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
Meta-Analysis
. 2025 May;40(6):1288-1296.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-09097-8. Epub 2024 Nov 13.

Efficacy of Interventions Intended to Increase Lung Cancer Screening Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Shina Satoh  1   2   3 , Manav Shah  1   3 , Mitchell Sungelo  1   2   3 , Louise Falzon  4 , Alex Makhnevich  1   5   3 , Brett Bade  1   5   3 , Elizabeth Cohn  1   5 , Suhail Raoof  1   3 , Jesse Chusid  1   3 , Martin Lesser  1   5 , Karina Davidson  1   5   3 , Gerard A Silvestri  6 , Stuart L Cohen  7   8   9
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Efficacy of Interventions Intended to Increase Lung Cancer Screening Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Shina Satoh et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2025 May.

Abstract

Background: Few eligible patients in the United States participate in lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT).

Objective: What is the efficacy of interventions to increase LCS participation?

Design: We performed a systematic review following a prespecified protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021283984). In June/July of 2021, we searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and Epistemonikos from 1946 to October 2021 to identify studies evaluating interventions to increase LCS participation.

Participants: Thirteen of 2761 studies met inclusion criteria for data extraction. Of these, six had results available (five RCTs and one prospective observational study). The studies had predominantly White and non-Hispanic participants.

Main measures: An intention-to-treat analysis was used to calculate each study's relative risk (RR) to increase LCS. Effect sizes were pooled using a random-effects model with a subgroup analysis for multi- versus single-step interventions. Risk of bias was evaluated with the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) and risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I).

Key results: Overall, the proportion of screening LDCTs performed did not improve in the intervention group relative to the comparator group (RR [95% CI] of 1.30 [0.74, 2.29]), and meta-analysis indicated high heterogeneity of studies (I2 = 91%). Subgroup analysis suggests that interventions targeting multiple barriers may increase LCS participation (RR [95% CI] for multistep vs single-step; 2.68 [1.77, 4.05] vs 0.99 [0.89, 1.10], P < 0.01). Quality assessment revealed that three of five RCTs showed some concerns or high risk of bias.

Conclusion: Evidence on efficacy of interventions to increase LCS participation is limited due to a small number of prospective studies performed in non-diverse populations with critical risk of bias. Further, overall, studied interventions did not improve lung cancer screening participation, though interventions targeting multiple barriers may have some benefit.

Keywords: interventions; low-dose computed tomography (LDCT); lung cancer screening (LCS); meta-analysis; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations:. Conflict of Interest:: The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

References

    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Wagle NS, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023 Jan;73(1):17-48. - PubMed
    1. National Cancer Institute S, Epidemiology, and End Results Program,. Cancer Stat Facts: Lung and Bronchus Cancer. 2023 [May 16, 2023]; Available from: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/lungb.html.
    1. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. The New England journal of medicine. 2011 Aug 04;365(5):395-409. - PMC - PubMed
    1. de Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, de Jong PA, et al. Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Volume CT Screening in a Randomized Trial. The New England journal of medicine. 2020 Feb 6;382(6):503-13. - PubMed
    1. Force UPST. Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2021;325(10):962-70. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources