Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 May 5.
Published in final edited form as: JAMA Oncol. 2020 Jan 1;6(1):156. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.4598

Defining Equity in Eligibility for Cancer Screening

Hilary A Robbins 1, Mattias Johansson 1
PMCID: PMC7202979  NIHMSID: NIHMS1067991  PMID: 31697333

Aldrich et al1 report that according to current US lung cancer screening criteria (USPSTF), a lower proportion of current- and former-smoking lung cancer cases may be classified as eligible for screening among African-Americans (32%) than whites (56%). This report is important in highlighting the issue of equity in how cancer screening is offered across racial and ethnic groups, but also prompts the question of how to define equity in the specific context of screening eligibility.

The central question is whether screening eligibility criteria should be modified to capture an equal proportion of future cancer cases across racial and ethnic groups. A key consideration is that any screening program has benefits, but also harms, which can include surveillance scans, invasive diagnostic procedures, and overdiagnosis.2 The benefit of lung screening, in terms of lung cancer deaths prevented, is largest among people with highest baseline risk for lung cancer death (>6 per 1000 screening participants), but nearly negligible among those with lowest risk (<0.2 per 1000).3 In contrast, while harms are also lower among low-risk people, they are still tangible.3

In recommending that lung screening be extended to African-Americans with 20 to 29 pack-years of smoking, Aldrich et al. rightly consider that lung cancer risk is higher in African Americans than whites, independent of smoking and other risk factors. However, it is unclear what proportion of African Americans with 20 to 29 pack-years would have sufficiently high risk that lung screening would be of net benefit. Inevitably, while many such individuals would have high anticipated benefit from screening, our concern is that a non-negligible proportion would experience harms with little benefit.

When two people have the same individualized, anticipated screening benefit – which outweighs the potential harms – both should be eligible, irrespective of race. Similarly, two people for whom the harms outweigh the benefits should both be ineligible. Rather than defining race-specific criteria for lung screening, we therefore argue that a better way is to use a validated risk prediction model, and corresponding risk threshold, that accounts for the differences in risk experienced by African-Americans and other races/ethnicies.4 Ultimately, the larger challenge will be to ensure equity not only in eligibility criteria, but throughout the process of screening initiation and cancer diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship.

Acknowledgments

Funding

This work was supported by the INTEGRAL Program (NCI U19 CA203654).

References

  • 1.Aldrich MC, Mercaldo SF, Sandler KL, Blot WJ, Grogan EL, Blume JD. Evaluation of USPSTF lung cancer screening guidelines among African American adult smokers. JAMA Oncol June 2019. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.1402 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Robbins HA, Callister M, Sasieni P, et al. Benefits and harms in the National Lung Screening Trial: expected outcomes with a modern management protocol. Lancet Respir Med May 2019. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(19)30136-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kovalchik SA, Tammemagi M, Berg CD, et al. Targeting of low-dose CT screening according to the risk of lung-cancer death. N Engl J Med 2013;369(3):245–254. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1301851 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Katki HA, Petito LC, Cheung LC, et al. Implications of 9 risk prediction models for selecting ever-smokers for CT lung-cancer screening. Ann Intern Med 2018;169(1):10–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES