Timely adherence to follow-up after high-risk lung cancer screenings.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Dustin Kee, Keith M Sigel, Juan P Wisnivesky, Minal S Kale
{"title":"Timely adherence to follow-up after high-risk lung cancer screenings.","authors":"Dustin Kee,&nbsp;Keith M Sigel,&nbsp;Juan P Wisnivesky,&nbsp;Minal S Kale","doi":"10.1177/09691413231162507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To achieve the lung cancer screening (LCS) mortality benefit in clinical trials, timely, real-world follow-up of abnormal test results is necessary. Presently, annual LCS rates are lower than in trials, and adherence to follow-up after suspicious findings has not been well studied. This study examined timely adherence to follow-up recommendations after positive low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screenings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included individuals from two academic primary care practices in New York City who met United States Preventative Services Task Force LCS eligibility and had a positive LDCT scan between 2013 and 2020. They were recommended for shorter interval follow-up repeat computed tomography (CT), CT biopsy, or positron emission tomography/CT. Adherence was completion of the prescribed imaging by 15 days after the recommended 7-, 30-, and 90-day follow-up and by 30 days after the 180-day recommended follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 106 individuals with a positive LDCT scan, 64 (60%) were adherent to follow-up recommendations. Adherence was 72%, 63%, and 42% for recommended follow-ups of 30, 90, and 180 days, respectively. Being male was a predictor of a lower adherence rate. Among 23 individuals newly diagnosed with lung cancer after a positive LDCT scan, 83% were adherent to follow-up testing and 82% of cancers were Stage 1A or limited stage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was variable adherence to the LCS follow-up recommendations despite positive screening CT, suggesting that even in a well-established screening program there may not be an efficient, systematic approach for follow-up. The delays in repeat testing potentially undermine the benefits of early detection.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"150-155"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Screening","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413231162507","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To achieve the lung cancer screening (LCS) mortality benefit in clinical trials, timely, real-world follow-up of abnormal test results is necessary. Presently, annual LCS rates are lower than in trials, and adherence to follow-up after suspicious findings has not been well studied. This study examined timely adherence to follow-up recommendations after positive low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screenings.

Methods: This retrospective study included individuals from two academic primary care practices in New York City who met United States Preventative Services Task Force LCS eligibility and had a positive LDCT scan between 2013 and 2020. They were recommended for shorter interval follow-up repeat computed tomography (CT), CT biopsy, or positron emission tomography/CT. Adherence was completion of the prescribed imaging by 15 days after the recommended 7-, 30-, and 90-day follow-up and by 30 days after the 180-day recommended follow-up.

Results: Among 106 individuals with a positive LDCT scan, 64 (60%) were adherent to follow-up recommendations. Adherence was 72%, 63%, and 42% for recommended follow-ups of 30, 90, and 180 days, respectively. Being male was a predictor of a lower adherence rate. Among 23 individuals newly diagnosed with lung cancer after a positive LDCT scan, 83% were adherent to follow-up testing and 82% of cancers were Stage 1A or limited stage.

Conclusions: There was variable adherence to the LCS follow-up recommendations despite positive screening CT, suggesting that even in a well-established screening program there may not be an efficient, systematic approach for follow-up. The delays in repeat testing potentially undermine the benefits of early detection.

高危肺癌筛查后及时坚持随访。
目的:为了在临床试验中实现肺癌筛查(LCS)的死亡率获益,对异常检测结果进行及时、真实的随访是必要的。目前,LCS的年发生率低于试验中,并且在可疑发现后的随访依从性还没有得到很好的研究。本研究考察了低剂量计算机断层扫描(LDCT)阳性筛查后对随访建议的及时依从性。方法:本回顾性研究纳入了来自纽约市两家学术初级保健诊所的个体,这些个体符合美国预防服务工作组LCS资格,并在2013年至2020年期间进行了LDCT扫描。建议进行短间隔随访的重复计算机断层扫描(CT)、CT活检或正电子发射断层扫描/CT。依从性是在推荐的7、30和90天随访后15天完成规定的影像学检查,在推荐的180天随访后30天完成规定的影像学检查。结果:在106例LDCT扫描阳性患者中,64例(60%)遵循随访建议。推荐随访30天、90天和180天的依从性分别为72%、63%和42%。男性是较低依从率的一个预测指标。在23名LDCT扫描呈阳性后新诊断为肺癌的患者中,83%的患者坚持进行后续检测,82%的患者为1A期或有限期。结论:尽管CT筛查呈阳性,但对LCS随访建议的依从性不同,这表明即使在一个完善的筛查计划中,也可能没有一个有效的、系统的随访方法。重复检测的延迟可能会破坏早期发现的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Screening
Journal of Medical Screening 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
40
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Screening, a fully peer reviewed journal, is concerned with all aspects of medical screening, particularly the publication of research that advances screening theory and practice. The journal aims to increase awareness of the principles of screening (quantitative and statistical aspects), screening techniques and procedures and methodologies from all specialties. An essential subscription for physicians, clinicians and academics with an interest in screening, epidemiology and public health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信