9%) were grade 3 and nine (3.5%) were grade 4. One participant was diagnosed as lung cancer.

Conclusion

The protocol developed by this study is assessed to be feasible to perform K-LUCAS in multicenter nationwide scale.

Smokers' interest in a lung cancer screening programme: a national survey in England

BACKGROUND

Following the recommendation of lung cancer screening in the US, screening committees in several European countries are reviewing the evidence for implementing national programmes. However, inadequate participation from high-risk groups poses a potential barrier to its effectiveness. The present study examined interest in a national lung cancer screening programme and modifiable attitudinal factors that may affect participation by smokers.

METHODS

A population-based survey of English adults (n = 1464; aged 50-70 years) investigated screening intentions in different invitation scenarios, beliefs about lung cancer, early detection and treatment, worry about lung cancer risk, and stigma. Data on smoking status and perceived chances of quitting were also collected, but eligibility for lung screening in the event of a national programme was unknown.

RESULTS

Intentions to be screened were high in all three invitation scenarios for both current (≥ 89%) and former (≥ 94%) smokers. However, smokers were less likely to agree that early-stage survival is good (43% vs. 53%; OR: 0.64, 0.46-0.88) or be willing to have surgery for an early stage, screen-detected cancer (84% vs. 94%; OR: 0.38, 0.21-0.68), compared with former smokers. Willingness to have surgery was positively associated with screening intentions; with absolute differences of 25% and 29%. Worry about lung cancer risk was also most common among smokers (48%), and one fifth of respondents thought screening smokers was a waste of NHS money.

CONCLUSIONS

A national lung cancer screening programme would be well-received in principle. To improve smokers' participation, care should be taken to communicate the survival benefits of early-stage diagnosis, address concerns about surgery, and minimise anxiety and stigma related to lung cancer risk.

Negative cancer beliefs, recognition of cancer symptoms and anticipated time to help-seeking: an international cancer benchmarking partnership (ICBP) study

Background

Understanding what influences people to seek help can inform interventions to promote earlier diagnosis of cancer, and ultimately better cancer survival. We aimed to examine relationships between negative cancer beliefs, recognition of cancer symptoms and how long people think they would take to go to the doctor with possible cancer symptoms (anticipated patient intervals).

Methods

Telephone interviews of 20,814 individuals (50+) in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Sweden were carried out using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer Measure (ABC). ABC included items on cancer beliefs, recognition of cancer symptoms and anticipated time to help-seeking for cough and rectal bleeding. The anticipated time to help-seeking was dichotomised as over one month for persistent cough and over one week for rectal bleeding.

Results

Not recognising persistent cough/hoarseness and unexplained bleeding as cancer symptoms increased the likelihood of a longer anticipated patient interval for persistent cough (OR = 1.66; 95%CI = 1.47–1.87) and rectal bleeding (OR = 1.90; 95%CI = 1.58–2.30), respectively. Endorsing four or more out of six negative beliefs about cancer increased the likelihood of longer anticipated patient intervals for persistent cough and rectal bleeding (OR = 2.18; 95%CI = 1.71–2.78 and OR = 1.97; 95%CI = 1.51–2.57). Many negative beliefs about cancer moderated the relationship between not recognising unexplained bleeding as a cancer symptom and longer anticipated patient interval for rectal bleeding (p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Intervention studies should address both negative beliefs about cancer and knowledge of symptoms to optimise the effect.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4287-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Attitudes towards lung cancer screening in socioeconomically deprived and heavy smoking communities: informing screening communication

BACKGROUND

While discussion continues over the future implementation of lung cancer screening, low participation from higher risk groups could limit the effectiveness of any national screening programme.

OBJECTIVES

To compare smokers' beliefs about lung cancer screening with those of former and never smokers within a low socioeconomic status (SES) sample, to explore the views of lower SES smokers and ex-smokers in-depth, and to provide insights into effective engagement strategies.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Using proactive, community-based recruitment methods, we surveyed 175 individuals from socioeconomically deprived communities with high smoking prevalence and subsequently interviewed 21 smokers and ex-smokers. Participants were approached in community settings or responded to a mail-out from their housing association.

RESULTS

Interviewees were supportive of screening in principle, but many were doubtful about its ability to deliver long-term survival benefit for their generation of "heavy smokers." Lung cancer was perceived as an uncontrollable disease, and the survey data showed that fatalism, worry and perceived risk of lung cancer were particularly high among smokers compared with non-smokers. Perceived blame and stigma around lung cancer as a self-inflicted smokers' disease were implicated by interviewees as important social deterrents of screening participation. The belief that lungs are not a treatable organ appeared to be a common lay explanation for poor survival and undermined the potential value of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Attitudes towards screening among this high-risk group are complex. Invitation strategies need to be carefully devised to achieve equitable participation in screening.

Impact of low-dose CT screening on smoking cessation among high-risk participants in the UK Lung Cancer Screening Trial

Background

Smoking cessation was examined among high-risk participants in the UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) Pilot Trial of low-dose CT screening.

Methods

High-risk individuals aged 50–75 years who completed baseline questionnaires were randomised to CT screening (intervention) or usual care (no screening control). Smoking habit was determined at baseline using self-report. Smokers were asked whether they had quit smoking since joining UKLS at T₁ (2 weeks after baseline scan results or control assignment) and T₂ (up to 2 years after recruitment). Intention-to-treat (ITT) regression analyses were undertaken, adjusting for baseline lung cancer distress, trial site and sociodemographic variables.

Results

Of a total 4055 individuals randomised to CT screening or control, 1546 were baseline smokers (759 intervention, 787 control). Smoking cessation rates were 8% (control n=36/479) versus 14% (intervention n=75/527) at T₁ and 21% (control n=79/377) versus 24% (intervention n=115/488) at T₂. ITT analyses indicated that the odds of quitting among screened participants were significantly higher at T₁ (adjusted OR (aOR) 2.38, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.64, p<0.001) and T₂ (aOR 1.60, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.18, p=0.003) compared with control. Intervention participants who needed additional clinical investigation were more likely to quit in the longer term compared with the control group (aOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.62 to 3.22, p=0.007) and those receiving a negative result (aOR 2.43, 95% CI 1.54 to 3.84, p<0.001).

Conclusions

CT lung cancer screening for high-risk participants presents a teachable moment for smoking cessation, especially among those who receive a positive scan result. Further behavioural research is needed to evaluate optimal strategies for integrating smoking cessation intervention with stratified lung cancer screening.

Trial registration number

Results, ISRCTN 78513845

Cancer beliefs in cancer survivors, cancer relatives and persons with no cancer experience

Aims: Negative cancer beliefs have been associated with late stage at cancer diagnosis. High levels of negative cancer beliefs have been found among individuals with low socioeconomic position and ethnic minority women, but the impact of cancer experience on cancer beliefs is unexamined. The aim of this study was to examine whether cancer beliefs are associated with cancer experience. Methods: This was a cross-sectional population-based study. Telephone interviews of 2992 Danish residents (30+) were carried out using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer Measure (ABC). Respondents reported whether they or someone close had been diagnosed with cancer and whether they agreed/disagreed with three positively and three negatively framed cancer beliefs. Results: Respondents with someone close diagnosed was reference group. Compared with these, respondents with no cancer experience (RR_adj=0.91, 95% CI=0.84-0.98) or who had had cancer themselves (RR_adj=0.87, 0.77-0.98) were less likely to believe that cancer treatment is worse than the cancer itself, and respondents with no cancer experience were less likely to believe that a diagnosis of cancer is a death sentence (RR_adj=0.83, 0.70-0.98), but more likely to report that they did not want to know if they had cancer (RR_adj=1.31, 1.01-1.71). Conclusions: The results suggest that cancer beliefs are sensitive to cancer experience. This is an important addition to previous results focusing on the association between cancer beliefs and static factors such as socioeconomic position and ethnicity. Since cancer beliefs may determine health-related behaviour, it is important that negative cancer beliefs are addressed and possibly reframed in population-based interventions.

