Dataset Information

Engaging Patients in Smoking Cessation Treatment within the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: Lessons Learned from an NCI SCALE Trial.

ABSTRACT: Offering smoking cessation treatment at lung cancer screening (LCS) will maximize mortality reduction associated with screening, but predictors of treatment engagement are not well understood. We examined participant characteristics of engagement in an NCI SCALE cessation trial. Eligible LCS patients (N = 818) were randomized to the Intensive arm (8 phone counseling sessions +8 weeks of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)) vs. Minimal arm (3 sessions + 2 weeks of NRT). Engagement was measured by number of sessions completed (none, some, or all) and NRT mailed (none vs. any) in each arm. In the Intensive arm, those with ≥some college (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.1, 4.0) and undergoing an annual scan (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.1, 4.2) engaged in some counseling vs. none. Individuals with higher nicotine dependence were more likely (OR = 2.8, 95% CI = 1.3, 6.2) to request NRT. In the Minimal arm, those with higher education (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.1, 3.9) and undergoing an annual scan (OR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.04, 3.8) completed some sessions vs. none. Requesting NRT was associated with more pack-years (OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.1, 3.5). Regardless of treatment intensity, additional strategies are needed to engage those with lower education, less intensive smoking histories, and undergoing a first scan. These efforts will be important given the broader 2021 LCS guidelines.

SUBMITTER: Williams RM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9027703 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Engaging Patients in Smoking Cessation Treatment within the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: Lessons Learned from an NCI SCALE Trial.

Williams Randi M RM Eyestone Ellie E Smith Laney L Philips Joanna G JG Whealan Julia J Webster Marguerite M Li Tengfei T Luta George G Taylor Kathryn L KL On Behalf Of The Lung Screening Tobacco Health Trial

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) 20220323 4

Offering smoking cessation treatment at lung cancer screening (LCS) will maximize mortality reduction associated with screening, but predictors of treatment engagement are not well understood. We examined participant characteristics of engagement in an NCI SCALE cessation trial. Eligible LCS patients (N = 818) were randomized to the Intensive arm (8 phone counseling sessions +8 weeks of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)) vs. Minimal arm (3 sessions + 2 weeks of NRT). Engagement was measured by ...[more]

PMID: 35448154

Similar Datasets

Project description:SignificanceIncreased rates of smoking cessation will be essential to maximize the population benefit of low-dose CT screening for lung cancer. The NCI's Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination (SCALE) Collaboration includes eight randomized trials, each assessing evidence-based interventions among smokers undergoing lung cancer screening (LCS). We examined predictors of trial enrollment to improve future outreach efforts for cessation interventions offered to older smokers in this and other clinical settings.MethodsWe included the six SCALE trials that randomized individual participants. We assessed demographics, intervention modalities, LCS site and trial administration characteristics, and reasons for declining.ResultsOf 6285 trial- and LCS-eligible individuals, 3897 (62%) declined and 2388 (38%) enrolled. In multivariable logistic regression analyses, Blacks had higher enrollment rates (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2,1.8) compared to Whites. Compared to "NRT Only" trials, those approached for "NRT + prescription medication" trials had higher odds of enrollment (OR 6.1, 95% CI 4.7,7.9). Regarding enrollment methods, trials using "Phone + In Person" methods had higher odds of enrollment (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2,1.9) compared to trials using "Phone Only" methods. Some of the reasons for declining enrollment included "too busy" (36.6%), "not ready to quit" (8.2%), "not interested in research" (7.7%), and "not interested in the intervention offered" (6.2%).ConclusionEnrolling smokers in cessation interventions in the LCS setting is a major priority that requires multiple enrollment and intervention modalities. Barriers to enrollment provide insights that can be addressed and applied to future cessation interventions to improve implementation in LCS and other clinical settings with older smokers.ImplicationsWe explored enrollment rates and reasons for declining across six smoking cessation trials in the lung cancer screening setting. Offering multiple accrual methods and pharmacotherapy options predicted increased enrollment across trials. Enrollment rates were also greater among Blacks compared to Whites. The findings offer practical information for the implementation of cessation trials and interventions in the lung cancer screening context and other clinical settings, regarding intervention modalities that may be most appealing to older, long-term smokers.

