Locations:
Search IconSearch
June 9, 2021/Cancer

Expanded Recommendations for Lung Cancer Screening: What Clinicians Should Know

Too far or not far enough? And what implementation means for your patients

Lungs

By Peter Mazzone, MD, MPH

Advertisement

Cleveland Clinic is a non-profit academic medical center. Advertising on our site helps support our mission. We do not endorse non-Cleveland Clinic products or services. Policy

Individuals who currently or previously smoked (those who have quit in the last 15 years) age 50 to 80 with a 20 pack-year smoking history are now candidates for an annual lung cancer screening. This is according to new recommendations published by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).

This change follows new evidence that supports the benefit of screening and better overall management associated with its potential risk. Some estimates suggest this expanded eligibility will increase the screening pool by 80% to 90%.

This new recommendation was supported by USPSTF-initiated modeling studies, in addition to findings from the NELSON trial, a large published study that included a starting age of 50 for trial participants.

Eligibility criteria: A well-intentioned debate

However, there is still some debate within the field as to whether or not the recommendations go too far — or not far enough. The camp supporting the latter argument says that individuals who previously smoked and who are ineligible for screening because of the 15-year cut-off still have a relatively high risk of developing cancer. They suggest that targeted screening tools, like risk calculators, could play a vital role in identifying those who do not meet the new recommendations but may still benefit from screening. On the other hand, others argue that more restrictive criteria are beneficial, sifting out low-risk candidates and, thus, reducing screening exposures, including unnecessary biopsy of (most commonly) benign lung nodules, radiation exposure and undue anxiety.

Advertisement

What does high-quality screening mean?

It’s an important and well-intentioned debate ultimately derived from a desire to improve patient outcomes. It’s also important to remember that lung cancer screening is more complex than the selection criteria alone. A robust screening program means developing outreach and education initiatives, thorough and collaborative diagnostic management and tracking, and smoking cessation and other support programs. Regardless of your views on screening parameters, there is a consensus that high-quality lung cancer screening is paramount. More specifically, this means an investment in the following:

  • Education and outreach campaigns that target eligible individuals.
  • Guidance and support to those who are referred for screening.
  • Performance of high-quality low radiation dose chest CT imaging.
  • Expert interpretation of the imaging findings.
  • Expert management of the imaging findings to minimize testing in those without cancer and efficiently diagnose early-stage lung cancer when it is present.
  • Tracking and outreach to ensure compliance with annual screening and follow-up recommendations
  • Provision of smoking cessation guidance or connection to a smoking cessation program.

Implementation will still take some time, but we are headed in the right direction

Operationalizing these changes may still take time. Private insurers can change their coverage rules anytime between now and the end of 2022. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will take up a new net coverage determination with a decision expected in 9 to 12 months. Importantly, because many insurers are making coverage changes now, clinicians need to be aware of the criteria and refer those with coverage for screening.

Advertisement

We look forward to a time when the majority of lung cancers are screen-detected. The updated USPSTF recommendations are a step in that direction.

About the author: Dr. Mazzone is Director of the Lung Cancer Program and Lung Cancer Screening Program for the Respiratory Institute.

Advertisement

Related Articles

Dr. Jame Abraham
October 20, 2025/Cancer/News & Insight
Trastuzumab Deruxtecan Improves Invasive Disease-Free Survival of Early-Stage HER+ Breast Cancer by 53%

International study supports change in clinical care in post-neoadjuvant setting

Squamous cell carcinoma
October 16, 2025/Cancer
Lymphovascular Invasion a Strong Predictor of Poor Prognosis in Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Early detection, prognostication and intervention may improve outcomes

Dr. Khouri and patient
October 15, 2025/Cancer/News & Insight
BCL-2 Inhibition in Plasma Cell Disorders: The Work Continues

Preliminary results suggest combination therapy with lisaftoclax improves survival with few adverse events in patients with AL amyloidosis and relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Head and neck cancer illustration
October 6, 2025/Cancer/Radiation Oncology
Blood-Based Assay Shows Promise for Personalizing Treatment in Head and Neck Cancer

New research demonstrates that cfDNA methylation patterns may noninvasively identify tumor hypoxia in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Head & neck image contouring
October 3, 2025/Cancer/Radiation Oncology
Subspecialty Peer Review Improves Consistency, Quality and Safety in Head and Neck Radiation Therapy

Program reduces major contour changes and variations in organ-at-risk dosing across health system

Breast radiation therapy
October 2, 2025/Cancer/Radiation Oncology
Study Confirms Breast Volume Preservation with Five-Day Radiation Therapy

No significant differences seen in breast volume loss between whole and partial breast treatment approaches

CT scan after prostate brachytherapy
October 1, 2025/Cancer/Radiation Oncology
Clinical Outcomes for AI vs. Physician-Drawn Contours After Prostate Brachytherapy Comparable

Despite wide variations in contours, researchers find AI and physician methods yield equivalent results.

Ad