Abstract
This cross-sectional study estimates the prevalence of lung cancer screening among eligible adults in 2021 and examines factors associated with screening.
Introduction
Despite recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) endorsing lung cancer screening (LCS), data from the 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) showed that 12.8% of eligible adults received a computed tomographic (CT) scan to check for lung cancer.1 Screening rates declined during the COVID-19 pandemic.2 Increasing LCS among eligible adults is a national priority.3 We estimated LCS using data from the 2021 BRFSS and examined factors associated with LCS.
Methods
The 2021 BRFSS4 data were collected from January 2021 through January 2022; 4 states (Maine, Michigan, New Jersey, and Rhode Island) are included the LCS module. We included adults aged 55 to 79 years with at least a 30-pack-year smoking history who currently smoked or quit within the past 15 years (eMethods in Supplement 1).5 We excluded respondents who reported a history of lung cancer. The study was exempt from institutional review board oversight and informed consent by the Common Rule given its use of publicly available data. We followed the STROBE reporting guideline.
We calculated the percentage and 95% CIs of eligible respondents who reported receiving a CT scan for LCS and conducted χ2 tests to assess statistically significant differences across demographic categories and subgroups based on lung cancer risk. We also examined factors associated with LCS using multivariable hierarchical logistic regression and reported odds ratios (ORs). We used the survey package in R, version 4.2.1 (The R Project) to account for the data design, with a 2-sided P < .05 considered significant.
Results
The weighted sample included 112 399 respondents who underwent LCS (mean [SD] age, 65.7 [5.8] years); 49.5% were males and 50.5% were females and 86.7% were White. Prevalence of LCS was 21.2%, an increase of 8.4% from 2019.1 Respondents who underwent LCS reported a high pack-year smoking history (mean [SD], 57.3 [49.6] pack-years; 95% CI, 50.8-63.8 pack-years). The mean (SD) time since quitting was 6.9 (4.6) years (95% CI, 5.8-8.0 years) (Table 1). Of respondents who underwent LCS, 4.5% (95 CI, −4.5% to 13.5%) had no health insurance and 27.7% (95% CI, 16.0%-39.5%) reported poor health.
Table 1. Demographic and Lung Cancer Risk Factors Associated With LCS Eligibility and Completion of Screening.
| Characteristic | Respondents eligible for LCS | Respondents screened for LCS | P valuea | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighted No. | Weighted % (95% CI) | Weighted No. | Weighted % within group (95% CI) | ||
| Eligible for LCS January 2021-January 2022 | |||||
| Not screened | 418 393 | 78.8 (75.1 to 82.5) | NA | NA | <.001 |
| Screened | 112 399 | 21.2 (17.5 to 24.9) | 112 399 | 21.2 (17.5 to 24.9) | |
| State | |||||
| Maine | 52 002 | 9.5 (8.2 to 10.8) | 10 221 | 20.0 (15.4 to 24.5) | .21 |
| Michigan | 299 670 | 55.0 (50.4 to 59.5) | 67 200 | 22.6 (17.2 to 28.0) | |
| New Jersey | 169 728 | 31.1 (26.4 to 35.8) | 27 831 | 17.5 (10.9 to 24.1) | |
| Rhode Island | 23 913 | 4.4 (3.5 to 5.2) | 7148 | 30.3 (21.8 to 38.9) | |
| Demographic characteristics | |||||
| Sex | |||||
| Male | 290 460 | 53.3 (48.7 to 57.9) | 55 618 | 19.9 (15.1 to 24.6) | .46 |
| Female | 254 853 | 46.7 (42.1 to 51.3) | 56 781 | 22.6 (17.0 to 28.3) | |
| Race and ethnicityb | |||||
| Black | 24 247 | 4.6 (2.4 to 6.8) | 3912 | 16.1 (2.2 to 30.0) | .09 |
| Hispanic | 15 089 | 2.9 (1.2 to 4.5) | 2716 | 18.0 (−0.3 to 36.4) | |
| Multiracial | 3087 | 0.6 (0.3 to 0.9) | 510 | 16.6 (−5.1 to 38.3) | |
| White | 467 654 | 89.1 (85.9 to 92.4) | 95 286 | 21.0 (17.3% to 24.7) | |
| Other | 14 516 | 2.8 (0.7 to 4.8) | 7515 | 52.8 (16.0 to 89.5) | |
| Educational attainment | |||||
| Less than high school diploma | 84 366 | 15.5 (11.6 to 19.3) | 17 493 | 20.7 (9.9 to 31.5) | .33 |
| High school diploma or GED | 229 878 | 42.2 (37.5 to 46.8) | 40 113 | 17.7 (11.9 to 23.4) | |
| Some college or technical school | 172 585 | 31.7 (27.3 to 36.0) | 39 296 | 24.1 (17.7 to 30.5) | |
| 4 y college or more | 58 118 | 10.7 (8.6 to 12.7) | 15 131 | 27.0 (18.6 to 35.3) | |
| Annual household income, $ | |||||
| <25 000 | 113 054 | 24.6 (20.4 to 28.9) | 22 728 | 20.5 (13.3 to 27.6) | .29 |
| 25 000-49 999 | 153 352 | 33.4 (28.4 to 38.4) | 37 778 | 26.3 (17.6 to 35.0) | |
| 50 000-74 999 | 76 767 | 16.7 (12.9 to 20.6) | 13 764 | 18.1 (8.7 to 27.4) | |
| 75 000-99 999 | 60 784 | 13.3 (9.6 to 16.9) | 8420 | 14.2 (6.4 to 22.0) | |
| ≥100 000 | 54 730 | 11.9 (8.7 to 15.1) | 14 589 | 26.7 (15.1 to 38.2) | |
| Access to medical care | |||||
| Health insurance coverage | |||||
| Private | 169 764 | 32.1 (27.8 to 36.4) | 29 753 | 17.6 (12.0 to 23.1) | .07 |
| Public | 345 601 | 65.4 (60.9 to 69.8) | 77 794 | 23.5 (18.5 to 28.4) | |
| No insurance | 13 457 | 2.5 (0.8 to 4.3) | 604 | 4.5 (−4.5 to 13.5) | |
| PHP | |||||
| Does not have a PHP | 38 274 | 7.0 (4.4 to 9.7) | 2920 | 7.6 (0.7 to 14.6) | .01 |
| Has a PHP | 505 061 | 93.0 (90.3 to 95.6) | 108 904 | 22.2 (18.3 to 26.1) | |
| Delay of medical care due to cost (past 12 mo) | |||||
| Has not delayed care | 516 621 | 94.8 (93.0 to 96.7) | 104 510 | 20.8 (17.0 to 24.6) | .40 |
| Has delayed care | 28 056 | 5.2 (3.3 to 7.0) | 7800 | 27.8 (10.7 to 44.9) | |
| General health status | |||||
| Excellent | 46 643 | 8.6 (5.8 to 11.3) | 4915 | 10.5 (2.5 to 18.6) | .10 |
| Very good | 122 497 | 22.5 (18.6 to 26.4) | 32 151 | 26.9 (16.8 to 36.9) | |
| Good | 194 795 | 35.8 (31.4 to 40.2) | 34 796 | 18.0 (13.0 to 23.0) | |
| Fair | 121 719 | 22.4 (18.3 to 26.5) | 24 038 | 21.3 (14.1 to 28.6) | |
| Poor | 57 904 | 10.7 (7.9 to 13.4) | 15 861 | 27.7 (16.0 to 39.5) | |
| Lung cancer risk factors | |||||
| Age, y | |||||
| 55-64 | 295 730 | 54.2 (49.6 to 58.8) | 47 725 | 16.4 (11.5 to 21.2) | .001 |
| 65-77 | 233 274 | 42.8 (38.2 to 47.4) | 63 511 | 28.5 (22.6 to 34.4) | |
| 78-79c | 16 308 | 3.0 (1.4 to 4.5) | 1162 | 7.2 (−1.0 to 15.4) | |
| Smoking status | |||||
| Former | 248 020 | 45.5 (40.9 to 50.1) | 61 576 | 25.3 (20.0 to 30.5) | .05 |
| Current | 297 293 | 54.5 (49.9 to 59.1) | 50 823 | 17.7 (12.5 to 22.9) | |
| Smoking history, pack-years | |||||
| 30-39 | 171 157 | 31.4 (27.1 to 35.7) | 30,22 | 18.0 (11.7 to 24.3) | .20 |
| 40-49 | 179 140 | 32.9 (28.7 to 37.0) | 34 085 | 19.2 (13.6 to 24.8) | |
| 50-59 | 90 560 | 16.6 (12.6 to 20.7) | 24 412 | 29.8 (17.6 to 42.0) | |
| ≥60 | 104 456 | 19.2 (15.6 to 22.7) | 23 674 | 22.9 (15.4 to 30.3) | |
| Years since quitting smokingd | |||||
| <5 | 73 540 | 29.7 (24.7 to 35.0) | 20 600 | 28.8 (19.4 to 38.2) | .17 |
| 5-10 | 92 250 | 37.2 (31.7 to 42.9) | 26 379 | 28.9 (19.8 to 38.0) | |
| 11-15 | 82 231 | 33.2 (27.7 to 38.9) | 14 598 | 18.0 (9.5 to 26.5) | |
Abbreviations: GED, General Education Development; LCS, lung cancer screening; NA, not applicable; PHP, primary health professional.
All P values are from adjusted Wald χ2 tests.
