Skip Navigation

JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2004 96(14):1083-1094; doi:10.1093/jnci/djh194
© 2004 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, K. L.
Right arrow Articles by McGuire, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, K. L.
Right arrow Articles by McGuire, C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2004 Oxford University Press

ARTICLE

Quality of Life and Trial Adherence Among Participants in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial

Kathryn L. Taylor, Rebecca Shelby, Edward Gelmann, Colleen McGuire

Affiliation of authors: Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC

Correspondence to: Kathryn L. Taylor, PhD, Cancer Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, 2233 Wisconsin Ave., NW, Ste. 317, Washington, DC 20007 (e-mail: taylorkl{at}georgetown.edu)

Background: The National Cancer Institute's Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial was designed to examine whether annual screening tests for these four tumor sites result in reduced disease-related mortality. We assessed the impact of trial participation on both health-related quality of life (HRQL) and trial adherence. Methods: Participants (N = 432; 217 in the control arm and 215 in screening arm) were accrued from the Georgetown University PLCO site from May through December 1998. Screening-arm participants were interviewed by telephone at baseline (prescreening), shortly after notification of screening results (short-term follow-up), and 9 months after notification of screening results (intermediate-term follow up). Control-arm participants completed a baseline and 1-year follow-up assessment. Logistic regression analyses were conducted. Results: Participants reported high levels of HRQL and satisfaction with their decision to participate. Screening-arm participants with abnormal screening results had a higher level of intrusive thoughts about cancer than those with all normal results (odds ratio [OR] = 2.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3 to 6.3) at the short-term follow-up but not at the intermediate-term follow-up (when abnormal test results were known to be false positive; OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 0.89 to 4.2). Trial adherence was statistically significantly better among participants who had received all normal results in the previous year's screening tests (93.7% versus 78.7%; OR = 3.7, CI = 1.1 to 12.0) than in those who received at least one abnormal result. In the control arm, adherence (defined as returning annual questionnaires) was positively associated with education (OR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.4 to 8.4) and sex, with women being more likely to return questionnaires than men (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.05 to 4.4). Conclusions: It is feasible to collect HRQL measures as part of a large cancer screening trial. Prior abnormal screening results were related to short-term HRQL but not to intermediate-term HRQL. Trial adherence was poorer among those who had received previous false-positive results. These results suggest several methods for improving adherence in this and other subgroups.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
P. M. McMahon, C. Y. Kong, B. E. Johnson, M. C. Weinstein, J. C. Weeks, K. M. Kuntz, J.-A. O. Shepard, S. J. Swensen, and G. S. Gazelle
Estimating Long-term Effectiveness of Lung Cancer Screening in the Mayo CT Screening Study
Radiology, July 1, 2008; 248(1): 278 - 287.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Respir JHome page
U. Montes, L. M. Seijo, A. Campo, A. B. Alcaide, G. Bastarrika, and J. J. Zulueta
Factors determining early adherence to a lung cancer screening protocol
Eur. Respir. J., September 1, 2007; 30(3): 532 - 537.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
N. T. Brewer, T. Salz, and S. E. Lillie
Systematic Review: The Long-Term Effects of False-Positive Mammograms
Ann Intern Med, April 3, 2007; 146(7): 502 - 510.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
J. L. Mulshine
New Developments in Lung Cancer Screening
J. Clin. Oncol., May 10, 2005; 23(14): 3198 - 3202.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.