Pub Date : 2024-12-01Epub Date: 2024-03-28DOI: 10.1177/09691413241240564
Chisato Hamashima, Hirokazu Takahashi
National screening programs for gastric, colorectal, lung, breast, and cervical cancers are offered in Japan. The initial introduction of cancer screening programs was decided based on experts' opinions. Since 2003, the research groups funded by the National Cancer Center have published screening guidelines for gastric, colorectal, lung, prostate, cervical, and breast cancers. Although such guidelines have increasingly contributed to promoting evidence-based screening, it is still insufficient. Cancer screenings have mainly been provided in communities and workplaces. Compared with the average of OECD countries, participation rates in breast and cervical cancer screening are lower. Participation rates cannot be accurately calculated due to a lack of comprehensive cancer screening registries at the national level. Alternatively, estimates are derived from questionnaire surveys conducted on randomly selected samples from the national population. The quality assurance system has been limited to community-based screening and was not adapted to workplace screening until 2018. While there is a long history of cancer screening, the complex program delivery system might be a barrier to increasing the participation rate. Continued efforts are necessary to offer evidence-based cancer screening and establish an effective quality assurance system.
{"title":"Cancer screening programs in Japan: Progress and challenges.","authors":"Chisato Hamashima, Hirokazu Takahashi","doi":"10.1177/09691413241240564","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241240564","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>National screening programs for gastric, colorectal, lung, breast, and cervical cancers are offered in Japan. The initial introduction of cancer screening programs was decided based on experts' opinions. Since 2003, the research groups funded by the National Cancer Center have published screening guidelines for gastric, colorectal, lung, prostate, cervical, and breast cancers. Although such guidelines have increasingly contributed to promoting evidence-based screening, it is still insufficient. Cancer screenings have mainly been provided in communities and workplaces. Compared with the average of OECD countries, participation rates in breast and cervical cancer screening are lower. Participation rates cannot be accurately calculated due to a lack of comprehensive cancer screening registries at the national level. Alternatively, estimates are derived from questionnaire surveys conducted on randomly selected samples from the national population. The quality assurance system has been limited to community-based screening and was not adapted to workplace screening until 2018. While there is a long history of cancer screening, the complex program delivery system might be a barrier to increasing the participation rate. Continued efforts are necessary to offer evidence-based cancer screening and establish an effective quality assurance system.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"207-210"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140307753","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-12-01Epub Date: 2024-08-07DOI: 10.1177/09691413241264480
Alain Braillon
{"title":"Ethics of screening promotion: A slippery slope to forced marketing?","authors":"Alain Braillon","doi":"10.1177/09691413241264480","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241264480","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"266-267"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141898917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-12-01Epub Date: 2024-06-11DOI: 10.1177/09691413241259991
Joyce Lee, Lynn K Han, Luc G T Morris, Deborah Korenstein, Jennifer L Marti
Objective: The incidence of melanoma has increased dramatically over the past four decades, while overall mortality has remained stable. This increase in incidence without a change in overall mortality may be due to overdiagnosis through skin cancer screening. Despite the USPSTF citing insufficient evidence for or against professional skin cancer screening in average-risk adults, U.S. skin cancer screening practices may be leading to overdiagnosis of skin cancers.
Methods: Two reviewers examined the online recommendations for skin cancer screening of 1113 U.S. cancer centers accredited by the Commission on Cancer, including 66 designated by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Recommendations on skin cancer screening, such as age, frequency, and patient population (i.e. high-risk of developing skin cancer, "people of color") were documented.
Results: We found that 18% of centers (202) recommended professional screening in average-risk adults, 35.8% (399) advised regular self-examination, and only 3.4% (38) cited insufficient evidence for screening practices; 49% of NCI centers (32/66) recommended screening in high-risk adults compared to 13% of non-NCI centers (135/1047; p = 0.0004); 0.45% of centers (5) mentioned the potential harms of screening, while 3.5% (39) specifically recommended screening for people of color.
Conclusion: Our study reveals that many U.S. cancer centers advise some form of skin cancer screening despite a lack of evidence for or against these practices. Few centers mentioned the potential harms of screening, including overdiagnosis. This indicates a need for stronger evidence for specific screening guidelines and for greater public awareness of the potential benefits and harms of routine skin cancer screening.
