Cargando…

Patient Adherence to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System–Recommended Screening Intervals in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lung cancer screening (LCS) is effective in reducing mortality, particularly when patients adhere to follow-up recommendations standardized by the Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System (Lung-RADS). Nevertheless, patient adherence to recommended intervals varies, potentially diminishing benef...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lin, Yannan, Fu, Mingzhou, Ding, Ruiwen, Inoue, Kosuke, Jeon, Christie Y., Hsu, William, Aberle, Denise R., Prosper, Ashley Elizabeth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8692358/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34624528
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2021.09.013
_version_ 1784618940485337088
author Lin, Yannan
Fu, Mingzhou
Ding, Ruiwen
Inoue, Kosuke
Jeon, Christie Y.
Hsu, William
Aberle, Denise R.
Prosper, Ashley Elizabeth
author_facet Lin, Yannan
Fu, Mingzhou
Ding, Ruiwen
Inoue, Kosuke
Jeon, Christie Y.
Hsu, William
Aberle, Denise R.
Prosper, Ashley Elizabeth
author_sort Lin, Yannan
collection PubMed
description Lung cancer screening (LCS) is effective in reducing mortality, particularly when patients adhere to follow-up recommendations standardized by the Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System (Lung-RADS). Nevertheless, patient adherence to recommended intervals varies, potentially diminishing benefit from screening. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient adherence to Lung-RADS–recommended screening intervals. We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and major radiology and oncology conference archives between April 28, 2014, and December 17, 2020. Eligible studies mentioned patient adherence to the recommendations of Lung-RADS. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020189326). We identified 24 eligible studies for qualitative summary, of which 21 were suitable for meta-analysis. The pooled adherence rate was 57% (95% confidence interval: 46%–69%) for defined adherence (e.g., an annual incidence screen was performed within 15 mo) among 6689 patients and 65% (95% confidence interval: 55%–75%) for anytime adherence among 5085 patients. Large heterogeneity in adherence rates between studies was observed (I(2) = 99% for defined adherence, I(2) = 98% for anytime adherence). Heterogeneous adherence rates were associated with Lung-RADS scores, with significantly higher adherence rates among Lung-RADS 3 to 4 than Lung-RADS 1 to 2 (p < 0.05). Patient adherence to Lung-RADS–recommended screening intervals is suboptimal across clinical LCS programs in the United States, especially among patients with results of Lung-RADS categories 1 to 2. To improve adherence rates, future research may focus on implementing tailored interventions after identifying barriers to LCS. We also propose a minimum standardized set of data elements for future pooled analyses of LCS adherence on the basis of our findings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8692358
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86923582022-01-01 Patient Adherence to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System–Recommended Screening Intervals in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Lin, Yannan Fu, Mingzhou Ding, Ruiwen Inoue, Kosuke Jeon, Christie Y. Hsu, William Aberle, Denise R. Prosper, Ashley Elizabeth J Thorac Oncol Article Lung cancer screening (LCS) is effective in reducing mortality, particularly when patients adhere to follow-up recommendations standardized by the Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System (Lung-RADS). Nevertheless, patient adherence to recommended intervals varies, potentially diminishing benefit from screening. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient adherence to Lung-RADS–recommended screening intervals. We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and major radiology and oncology conference archives between April 28, 2014, and December 17, 2020. Eligible studies mentioned patient adherence to the recommendations of Lung-RADS. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020189326). We identified 24 eligible studies for qualitative summary, of which 21 were suitable for meta-analysis. The pooled adherence rate was 57% (95% confidence interval: 46%–69%) for defined adherence (e.g., an annual incidence screen was performed within 15 mo) among 6689 patients and 65% (95% confidence interval: 55%–75%) for anytime adherence among 5085 patients. Large heterogeneity in adherence rates between studies was observed (I(2) = 99% for defined adherence, I(2) = 98% for anytime adherence). Heterogeneous adherence rates were associated with Lung-RADS scores, with significantly higher adherence rates among Lung-RADS 3 to 4 than Lung-RADS 1 to 2 (p < 0.05). Patient adherence to Lung-RADS–recommended screening intervals is suboptimal across clinical LCS programs in the United States, especially among patients with results of Lung-RADS categories 1 to 2. To improve adherence rates, future research may focus on implementing tailored interventions after identifying barriers to LCS. We also propose a minimum standardized set of data elements for future pooled analyses of LCS adherence on the basis of our findings. 2021-10-06 2022-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8692358/ /pubmed/34624528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2021.09.013 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ).
spellingShingle Article
Lin, Yannan
Fu, Mingzhou
Ding, Ruiwen
Inoue, Kosuke
Jeon, Christie Y.
Hsu, William
Aberle, Denise R.
Prosper, Ashley Elizabeth
Patient Adherence to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System–Recommended Screening Intervals in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Patient Adherence to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System–Recommended Screening Intervals in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Patient Adherence to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System–Recommended Screening Intervals in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Patient Adherence to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System–Recommended Screening Intervals in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Patient Adherence to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System–Recommended Screening Intervals in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Patient Adherence to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System–Recommended Screening Intervals in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort patient adherence to lung ct screening reporting & data system–recommended screening intervals in the united states: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8692358/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34624528
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2021.09.013
work_keys_str_mv AT linyannan patientadherencetolungctscreeningreportingdatasystemrecommendedscreeningintervalsintheunitedstatesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fumingzhou patientadherencetolungctscreeningreportingdatasystemrecommendedscreeningintervalsintheunitedstatesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT dingruiwen patientadherencetolungctscreeningreportingdatasystemrecommendedscreeningintervalsintheunitedstatesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT inouekosuke patientadherencetolungctscreeningreportingdatasystemrecommendedscreeningintervalsintheunitedstatesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT jeonchristiey patientadherencetolungctscreeningreportingdatasystemrecommendedscreeningintervalsintheunitedstatesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hsuwilliam patientadherencetolungctscreeningreportingdatasystemrecommendedscreeningintervalsintheunitedstatesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT aberledeniser patientadherencetolungctscreeningreportingdatasystemrecommendedscreeningintervalsintheunitedstatesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT prosperashleyelizabeth patientadherencetolungctscreeningreportingdatasystemrecommendedscreeningintervalsintheunitedstatesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis