Journal of Medical Screening最新文献

Objective: To evaluate interval cancer (IC) after two screening rounds of the Swedish population-based screening program of Stockholm-Gotland applying gender-specific cut-off levels in the fecal immunochemical test (FIT).

Methods: All 60- to 69-year-olds invited to screening 2015-2019 were included. The cut-off level for a positive test was 40 µg/g in women and 80 µg/g in men. Screening-detected colorectal cancers (SD CRCs) and ICs were verified in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Register, and the follow-up time was two years from invitation. The test sensitivity, the IC rate (ICs per 10,000 screening negatives) and the IC incidence (ICs per 100,000 person-years) relative to the background CRC incidence were assessed by gender and age. The FIT levels were compared in men and women for CRCs diagnosed within one year of the sample.

Results: In the second screening round, 229,187 were invited, and SD CRCs and ICs were diagnosed in 193 and 144, respectively. The IC rate was 8.9 (7.4-10.3) and test sensitivity 0.61 (0.55-0.66), and was similar in men and women. For two screening rounds, the IC rate was significantly higher in men than in women, but the IC incidence/ background CRC incidence was similar in both genders. The FIT levels in female participants with CRC were significantly lower overall, and in early-staged CRCs as compared to men, and proximal localization was more common in women. In multivariable analysis, FIT levels were significantly lower in proximal CRCs.

Conclusion: Over two rounds, the IC incidence relative to the background CRC incidence was similar in men and women supporting a gender-specific screening strategy. The results could be explained by lower FIT levels in women due to proximal CRC localization.

Objective: Equitable elimination of cervical cancer in Australia within the next decade will require high National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) participation by all subgroups of women. The aim of this study was to examine the participation of immigrants compared to Australian-born women.

Methods: Participation in the NCSP (≥1cytology test) over a 3-year (2010-2012) and 5-year (2008-2012) period, by place of birth and time since immigration was examined using individually linked data of 67,350 New South Wales (NSW) women aged ≥45 enrolled in the 45 and Up Study.

Results: Three-year cervical screening participation was 77.0% overall. Compared to Australian-born women (77.8%), 3-year participation was lower for women born in New Zealand (adjusted odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.87), Oceania (0.67, 0.51-0.89), Middle East/North Africa (0.76, 0.60-0.97), South-East Asia (0.72, 0.60-0.87), Chinese Asia (0.82, 0.69-0.97), Japan/South Korea (0.68, 0.50-0.94), and Southern/Central Asia (0.54, 0.43-0.67), but higher for women from Malta (2.85, 1.77-4.58) and South America (1.33, 1.01-1.75). Non-English-speaking-at-home women were less likely to be screened than English-speaking-at-home women (0.85, 0.78-0.93). Participation increased with years lived in Australia but remained lower in immigrant groups compared to Australian-born women, even after ≥20 years living in Australia. Similar results were observed for 5-year participation.

Conclusions: Women born in New Zealand, Oceania, and parts of Asia and the Middle East had lower NCSP participation, which persisted for ≥20 years post-immigration. The NCSP transition to primary HPV screening, and the introduction of the universal self-collection option in 2022, will offer new opportunities for increasing screening participation for these groups.

Objective: To compare interval cancer proportions (ICP) in the faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based Scottish Bowel Screening Programme (SBoSP) with the former guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBT)-based SBoSP and investigate associations between interval cancer (IC) and faecal haemoglobin concentration (f-Hb) threshold, sex, age, deprivation, site, and stage.

Methods: The ICP data from first year of the FIT-based SBoSP and the penultimate year of the gFOBT-based SBoSP were compared in a prospective cohort design.

Results: With FIT, 801 colorectal cancers (CRCs) were screen detected (SDC), 802 were in non-participants, 548 were ICs, 39 were colonoscopy missed and 72 were diagnosed after incomplete screening; with gFOBT: 540, 904, 556, 45, and 13, respectively. FIT had a significantly higher proportion of SDC compared to IC than gFOBT. For FIT and gFOBT, ICP was significantly higher in women than men. As f-Hb threshold increased, ICP increased and, for any f-Hb threshold for men, a lower threshold was required for comparable ICP in women. In Scotland, the current threshold of ≥80 µg Hb/g faeces would have to be lowered to ≥40 µg Hb/g faeces for women to achieve sex equality for ICP. In the FIT-based SBoSP, there were four times as many stage I SDC than IC. This was reversed in advanced stages, with twice as many stage IV CRC diagnosed as IC versus SDC.

Conclusions: Reducing the numbers of IC requires lowering the f-Hb threshold. Using different f-Hb thresholds for women and men could eliminate the sex disparity, but with additional colonoscopy.

Objectives: Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is an effective screening tool for colorectal cancer. If an FIT is abnormal, a follow-up colonoscopy is necessary to remove polyps or find cancers. We sought to develop a usable risk prediction model to identify patients unlikely to complete a colonoscopy following an abnormal FIT test.

Methods: We recalibrated and then redeveloped a prediction model in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), using a retrospective cohort of patients aged 50-75 with an abnormal FIT test and clinical data. Logistic and Cox regressions were used to recalibrate and then redevelop the model.

Results: The initial risk model used data from eight FQHCs (26 clinics) including 1723 patients. When we applied the model to a single large FQHC (34 clinics, 884 eligible patients), the model did not recalibrate successfully (c-statistic dropped more than 0.05, from 0.66 to 0.61). The model was redeveloped in the same FQHC in a cohort of 1401 patients with a c-statistic of 0.65.

Conclusions: The original model developed in a group of FQHCs did not adequately recalibrate in the single large FQHC. Health system, patient characteristics or data differences may have led to the inability to recalibrate the model. However, the redeveloped model provides an adequate model for the single FQHC.

Objectives: Pre-trial focus groups of the Early detection of Cancer of the Lung Scotland (ECLS) trial indicated that those at high risk of lung cancer are more likely to engage with community-based recruitment methods. The current study aimed to understand if general practitioner (GP) and community-based recruitment might attract different groups of people, and to quantitatively explore the demographic and psychosocial differences between people responding to GP or community-based recruitment.

Design: Secondary data analysis of ECLS trial baseline data.

Methods: Adults (n = 11,164) aged 50 to 75 years completed a baseline questionnaire as part of their participation in the ECLS trial. The questionnaire assessed smoking behaviour, health state, health anxiety and illness perception. Alongside demographic characteristics, how participants were made aware of the study/participant recruitment method (GP recruitment/community recruitment) was also obtained via trial records.

Results: The likelihood of being recruited via community-based methods increased as deprivation level decreased. Those recruited via the community had higher levels of perceived personal control of developing lung cancer and were more likely to understand their own risk of developing lung cancer, compared to those who were recruited to the trial via their GP. Health state and health anxiety did not predict recruitment methods in multivariable analysis.

Conclusions: Community and opportunistic screening invitations were associated with uptake in people from less-deprived backgrounds, and therefore might not be the optimal method to reach those at high risk of lung cancer and living in more deprived areas.

Objective: A rolling circle amplification (RCA) based commercial methodology using cell-free (cf)DNA to screen for common trisomies became available in 2018. Relevant publications documented high detection but with a higher than expected 1% false positive rate. Preliminary evidence suggested assay variability was an issue. A multi-center collaboration was created to explore this further and examine whether subsequent manufacturer changes were effective.

Methods: Three academic (four devices) and two commercial (two devices) laboratories provided run date, chromosome 21, 18, and 13 run-specific standard deviations, number of samples run, and reagent lot identifications. Temporal trends and between-site/device consistency were explored. Proportions of run standard deviations exceeding pre-specified caps of 0.4%, 0.4% and 0.6% were computed.

Results: Overall, 661 RCA runs between April 2019 and July 30, 2022 tested 39,756 samples. In the first 24, subsequent 9, and final 7 months, proportions of capped chromosome 21 runs dropped from 39% to 22% to 6.0%; for chromosome 18, rates were 76%, 36%, and 4.0%. Few chromosome 13 runs were capped using the original 0.60%, but capping at 0.50%, rates were 28%, 16%, and 7.6%. Final rates occurred after reformulated reagents and imaging software modifications were fully implemented across all devices. Revised detection and false positive rates are estimated at 98.4% and 0.3%, respectively. After repeat testing, failure rates may be as low as 0.3%.

Conclusion: Current RCA-based screening performance estimates are equivalent to those reported for other methods, but with a lower test failure rate after repeat testing.

Objectives: Cancer risk prediction may be subject to detection bias if utilization of screening is related to cancer risk factors. We examine detection bias when predicting breast cancer risk by race/ethnicity.