{"title":"Skin cancer screening recommendations by U.S. cancer centers: Inconsistency with national guidelines.","authors":"Joyce Lee, Lynn K Han, Luc G T Morris, Deborah Korenstein, Jennifer L Marti","doi":"10.1177/09691413241259991","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241259991","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The incidence of melanoma has increased dramatically over the past four decades, while overall mortality has remained stable. This increase in incidence without a change in overall mortality may be due to overdiagnosis through skin cancer screening. Despite the USPSTF citing insufficient evidence for or against professional skin cancer screening in average-risk adults, U.S. skin cancer screening practices may be leading to overdiagnosis of skin cancers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two reviewers examined the online recommendations for skin cancer screening of 1113 U.S. cancer centers accredited by the Commission on Cancer, including 66 designated by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Recommendations on skin cancer screening, such as age, frequency, and patient population (i.e. high-risk of developing skin cancer, \"people of color\") were documented.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found that 18% of centers (202) recommended professional screening in average-risk adults, 35.8% (399) advised regular self-examination, and only 3.4% (38) cited insufficient evidence for screening practices; 49% of NCI centers (32/66) recommended screening in high-risk adults compared to 13% of non-NCI centers (135/1047; <i>p</i> = 0.0004); 0.45% of centers (5) mentioned the potential harms of screening, while 3.5% (39) specifically recommended screening for people of color.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study reveals that many U.S. cancer centers advise some form of skin cancer screening despite a lack of evidence for or against these practices. Few centers mentioned the potential harms of screening, including overdiagnosis. This indicates a need for stronger evidence for specific screening guidelines and for greater public awareness of the potential benefits and harms of routine skin cancer screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"263-265"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141307301","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-12-01Epub Date: 2024-03-15DOI: 10.1177/09691413241239023
Darren R Brenner, Chantelle Carbonell, Linan Xu, Nicole Nemecek, Huiming Yang
Objective: To quantify the associations between time to colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT+) and colorectal cancer (CRC)-related outcomes in the context of a provincial, population-based CRC screening program.
Setting: Population-based, retrospective cohort study in Alberta, Canada, including Albertans aged 50-74 with at least one FIT+ in 2014-2017.
Methods: Study outcomes were CRC diagnosis after a FIT+ and a diagnostic follow-up colonoscopy in 2014-2019 and CRC stage at diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relative risk of any CRC or advanced-stage CRC. Results were presented as crude odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: Of the 787,967 participants who had a FIT, 63,232 (8%) had a FIT+ and met the study's eligibility criteria. The risk of any CRC or advanced-stage CRC stayed high and was relatively consistent for follow-up colonoscopies performed within 1-12 months of the FIT+. After 12 months, the risk of CRC was considerably higher, particularly for advanced-stage CRC. The OR and aOR for any CRC were 1.40 (95% CI: 1.13-1.73; p < 0.05) and 1.20 (95% CI: 0.96-1.49), respectively, and the OR and aOR for advanced-stage CRC were 1.42 (95% CI: 0.98-2.08) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.59-1.32), respectively, for colonoscopy follow-up within 12-18 months versus 1-2 months.
Conclusions: For Albertans who used FIT for CRC screening, a longer time interval between a FIT+ and follow-up colonoscopy, particularly over 12 months, increases the risk of having CRC and decreases the effectiveness of CRC screening programs.
{"title":"Association between time to colonoscopy after positive fecal testing and colorectal cancer outcomes in Alberta, Canada.","authors":"Darren R Brenner, Chantelle Carbonell, Linan Xu, Nicole Nemecek, Huiming Yang","doi":"10.1177/09691413241239023","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241239023","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To quantify the associations between time to colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT+) and colorectal cancer (CRC)-related outcomes in the context of a provincial, population-based CRC screening program.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Population-based, retrospective cohort study in Alberta, Canada, including Albertans aged 50-74 with at least one FIT+ in 2014-2017.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Study outcomes were CRC diagnosis after a FIT+ and a diagnostic follow-up colonoscopy in 2014-2019 and CRC stage at diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relative risk of any CRC or advanced-stage CRC. Results were presented as crude odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 787,967 participants who had a FIT, 63,232 (8%) had a FIT+ and met the study's eligibility criteria. The risk of any CRC or advanced-stage CRC stayed high and was relatively consistent for follow-up colonoscopies performed within 1-12 months of the FIT+. After 12 months, the risk of CRC was considerably higher, particularly for advanced-stage CRC. The OR and aOR for any CRC were 1.40 (95% CI: 1.13-1.73; <i>p</i> < 0.05) and 1.20 (95% CI: 0.96-1.49), respectively, and the OR and aOR for advanced-stage CRC were 1.42 (95% CI: 0.98-2.08) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.59-1.32), respectively, for colonoscopy follow-up within 12-18 months versus 1-2 months.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For Albertans who used FIT for CRC screening, a longer time interval between a FIT+ and follow-up colonoscopy, particularly over 12 months, increases the risk of having CRC and decreases the effectiveness of CRC screening programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"232-238"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11526417/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140133189","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-12-01Epub Date: 2024-03-07DOI: 10.1177/09691413241237616
Håkan Jonsson, Anne Andersson, Zheng Mao, Lennarth Nyström
Objective: To analyze differences between screen-detected and non-screen-detected invasive breast cancers by tumour characteristics and age at diagnosis in the nationwide population-based mammography screening program in Sweden.
Methods: Data were retrieved from the National Quality Register for Breast Cancer for 2008-2017. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the likelihood for a tumour to be screen-detected by tumour characteristics and age group at diagnosis.
Results: In total there were 51,429 invasive breast cancers in the target age group for mammography screening of 40-74 years. Likelihood of screen detection decreased with larger tumour size, lymph node metastases, higher histological grade and distant metastasis. Odds ratios (ORs) for negative oestrogen (ER) and progesterone (PgR) were 0.41 and 0.57; for positive HER2, 0.62; for Ki-67 high versus low, 0.49. Molecular sub-types had OR of 0.56, 0.40 and 0.28, respectively, for luminal B-like, HER2-positive and triple negative versus luminal A-like. Adjusting for tumour size (T), lymph node status (N), age, year and county at diagnosis slightly elevated the ORs. Statistically significant interactions between tumour characteristics and age were found (p < 0.05) except for ER and PgR. The age group 40-49 deviated most from the other age groups.
Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that screen-detected invasive breast cancers had more favourable tumour characteristics than non-screen-detected after adjusting for age, year and county of diagnosis, and even after adjusting for T and N. The trend towards favourable tumour characteristics was less pronounced in the 40-49 age group compared to the other age groups, except for ER and PgR.
目的分析在瑞典全国范围内开展的基于人群的乳腺放射摄影筛查项目中,根据肿瘤特征和诊断年龄筛查出的浸润性乳腺癌与未筛查出的浸润性乳腺癌之间的差异:数据取自2008-2017年全国乳腺癌质量登记册。采用逻辑回归分析法,根据肿瘤特征和诊断时的年龄组来估计肿瘤被筛查出的可能性:在40-74岁的乳腺放射摄影筛查目标年龄组中,共有51429例浸润性乳腺癌。筛查发现的可能性随着肿瘤体积增大、淋巴结转移、组织学分级升高和远处转移而降低。雌激素(ER)和孕激素(PgR)阴性的比值比(ORs)分别为 0.41 和 0.57;HER2 阳性的比值比为 0.62;Ki-67 高与低的比值比为 0.49。分子亚型方面,管腔 B 型、HER2 阳性和三阴性与管腔 A 型的 OR 值分别为 0.56、0.40 和 0.28。对肿瘤大小(T)、淋巴结状态(N)、年龄、诊断年份和地区进行调整后,ORs略有升高。肿瘤特征与年龄之间存在统计学意义上的交互作用(P 结论:我们的研究表明,筛查发现的乳腺癌与年龄之间的交互作用具有统计学意义:我们的研究表明,筛查出的浸润性乳腺癌与未筛查出的乳腺癌相比,在调整了年龄、诊断年份和县之后,甚至在调整了 T 和 N 之后,都具有更有利的肿瘤特征。
{"title":"Age-specific differences in tumour characteristics between screen-detected and non-screen-detected breast cancers in women aged 40-74 at diagnosis in Sweden from 2008 to 2017.","authors":"Håkan Jonsson, Anne Andersson, Zheng Mao, Lennarth Nyström","doi":"10.1177/09691413241237616","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241237616","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze differences between screen-detected and non-screen-detected invasive breast cancers by tumour characteristics and age at diagnosis in the nationwide population-based mammography screening program in Sweden.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were retrieved from the National Quality Register for Breast Cancer for 2008-2017. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the likelihood for a tumour to be screen-detected by tumour characteristics and age group at diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total there were 51,429 invasive breast cancers in the target age group for mammography screening of 40-74 years. Likelihood of screen detection decreased with larger tumour size, lymph node metastases, higher histological grade and distant metastasis. Odds ratios (ORs) for negative oestrogen (ER) and progesterone (PgR) were 0.41 and 0.57; for positive HER2, 0.62; for Ki-67 high versus low, 0.49. Molecular sub-types had OR of 0.56, 0.40 and 0.28, respectively, for luminal B-like, HER2-positive and triple negative versus luminal A-like. Adjusting for tumour size (T), lymph node status (N), age, year and county at diagnosis slightly elevated the ORs. Statistically significant interactions between tumour characteristics and age were found (<i>p</i> < 0.05) except for ER and PgR. The age group 40-49 deviated most from the other age groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study demonstrates that screen-detected invasive breast cancers had more favourable tumour characteristics than non-screen-detected after adjusting for age, year and county of diagnosis, and even after adjusting for T and N. The trend towards favourable tumour characteristics was less pronounced in the 40-49 age group compared to the other age groups, except for ER and PgR.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"248-257"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11526418/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140061163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-12-01Epub Date: 2024-05-26DOI: 10.1177/09691413241256744
James Y Dai, E Georg Luebeck, Ellen T Chang, Christina A Clarke, Earl A Hubbell, Nan Zhang, Stephen W Duffy
Background: Late-stage cancer incidence has been proposed as an early surrogate for mortality in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cancer screening; however, its validity has not been systematically evaluated across screening RCTs of different cancers.
