Psychosocial consequences of a three-month follow-up after receiving an abnormal lung cancer CT-screening result: A longitudinal survey

Abstract

Background: Participation in lung cancer CT-screening can be associated with a need for follow-up procedures. The screening and waiting for test results introduce the risk of experiencing psychosocial consequences. Therefore, the aims of this study were: 1) To investigate if the psychosocial consequences changed from before an annual screening round to before a three-month follow-up CT-scan in participants with a positive screening result. 2) To investigate potential differences in psychosocial consequences between false positives (FP) and true positives (TP). FP were defined as those where cancer was not confirmed in the follow-up CT-scan and TP where it was. Materials and Methods: : This longitudinal study was based on data from the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST). The Consequences of Screening-Lung cancer (COS-LC) questionnaire was used to measure psychosocial consequences among 130 participants who all received an abnormal CT-screening result at their annual screening round. Eligible participants completed the COS-LC before their annual CT-screening and before the three-month follow-up. Results: We found a statistically significant increase in negative psychosocial consequences between the annual lung cancer CT-screening and the three-month follow-up CT-scan in four of nine psychosocial scales; Sense of dejection, Self-blame, Focus on airway symptoms and Harm of smoking. Furthermore, an increase, however not statistically significant, was identified in all remaining scales, except for the scale Stigmatisation which was slightly decreased. We found no evidence of an association between psychosocial consequences and diagnostic groups, FP and TP. Conclusions: An increase in negative psychosocial consequences was observed between the annual lung cancer CT-screening and the three-month follow-up CT-scan. Since we found no statistically significant difference between the diagnostic groups, the increase in negative psychosocial consequences is interpreted as a nocebo effect of living three months in uncertainty not knowing if one's positive CT-screening result was true or false.

Cost-Effectiveness of Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Comparing the NLST and NELSON Trial Protocols

“…Applicable to the Hungarian model only, patients with an indeterminate screen have a utility decrement of 0.03 while waiting for their repeat LDCT. This follows the logic that the state of uncertainty associated with waiting an additional three months for final screening results is less desirable than receiving an initial, definitive result [23,28]. Patients in the US model do not experience this utility loss, as they receive a confirmed positive or negative result in the initial screening round.…”

Swiss Pilot Low-Dose CT Lung Cancer Screening Study: First Baseline Screening Results

“…Another main issue in lung cancer screening is in defining a screening protocol associated with a low recall rate and a high detection rate. In the context of screening, the recall rate is a crucial metric that reflects the proportion of individuals who are called back for additional tests or evaluations following an initial screening, often due to the detection of suspicious findings [ 19 ]. A high recall rate can lead to increased anxiety and stress among patients who are called back for further tests.…”

Luckily—I am not the worrying kind: Experiences of patients in the Danish cancer patient pathway for non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer

“…In research, similar methods have been used in studies investigating the psychosocial consequences of cancer screening. Both short and long-term negative psychosocial consequences for participants have been found (Brodersen and Siersma, 2013; Damhus et al, 2021; Rasmussen et al, 2020). Based on our findings in this study, we argue that these questionnaires might measure only some of what was intended.…”