Implications of incidental findings from lung screening for primary care: data from a UK pilot.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bartlett EC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8184811 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6812160 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLung cancer screening using low-dose CT (LDCT) was shown to reduce lung cancer mortality by 20% in the National Lung Screening Trial.MethodsThe pilot UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) is a randomised controlled trial of LDCT screening for lung cancer versus usual care. A population-based questionnaire was used to identify high-risk individuals. CT screen-detected nodules were managed by a pre-specified protocol. Cost effectiveness was modelled with reference to the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial mortality reduction.Results247 354 individuals aged 50-75 years were approached; 30.7% expressed an interest, 8729 (11.5%) were eligible and 4055 were randomised, 2028 into the CT arm (1994 underwent a CT). Forty-two participants (2.1%) had confirmed lung cancer, 34 (1.7%) at baseline and 8 (0.4%) at the 12-month scan. 28/42 (66.7%) had stage I disease, 36/42 (85.7%) had stage I or II disease. 35/42 (83.3%) had surgical resection. 536 subjects had nodules greater than 50 mm(3) or 5 mm diameter and 41/536 were found to have lung cancer. One further cancer was detected by follow-up of nodules between 15 and 50 mm(3) at 12 months. The baseline estimate for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of once-only CT screening, under the UKLS protocol, was £8466 per quality adjusted life year gained (CI £5542 to £12 569).ConclusionsThe UKLS pilot trial demonstrated that it is possible to detect lung cancer at an early stage and deliver potentially curative treatment in over 80% of cases. Health economic analysis suggests that the intervention would be cost effective-this needs to be confirmed using data on observed lung cancer mortality reduction.Trial registrationISRCTN 78513845.
| S-EPMC4752629 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The goal of clinical proteomics is to identify, quantify, and characterize proteins in body fluids or tissue to assist diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of patients. In this way, it is similar to more mature omics technologies, such as genomics, that are increasingly applied in biomedicine. We argue that, similar to those fields, proteomics also faces ethical issues related to the kinds of information that is inherently obtained through sample measurement, although their acquisition was not the primary purpose. Specifically, we show that individuals can be identified both by their characteristic, individual-specific protein levels and by variant peptides reporting on coding single nucleotide polymorphisms. Furthermore, it is in the nature of blood plasma proteomics profiling that it broadly reports on the health status of an individual – beyond the disease under investigation. Finally, we show that private and potentially sensitive information, such as ethnicity and pregnancy status, can increasingly be derived from proteomics data. Although this is potentially valuable not only to the individual, but also for biomedical research, it raises ethical questions similar to the incidental findings obtained through other omics technologies. We here introduce the necessity of - and argue for the desirability for - ethical and human rights-related issues to be discussed within the proteomics community. Those thoughts are more fully developed in our accompanying manuscript. Appreciation and discussion of ethical aspects of proteomic research will allow for deeper, better-informed, more diverse, and, most importantly, wiser guidelines for clinical proteomics.
