Lung CancerNCT06052449
Assessing Social Determinants of Health to Increase Cancer Screening
A study testing Social determinants of health screening assessment and referral process and Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk) in people with Lung Cancer, run by Hackensack Meridian Health at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
A multilevel lung screening intervention that pairs Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) screening and referral with a tailored health communication and decision support tool for lung screening has the potential to significantly impact lung screening uptake among at-risk individuals in the community, particularly… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 50 to 80 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Lung Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Social determinants of health screening assessment and referral process and Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 101 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 30 Sep 2023to 19 Aug 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 50 to 80 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Aged 50 years to 80 years
- Currently smoke or quit smoking within the past 15 years
- 20 pack-year smoking history
- Has never had lung cancer screening
- Able to provide informed consent
- Able to speak and understand English
Who cannot join
- Diagnosed with lung cancer
- Has a history of having a lung cancer screening scan
- Unable to speak and understand English
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Hackensack Meridian Health - Center for Discovery and Innovation
Nutley, New Jersey, 07110
About this study
A multilevel lung screening intervention that pairs Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) screening and referral with a tailored health communication and decision support tool for lung screening has the potential to significantly impact lung screening uptake among at-risk individuals in the community, particularly among those who face barriers related to SDoH. In addition, findings will advance the understanding of effective strategies for improving lung screening and prevention efforts in non-traditional settings, with the ultimate goal of reducing the burden of lung cancer. As ways to support the realization of the public health benefit of lung cancer screening are considered, multiple strategies and venues to reach, and intervene, with screening-eligible is key.
The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness of a community-based lung screening educational tool paired with a social determinants of health (SDoH) screening assessment and referral process compared to a community-based lung cancer screening (LCS) educational tool alone as part of community outreach activities to improve (a) LCS rates (primary outcome); (b) intention to screen; and (c) individual-level potential drivers of LCS (health literacy, mistrust, stigma, fatalism, knowledge, health beliefs). It is hypothesized that providing SDoH screening and referral will result in higher levels of LCS, forward movement of intention to screen, and improved individual-level drivers of LCS.
Read the detailed description
The study will be a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare primary (LCS uptake) and secondary outcomes (intent to screen, literacy, mistrust, stigma, fatalism, health beliefs) among LCS-eligible men and women in New Jersey community-based settings who receive a community-based LCS educational tool paired with a social determinants of health (SDoH) screening assessment and referral process (n=50) compared to a community-based LCS educational tool alone (n=50) as part of community outreach activities. All individuals who attend a community event are normally assessed for cancer risks and appropriate cancer screening education is provided. For those who are eligible for LCS, they will also be invited to participate in this study.
- Conditions
- Lung Cancer
- Being tested
- Social determinants of health screening assessment and referral process, Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk)
- Keywords
- screening, social determinants of health, lung cancer screening
- Medical subject headings
- Lung Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Social determinants of health screening assessment and referral processBehavioural
Unite Us is an electronic SDoH screening and referral tool assessing: (1) financial resource strain; (2) housing stability; (3) transportation needs; and (4) food insecurity. Upon completion, the Unite Us platform identifies a list of geographically-tailored resources to connect the individual in need. A staff member will administer the SDoH screening and referral tool, review the results with the participant, and use the geographically-tailored resources to make SDoH-related referrals.
Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk)Behavioural
The current practice during community events is to offer LungTalk. LungTalk is a novel theoretically grounded health educational tool that will be delivered via iPad and is an interactive computer-based program that includes audio, video and animation segments with scripts presented from a master content library in consideration of different ways people like to learn. Informed by our prior research, LungTalk tailors its content based on smoking status and perceived barriers.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Social determinants of health screening | Experimental | Participants will receive a social determinants of health screening assessment and referral process in addition to the community-based lung cancer screening educational tool. Receives: Behavioral: Social determinants of health screening assessment and referral process; Behavioral: Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk) |
| Community-based lung cancer screening | Active comparator | Participants will receive a community-based lung cancer screening educational tool. Receives: Behavioral: Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Lung Cancer Screening Uptake
Number of participants in the two groups that get screened (have a computed tomography (CT or CAT) scan)
Measured: 1 months post intervention
Secondary outcomes (14)
Health Literacy
Health Literacy will be measured using the 3-item health literacy scale ranging from 0 (low health literacy level) to 12 (high health literacy level)
Measured: Baseline
Health Literacy
Health Literacy will be measured using the 3-item health literacy scale ranging from 0 (low health literacy level) to 12 (high health literacy level)
Measured: 1 months post intervention
Medical Mistrust
Medical Mistrust will be measured with 5 items ranging from 5 (low mistrust) to 25 (high mistrust)
Measured: Baseline
Medical Mistrust
Medical Mistrust will be measured with 5 items ranging from 5 (low mistrust) to 25 (high mistrust)
Measured: 1 months post intervention
Perceived Smoking-Related Stigma
Perceived Smoking-Related Stigma will be measured using the 5-item smoking-related stigma subscale of the Cataldo Lung Cancer Stigma Scale ranging from 5 (low perceived stigma) to 25 (high perceived stigma)
Measured: Baseline
Perceived Smoking-Related Stigma
Perceived Smoking-Related Stigma will be measured using the 5-item smoking-related stigma subscale of the Cataldo Lung Cancer Stigma Scale ranging from 5 (low perceived stigma) to 25 (high perceived stigma)
Measured: 1 months post intervention
Lung Cancer Fatalism
Lung Cancer Fatalism will be measured with 11 items ranging from 0 (no fatalism) to 11 (high fatalism)
Measured: Baseline
Lung Cancer Fatalism
Lung Cancer Fatalism will be measured with 11 items ranging from 0 (no fatalism) to 11 (high fatalism)
Measured: 1 months post intervention
Knowledge of Lung Cancer and Lung Screening
Knowledge of Lung Cancer and Lung Screening will be assessed with a 7-item multidimensional scale used in our preliminary studies adapted from literature specific to lung cancer. Several aspects will be assessed, including knowledge of lung cancer, risk, and screening. Range of scores is 0 (no knowledge) to 7 (high level of knowledge).
Measured: Baseline
Knowledge of Lung Cancer and Lung Screening
Knowledge of Lung Cancer and Lung Screening will be assessed with a 7-item multidimensional scale used in our preliminary studies adapted from literature specific to lung cancer. Several aspects will be assessed, including knowledge of lung cancer, risk, and screening. Range of scores is 0 (no knowledge) to 7 (high level of knowledge).
Measured: 1 months post intervention
Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening Scale
Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening Scale will be used ranging from 17 (low perceived barriers to lung screening) to 68 (high perceived barriers to lung screening).
Measured: Baseline
Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening Scale
Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening Scale will be used ranging from 17 (low perceived barriers to lung screening) to 68 (high perceived barriers to lung screening).
Measured: 1 months post intervention
Stage of Adoption for Decision-Making About Lung Screening
Stage of Adoption for Decision-Making About Lung Screening will be assessed with an algorithm of questions used in our prior studies assessing the 7 stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance). This will allow us to assess intent if someone has "decided to act".
Measured: Baseline
Stage of Adoption for Decision-Making About Lung Screening
Stage of Adoption for Decision-Making About Lung Screening will be assessed with an algorithm of questions used in our prior studies assessing the 7 stages (unaware, aware but unengaged, undecided, decided not to act, decided to act, action, and maintenance). This will allow us to assess intent if someone has "decided to act".
