Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jan;17(1):160-166.
doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.09.011. Epub 2021 Oct 12.

Impact of Joint Lung Cancer Screening and Cessation Interventions Under the New Recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Affiliations

Impact of Joint Lung Cancer Screening and Cessation Interventions Under the New Recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Rafael Meza et al. J Thorac Oncol. 2022 Jan.

Abstract

Introduction: In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) revised its lung cancer screening recommendations expanding its eligibility. As more smokers become eligible, cessation interventions at the point of screening could enhance the benefits. Here, we evaluate the effects of joint screening and cessation interventions under the new recommendations.

Methods: A validated lung cancer natural history model was used to estimate lifetime number of low-dose computed tomography screens, percentage ever screened, lung cancer deaths, lung cancer deaths averted, and life-years gained for the 1960 U.S. birth cohort aged 45 to 90 years (4.5 million individuals). Screening occurred according to the USPSTF 2013 and 2021 recommendations with varying uptake (0%, 30%, 100%), with or without a cessation intervention at the point of screening with varying effectiveness (15%, 100%).

Results: Screening 30% of the eligible population according to the 2021 criteria with no cessation intervention (USPSTF 2021, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention) was estimated to result in 6845 lung cancer deaths averted and 103,725 life-years gained. These represent 28% and 34% increases, respectively, relative to screening according to the 2013 guidelines (USPSTF 2013, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention). Adding a cessation intervention at the time of the first screen with 15% effectiveness (USPSTF 2021, 30% uptake, with cessation intervention with 15% effectiveness) was estimated to result in 2422 additional lung cancer deaths averted (9267 total, ∼73% increase versus USPSTF 2013, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention) and 322,785 life-years gained (∼318% increase). Screening 100% of the eligible according to the 2021 guidelines with no cessation intervention (USPSTF 2021, 100% uptake, without cessation intervention) was estimated to result in 23,444 lung cancer deaths averted (∼337% increase versus USPSTF 2013, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention) and 354,330 life-years gained (∼359% increase). Adding a cessation intervention with 15% effectiveness (USPSTF 2021, 100% uptake, with cessation intervention with 15% effectiveness) would result in 31,998 lung cancer deaths averted (∼497% increase versus USPSTF 2013, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention) and 1,086,840 life-years gained (∼1309% increase).

Conclusions: Joint screening and cessation interventions would result in considerable lung cancer deaths averted and life-years gained. Adding a one-time cessation intervention of modest effectiveness (15%) results in comparable life-years gained as increasing screening uptake from 30% to 100% because while cessation decreases mortality from many causes, screening only reduces lung cancer mortality. This simulation indicates that incorporating cessation programs into screening practice should be a priority as it can maximize overall benefits.

Keywords: CISNET; Cesssation interventions within lung screening; Deaths averted; Life-years gained; Lung cancer screening; Simulation modeling.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report not conflict of interests.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Age-specific screening eligibility of individuals from the 1960 US birth-cohort according to 2013 USPSTF guidelines (left) or 2021 USPSTF guidelines (right). The different shaded areas represent the proportion of the cohort eligible and not eligible for screening by smoking status. The darkest area at the bottom represents the percentage of the cohort eligible for joint screening and cessation interventions.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Cumulative life-years gained (top) and cumulative lung cancer deaths averted (bottom) of joint screening and cessation interventions for the 4.5 million individuals at age 45 from the US 1960 birth cohort under different screening uptake and cessation intervention effectiveness assumptions. Left panels correspond to LDCT screening under the USPSTF 2013 guidelines and right panels to screening under the USPSTF 2021 guidelines.

Comment in

References

    1. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Jama. 2021;325(10):962–970. - PubMed
    1. Joseph AM, Rothman AJ, Almirall D, et al. Lung Cancer Screening and Smoking Cessation Clinical Trials. SCALE (Smoking Cessation within the Context of Lung Cancer Screening) Collaboration. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;197(2):172–182. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cao P, Jeon J, Levy DT, et al. Potential Impact of Cessation Interventions at the Point of Lung Cancer Screening on Lung Cancer and Overall Mortality in the United States. J Thorac Oncol. 2020;15(7):1160–1169. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cadham CJ, Jayasekera JC, Advani SM, et al. Smoking cessation interventions for potential use in the lung cancer screening setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2019;135:205–216. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meza R, Jeon J, Toumazis I, et al. Evaluation of the Benefits and Harms of Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Jama. 2021;325(10):988–997. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types