Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36053535›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Analysis of Eligibility for Lung Cancer Screening by Race After 2021 Changes to US Preventive Services Task Force Screening Guidelines.

Laura C Pinheiro, Lauren Groner, Orysya Soroka, Ashley E Prosper, Kellie Jack, Rulla M Tamimi, Monika Safford, Erica Phillips

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Lung cancer screening eligibility and recruitment during routine care by pulmonologists: barriers and new opportunities in the Brazilian public healthcare system.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2024
    Article
  13. Pack-Year Smoking History: An Inadequate and Biased Measure to Determine Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Laura C PinheiroDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York.
Lauren GronerDepartment of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York.
Orysya SorokaDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York.
Ashley E ProsperDepartment of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles.
Kellie JackDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York.
Rulla M TamimiSandra and Edward Meyer Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York.
Monika SaffordDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York.
Erica PhillipsDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Lung cancer incidence and mortality have disproportionate consequences for racial and ethnic minority populations. The extent to which the 2021 changes to the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) screening guidelines have reduced the racial disparity gap in lung cancer screening eligibility is not known. Objective: To assess the consequences of the changes in USPSTF low-dose computed tomography eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening between 2013 and 2021 among Black and White community-dwelling adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed data from the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke study, a prospective longitudinal cohort study of community-dwelling Black and White adults 45 years and older who were initially recruited across the US between January 2003 and October 2007, with ongoing follow-up. All participants who would have been potentially eligible for lung cancer screening based on the 2021 USPSTF guidelines (N = 14 285) were included. Follow-up data for the current cohort study were collected and analyzed between January 2013 and December 2017, with final analysis performed in 2021. Exposures: Self-reported Black vs White race. Primary Outcomes and Measures: Differences in the proportion of Black vs White participants eligible for lung cancer screening according to 2013 and 2021 guidelines were assessed using modified Poisson models with robust SEs. Associations between important covariates (demographic characteristics and social factors associated with health), including interaction and dissimilarity indices (2 measures of residential segregation), and differences in screening eligibility were also examined. Results: Among 14 285 participants (mean [SD] age, 64.7 [7.5] years; 7675 men [53.7%]), 5787 (40.5%) self-identified as Black and 8498 (59.5%) as White. Based on the 2013 USPSTF guidelines, 1109 of 5787 Black participants (19.2%) and 2313 of 8498 White participants (27.2%) were eligible for lung cancer screening (difference, -8.06 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.44 to -6.67 percentage points). Based on the 2021 guidelines, 1667 of 5787 Black participants (28.8%) and 2940 of 8498 White participants (34.6%) were eligible for screening (difference, -5.73 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.28 to -4.19 percentage points). After adjustment for differences in individual characteristics and residential segregation, the 2013 difference in screening eligibility among Black vs White participants was -12.66 percentage points (95% CI, -14.71 to -10.61 percentage points), and the 2021 difference was -12.15 percentage points (95% CI, -14.37 to -9.93 percentage points). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, 2021 changes to the USPSTF lung cancer screening guidelines were associated with reductions in but not elimination of existing eligibility disparities in lung cancer screening among Black and White adults. These findings suggest that accounting for factors beyond age and pack-years of smoking is needed when tailoring guidelines to improve screening eligibility among groups at high risk of lung cancer.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsAdultCohort StudiesEthnicityHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedMinority GroupsProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36053535
PMCPMC9440399

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.