Educational content on VJOncology is intended for healthcare professionals only. By visiting this website and accessing this information you confirm that you are a healthcare professional.

Share this video  

WCLC 2022 | Results of YESS: personalized smoking cessation support in a lung cancer screening programme

Rachael Louise Murray, PhD, FRCR, MRCP, MB ChB, Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom, shares the results of the Yorkshire Enhanced Stop Smoking Study (YESS) (NCT03750110). 2150 smokers attending the LHC were eligible for referral to a SCP. 2150 smokers attending the LHC were eligible for referral to a SCP. 1003 smokers participated in the YESS trial. A quit rate of 33.6% 30% in intervention versus usual care was observed at the 7-day point prevalent abstinence, which was insignificant. There was no significant different in self-reported figures at 3-months and validated and self-reported figures at 12-months, however, quite rates at 12-months were largely maintained in 28-29%. Females were significantly more likely to quit smoking if they received the intervention compared to usual care. This interview took place at the IASLC 2022 World Conference on Lung Cancer congress in Vienna, Austria.

Transcript (edited for clarity)

So in terms of our results. So we had 2,150 smokers who were eligible to see our smoking cessation practitioner. Of those, 89% agree to the first consultation with our advisor and of those, 84% agree to ongoing support, which is fantastic. We then looked at who’d consented for the study. So we had 1003 participants, approximately 47% went into our usual care arm and 53% went into our intervention arm...

So in terms of our results. So we had 2,150 smokers who were eligible to see our smoking cessation practitioner. Of those, 89% agree to the first consultation with our advisor and of those, 84% agree to ongoing support, which is fantastic. We then looked at who’d consented for the study. So we had 1003 participants, approximately 47% went into our usual care arm and 53% went into our intervention arm. So before I get into the study results, we did look at our quit rates for the first four weeks. Just purely looking at this co-located service.

We had a quick rate of 16.5%, in those who were willing to receive ongoing support as a validated figure. And that increased to 20% if we use self-reported figures and our cost per quitter was… I’m just trying to remember off the top of my head, it was around 450 pounds, somewhere around that. So yes, in our study intervention. So our intervention group, we had a quit rate of 33.6%, in our intervention arm and 30% in our usual care arm. And that was a 7 day validated point prevalent abstinence, 3 months after the lung health check.

So there was no significant difference between the groups. And then when we looked at our self-reported figures at 3 months and then validated and self-reported figures at 12 months, again, there was no significant difference. But the really important finding is that we found that quit rates at 12 months were largely maintained. So looking at 28%/29%, and what we know is that if people quit for 12 months, that’s a really good indicator that they’re going to carry on being quit for a long time in the future. It’s not a short term reaction to having been in the lung cancer screening program.

So then also within our primary outcome, we looked at various demographic data to see if there was any effect and what we found is the significant interaction with gender. So there was not much difference in the males, but females were significantly more likely to have quit smoking if they received our intervention than if they were in the usual care arm. There was some interaction according to deprivation group, but there was no individual difference between those. And at 12 months we saw the same gender effect persevering, but the deprivation had disappeared. So everyone that was added were those age 55 and above, but we did look at age bands, but there was no significant difference or interaction when we looked at age.

Read more...