Predictors of Enrollment of Older Smokers in Six Smoking Cessation Trials in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: The Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination (SCALE) Collaboration

Ellie Eyestone, Randi M Williams, George Luta, Emily Kim, Benjamin A Toll, Alana Rojewski, Jordan Neil, Paul M Cinciripini, Marisa Cordon, Kristie Foley, Jennifer S Haas, Anne M Joseph, Jennifer A Minnix, Jamie S Ostroff, Elyse Park, Nancy Rigotti, Lia Sorgen, Kathryn L Taylor, Ellie Eyestone, Randi M Williams, George Luta, Emily Kim, Benjamin A Toll, Alana Rojewski, Jordan Neil, Paul M Cinciripini, Marisa Cordon, Kristie Foley, Jennifer S Haas, Anne M Joseph, Jennifer A Minnix, Jamie S Ostroff, Elyse Park, Nancy Rigotti, Lia Sorgen, Kathryn L Taylor

Abstract

Significance: Increased 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.

Methods: We included the six SCALE trials that randomized individual participants. We assessed demographics, intervention modalities, LCS site and trial administration characteristics, and reasons for declining.

Results: Of 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%).

Conclusion: Enrolling 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.

Implications: We 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.

© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Distribution of Reasons for Declining Trial Participation

References

    1. Aberle DR. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(5):395–409.
    1. 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(6):503–513.
    1. Moyer VA. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(5):330–338.
    1. Ma J, Ward EM, Smith R, Jemal A. Annual number of lung cancer deaths potentially avertable by screening in the United States. Cancer. 2013;119(7):1381–1385.
    1. Zahnd WE, Eberth JM. Lung cancer screening utilization: a behavioral risk factor surveillance system analysis. Am J Prev Med. 2019;57(2):250–255.
    1. Cao P, Jeon J, Levy DT, et al. . Potential impact of cessation interventions at the point of lung cancer screening on lung cancer and overall mortality in the United States. J Thorac Oncol. 2020;15(7):1160–1169.
    1. Villanti AC, Jiang Y, Abrams DB, Pyenson BS. A cost-utility analysis of lung cancer screening and the additional benefits of incorporating smoking cessation interventions. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71379.
    1. Taylor KL, Cox LS, Zincke N, Mehta L, McGuire C, Gelmann E. Lung cancer screening as a teachable moment for smoking cessation. Lung Cancer. 2007;56(1):125–134.
    1. Joseph AM, Rothman AJ, Almirall D, et al. . Lung cancer screening and smoking cessation clinical trials. SCALE (smoking cessation within the context of lung cancer screening) Collaboration. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;197(2):172–182.
    1. National Cancer Institute. Smoking cessation at lung examination: the SCALE Collaboration | BRP | DCCPS/NCI/NIH. Available from . Accessed May 13, 2021.
    1. National Cancer Institute. Smoking cessation at lung examination (SCALE) collaboration special collection (NCI). Available from . Accessed May 13, 2021.
    1. Friedenreich CM. Methods for pooled analyses of epidemiologic studies. Epidemiology. 1993;4(4):295–302.
    1. Dahm JL, Cook E, Baugh K, et al. . Predictors of enrollment in a smoking cessation clinical trial after eligibility screening. J Natl Med Assoc. 2009;101(5):450–455.
    1. King AC, Cao D, Southard CC, Matthews A. Racial differences in eligibility and enrollment in a smoking cessation clinical trial. Health Psychol. 2011;30(1):40–48.
    1. Velicer WF, Keller S, Friedman RH, et al. . Comparing participants and nonparticipants recruited for an effectiveness study of nicotine replacement therapy. Ann Behav Med. 2005;29(3):181–191.
    1. Skov-Ettrup LS, Dalum P, Ekholm O, Tolstrup JS. Reach and uptake of Internet- and phone-based smoking cessation interventions: results from a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 2014;62:38–43. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.01.020. PMID: 24508983.
    1. Audrain-McGovern J, Halbert CH, Rodriguez D, Epstein LH, Tercyak KP. Predictors of participation in a smoking cessation program among young adult smokers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2007;16(3):617–619.
    1. An LC, Betzner A, Schillo B, et al. . The comparative effectiveness of clinic, work-site, phone, and Web-based tobacco treatment programs. Nicotine Tob Res. 2010;12(10):989–996.
    1. Buller DB, Meenan R, Severson H, Halperin A, Edwards E, Magnusson B. Comparison of four recruiting strategies in a smoking cessation trial. Am J Health Behav. 2012;36(5):577–588.
    1. van den Brand FA, Nagelhout GE, Reda AA, et al. . Healthcare financing systems for increasing the use of tobacco dependence treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.. 2017;9:CD004305.
    1. Trofor AC, Man MA, Marginean C, Dumitru F, Trofor L. Smoking cessation for free: outcomes of a study of three Romanian clinics. Open Med (Wars). 2016;11(1):605–610.
    1. Cummings KM, Fix B, Celestino P, Carlin-Menter S, O’Connor R, Hyland A. Reach, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of free nicotine medication giveaway programs. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2006;12(1):37–43.
    1. Tinkelman D, Wilson SM, Willett J, Sweeney CT. Offering free NRT through a tobacco quitline: impact on utilisation and quit rates. Tob Control. 2007;16(Suppl 1):i42–i46. doi:10.1136/tc.2007.019919. PMID: 18048631; PMCID: PMC2598517.
    1. Belisario JSM, Bruggeling MN, Gunn LH, Brusamento S, Car J. Interventions for recruiting smokers into cessation programmes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;12(12):CD009187.
    1. Taylor KL, Hagerman CJ, Luta G, et al. . Preliminary evaluation of a telephone-based smoking cessation intervention in the lung cancer screening setting: a randomized clinical trial. Lung Cancer. 2017;108:242–246. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2017.01.020. PMID: 28216065; PMCID: PMC5476481.
    1. Ferketich AK, Otterson GA, King M, Hall N, Browning KK, Wewers ME. A pilot test of a combined tobacco dependence treatment and lung cancer screening program. Lung Cancer. 2012;76(2):211–215.
    1. Clark MM, Cox LS, Jett JR, et al. . Effectiveness of smoking cessation self-help materials in a lung cancer screening population. Lung Cancer. 2004;44(1):13–21.
    1. Marshall HM, Courtney DA, Passmore LH, et al. . Brief tailored smoking cessation counseling in a lung cancer screening population is feasible: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Nicotine Tob Res. 2016;18(7):1665–1669.
    1. van der Aalst CM, de Koning HJ, van den Bergh KAM, Willemsen MC, van Klaveren RJ. The effectiveness of a computer-tailored smoking cessation intervention for participants in lung cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial. Lung Cancer. 2012;76(2):204–210.
    1. Tremblay A, Taghizadeh N, Huang J, et al. . A randomized controlled study of integrated smoking cessation in a lung cancer screening program. J Thorac Oncol. 2019;14(9):1528–1537.
    1. Piñeiro B, Simmons VN, Palmer AM, Correa JB, Brandon TH. Smoking cessation interventions within the context of Low-Dose Computed Tomography lung cancer screening: a systematic review. Lung Cancer. 2016;98:91–98. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.05.028. PMID: 27393513.
    1. Foley KL, Miller DP, Weaver K, et al. . The OaSiS trial: a hybrid type II, national cluster randomized trial to implement smoking cessation during CT screening for lung cancer. Contemp Clin Trials. 2020;91:105963. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2020.105963. PMID: 32087340; PMCID: PMC7378998.
    1. Zeliadt SB. Promoting Smoking Cessation in Lung Cancer Screening through Proactive Treatment. IIR 16-071. . Accessed June 10, 2021.
    1. Fu SS, Rothman AJ, Vock DM, et al. . Program for lung cancer screening and tobacco cessation: study protocol of a sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2017;60:86–95. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2017.07.002. PMID: 28687349; PMCID: PMC5558455.
    1. Taylor KL, Deros DE, Fallon S, et al. . Study protocol for a telephone-based smoking cessation randomized controlled trial in the lung cancer screening setting: the lung screening, tobacco, and health trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2019;82:25–35. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2019.05.006. PMID: 31129371; PMCID: PMC6657688.
    1. Wood DE, Kazerooni EA, Baum SL, et al. . Lung cancer screening, version 3.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2018;16(4):412–441.
    1. Recommendation: Lung Cancer: Screening. United States Preventive Services Taskforce. Available from . Accessed May 13, 2021.
    1. Herrera CA, Rada G, Kuhn-Barrientos L, Barrios X. Does ownership matter? An overview of systematic reviews of the performance of private for-profit, private not-for-profit and public healthcare providers. PLoS One. 2014;9(12):e93456.
    1. United States Census Bureau. 2010. Census urban and rural classification and urban area criteria. The United States Census Bureau. Available from . Accessed May 13, 2021.
    1. Thompson CG, Kim RS, Aloe AM, Becker BJ. Extracting the variance inflation factor and other multicollinearity diagnostics from typical regression results. Basic Appl Soc Psychol. 2017;39(2):81–90.
    1. Schnoll RA, Cappella J, Lerman C, et al. . A novel recruitment message to increase enrollment into a smoking cessation treatment program: preliminary results from a randomized trial. Health Commun. 2011;26(8):735–742.
    1. Graham AL, Bock BC, Cobb NK, Niaura R, Abrams DB. Characteristics of smokers reached and recruited to an internet smoking cessation trial: a case of denominators. Nicotine Tob Res. 2006;8(Suppl 1):S43–48. doi:10.1080/14622200601042521. PMID: 17491170; PMCID: PMC2885695.
    1. Cadham CJ, Jayasekera JC, Advani SM, et al. . Smoking cessation interventions for potential use in the lung cancer screening setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lung Cancer. 2019;135:205–216. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.06.024. PMID: 31446996; PMCID: PMC6739236.
    1. Cokkinides VE, Halpern MT, Barbeau EM, Ward E, Thun MJ. Racial and ethnic disparities in smoking-cessation interventions: analysis of the 2005 National Health Interview Survey. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34(5):404–412.
    1. Danesh D, Paskett ED, Ferketich AK. Disparities in receipt of advice to quit smoking from health care providers: 2010 National Health Interview Survey. Prev Chronic Dis. 2014;11:E131. doi:10.5888/pcd11.140053. PMID: 25078568; PMCID: PMC4124041.
    1. Ahluwalia JS, Richter K, Mayo MS, et al. . African American smokers interested and eligible for a smoking cessation clinical trial: predictors of not returning for randomization. Ann Epidemiol. 2002;12(3):206–212.
    1. Kumar P, Gareen IF, Lathan C, et al. . Racial differences in tobacco cessation and treatment usage after lung screening: an examination of the National Lung Screening Trial. Oncologist. 2016;21(1):40–49.
    1. Carpenter MJ, Hughes JR, Solomon LJ, Callas PW. Both smoking reduction with nicotine replacement therapy and motivational advice increase future cessation among smokers unmotivated to quit. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004;72(3):371–381.
    1. Tzelepis F, Paul CL, Walsh RA, Knight J, Wiggers J. Who enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of quitline support? Comparison of participants versus nonparticipants. Nicotine Tob Res. 2013;15(12):2107–2113.
    1. Volpp KG, Gurmankin Levy A, Asch DA, et al. . A randomized controlled trial of financial incentives for smoking cessation. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2006;15(1):12–18.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi