Although lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality in high-risk patients, most of those eligible are not referred for screening. Tobacco cessation counseling may be an opportune time to educate people about LCS, but little is known about the utilization and perceptions of LCS among people undergoing tobacco cessation treatment.
Materials and Methods
We surveyed 185 current smokers, including 122 smokers between the ages of 55 and 80 years, who were attending a tobacco cessation class in a large integrated health care system regarding lung cancer risk perception and perceived benefits, harms, and barriers to LCS. We analyzed results according to whether participants had already undergone LCS and also whether they had undergone colorectal cancer screening.
A minority (18.9%) of participants had undergone LCS, and no participant who had not undergone LCS was familiar with LCS. Perceived lung cancer risk was high, and screening was believed to be beneficial. Common barriers included being a current smoker (56.6%), worrying about test results (52.5%), lack of knowledge about the test (50.8%), absence of symptoms of lung cancer (40.2%), costs of the study (35.2%), and worrying about being blamed for having smoked (33.6%). Perceived risk and barriers to LDCT were similar among people who had or had not previously undergone colorectal cancer screening.
Utilization of LCS was low, and few smokers were aware of LDCT for LCS. A number of patient-related barriers to screening exist among smokers. Tobacco cessation counseling may be an opportune time to provide education regarding LCS with LDCT.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Clinical Lung Cancer
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
Cancer Facts & Figures, 2016. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2016.
- Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening.N Engl J Med. 2011; 365: 395-409
- Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160: 330-338
- Lung Cancer Screening, Version 1.2015.National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Plymouth Meeting, PA2015
- American Cancer Society lung cancer screening guidelines.CA Cancer J Clin. 2013; 63: 107-117
- Applying the National Lung Screening Trial eligibility criteria to the US population: what percent of the population and of incident lung cancers would be covered?.J Med Screen. 2012; 19: 154-156
- Perceptions and utilization of lung cancer screening among primary care physicians.J Thorac Oncol. 2016; 11: 1856-1862
- Barriers to uptake among high-risk individuals declining participation in lung cancer screening: a mixed methods analysis of the UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) trial.BMJ Open. 2015; 5: e008254
- A qualitative study exploring why individuals opt out of lung cancer screening.Fam Pract. 2017; 34: 239-244
- Multilevel barriers to the successful implementation of lung cancer screening: why does it have to be so hard?.Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017; 14: 1261-1265
- Patient willingness and barriers to receiving a CT scan for lung cancer screening.Lung Cancer. 2014; 84: 307-309
- A qualitative analysis of smokers' perceptions about lung cancer screening.BMC Public Health. 2017; 17: 589
- High-risk community and primary care providers knowledge about and barriers to low-dose computed topography lung cancer screening.Lung Cancer. 2017; 106: 42-49
- Development and psychometric evaluation of the Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales.Cancer Nurs. 2017; 40: 237-244
- Lung cancer screening: what do long-term smokers know and believe?.Health Expect. 2017; 20: 59-68
Published online: October 26, 2018
Accepted: September 18, 2018
Received in revised form: August 9, 2018
Received: May 17, 2018
© 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.