Participation in community-based lung cancer screening: the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND

Screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality; however, the most effective strategy for optimising participation is unknown. Here we present data from the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial, including response to invitation, screening eligibility and uptake of community-based LDCT screening.

METHODS

Individuals aged 55-80 years, identified from primary care records as having ever smoked, were randomised prior to consent to invitation to telephone lung cancer risk assessment or usual care. The invitation strategy included general practitioner endorsement, pre-invitation and two reminder invitations. After telephone triage, those at higher risk were invited to a Lung Health Check (LHC) with immediate access to a mobile CT scanner.

RESULTS

Of 44 943 individuals invited, 50.8% (n=22 815) responded and underwent telephone-based risk assessment (16.7% and 7.3% following first and second reminders, respectively). A lower response rate was associated with current smoking status (adjusted OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.42-0.46) and socioeconomic deprivation (adjusted OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.54-0.62 for the most

CONCLUSIONS

Telephone risk assessment followed by a community-based LHC is an effective strategy for lung cancer screening implementation. However, lower participation associated with current smoking status and socioeconomic deprivation underlines the importance of research to ensure equitable access to screening.

Informations de copyright

Copyright ©The authors 2022.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest: P.A.J. Crosbie reports consulting fees and stock options from Everest Detection; lecture honoraria from AstraZeneca; designing a questionnaire for Novartis; and designing a study for North West eHealth; outside the submitted work. D. Baldwin reports lecture honoraria from MSD, AstraZeneca, Roche and BMS; outside the submitted work. K.N. Franks reports grants from Yorkshire Cancer Research, AstraZeneca and CRUK/AstraZeneca; consulting fees from AstraZeneca; lecture honoraria and payment for expert testimony from AstraZeneca, Roche and Takeda; advisory board membership with Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Lilley and Takeda; outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose.