Implementing lung cancer screening in the real world: opportunity, challenges and solutions.

The World Health Organization estimates that, in 2012, there were 1,589,925 deaths from lung cancer worldwide. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) has the potential to significantly alter this statistic, by identifying lung cancers in earlier stages, enabling curative treatment. Challenges remain, however, in replicating the 20% mortality benefit demonstrated by the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), in populations outside the confines of a research trial, not only in the US but around the world. We review the history of lung cancer screening, the current evidence for LDCT screening, and the key elements needed for a successful screening program.

Cardiac CT and coronary CTA: early Medicare claims analysis of national and regional utilization and coverage.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess trends in utilization and Medicare coverage of cardiac CT and coronary CT angiography (CCTA). METHODS: Medicare claims for cardiac CT and CCTA were identified for the first 3 complete years for which Current Procedural Terminology(®) tracking codes existed (2006-2008). The frequencies of billed and denied services were extracted on national and regional bases, along with reporting physician specialty and site of service. RESULTS: Total annual claims for cardiac CT and CCTA services for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries increased from 58,124 to 95,269 (+64%) between 2006 and 2008. The overall percentage of denied claims decreased from 34% to 21% (20,014 of 58,124 to 20,062 of 95,269, P < .001), with the highest denial rate for calcium scoring studies (declining from 82% to 61%) and the lowest rate for CCTA (29% to 14%). Annual overall regional denial rates ranged from 8.9% to 80.6%. Of all 254,672 base services, 138,136 claims (54%) were submitted by cardiologists, 90,767 (36%) by radiologists, and 13,445 (5%) by others. In 12,324 cases (5%), provider specialty was undetermined. Two-thirds (67%) of services were reported in the office setting (170,511), followed by the outpatient hospital (64,008 [25%]), inpatient hospital (15,922 [6%]), ER (1,577 [1%]), and all other (2,654 [1%]) settings. CONCLUSION: Most cardiac CT and CCTA services are reported by cardiologists and most takes place in private office and outpatient hospital settings. During the first 3 years of Current Procedural Terminology tracking codes, the utilization of cardiac CT and CCTA by Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries increased by 64%. Despite perceptions that new technology tracking codes are rarely payable, a large majority of all examinations are reimbursed by Medicare. Coverage varies regionally but overall has improved, setting the stage for expanded patient access.

NIH state-of-the-science conference statement: Enhancing use and quality of colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: To provide health care providers, patients, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data on enhancing use and quality of colorectal cancer screening. PARTICIPANTS: A non-DHHS, nonadvocate 13-member panel representing the fields of cancer surveillance, health services research, community-based research, informed decision-making, access to care, health care policy, health communication, health economics, health disparities, epidemiology, statistics, thoracic radiology, internal medicine, gastroenterology, public health, end-of-life care, and a public representative. In addition, 20 experts from pertinent fields presented data to the panel and conference audience. EVIDENCE: Presentations by experts and a systematic review of the literature prepared by the RTI International-University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center, through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Scientific evidence was given precedence over anecdotal experience. CONFERENCE PROCESS: The panel drafted its statement based on scientific evidence presented in open forum and on published scientific literature. The draft statement was presented on the final day of the conference and circulated to the audience for comment. The panel released a revised statement later that day at http://consensus.nih.gov. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the NIH or the Federal Government. CONCLUSIONS: The panel found that despite substantial progress toward higher colorectal cancer screening rates nationally, screening rates fall short of desirable levels. Targeted initiatives to improve screening rates and reduce disparities in underscreened communities and population subgroups could further reduce colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality. This could be achieved by utilizing the full range of screening options and evidence-based interventions for increasing screening rates. With additional investments in quality monitoring, Americans could be assured that all screening achieves high rates of cancer prevention and early detection. To close the gap in screening, this report identifies the following priority areas for implementation and research to enhance the use and quality of colorectal cancer screening: • Eliminate financial barriers to colorectal cancer screening and appropriate follow up. • Widely implement interventions that have proven effective at increasing colorectal cancer screening, including patient reminder systems and one-on-one interactions with providers, educators, or navigators. • Conduct research to assess the effectiveness of tailoring programs to match the characteristics and preferences of target population groups to increase colorectal cancer screening. • Implement systems to ensure appropriate follow-up of positive colorectal cancer screening results. • Develop systems to assure high quality of colorectal cancer screening programs. • Conduct studies to determine the comparative effectiveness of the various colorectal cancer screening methods in usual practice settings.