Measured: 1 months post intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 Sep 2023
- Study start30 Sep 2023
- Primary completion19 Aug 2025
- Study completion19 Aug 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (13)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Lung CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 101 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hackensack Meridian Health
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Becton, Dickinson and Company
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Lisa Carter-Bawa, PhD, Principal investigator, Hackensack Meridian Health
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06052449
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Pro2023-0374
- Status last verified
- Feb 2026
- First submitted
- 19 Sep 2023
- Last updated
- 11 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Cancer Facts & Figures 2023. American Cancer Society, Inc.; 2022. https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/all-cancer-facts-figures/2023-cancer-facts-figures.html
Pettit N, Ceppa D, Monahan P. Low Rates of Lung and Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake Among a Safety-net Emergency Department Population. West J Emerg Med. 2022 Aug 11;23(5):739-745. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2022.5.55351.
PubMed 36205665Carter-Harris L, Ceppa DP, Hanna N, Rawl SM. Lung cancer screening: what do long-term smokers know and believe? Health Expect. 2017 Feb;20(1):59-68. doi: 10.1111/hex.12433. Epub 2015 Dec 23.
PubMed 26701339Carter-Harris L, Brandzel S, Wernli KJ, Roth JA, Buist DSM. A qualitative study exploring why individuals opt out of lung cancer screening. Fam Pract. 2017 Apr 1;34(2):239-244. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmw146.
PubMed 28122849Carter-Harris L, Slaven JE 2nd, Monahan PO, Draucker CB, Vode E, Rawl SM. Understanding lung cancer screening behaviour using path analysis. J Med Screen. 2020 Jun;27(2):105-112. doi: 10.1177/0969141319876961. Epub 2019 Sep 24.
PubMed 31550991Mohan G, Chattopadhyay S. Cost-effectiveness of Leveraging Social Determinants of Health to Improve Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review. JAMA Oncol. 2020 Sep 1;6(9):1434-1444. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.1460.
PubMed 32556187Weinstein D. The Precaution Adoption Process Model. In: Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Researchm and Practice. 4th Ed. Jossey-Bass; 2008:123-147.
Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ. Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med. 2004 Sep;36(8):588-94.
PubMed 15343421Thompson HS, Valdimarsdottir HB, Winkel G, Jandorf L, Redd W. The Group-Based Medical Mistrust Scale: psychometric properties and association with breast cancer screening. Prev Med. 2004 Feb;38(2):209-18. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.09.041.
PubMed 14715214Cataldo JK, Slaughter R, Jahan TM, Pongquan VL, Hwang WJ. Measuring stigma in people with lung cancer: psychometric testing of the cataldo lung cancer stigma scale. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2011 Jan;38(1):E46-54. doi: 10.1188/11.ONF.E46-E54.
PubMed 21186151Mayo RM, Ureda JR, Parker VG. Importance of fatalism in understanding mammography screening in rural elderly women. J Women Aging. 2001;13(1):57-72. doi: 10.1300/J074v13n01_05.
PubMed 11217186Carter-Harris L, Slaven JE 2nd, Monohan P, Rawl SM. Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales. Cancer Nurs. 2017 May/Jun;40(3):237-244. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000386.
PubMed 27244666Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O'Neal L, McLeod L, Delacqua G, Delacqua F, Kirby J, Duda SN; REDCap Consortium. The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019 Jul;95:103208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208. Epub 2019 May 9.
PubMed 31078660
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Assessing Social Determinants of Health to Increase Cancer Screening
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06052449
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Pro2023-0374
- Conditions
- Lung Cancer
- Keywords
- screening, social determinants of health, lung cancer screening
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 101 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hackensack Meridian HealthUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Becton, Dickinson and Company
- Study start
- 30 Sep 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 19 Aug 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 19 Aug 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 25 Sep 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 11 Mar 2026
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
A multilevel lung screening intervention that pairs Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) screening and referral with a tailored health communication and decision support tool for lung screening has the potential to significantly impact lung screening uptake among at-risk individuals in the community, particularly among those who face barriers related to SDoH. In addition, findings will advance the understanding of effective strategies for improving lung screening and prevention efforts in non-traditional settings, with the ultimate goal of reducing the burden of lung cancer. As ways to support the realization of the public health benefit of lung cancer screening are considered, multiple strategies and venues to reach, and intervene, with screening-eligible is key.
The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness of a community-based lung screening educational tool paired with a social determinants of health (SDoH) screening assessment and referral process compared to a community-based lung cancer screening (LCS) educational tool alone as part of community outreach activities to improve (a) LCS rates (primary outcome); (b) intention to screen; and (c) individual-level potential drivers of LCS (health literacy, mistrust, stigma, fatalism, knowledge, health beliefs). It is hypothesized that providing SDoH screening and referral will result in higher levels of LCS, forward movement of intention to screen, and improved individual-level drivers of LCS.
Detailed description
The study will be a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare primary (LCS uptake) and secondary outcomes (intent to screen, literacy, mistrust, stigma, fatalism, health beliefs) among LCS-eligible men and women in New Jersey community-based settings who receive a community-based LCS educational tool paired with a social determinants of health (SDoH) screening assessment and referral process (n=50) compared to a community-based LCS educational tool alone (n=50) as part of community outreach activities. All individuals who attend a community event are normally assessed for cancer risks and appropriate cancer screening education is provided. For those who are eligible for LCS, they will also be invited to participate in this study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Social determinants of health screening | Experimental | Behavioral: Social determinants of health screening assessment and referral process, Behavioral: Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk)Participants will receive a social determinants of health screening assessment and referral process in addition to the community-based lung cancer screening educational tool. |
| Community-based lung cancer screening | Active comparator | Behavioral: Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk)Participants will receive a community-based lung cancer screening educational tool. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 50 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Aged 50 years to 80 years
- Currently smoke or quit smoking within the past 15 years
- 20 pack-year smoking history
- Has never had lung cancer screening
- Able to provide informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Diagnosed with lung cancer
- Has a history of having a lung cancer screening scan
- Unable to speak and understand English
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Social determinants of health screening assessment and referral processUnite Us is an electronic SDoH screening and referral tool assessing: (1) financial resource strain; (2) housing stability; (3) transportation needs; and (4) food insecurity. Upon completion, the Unite Us platform identifies a list of geographically-tailored resources to connect the individual in need. A staff member will administer the SDoH screening and referral tool, review the results with the participant, and use the geographically-tailored resources to make SDoH-related referrals. | Behavioural | Social determinants of health screening |
| Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk)The current practice during community events is to offer LungTalk. LungTalk is a novel theoretically grounded health educational tool that will be delivered via iPad and is an interactive computer-based program that includes audio, video and animation segments with scripts presented from a master content library in consideration of different ways people like to learn. Informed by our prior research, LungTalk tailors its content based on smoking status and perceived barriers. | Behavioural | Community-based lung cancer screening, Social determinants of health screening |
Primary outcome
Lung Cancer Screening Uptake
Time frame: 1 months post intervention
Number of participants in the two groups that get screened (have a computed tomography (CT or CAT) scan)
14 secondary outcomes
Health Literacy
Time frame: Baseline
Health Literacy
Time frame: 1 months post intervention
Medical Mistrust
Time frame: Baseline
Medical Mistrust
Time frame: 1 months post intervention
Perceived Smoking-Related Stigma
Time frame: Baseline
Perceived Smoking-Related Stigma
Time frame: 1 months post intervention
Lung Cancer Fatalism
Time frame: Baseline
Lung Cancer Fatalism
Time frame: 1 months post intervention
Knowledge of Lung Cancer and Lung Screening
Time frame: Baseline
Knowledge of Lung Cancer and Lung Screening
Time frame: 1 months post intervention
Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening Scale
Time frame: Baseline
Perceived Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening Scale
Time frame: 1 months post intervention
Stage of Adoption for Decision-Making About Lung Screening
Time frame: Baseline
Stage of Adoption for Decision-Making About Lung Screening
Time frame: 1 months post intervention
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Mar 2026.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- BackgroundCancer Facts & Figures 2023. American Cancer Society, Inc.; 2022. https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/all-cancer-facts-figures/2023-cancer-facts-figures.html
- Background: PubMed 36205665Pettit N, Ceppa D, Monahan P. Low Rates of Lung and Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake Among a Safety-net Emergency Department Population. West J Emerg Med. 2022 Aug 11;23(5):739-745. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2022.5.55351.
- Background: PubMed 26701339Carter-Harris L, Ceppa DP, Hanna N, Rawl SM. Lung cancer screening: what do long-term smokers know and believe? Health Expect. 2017 Feb;20(1):59-68. doi: 10.1111/hex.12433. Epub 2015 Dec 23.
- Background: PubMed 28122849Carter-Harris L, Brandzel S, Wernli KJ, Roth JA, Buist DSM. A qualitative study exploring why individuals opt out of lung cancer screening. Fam Pract. 2017 Apr 1;34(2):239-244. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmw146.
- Background: PubMed 31550991Carter-Harris L, Slaven JE 2nd, Monahan PO, Draucker CB, Vode E, Rawl SM. Understanding lung cancer screening behaviour using path analysis. J Med Screen. 2020 Jun;27(2):105-112. doi: 10.1177/0969141319876961. Epub 2019 Sep 24.
- Background: PubMed 32556187Mohan G, Chattopadhyay S. Cost-effectiveness of Leveraging Social Determinants of Health to Improve Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review. JAMA Oncol. 2020 Sep 1;6(9):1434-1444. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.1460.
- BackgroundWeinstein D. The Precaution Adoption Process Model. In: Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Researchm and Practice. 4th Ed. Jossey-Bass; 2008:123-147.
- Background: PubMed 15343421Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ. Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med. 2004 Sep;36(8):588-94.
- Background: PubMed 14715214Thompson HS, Valdimarsdottir HB, Winkel G, Jandorf L, Redd W. The Group-Based Medical Mistrust Scale: psychometric properties and association with breast cancer screening. Prev Med. 2004 Feb;38(2):209-18. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.09.041.
- Background: PubMed 21186151Cataldo JK, Slaughter R, Jahan TM, Pongquan VL, Hwang WJ. Measuring stigma in people with lung cancer: psychometric testing of the cataldo lung cancer stigma scale. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2011 Jan;38(1):E46-54. doi: 10.1188/11.ONF.E46-E54.
- Background: PubMed 11217186Mayo RM, Ureda JR, Parker VG. Importance of fatalism in understanding mammography screening in rural elderly women. J Women Aging. 2001;13(1):57-72. doi: 10.1300/J074v13n01_05.
- Background: PubMed 27244666Carter-Harris L, Slaven JE 2nd, Monohan P, Rawl SM. Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales. Cancer Nurs. 2017 May/Jun;40(3):237-244. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000386.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Lung Cancer
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Study of INBRX-106 and INBRX-106 in Combination With Pembrolizumab (Keytruda®) in Subjects With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors (Hexavalent OX40 Agonist)
Solid Tumor, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
A Prospective ,Multicenter ,Non-interventional ,Real-world Study Observing Changes in Molecular Markers Osimertinib Targeted Therapy in EGFRm NSCLC
Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study Evaluating Sotorasib Platinum Doublet Combination Versus Pembrolizumab Platinum Doublet Combination as a Front-Line Therapy in Participants With Stage IV or Advanced Stage IIIB/C Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers (CodeBreaK 202)
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Datopotamab Deruxtecan (Dato-DXd, DS-1062a) in Advanced and/or Unresectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Metastatic Lung Cancer, Advanced Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Lisa Carter-Bawa, PhD principal investigator
Hackensack Meridian Health
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Social determinants of health screening assessment and referral process and Current practice - Community-based lunch cancer screening (LungTalk) in people with Lung Cancer, run by Hackensack Meridian Health at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 11 Mar 2026). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Lung Cancer Screening Uptake (time frame: 1 months post intervention). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06052449, which also lists 13 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 Mar 2026.