2020-12-21 | PXD021677 | Pride
Project description:Purpose To explore provider and patient characteristics that influence how primary care providers (PCPs) communicate and manage incidental imaging findings. Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board. Through semistructured interviews, researchers explored concerns and perspectives of 30 PCPs on receiving and acting on incidental imaging findings. Open-ended questions were designed to elicit a range of responses rather than quantifiable data. Thematic codes were developed and explicitly defined. Three research assistants independently coded all 30 deidentified transcripts and resolved discrepancies (κ = 0.85). Codes pertaining to PCP and patient characteristics were organized into an explanatory model. Results Some PCPs felt compelled but frustrated to pursue costly follow-up for incidental imaging findings of limited clinical importance. Other PCPs did not act on findings that were unfamiliar or occurred in an unusual clinical context when follow-up recommendations were not given; the challenges of researching the clinical importance of these findings or seeking specialist consultation led to inaction. Some PCPs reported using a uniform approach to communicate and manage incidental findings, while others adapted their approach to the patient and the finding. Sometimes PCP characteristics such as follow-up style superseded patient characteristics. At other times patient characteristics such as health literacy superseded PCP characteristics. Conclusion PCPs cited a variety of objective and subjective factors that influence how they communicate and manage incidental imaging findings. These results suggest that some patients may receive inappropriate follow-up of incidental imaging findings and present an opportunity for radiologists to help PCPs and patients to best use the information conveyed in imaging reports. © RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
| S-EPMC5084970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The safety of novel therapeutics and vaccines are typically assessed in early phase clinical trials involving "healthy volunteers." Abnormalities in such individuals can be difficult to interpret and may indicate previously unrecognized medical conditions. The frequency of incidental findings (IFs) in healthy volunteers who attend for clinical trial screening is unclear. To assess this, we retrospectively analyzed data for 1838 "healthy volunteers" screened for enrolment in a UK multicenter, phase I/II severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) vaccine trial. Participants were predominantly White (89.7%, 1640/1828) with a median age of 34 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 27-44). There were 27.7% of participants (510/1838) who had at least one IF detected. The likelihood of identifying evidence of a potential, new blood-borne virus infection was low (1 in 238 participants) compared with identification of an elevated alanine transaminase (ALT; 1 in 17 participants). A large proportion of participants described social habits that could impact negatively on their health; 21% consumed alcohol in excess, 10% were current smokers, 11% described recreational drug use, and only 48% had body weight in the ideal range. Our data demonstrate that screening prior to enrollment in early phase clinical trials identifies a range of IFs, which should inform discussion during the consent process. Greater clarity is needed to ensure an appropriate balance is struck between early identification of medical problems and avoidance of exclusion of volunteers due to spurious or physiological abnormalities. Debate should inform the role of the trial physician in highlighting and advising about unhealthy social habits.
| S-EPMC8652599 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Asymptomatic blastomycosis infections are rarely identified or described in the literature, but are believed to comprise 50% of cases. In this report we describe five sporadic cases of blastomycosis in asymptomatic patients. All of these cases were initially identified as incidental findings of lung nodules on CXR or CT. To our knowledge, these are the first detailed descriptions of asymptomatic blastomycosis, occurring as sporadic disease, in the literature.
| S-EPMC6076388 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLow-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scan for lung cancer screening is underutilized. Studies suggest that up to one-third of providers do not know the current lung cancer screening guidelines. Thus, identifying the barriers to utilization of LDCT scan is essential.MethodsPrimary care providers in three different healthcare settings in the United States were surveyed to assess provider knowledge of LDCT scan screening criteria, lung cancer screening practices, and barriers to the utilization of LDCT scan screening. Fisher’s Exact, Chi-Squared, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare provider responses. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test the association between provider characteristics and the likelihood of utilizing LDCT scan for lung cancer screening.ResultsThe survey was sent to 614 providers, with a 15.7% response rate. Overall, 29.2% of providers report never ordering LDCT scans for eligible patients. Providers practicing at a community or academic hospital more frequently order LDCT scans than those practicing at a safety net hospital. Academic- and community-based providers received a significantly higher mean knowledge score than safety net-based providers [academic 6.84 (SD 1.33), community 6.72 (SD 1.46), safety net 5.85 (SD 1.38); P<0.01]. Overall, only 6.2% of respondents correctly identified all six Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services eligibility criteria when challenged with three incorrect criteria. Common barriers to utilization of LDCT scan included failure of the electronic medical record (EMR) to notify providers of eligible patients (54.7%), patient refusal (37%), perceived high false-positive rate leading to unnecessary procedures (18.9%), provider time constraints (16.8%), and lack of insurance coverage (13.7%).ConclusionsProvider knowledge of lung cancer screening guidelines varies, perhaps contributing to underutilization of LDCT scan for lung cancer screening. Improved provider education at safety net hospitals and improving EMR-based best practice alerts may improve the rate of lung cancer screening.
| S-EPMC7330370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Computed tomography (CT) is commonly used in trauma care, with increasing implementation during the emergency work-up of elderly patients with low-energy falls (LEF). The prevalence of incidental findings (IFs) resulting from CT imaging and requiring down-stream actions in this patient cohort is unknown. We have investigated the prevalence and urgency of IFs from emergency CT examinations in these patients. A total of 2871 patients with LEF and emergency CT examinations were consecutively included in this retrospective cohort study. The primary endpoint was the prevalence of IFs; the secondary endpoint was their urgency. The median age was 82 years (64.2% were women). IFs were identified in 73.9% of patients, with an average of 1.6 IFs per patient. Of all IFs, 16.4% were classified as urgent or relevant, predominantly in the abdomen, chest and neck. Increasing age was associated with the prevalence of an IF (odds ratio: 1.053, 95% confidence interval: 1.042-1.064). Significantly more IFs were found in female patients (75.2% vs. 71.5%). IFs resulting from CT examinations of the elderly are frequent, but in more than 8 out of 10, they are harmless or currently asymptomatic. For the benefit of an accurate diagnosis of traumatic lesions, concerns about IFs with respect to disease burden, further work-up and resource utilisation might be disregarded.
| S-EPMC8871195 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeUK primary care provides a rich data source for research. The impact of proposed data collection restrictions is unknown. This study aimed to assess the impact of restricting the scope of electronic health record (EHR) data collection on the ability to conduct research. The study estimated the consequences of restricted data collection on published Clinical Practice Research Datalink studies from high impact journals or referenced in clinical guidelines.MethodsA structured form was used to systematically analyse the extent to which individual studies would have been possible using a database with data collection restrictions in place: (1) retrospective collection of specified diseases only; (2) retrospective collection restricted to a 6- or 12-year period; (3) prospective and retrospective collection restricted to non-sensitive data. Outcomes were categorised as unfeasible (not reproducible without major bias); compromised (feasible with design modification); or unaffected.ResultsOverall, 91% studies were compromised with all restrictions in place; 56% studies were unfeasible even with design modification. With restrictions on diseases alone, 74% studies were compromised; 51% were unfeasible. Restricting collection to 6/12 years had a major impact, with 67 and 22% of studies compromised, respectively. Restricting collection of sensitive data had a lesser but marked impact with 10% studies compromised.ConclusionEHR data collection restrictions can profoundly reduce the capacity for public health research that underpins evidence-based medicine and clinical guidance. National initiatives seeking to collect EHRs should consider the implications of restricting data collection on the ability to address vital public health questions.
| S-EPMC6618795 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The prevalence of incidental nonneoplastic lung disease in patients undergoing resection for mass lesions is unknown. We determined the prevalence and characteristics of parenchymal findings in patients with lung nodules, aiming to increase awareness of findings that could potentially impact patient management. A total of 397 patients with benign or malignant mass lesions with available presurgical chest computed tomography scans resected between January 2001 and July 2015 were included. Retrospective histologic assessment of parenchymal abnormalities in at least 1 section of grossly normal lung was performed for each case by 2 pulmonary pathologists and correlated with original pathology reports, clinical history, and radiologic findings. A total of 233 women and 164 men underwent resections for carcinomas (78%) or benign nodules (22%). One hundred one (25%) patients showed parenchymal abnormalities, including 14 patients with multiple findings. The most common abnormal findings were fibrotic interstitial changes (10%), including usual interstitial pneumonia (1%), followed by granulomatous processes (8%). Other findings included aspiration (4%), intravascular thrombi (2%), Langerhans cell histiocytosis (1.5%), constrictive bronchiolitis (1%), atypical lymphoid infiltrates (1%), and amyloidosis (0.5%). Abnormalities were more likely to have been documented in the original pathology report by pulmonary pathologists (68%) than by general pathologists (15%) (P < .0001). Cases with histologic parenchymal abnormalities were more likely to show radiologic interstitial lung abnormalities than those without (16% versus 5%; P = .001). Evaluation of background lung parenchyma may yield valuable and unanticipated information in patients undergoing surgical resections for lung masses that may correlate with radiographic interstitial lung abnormalities and influence clinical management.
| S-EPMC6492265 | biostudies-literature