Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening by the 2021 USPSTF Guidelines Versus Risk-Based Criteria: The Multiethnic Cohort Study

Abstract Background In 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) revised its lung cancer screening guidelines to expand screening eligibility. We evaluated screening sensitivities and racial and ethnic disparities under the 2021 USPSTF criteria vs alternative risk-based criteria in a racially and ethnically diverse population. Methods In the Multiethnic Cohort, we evaluated the proportion of ever-smoking lung cancer cases eligible for screening (ie, screening sensitivity) under the 2021 USPSTF criteria and under risk-based criteria through the PLCOm2012 model (6-year risk ≥1.51%). We also calculated the screening disparity (ie, absolute sensitivity difference) for each of 4 racial or ethnic groups (African American, Japanese American, Latino, Native Hawaiian) vs White cases. Results Among 5900 lung cancer cases, 43.3% were screen eligible under the 2021 USPSTF criteria. Screening sensitivities varied by race and ethnicity, with Native Hawaiian (56.7%) and White (49.6%) cases attaining the highest sensitivities and Latino (37.3%), African American (38.4%), and Japanese American (40.0%) cases attaining the lowest. Latino cases had the greatest screening disparity vs White cases at 12.4%, followed by African American (11.2%) and Japanese American (9.6%) cases. Under risk-based screening, the overall screening sensitivity increased to 75.7%, and all racial and ethnic groups had increased sensitivities (54.5%-91.9%). Whereas the screening disparity decreased to 5.1% for African American cases, it increased to 28.6% for Latino cases and 12.8% for Japanese American cases. Conclusions In the Multiethnic Cohort, racial and ethnic disparities decreased but persisted under the 2021 USPSTF lung cancer screening guidelines. Risk-based screening through PLCOm2012 may increase screening sensitivities and help to reduce disparities in some, but not all, racial and ethnic groups. Further optimization of risk-based screening strategies across diverse populations is needed.

[1]  S. Lam,et al.  USPSTF2013 versus PLCOm2012 lung cancer screening eligibility criteria (International Lung Screening Trial): interim analysis of a prospective cohort study , 2021, The Lancet Oncology.

[2]  N. Powe,et al.  New Creatinine- and Cystatin C-Based Equations to Estimate GFR without Race. , 2021, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  Summer S. Han,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. , 2021, JAMA.

[4]  C. Berg,et al.  Using Prediction-Models to Reduce Persistent Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Draft 2020 USPSTF Lung-Cancer Screening Guidelines. , 2021, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[5]  K. Kovitz,et al.  Brief Report: Risk Prediction Model Versus United States Preventive Services Task Force 2020 Draft Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility Criteria—Reducing Race Disparities , 2020, JTO clinical and research reports.

[6]  K. Kovitz,et al.  Risk Prediction Model versus United States Preventive Services Task Force Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility Criteria - Reducing Race Disparities. , 2020, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[7]  R. Kaaks,et al.  Risk prediction models versus simplified selection criteria to determine eligibility for lung cancer screening: an analysis of German federal-wide survey and incidence data , 2020, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[8]  W. Rüther,et al.  Task force. , 2011, Midwives.

[9]  L. Marchand,et al.  Diabetes-Related Complications and Pancreatic Cancer Incidence in the Multiethnic Cohort , 2020, JNCI cancer spectrum.

[10]  H. Kauczor,et al.  Lung cancer mortality reduction by LDCT screening—Results from the randomized German LUSI trial , 2019, International journal of cancer.

[11]  Summer S. Han,et al.  Disparities of national lung cancer screening guidelines in the U.S. population. , 2020, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[12]  Harry J de Koning,et al.  Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Volume CT Screening in a Randomized Trial. , 2020, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Summer S. Han,et al.  A Comparative Modeling Analysis of Risk-Based Lung Cancer Screening Strategies , 2019, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[14]  W. Blot,et al.  Evaluation of USPSTF Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines Among African American Adult Smokers. , 2019, JAMA oncology.

[15]  M. Tsao,et al.  Outcomes of Long-term Interval Rescreening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer in Different Risk Cohorts. , 2019, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[16]  M. Foreman,et al.  Potential Racial Disparities Using Current Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines , 2019, Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities.

[17]  R. Booton,et al.  Second round results from the Manchester ‘Lung Health Check’ community-based targeted lung cancer screening pilot , 2018, Thorax.

[18]  R. Shah,et al.  Racial disparities in eligibility for low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening among older adults with a history of smoking , 2018, Cancer Causes & Control.

[19]  Ravi Menezes,et al.  Importance of Long-term Low-Dose CT Follow-up after Negative Findings at Previous Lung Cancer Screening. , 2018, Radiology.

[20]  R. Booton,et al.  Implementing lung cancer screening: baseline results from a community-based ‘Lung Health Check’ pilot in deprived areas of Manchester , 2018, Thorax.

[21]  S. Lam,et al.  Participant selection for lung cancer screening by risk modelling (the Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer [PanCan] study): a single-arm, prospective study. , 2017, The Lancet. Oncology.

[22]  D. Manners,et al.  Identifying high risk individuals for targeted lung cancer screening: Independent validation of the PLCOm2012 risk prediction tool , 2017, International journal of cancer.

[23]  Harry J de Koning,et al.  Risk prediction models for selection of lung cancer screening candidates: A retrospective validation study , 2017, PLoS medicine.

[24]  Shelly C. Lu,et al.  Prevalence of chronic liver disease and cirrhosis by underlying cause in understudied ethnic groups: The multiethnic cohort , 2016, Hepatology.

[25]  Andrew Miles Obtaining Predictions from Models Fit to Multiply Imputed Data , 2016 .

[26]  B. Kramer,et al.  Lung Cancer Risk and Demographic Characteristics of Current 20-29 Pack-year Smokers: Implications for Screening. , 2015, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[27]  H. Boeing,et al.  Selecting High-Risk Individuals for Lung Cancer Screening: A Prospective Evaluation of Existing Risk Models and Eligibility Criteria in the German EPIC Cohort , 2015, Cancer Prevention Research.

[28]  B. Henderson,et al.  Linking data from the Multiethnic Cohort Study to Medicare data: linkage results and application to chronic disease research. , 2015, American journal of epidemiology.

[29]  Timothy R. Church,et al.  Evaluation of the Lung Cancer Risks at Which to Screen Ever- and Never-Smokers: Screening Rules Applied to the PLCO and NLST Cohorts , 2014, PLoS medicine.

[30]  C. Gatsonis,et al.  Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening , 2012 .

[31]  A. Daley,et al.  Influence of smoking cessation after diagnosis of early stage lung cancer on prognosis: systematic review of observational studies with meta-analysis , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[32]  M. Kenward,et al.  Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: potential and pitfalls , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[33]  D O Stram,et al.  A multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and Los Angeles: baseline characteristics. , 2000, American journal of epidemiology.

[34]  J. Schafer Multiple imputation: a primer , 1999, Statistical methods in medical research.