Worry and risk perception of breast cancer in a prevention trial of low dose tamoxifen in midlife postmenopausal hormone users

OBJECTIVE

There is increasing interest in combining postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) and SERMs in midlife women. We previously showed that refusal to participate in a prevention trial of low dose tamoxifen in HT users was associated with higher worry about breast cancer. Given this counterintuitive finding, we studied which factors influenced worry and risk perception of breast cancer.

METHODS

We assessed the relationships of breast cancer worry and risk perception with age, age at menopause, Gail risk, education, adherence to mammographic screening, BMI, smoking, physical activity, alcohol use, anxiety and depression in 457 midlife HT users who were eligible to participate in the trial.

RESULTS

Women with menopause <48 years were more worried about breast cancer than women with menopause >52 years (OR = 5.0, 95% CI, 1.2-21.1). Worry was also associated with high absolute risk perception and former smoking. Factors associated with higher risk perception were age>60 years, at-risk life style, worry about breast cancer and depression.

CONCLUSIONS

The inverse association between early menopause and worry about breast cancer is in contrast with the known protective effect of early menopause on breast cancer risk and seems to reflect a feeling of aging and disease vulnerability. Our findings indicate that worry about cancer has an affective construct which is independent of breast cancer biology but is engaged in health decision making. Increasing breast cancer risk awareness in subjects high in worry without a plan of emotional coping may therefore be counterproductive because of avoidant attitudes.

Long-term psychosocial outcomes of low-dose CT screening: results of the UK Lung Cancer Screening randomised controlled trial

Background

The UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) trial is a randomised pilot trial of low-dose CT (LDCT) screening for individuals at high risk of lung cancer. We assessed the long-term psychosocial impact on individuals participating in the UKLS trial.

Methods

A random sample of individuals aged 50–75 years was contacted via primary care. High-risk individuals who completed T₀ questionnaires (baseline) were randomised to LDCT screening (intervention) or usual care (no screening control). T₁ questionnaires were sent 2 weeks after baseline scan results or control assignment. T₂ questionnaires were sent up to 2 years after recruitment. Measures included cancer distress, anxiety, depression and decision satisfaction.

Results

A total of 4037 high-risk individuals were randomised and they completed T₀ questionnaires (n=2018 intervention, n=2019 control). Cancer distress was higher at T₁ in intervention arm participants who received positive screening results (p≤0.001), but not at T₂ (p=0.04). T₂ anxiety (p≤0.001) and depression (p≤0.01) were higher in the control arm, but the absolute differences were small and not clinically relevant. At both time points, fewer control than screened participants were satisfied with their decision to participate in UKLS (p≤0.001). Regardless of trial allocation, cancer distress was higher in women (p≤0.01), participants aged ≤65 years (p≤0.001), current smokers (p≤0.001), those with lung cancer experience (p≤0.001) and those recruited from the Liverpool area (p≤0.001).

Conclusion

Lung cancer screening using LDCT appears to have no clinically significant long-term psychosocial impact on high-risk participants. Strategies for engaging and supporting underserved groups are the key to implement routine lung cancer screening in the UK.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN 78513845; results.

Pulmonary nodules and CT screening: the past, present and future

Lung cancer screening has come a long way since the early studies with chest X-ray. Advancing technology and progress in the processing of images have enabled low dose CT to be tried and tested, and evidence suggests its use can result in a significant mortality benefit. There are several issues that need refining in order to successfully implement screening in the UK and elsewhere. Some countries have started patchy implementation of screening and there is increased recognition that the appropriate management of pulmonary nodules is crucial to optimise benefits of early detection, while reducing harm caused by inappropriate medical intervention. This review summarises and differentiates the many recent guidelines on pulmonary nodule management, discusses screening activity in other countries and exposes the present barriers to implementation in the UK.