Sarah Q. Ahmad , Francesca Pesola , Philip A.J. Crosbie , Rhian Gabe , Neil Hancock , Martyn P.T. Kennedy , Catriona Marshall , Samantha L. Quaife , Suzanne Rogerson , Irene Simmonds , Matthew E.J. Callister
{"title":"在约克郡肺筛查试验中坚持以社区为基础的肺癌筛查。","authors":"Sarah Q. Ahmad , Francesca Pesola , Philip A.J. Crosbie , Rhian Gabe , Neil Hancock , Martyn P.T. Kennedy , Catriona Marshall , Samantha L. Quaife , Suzanne Rogerson , Irene Simmonds , Matthew E.J. Callister","doi":"10.1016/j.lungcan.2025.108086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Lung cancer screening saves lives by detecting cancers early, but continued adherence to screening rounds is required for participants to experience the maximum clinical benefit. Here we describe factors associated with screening adherence in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>All eligible individuals following baseline (prevalent) screening were invited for a biennial incident screen in a community setting. Participants were contacted by phone (up to two attempts) to arrange an appointment or sent a pre-arranged appointment letter if non-contactable. Characteristics of attenders versus non-attenders were compared using univariate and multivariable models.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 6,650 individuals who attended baseline screening, 5,975 were eligible for the second round. The mean age of those eligible was 70.5 years, 45.2 % were female, 31.7 % were from the most socio-economically deprived quintile and 33.9 % reported current smoking at the time of the baseline scan. Of these, 5,184 (86.8 %) attended their second screen and 791 (13.2 %) did not. Factors associated with lower attendance following multivariable analysis were socio-economic deprivation (OR 0.78, 95 % CI 0.60–1.02, most versus least deprived quintile) and current smoking (OR 0.57, 95 % CI 0.48–0.66, current versus previously quit). Sex, age, and ethnicity were not associated with attendance. Attendance was more likely in people who had an indeterminate (OR 2.10, 95 % CI 1.61–2.73; n = 871) or positive (OR 3.16, 95 % CI 0.98–10.19; n = 60) baseline scan compared to a negative baseline scan.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>Adherence was good overall but lower adherence amongst people who currently smoke and those from deprived populations is a concern due to their greater risk of lung cancer death. Further research is needed into interventions that increase adherence in these high-risk populations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":18129,"journal":{"name":"Lung Cancer","volume":"200 ","pages":"Article 108086"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adherence to community-based lung cancer screening in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Q. Ahmad , Francesca Pesola , Philip A.J. Crosbie , Rhian Gabe , Neil Hancock , Martyn P.T. Kennedy , Catriona Marshall , Samantha L. Quaife , Suzanne Rogerson , Irene Simmonds , Matthew E.J. Callister\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lungcan.2025.108086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Lung cancer screening saves lives by detecting cancers early, but continued adherence to screening rounds is required for participants to experience the maximum clinical benefit. Here we describe factors associated with screening adherence in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>All eligible individuals following baseline (prevalent) screening were invited for a biennial incident screen in a community setting. Participants were contacted by phone (up to two attempts) to arrange an appointment or sent a pre-arranged appointment letter if non-contactable. Characteristics of attenders versus non-attenders were compared using univariate and multivariable models.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 6,650 individuals who attended baseline screening, 5,975 were eligible for the second round. The mean age of those eligible was 70.5 years, 45.2 % were female, 31.7 % were from the most socio-economically deprived quintile and 33.9 % reported current smoking at the time of the baseline scan. Of these, 5,184 (86.8 %) attended their second screen and 791 (13.2 %) did not. Factors associated with lower attendance following multivariable analysis were socio-economic deprivation (OR 0.78, 95 % CI 0.60–1.02, most versus least deprived quintile) and current smoking (OR 0.57, 95 % CI 0.48–0.66, current versus previously quit). Sex, age, and ethnicity were not associated with attendance. Attendance was more likely in people who had an indeterminate (OR 2.10, 95 % CI 1.61–2.73; n = 871) or positive (OR 3.16, 95 % CI 0.98–10.19; n = 60) baseline scan compared to a negative baseline scan.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>Adherence was good overall but lower adherence amongst people who currently smoke and those from deprived populations is a concern due to their greater risk of lung cancer death. Further research is needed into interventions that increase adherence in these high-risk populations.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lung Cancer\",\"volume\":\"200 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108086\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lung Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500225000078\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lung Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500225000078","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
肺癌筛查通过早期发现癌症来挽救生命,但参与者需要持续坚持筛查以获得最大的临床益处。在这里,我们描述了在约克郡肺筛查试验中与筛查依从性相关的因素。方法:所有遵循基线(流行)筛查的符合条件的个体被邀请在社区环境中进行两年一次的事件筛查。通过电话(最多两次)联系参与者安排预约,如果无法联系,则发送预先安排的预约信。使用单变量和多变量模型比较参与者和非参与者的特征。结果:参加基线筛查的6650人中,有5975人有资格参加第二轮筛查。符合条件的平均年龄为70.5岁,45.2%为女性,31.7%来自社会经济最贫困的五分之一,33.9%的人在基线扫描时报告正在吸烟。其中,5184人(86.8%)参加了第二次筛查,791人(13.2%)没有参加。多变量分析后,与出勤率较低相关的因素是社会经济剥夺(OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60-1.02,最贫困五分位数vs最贫困五分位数)和当前吸烟(OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.48-0.66,当前戒烟vs以前戒烟)。性别、年龄和种族与出勤率无关。不确定(OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.61-2.73;n = 871)或阳性(or 3.16, 95% CI 0.98-10.19;N = 60)基线扫描与阴性基线扫描相比。讨论:总体依从性良好,但目前吸烟人群和贫困人群的依从性较低是一个问题,因为他们患肺癌死亡的风险更高。需要进一步研究提高这些高危人群依从性的干预措施。
Adherence to community-based lung cancer screening in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial
Introduction
Lung cancer screening saves lives by detecting cancers early, but continued adherence to screening rounds is required for participants to experience the maximum clinical benefit. Here we describe factors associated with screening adherence in the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial.
Methods
All eligible individuals following baseline (prevalent) screening were invited for a biennial incident screen in a community setting. Participants were contacted by phone (up to two attempts) to arrange an appointment or sent a pre-arranged appointment letter if non-contactable. Characteristics of attenders versus non-attenders were compared using univariate and multivariable models.
Results
Of 6,650 individuals who attended baseline screening, 5,975 were eligible for the second round. The mean age of those eligible was 70.5 years, 45.2 % were female, 31.7 % were from the most socio-economically deprived quintile and 33.9 % reported current smoking at the time of the baseline scan. Of these, 5,184 (86.8 %) attended their second screen and 791 (13.2 %) did not. Factors associated with lower attendance following multivariable analysis were socio-economic deprivation (OR 0.78, 95 % CI 0.60–1.02, most versus least deprived quintile) and current smoking (OR 0.57, 95 % CI 0.48–0.66, current versus previously quit). Sex, age, and ethnicity were not associated with attendance. Attendance was more likely in people who had an indeterminate (OR 2.10, 95 % CI 1.61–2.73; n = 871) or positive (OR 3.16, 95 % CI 0.98–10.19; n = 60) baseline scan compared to a negative baseline scan.
Discussion
Adherence was good overall but lower adherence amongst people who currently smoke and those from deprived populations is a concern due to their greater risk of lung cancer death. Further research is needed into interventions that increase adherence in these high-risk populations.
期刊介绍:
Lung Cancer is an international publication covering the clinical, translational and basic science of malignancies of the lung and chest region.Original research articles, early reports, review articles, editorials and correspondence covering the prevention, epidemiology and etiology, basic biology, pathology, clinical assessment, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, combined treatment modalities, other treatment modalities and outcomes of lung cancer are welcome.