Yang, Ping

1610 Background: Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) scans have reduced lung cancer deaths by 20.3% in high risk populations, although there is an unknown balance between the benefits and harms of LDCT scans as a screening tool. Our purpose was to compare health-related QOL issues among lung cancer patients who were initially detected by LDCT scans; 4 comparison groups included: lung cancer diagnosed by a screening chest X-ray, as an incidental finding from procedures taken for other medical reasons, or based on symptoms indicative for lung cancer and routinely diagnosed, and individuals who were LDCT screened but found no lung cancer (controls who participated in Mayo’s lung cancer CT screening trial). Methods: A total of 1,658 lung cancer patients (cared at Mayo Clinic) in the 4 groups (37, 151, 389, and 1081 respectively) and 488 controls were compared on following patient-reported outcomes (collected via validated tools): overall QOL, four symptoms (cough, pain, dyspnea, fatigue), mental/ physical/ emotional/ social/ spiritual QOL, and other concerns (e.g., family/ friends/ financial/ legal). A clinically significant deficit was defined as at least 10-points in difference (or <50 points) on a 0-100 scale. The rates of deficits were compared via Fisher’s exact tests and average QOL values via Kruskal-Wallis tests. Results: Overall QOL and individual symptoms were significantly worse (p<0.05) in all lung cancer groups than in controls, except for pain. LDCT-screened patients reported the greatest deficit among the 4 lung cancer groups in physical (41%), emotional (24%), social (38%), and spiritual QOL (24%); whereas chest X-ray detected patients had the least deficit in overall QOL (22%) and pain (32%). All 4 lung cancer groups experienced much worse fatigue (52-64%) than the controls (32%). Conclusions: Our preliminary results suggest that LDCT-screening detected lung cancer patients reported a different QOL profile from other lung cancer patients and non-lung cancer controls. The clinical course, smoking behavior, and QOL related health issues associated with LDCT screening for lung cancer warrant thorough investigation.

e23111 Background: Acupuncture has been shown to reduce aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgias, as well as possibly hot flashes and fatigue, but research has been limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate real world perceived benefit of acupuncture for commonly experienced symptoms among breast cancer survivors. Methods: Breast cancer survivors who had used acupuncture for cancer- or treatment-related symptoms were identified using an ongoing prospective Mayo Clinic Breast Disease Registry (MCBDR) cohort. In addition, Mayo Clinic electronic health records (EHR) were queried to identify additional participants. All identified patients were mailed a survey with acupuncture-related questions. Respondents were also asked to recall their severity of arthralgia, myalgia, post-surgical pain, hot flashes, nausea/vomiting, fatigue, depression, anxiety, insomnia, lymphedema, headache, and neuropathy from 1 to 5 (1 = mild, 5 = severe) before and after acupuncture treatment. Results: Acupuncture use was reported among 413 participants in MCBDR (12% of all enrollees) and 73 patients were identified in the Mayo EHR. 241 eligible women returned surveys (median age at diagnosis 50 yrs). Mean symptom severity scores decreased from before to after acupuncture by at least 1 point for all queried symptoms (Table). Conclusions: Acupuncture is frequently used by patients for a variety of breast cancer-related symptoms. Those who do pursue acupuncture usually perceive few toxicities and substantial benefits. Cost may be a barrier to treatment for some. [Table: see text]