Methods: We used screening and diagnosis histories from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium to estimate risk of breast cancer onset and calculated relative risk of onset and diagnosis for each racial/ethnic group compared with non-Hispanic White women.

Results: Of 104,073 women aged 40-54 receiving their first screening mammogram at a Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium facility between 2000 and 2018, 10.2% (n = 10,634) identified as Asian, 10.9% (n = 11,292) as Hispanic, and 8.4% (n = 8719) as non-Hispanic Black. Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black women had slightly lower screening frequencies but biopsy rates following a positive mammogram were similar across groups. Risk of cancer diagnosis was similar for non-Hispanic Black and White women (relative risk vs non-Hispanic White = 0.90, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.14) but was lower for Asian (relative risk = 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.97) and Hispanic women (relative risk = 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08). Relative risks of disease onset were 0.78 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.88), 0.70 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.83), and 0.95 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.09) for Asian, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Black women, respectively.

Conclusions: Racial/ethnic differences in mammography and biopsy utilization did not induce substantial detection bias; relative risks of disease onset were similar to or modestly different than relative risks of diagnosis. Asian and Hispanic women have lower risks of developing breast cancer than non-Hispanic Black and White women, who have similar risks.

Objectives: To inform the development and evaluation of new blood-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests satisfying minimum United States (US) coverage criteria, we estimated the impact of the different test performance characteristics on long-term testing benefits and burdens.

Methods: A novel CRC-Microsimulation of Adenoma Progression and Screening (CRC-MAPS) model was developed, validated, then used to assess different screening tests for CRC. We compared multiple, hypothetical blood-based CRC screening tests satisfying minimum coverage criteria of 74% CRC sensitivity and 90% specificity, to measure how changes in a test's CRC sensitivity, specificity, and adenoma sensitivity (sizes 1-5 mm, 6-9 mm, ≥10 mm) affect total number of colonoscopies (COL), CRC incidence reduction (IR), CRC mortality reduction (MR), and burden-to-benefit ratios (incremental COLs per percentage-point increase in IR or MR).

Results: A blood test meeting minimum US coverage criteria for performance characteristics resulted in 1576 lifetime COLs per 1000 individuals, 46.7% IR and 59.2% MR compared to no screening. Tests with increased CRC sensitivity of 99% ( + 25%) vs. increased ≥10 mm adenoma sensitivity of 13.6% ( + 3.6%) both yielded the same MR, 62.7%. Test benefits improved the most with increases in all-size adenoma sensitivity, then size-specific adenoma sensitivities, then specificity and CRC sensitivity, while increases in specificity or ≥10 mm adenoma sensitivity resulted in the most favorable burden-to-benefit tradeoffs (ratios <11.5).

Conclusions: Burden-to-benefit ratios for blood-based CRC screening tests differ by performance characteristic, with the most favorable tradeoffs resulting from improvements in specificity and ≥10 mm adenoma sensitivity.

Objective: Early detection through mammographic screening and various treatment modalities of cancer may have changed life expectancy and cause-specific mortality of breast cancer patients. We aimed to determine the long-term cause of death patterns in screening-detected patients and clinically diagnosed patients in the Netherlands compared with the general population.

Methods: Using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Statistics Netherlands of around 26,000 women, aged 50-75 at diagnosis and surgically treated for invasive breast cancer in 2004-2008, we compared patients with screening-detected and clinically diagnosed cancer for major causes of death until 2020. The expected number of all-cause and cause-specific deaths was calculated using rates of the general population.

Results: During the follow-up period, 4310 women died. The age-standardised all-cause mortality ratio for the screening-detected cancer group was 1.41 (95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.37-1.46). A higher mortality ratio was observed for patients with clinically detected cancer: 2.27 (95% CI, 2.19-2.34). The observed versus expected breast cancer mortality ratio in the screening-detected patient group was 8.92 (95% CI, 8.45-9.40) and 20.23 (19.38-21.09) in the clinical group. Excess mortality was found for lung cancer in both patient groups, and small elevations for circulatory and respiratory disease in the clinically detected group.

Conclusion: Our results indicate that for the screening group no other causes of death but breast and lung cancer were prominent compared with the general population. The clinical group showed excess mortality for some other causes of death as well, suggesting a less healthy group compared with the general population.