TY - JOUR
T1 - Invitation strategies and participation in a community-based lung cancer screening programme located in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation
AU - Goodley, Patrick
AU - Balata, Haval
AU - Alonso, Alberto
AU - Brockelsby, Christopher
AU - Conroy, Matthew
AU - Cooper-Moss, Nicola
AU - Craig, Christopher
AU - Evison, Matthew
AU - Hewitt, Kath
AU - Higgins, Coral
AU - Johnson, William
AU - Lyons, Judith
AU - Merchant, Zoe
AU - Rowlands, Ailsa
AU - Sharman, Anna
AU - Sinnott, Nicola
AU - Sperrin, Matthew
AU - Booton, Richard
AU - Crosbie, Philip A J
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by funding from Cancer Research UK. PG receives a PhD studentship from the North West Lung Centre Charity. PAJC is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre (IS-BRC-1215-20007).
Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
PY - 2023/8/16
Y1 - 2023/8/16
N2 - Introduction: Although lung cancer screening is being implemented in the UK, there is uncertainty about the optimal invitation strategy. Here, we report participation in a community screening programme following a population-based invitation approach, examine factors associated with participation, and compare outcomes with hypothetical targeted invitations. Methods: Letters were sent to all individuals (age 55-80) registered with a general practice (n=35 practices) in North and East Manchester, inviting ever-smokers to attend a Lung Health Check (LHC). Attendees at higher risk (PLCOm2012NoRace score≥1.5%) were offered two rounds of annual low-dose CT screening. Primary care recorded smoking codes (live and historical) were used to model hypothetical targeted invitation approaches for comparison. Results: Letters were sent to 35 899 individuals, 71% from the most socioeconomically deprived quintile. Estimated response rate in ever-smokers was 49%; a lower response rate was associated with younger age, male sex, and primary care recorded current smoking status (adjOR 0.55 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.58), p<0.001). 83% of eligible respondents attended an LHC (n=8887/10 708). 51% were eligible for screening (n=4540/8887) of whom 98% had a baseline scan (n=4468/4540). Screening adherence was 83% (n=3488/4199) and lung cancer detection 3.2% (n=144) over 2 rounds. Modelled targeted approaches required 32%-48% fewer invitations, identified 94.6%-99.3% individuals eligible for screening, and included 97.1%-98.6% of screen-detected lung cancers. Discussion: Using a population-based invitation strategy, in an area of high socioeconomic deprivation, is effective and may increase screening accessibility. Due to limitations in primary care records, targeted approaches should incorporate historical smoking codes and individuals with absent smoking records.
AB - Introduction: Although lung cancer screening is being implemented in the UK, there is uncertainty about the optimal invitation strategy. Here, we report participation in a community screening programme following a population-based invitation approach, examine factors associated with participation, and compare outcomes with hypothetical targeted invitations. Methods: Letters were sent to all individuals (age 55-80) registered with a general practice (n=35 practices) in North and East Manchester, inviting ever-smokers to attend a Lung Health Check (LHC). Attendees at higher risk (PLCOm2012NoRace score≥1.5%) were offered two rounds of annual low-dose CT screening. Primary care recorded smoking codes (live and historical) were used to model hypothetical targeted invitation approaches for comparison. Results: Letters were sent to 35 899 individuals, 71% from the most socioeconomically deprived quintile. Estimated response rate in ever-smokers was 49%; a lower response rate was associated with younger age, male sex, and primary care recorded current smoking status (adjOR 0.55 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.58), p<0.001). 83% of eligible respondents attended an LHC (n=8887/10 708). 51% were eligible for screening (n=4540/8887) of whom 98% had a baseline scan (n=4468/4540). Screening adherence was 83% (n=3488/4199) and lung cancer detection 3.2% (n=144) over 2 rounds. Modelled targeted approaches required 32%-48% fewer invitations, identified 94.6%-99.3% individuals eligible for screening, and included 97.1%-98.6% of screen-detected lung cancers. Discussion: Using a population-based invitation strategy, in an area of high socioeconomic deprivation, is effective and may increase screening accessibility. Due to limitations in primary care records, targeted approaches should incorporate historical smoking codes and individuals with absent smoking records.
KW - Clinical Epidemiology
KW - Lung Cancer
U2 - 10.1136/thorax-2023-220001
DO - 10.1136/thorax-2023-220001
M3 - Article
SN - 0040-6376
JO - Thorax
JF - Thorax
M1 - 220001
ER -