This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Studts, J. L. Articles by LaRocca, R. V. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Studts, J. L. Articles by LaRocca, R. V.

Validity of Self-reported Smoking Status among Participants in a Lung Cancer Screening Trial

¹ Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Louisville School of Medicine; ² Behavioral Oncology Program, James Graham Brown Cancer Center; ³ Department of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, University of Louisville School of Public Health and Information Sciences; ⁴ Kent School of Social Work, University of Louisville; ⁵ Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, University of Louisville School of Public Health and Information Sciences; ⁶ Department of Behavioral Science, University of Kentucky College of Medicine; and ⁷ Kentuckiana Cancer Institute, PLLC, Louisville, Kentucky

Requests for reprints: Jamie L. Studts, Behavioral Oncology Program, James Graham Brown Cancer Center, Room 422, 529 South Jackson Street, Louisville, KY 40202. Phone: 502-852-8094; Fax: 502-562-4368. E-mail: jamie.studts{at}louisville.edu

Lung cancer remains a devastating disease associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Recent research has suggested that lung cancer screening with spiral computed tomography scans might reduce lung cancer mortality. Studies of lung cancer screening have also suggested that significant numbers of participants quit smoking after screening. However, most have relied solely on self-reported smoking behavior, which may be less accurate among participants in lung cancer screening. To assess the validity of self-reported smoking status among participants in a lung cancer screening trial, this study compared self-reported smoking status against urinary cotinine levels. The sample included 55 consecutive participants enrolled in a randomized clinical trial comparing annual spiral computed tomography and chest X-ray for lung cancer screening. Participants were a mean of 59 years of age and predominantly Caucasian (96%) and male (55%). Self-reported smoking status was assessed before and after participants learned of the purpose of the biochemical verification study. Using urinary cotinine as the "gold standard," the sensitivity and specificity of self-reported smoking status were 91% and 95%, respectively ( = 0.85, P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval = 0.71-0.99). Total misclassification rate was 7%. However, three of the four misclassified participants reported concurrent use of nicotine replacement strategies. Eliminating these cases from the analysis revealed sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 95% ( = 0.96, P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval = 0.88-1.00). In conclusion, self-reported smoking status among participants in a lung cancer screening trial was highly consistent with urinary cotinine test results. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(10):1825–8)

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Blackford, G. Parmigiani, T. W. Kensler, C. Wolfgang, S. Jones, X. Zhang, D. W. Parsons, J. C.-H. Lin, R. J. Leary, J. R. Eshleman, et al. Genetic Mutations Associated with Cigarette Smoking in Pancreatic Cancer Cancer Res., April 15, 2009; 69(8): 3681 - 3688. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M. Ferrante, P. Ohman-Strickland, K. A. Hahn, S. V. Hudson, E. K. Shaw, J. C. Crosson, and B. F. Crabtree Self-report versus Medical Records for Assessing Cancer-Preventive Services Delivery Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., November 1, 2008; 17(11): 2987 - 2994. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. E. Matt, J. T. Bernert, and M. F. Hovell Measuring Secondhand Smoke Exposure in Children: An Ecological Measurement Approach J. Pediatr. Psychol., March 1, 2008; 33(2): 156 - 175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]