Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal ResearchA

Results of Lung Cancer Screening in the Community

John R. Handy, Michael Skokan, Erika Rauch, Steven Zinck, Rachel E. Sanborn, Svetlana Kotova and Mansen Wang
The Annals of Family Medicine May 2020, 18 (3) 243-249; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2519
John R. Handy Jr
1Department of Thoracic Surgery, Providence Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: john.handy@providence.org
Michael Skokan
2Pulmonology East, The Oregon Clinic, Portland, Oregon
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Erika Rauch
3Lung Cancer Screening, Providence Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon
MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steven Zinck
4The Radiology Group, Portland, Oregon
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rachel E. Sanborn
5Earle A. Chiles Research Institute, Providence Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Svetlana Kotova
1Department of Thoracic Surgery, Providence Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mansen Wang
6Medical Data Research Center, Portland, Oregon
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Published eLetters

If you would like to comment on this article, click on Submit a Response to This article, below. We welcome your input.

Submit a Response to This Article
Compose eLetter

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Vertical Tabs

Jump to comment:

  • RE: Results of Lung Cancer Screening in the Community AND Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines Implementation in Primary Care: A Call to Action.
    Ronald N. Adler
    Published on: 17 May 2020
  • Published on: (17 May 2020)
    Page navigation anchor for RE: Results of Lung Cancer Screening in the Community AND Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines Implementation in Primary Care: A Call to Action.
    RE: Results of Lung Cancer Screening in the Community AND Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines Implementation in Primary Care: A Call to Action.
    • Ronald N. Adler, Family Physician, University of Massachusetts Medical School

    Kudos to Handy et al. for their excellent report on their remarkable work.(1) They successfully marshaled the multidisciplinary resources of a large health system and created a rigorous, high-performing lung cancer screening (LCS) program. This included reviews by a multidisciplinary thoracic disease conference and deployment of a full-time LCS coordinator, who facilitated 99.9% follow-up of the 3,402 study participants.
    Their aim was to address the concern that outside of the rigorously-conducted NLST, LCS performed in typical community sites could fail to achieve similar outcomes. While they have demonstrated similar results in their system, they did so by committing significant resources and leveraging a well-designed program with high levels of engagement and follow-through. Unfortunately, the question remains: Are these results generalizable to typical community practice?
    The authors also describe the “eager participation” of their primary care clinicians, leading one to wonder if perhaps it was too eager, promoting LCS without adequate shared decision-making (SDM). This has been demonstrated previously.(2,3)
    Meanwhile, the “Call to Action” put forth in the same issue by Doubeni et al. concludes that “engagement of primary care clinicians and support from payers and funding agencies are needed to catalyze the adoption of LCS.”(4) In doing so, they seem to presume that the benefits of LCS uniformly exceed the harms. As the authors note, every o...

    Show More

    Kudos to Handy et al. for their excellent report on their remarkable work.(1) They successfully marshaled the multidisciplinary resources of a large health system and created a rigorous, high-performing lung cancer screening (LCS) program. This included reviews by a multidisciplinary thoracic disease conference and deployment of a full-time LCS coordinator, who facilitated 99.9% follow-up of the 3,402 study participants.
    Their aim was to address the concern that outside of the rigorously-conducted NLST, LCS performed in typical community sites could fail to achieve similar outcomes. While they have demonstrated similar results in their system, they did so by committing significant resources and leveraging a well-designed program with high levels of engagement and follow-through. Unfortunately, the question remains: Are these results generalizable to typical community practice?
    The authors also describe the “eager participation” of their primary care clinicians, leading one to wonder if perhaps it was too eager, promoting LCS without adequate shared decision-making (SDM). This has been demonstrated previously.(2,3)
    Meanwhile, the “Call to Action” put forth in the same issue by Doubeni et al. concludes that “engagement of primary care clinicians and support from payers and funding agencies are needed to catalyze the adoption of LCS.”(4) In doing so, they seem to presume that the benefits of LCS uniformly exceed the harms. As the authors note, every organization which supports LCS recommends SDM before proceeding with screening; CMS requires it. Not everyone agrees that the benefits demonstrated in NLST (decreased lung cancer mortality of 3 per 1000) exceed the harms (4 overdiagnosed lung cancers and 365 false positives per 1000 people screened). More recently, the NELSON trial of LCS reported zero all-cause mortality benefit and an even higher rate of overdiagnosis.(5)
    While I agree with Doubeni et al. that LCS has likely been underutilized and that family medicine clinicians are ideally positioned to improve this, it is important that we strive to promote the right thing: proactively offering LCS to eligible people with appropriate SDM and subsequent honoring of the values and preferences of our patients -- not unconsidered screening.
    1. Handy JR, Skokan M, Rauch E et al. Results of Lung Cancer Screening in the Community. Ann Fam Med. 2020; 18(3):243-249; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2519
    2. Brenner AT, Malo TI, Margolis M, et al. Evaluating shared decision making for lung cancer screening [published online August 13, 2018]. JAMA Intern Med. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3054
    3. Redberg RF. Failing Grade for Shared Decision Making for Lung Cancer Screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(10):1295–1296. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3527
    4. Doubeni CA, Wilkinson JM, Korsen N, Midthun DE. Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines Implementation in Primary Care: A Call to Action. Ann Fam Med 2020; 18(3):196-201; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2541
    5. De Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, de Jong PA, et al. Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Volume CT Screening in a Randomized Trial. N Engl J Med 2020; 382:503-513. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1911793

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 18 (3)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 18 (3)
Vol. 18, Issue 3
May/June 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • In Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Results of Lung Cancer Screening in the Community
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 3 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Results of Lung Cancer Screening in the Community
John R. Handy, Michael Skokan, Erika Rauch, Steven Zinck, Rachel E. Sanborn, Svetlana Kotova, Mansen Wang
The Annals of Family Medicine May 2020, 18 (3) 243-249; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2519

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Results of Lung Cancer Screening in the Community
John R. Handy, Michael Skokan, Erika Rauch, Steven Zinck, Rachel E. Sanborn, Svetlana Kotova, Mansen Wang
The Annals of Family Medicine May 2020, 18 (3) 243-249; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2519
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSIONS
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care
  • Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines Implementation in Primary Care: A Call to Action
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Artificial Intelligence Tools for Preconception Cardiomyopathy Screening Among Women of Reproductive Age
  • Family Physicians in Focused Practice in Ontario, Canada: A Population-Level Study of Trends From 1993/1994 Through 2021/2022
  • Seven Opportunities for Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care Electronic Visits: Qualitative Study of Staff and Patient Views
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Domains of illness & health:
    • Prevention
  • Methods:
    • Quantitative methods
  • Other research types:
    • Professional practice

Keywords

  • early cancer detection
  • lung cancer screening

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine