We are finally seeing a growing drumbeat of reports about lung cancer screening that reflect the real-world experiences of people facing this disease. These reports confirm what doctors, patients, and advocates like GO2 for Lung Cancer have been saying for far too long: our current lung cancer screening system is not meeting the needs of the people it is supposed to protect. While it is heartening to see these screening gaps acknowledged, it also shines a light on the sobering reality that today’s screening criteria are not including those most at risk, leaving too many people without access to early detection when it could make the greatest difference. 

Stories like Jessie Creel’s, a healthy 42-year-old never smoker diagnosed at stage 4 (IV), are devastating, but they are not unusual. Every day at GO2, we hear from families who were told they did not qualify for screening, only to learn they had advanced disease. The new data highlighted in reporting from the Washington Post confirms what our community experiences firsthand. The criteria are too narrow, too limited, and out of step with who is actually developing lung cancer today. 

Women, racial and ethnic minority groups, and individuals with no significant smoking history are being left out. And when they are excluded, they are diagnosed at a later stage, when treatment becomes far more complex, and outcomes are significantly worse. 

For years, GO2 has urged federal leaders to modernize screening criteria, so they reflect today’s science. We have consistently recommended that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) update screening eligibility in ways that mirror evidence-based guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and the American Cancer Society (ACS). These approaches take a broader view of risk and stay in sync with what patients and clinicians see every day, including family history, lung disease, radon exposure, occupational hazards, and environmental exposures. 

We are especially concerned that the USPSTF process requires 5 years just to begin its review cycle and often 7 or more years to complete it. Lung cancer patients simply do not have that kind of time. Following the ACS’s November 2023 update removing the 15-year quit-time criterion, GO2 led a multi-stakeholder letter formally requesting that the USPSTF initiate an expedited review. Despite clear evidence and growing urgency, that request has not been acted upon, and the next scheduled cycle will not reach its 5-year mark until 2026. Every year of delay keeps thousands of people from accessing screening that could save their lives. 

Until the United States adopts a truly population-based approach to lung cancer screening, updating eligibility to reflect today’s science is essential. We cannot continue using outdated criteria that miss most cases and leave too many patients facing a much harder fight.