Less than half of respondents (42%) perceived of LDCT as “very” or even moderately effective in reducing cancer-specific mortality.
Dr. Laurie E. Gaspar
“In actuality, if you look at the number needed to screen to prevent one lung cancer death, low-dose CT is more effective than mammography or even flexible sigmoidoscopy,” she observed.
The major perceived barrier to LDCT screening was financial cost to patients. Other barriers were false positives, patient awareness of screening, incidental finding, and insurance coverage.
To put the study in perspective, 12,000 lives could be saved each year if low-dose CT screening were fully implemented, Dr. Lewis said. Before this can happen, providers need education. The good news is that 80% of respondents said they want more education.
“This education should focus on the effectiveness of low-dose CT screening in saving lives from cancer, the guideline recommendations (meaning who to screen, when to screen, and how often), as well as the correct lung cancer screening test,” she said. “This is all needed before providers can have those shared decision-making conversations with their patients.”
Although the survey was conducted at Wake Forest, the “results and conclusions can likely be extrapolated to much of the primary care population in the United States,” session moderator Dr. Laurie E. Gaspar, professor and chair of radiation oncology at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, said.