Race and ethnicity are reported as collected within the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. This information was included as a variable because of disparities in LCS and outcomes. The other category includes American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, or race not included in the surveillance system.
Respondent age older than 80 years is collapsed within the data set; thus, we limited the sample to respondents 79 years or younger.
Only includes respondents who reported not smoking currently.
Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression analysis (Table 2) showed a higher likelihood of LCS for respondents in Rhode Island compared with Maine (OR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.05-3.67]; P = .03). Compared with White respondents, the likelihood of LCS was higher for those who self-reported belonging to racial and ethnic groups other than White, Black, Hispanic, or multiracial (OR, 8.89 [95% CI, 1.81-43.71]; P = .01). Respondents who reported having a primary health professional (PHP) had a higher likelihood of LCS compared with those without a PHP (OR, 5.62 [95% CI, 1.19-26.49]; P = .03). Compared with respondents aged 65 to 77 years, the likelihood of obtaining LCS was lower for those aged 55 to 64 years (OR, 0.43 [95% CI. 0.23-0.81]; P = .01) and those aged 78 to 79 years (OR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.04-0.80]; P = .02).
Table 2. Factors Associated With Obtaining LCS Among Eligible Individuals.
| Characteristic | OR (95% CI) | Pseudo R2 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| State | |||
| Intercept | 0.06 (0.01-0.40) | 0.02 | .001 |
| Maine | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| Michigan | 1.35 (0.82-2.21) | .24 | |
| New Jersey | 1.02 (0.52-2.03) | .95 | |
| Rhode Island | 1.96 (1.05-3.67) | .03 | |
| Demographic characteristics | |||
| Sex | |||
| Male | 1 [Reference] | 0.07 | NA |
| Female | 0.96 (0.58-1.59) | .87 | |
| Race and ethnicitya | |||
| White | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| Black | 0.83 (0.23-2.99) | .78 | |
| Hispanic | 0.79 (0.15-4.03) | .77 | |
| Multiracial | 0.73 (0.07-7.33) | .79 | |
| Other | 8.89 (1.81-43.71) | .01 | |
| Educational attainment | |||
| 4 y college or more | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| Less than high school diploma | 1.58 (0.52-4.80) | .42 | |
| High school diploma or GED | 1.11 (0.56-2.23) | .76 | |
| Some college or technical school | 1.61 (0.82-3.16) | .16 | |
| Annual household income, $ | |||
| 100 000 or more | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| <25 000 | 0.47 (0.18-1.27) | .14 | |
| 25 000-49 999 | 0.77 (0.33-1.83) | .56 | |
| 50 000-74 999 | 0.48 (0.19-1.23) | .13 | |
| 75 000-99 999 | 0.45 (0.18-1.12) | .09 | |
| Access to medical care | |||
| Health insurance coverage | |||
| Private | 1 [Reference] | 0.10 | NA |
| Public | 0.81 (0.42-1.56) | .53 | |
| No insurance | 0.69 (0.06-8.08) | .77 | |
| PHP | |||
| Does not have PHP | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| Has PHP | 5.62 (1.19-26.49) | .03 | |
| Delay of medical care due to cost | |||
| Has not delayed care | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| Has delayed care | 1.64 (0.52-5.18) | .40 | |
| General health status | |||
| Excellent | 1 [Reference] | 0.12 | NA |
| Very good | 2.51 (0.81-7.77) | .11 | |
| Good | 1.67 (0.57-4.92) | .35 | |
| Fair | 2.60 (0.85-7.93) | .09 | |
| Poor | 2.88 (0.85-9.77) | .09 | |
| Lung cancer risk factors | |||
| Age, y | 0.17 | ||
| 65-77 | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| 55-64 | 0.43 (0.23-0.81) | .01 | |
| 78-79b | 0.17 (0.04-0.80) | .02 | |
| Smoking status | |||