Project description:IntroductionEmbedded smoking cessation support within lung cancer screening is recommended in the United Kingdom; however, little is known about why individuals decline smoking cessation support in this setting. This study identified psychosocial factors that influence smoking cessation and quit motivation among those who declined support for quitting smoking alongside lung cancer screening.Aims and methodsQualitative interviews were conducted between August 2019 and April 2021 with 30 adults with a smoking history, recruited from the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial. Participants had declined smoking cessation support. Verbatim interview transcripts were thematically analyzed.ResultsFifty percent of participants were male and the majority were from the most deprived groups. Participants reported low motivation and a variety of barriers to stopping smoking. Participants described modifiable behavioral factors that influenced their quit motivation including self-efficacy, perceived effectiveness of stop-smoking services including smoking cessation aids, risk-minimizing beliefs, lack of social support, absence of positive influences on smoking, and beliefs about smoking/smoking cessation. Broader contextual factors included social isolation and stigma, coronavirus disease 2019, and comorbid mental and physical health conditions that deterred smoking cessation.ConclusionsTo encourage engagement in smoking cessation support during lung cancer screening, interventions should seek to encourage positive beliefs about the effectiveness of smoking cessation aids and increase confidence in quitting as part of supportive, person-centered care. Interventions should also acknowledge the wider social determinants of health among the lung screening-eligible population.ImplicationsThis study provides an in-depth understanding of the beliefs surrounding smoking and smoking cessation and further potential psychosocial factors that influence those attending lung cancer screening. Many of the barriers to smoking cessation found in the present study are similar to those outside of a lung screening setting however this work offers an understanding of potential facilitators that should be considered in future lung screening programs.

Project description:BackgroundLung cancer mortality is reduced via low-dose computed tomography screening and treatment of early-stage disease. Evidence-based smoking cessation treatment in the lung screening setting can further reduce mortality. We report the results of a cessation trial from the National Cancer Institute's Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination collaboration.MethodsEligible patients (n = 818) aged 50-80 years were randomly assigned (May 2017-January 2021) to the intensive vs minimal arms (8 vs 3 phone sessions plus 8 vs 2 weeks of nicotine patches, respectively). Bio-verified (primary) and self-reported 7-day abstinence rates were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months post random assignment. Logistic regression analyses evaluated the effects of study arm. All statistical tests were 2-sided.ResultsParticipants reported 48.0 (SD = 17.2) pack-years, and 51.6% were not ready to quit in less than 30 days. Self-reported 3-month quit rates were statistically significantly higher in the intensive vs minimal arm (14.3% vs 7.9%; odds ratio [OR] = 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.26 to 3.18). Bio-verified abstinence was lower but with similar relative differences between arms (9.1% vs 3.9%; OR = 2.70, 95% CI = 1.44 to 5.08). Compared with the minimal arm, the intensive arm was more effective among those with greater nicotine dependence (OR = 3.47, 95% CI = 1.55 to 7.76), normal screening results (OR = 2.58, 95% CI = 1.32 to 5.03), high engagement in counseling (OR = 3.03, 95% CI = 1.50 to 6.14), and patch use (OR = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.39 to 5.68). Abstinence rates did not differ statistically significantly between arms at 6 months (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 0.68 to 2.11) or 12 months (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 0.82 to 2.42).ConclusionsDelivering intensive telephone counseling and nicotine replacement with lung screening is an effective strategy to increase short-term smoking cessation. Methods to maintain short-term effects are needed. Even with modest quit rates, integrating cessation treatment into lung screening programs may have a large impact on tobacco-related mortality.

Dataset Information

Engaging Patients in Smoking Cessation Treatment within the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: Lessons Learned from an NCI SCALE Trial.

Publications

Engaging Patients in Smoking Cessation Treatment within the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: Lessons Learned from an NCI SCALE Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets