Mapping International Lung Cancer Screening Quality Indicators to the American College of Radiology Lung Cancer Screening Registry: A Crosswalk Analysis.
Gavin Stoel, Ella A Kazerooni, Charles S White, Shawn D Teague, Kyle Edwards, Judy Burleson, Kristin C Frisby, Madison Wulfeck, Dhiraj Baruah, Lauren K Groner
{"title":"Mapping International Lung Cancer Screening Quality Indicators to the American College of Radiology Lung Cancer Screening Registry: A Crosswalk Analysis.","authors":"Gavin Stoel, Ella A Kazerooni, Charles S White, Shawn D Teague, Kyle Edwards, Judy Burleson, Kristin C Frisby, Madison Wulfeck, Dhiraj Baruah, Lauren K Groner","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2026.10.017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) established 26 consensus quality indicators (QIs) for lung cancer screening (LCS) programs, of which 20 were rated as essential and 6 as desirable by the expert panel. We evaluated the extent to which the American College of Radiology (ACR) Lung Cancer Screening Registry (LCSR), the largest LCS registry in the U.S., can support measurement of the IASLC QIs. We performed a crosswalk analysis, mapping all 26 IASLC QIs to the LCSR Data Dictionary and its 46 clinical performance measures, classifying each as directly measurable, derivable, or not measurable. The crosswalk was reviewed and independently validated by members of the ACR Early Lung Cancer Detection Registry Quality and Education Committee. Eight QIs (30.8%) were directly measurable, 10 (38.5%) were derivable, and 8 (30.8%) were not measurable from LCSR data alone. The LCSR therefore contains sufficient data elements to support measurement of approximately 69% of IASLC QIs. Remaining gaps involve screening uptake, clinical investigation, procedure complications, curative-intent treatment, treatment equity, diagnostic investigation equity and selected wait-time measures and would require additional registry fields or external data linkage.</p>","PeriodicalId":73968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2026.10.017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) established 26 consensus quality indicators (QIs) for lung cancer screening (LCS) programs, of which 20 were rated as essential and 6 as desirable by the expert panel. We evaluated the extent to which the American College of Radiology (ACR) Lung Cancer Screening Registry (LCSR), the largest LCS registry in the U.S., can support measurement of the IASLC QIs. We performed a crosswalk analysis, mapping all 26 IASLC QIs to the LCSR Data Dictionary and its 46 clinical performance measures, classifying each as directly measurable, derivable, or not measurable. The crosswalk was reviewed and independently validated by members of the ACR Early Lung Cancer Detection Registry Quality and Education Committee. Eight QIs (30.8%) were directly measurable, 10 (38.5%) were derivable, and 8 (30.8%) were not measurable from LCSR data alone. The LCSR therefore contains sufficient data elements to support measurement of approximately 69% of IASLC QIs. Remaining gaps involve screening uptake, clinical investigation, procedure complications, curative-intent treatment, treatment equity, diagnostic investigation equity and selected wait-time measures and would require additional registry fields or external data linkage.