| Former | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| Current | 0.61 (0.37-1.00) | .05 | |
| Smoking history, pack-years | |||
| 30-39 | 1 [Reference] | NA | |
| 40-49 | 0.84 (0.43-1.61) | .59 | |
| 50-59 | 1.08 (0.48-2.40) | .86 | |
| ≥60 | 1.03 (0.50-2.10) | .94 |
Abbreviations: GED, General Education Development; NA, not applicable; OR, odds ratio; PHP, primary health professional.
Race and ethnicity are reported as collected within the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. This information was included as a variable because of disparities in LCS and outcomes. The other category includes American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, or race not included in the surveillance system.
Respondent age older than 80 years is collapsed within the data set; therefore, we limited the sample to respondents 79 years or younger.
Discussion
The prevalence of LCS in 2021 rebounded to higher levels than in 2019. However, LCS rates remain lower than other population-level cancer screening programs.5 Consistent with prior studies, LCS uptake varied between states. Having a PHP was associated with higher likelihood of LCS, and our findings highlight the potential importance of Medicare coverage for LCS. Limitations of this analysis include use of self-reported data that were collected in only 4 states.
Disparities in LCS uptake among eligible adults remain and will likely continue with the updated USPSTF recommendation increases the number of Black adults who are eligible for LCS.5 Research to identify facilitators for LCS among persons who currently smoke is needed, including a focus on the role of stigma as a barrier to screening.5,6 Finally, the high percentage of LCS in persons who reported poor health is concerning as many may not be healthy enough for treatment of lung cancer.
eMethods.
eReferences
Data Sharing Statement
References
- 1.Liu Y, Pan IE, Tak HJ, Vlahos I, Volk R, Shih YCT. Assessment of uptake appropriateness of computed tomography for lung cancer screening according to patients meeting eligibility criteria of the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(11):e2243163-e2243163. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.43163 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Fedewa SA, Bandi P, Smith RA, Silvestri GA, Jemal A. Lung cancer screening rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Chest. 2022;161(2):586-589. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2021.07.030 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion . Proposed Objectives for Inclusion in Healthy People 2030. Leading Health Indicators 2030: Advancing Health, Equity, and Well-Being. National Academies Press; 2020. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data and documentation. Updated September 30, 2021. Accessed January 23, 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/data_documentation/index.htm
- 5.Melzer AC, Wilt TJ. Expanded access to lung cancer screening—implementing wisely to optimize health. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(3):e210275-e210275. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.0275 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Hamann HA, Ver Hoeve ES, Carter-Harris L, Studts JL, Ostroff JS. Multilevel opportunities to address lung cancer stigma across the cancer control continuum. J Thorac Oncol. 2018;13(8):1062-1075. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2018.05.014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
eMethods.
eReferences
Data Sharing Statement
