Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 13, 2025

Use of Electromagnetic Navigational Transthoracic Needle Aspiration E-TTNA for Sampling of Lung Nodules
Published on: May 23, 2015
What Goes into Patient Selection for Lung Cancer Screening? Factors Associated with Clinician Judgments of
Eduardo R Núñez1,2,3,4, Sanqian Zhang1,2,5, Mark E Glickman1,2,5
1Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston and Bedford Healthcare Systems, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract:
Rationale: Achieving the net benefit of lung cancer screening (LCS) depends on optimizing patient selection. Objective: To identify factors associated with clinician assessments that a patient was unlikely to benefit from LCS ("LCS-inappropriate") because of comorbidities or limited life expectancy. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients assessed for LCS at 30 Veterans Health Administration facilities from January 1, 2015 to February 1, 2021. We conducted hierarchical mixed-effects logistic regression analyses to determine factors associated with clinicians' designations of LCS inappropriateness (primary outcome), accounting for 3-year predicted probability (i.e., competing risk) of non-lung cancer death. Measurements and Main Results: Among 38,487 LCS-eligible patients, 1,671 (4.3%) were deemed LCS-inappropriate by clinicians, whereas 4,383 (11.4%) had an estimated 3-year competing risk of non-lung cancer death greater than 20%. Patients with higher competing risks of non-lung cancer death were more likely to be deemed LCS-inappropriate (odds ratio [OR], 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.32-3.05). Older patients (ages 75-80; OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.18-1.78) and those with interstitial lung disease (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.51-2.59) were more likely to be deemed LCS-inappropriate than would be explained by competing risk of non-lung cancer death, whereas patients currently smoking (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.58-0.73) were less likely to be deemed LCS-inappropriate, suggesting that clinicians over- or underweighted these factors. The probability of being deemed LCS-inappropriate varied from 0.4% to 74%, depending on the clinician making the assessment (median OR, 3.07; 95% CI, 2.89-3.25). Conclusion: Concerningly, the likelihood that a patient is deemed LCS-inappropriate is more strongly associated with the clinician making the assessment than with patient characteristics. Patient selection may be optimized by providing decision support to help clinicians assess net LCS benefit.
More Related Videos
06:46Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
12:18A Machine Learning Approach to Design an Efficient Selective Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment
Published on: January 11, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-IV: Assessement and Diagnostic Studies
Medical History
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
Radiological Investigation III: Pulmonary Angiogram and PET Scan
Pulmonary Angiogram
A Pulmonary Angiogram is an invasive procedure involving injecting a contrast medium through a catheter threaded into the pulmonary artery or the right side of the heart to visualize the pulmonary vasculature. Computed Tomography (CT) scans have mainly replaced this...
Nursing Interventions II: Selecting and Classifying the Nursing Interventions
Assessment of Respiration
Subjective Assessment: Nurses interview the patient to gather information directly during the subjective assessment. It includes questions about the individual's medical history, medications, and symptoms, focusing on past respiratory conditions like...