Methods: We conducted a meta-regression analysis of cancer screening RCTs that reported both late-stage cancer incidence and cancer mortality. Based on a systematic literature review, we included 33 RCTs of screening programs targeting seven cancer types, including lung (n = 12), colorectal (n = 8), breast (n = 5), and prostate (n = 4), among others. We regressed the relative reduction of cancer mortality on the relative reduction of late-stage cancer incidence, inversely weighted for each RCT by the variance of estimated mortality reduction.
Results: Across cancer types, the relative reduction of late-stage cancer incidence was linearly associated with the relative reduction of cancer mortality. Specifically, we observed this association for lung (R2= 0.79 and 0.996 in three recent large trials), breast (R2= 0.94), prostate (R2= 0.98), and colorectal cancer (R2= 0.75 for stage III/IV cancers and 0.93 for stage IV cancers). Trials with a 20% or greater reduction in late-stage cancers were more likely to achieve a significant reduction in cancer mortality. Our results also showed that no reduction of late-stage cancer incidence was associated with no or minimal reduction in cancer mortality.
Conclusions: Meta-regression of historical screening RCTs showed a strong linear association between reductions in late-stage cancer incidence and cancer mortality.
{"title":"Strong association between reduction of late-stage cancers and reduction of cancer-specific mortality in meta-regression of randomized screening trials across multiple cancer types.","authors":"James Y Dai, E Georg Luebeck, Ellen T Chang, Christina A Clarke, Earl A Hubbell, Nan Zhang, Stephen W Duffy","doi":"10.1177/09691413241256744","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241256744","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Late-stage cancer incidence has been proposed as an early surrogate for mortality in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cancer screening; however, its validity has not been systematically evaluated across screening RCTs of different cancers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a meta-regression analysis of cancer screening RCTs that reported both late-stage cancer incidence and cancer mortality. Based on a systematic literature review, we included 33 RCTs of screening programs targeting seven cancer types, including lung (<i>n</i> = 12), colorectal (<i>n</i> = 8), breast (<i>n</i> = 5), and prostate (<i>n</i> = 4), among others. We regressed the relative reduction of cancer mortality on the relative reduction of late-stage cancer incidence, inversely weighted for each RCT by the variance of estimated mortality reduction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across cancer types, the relative reduction of late-stage cancer incidence was linearly associated with the relative reduction of cancer mortality. Specifically, we observed this association for lung (<i>R<sup>2</sup> </i>= 0.79 and 0.996 in three recent large trials), breast (<i>R<sup>2</sup> </i>= 0.94), prostate (<i>R<sup>2</sup> </i>= 0.98), and colorectal cancer (<i>R<sup>2</sup> </i>= 0.75 for stage III/IV cancers and 0.93 for stage IV cancers). Trials with a 20% or greater reduction in late-stage cancers were more likely to achieve a significant reduction in cancer mortality. Our results also showed that no reduction of late-stage cancer incidence was associated with no or minimal reduction in cancer mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Meta-regression of historical screening RCTs showed a strong linear association between reductions in late-stage cancer incidence and cancer mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"211-222"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11528850/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141155535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-12-01Epub Date: 2024-06-07DOI: 10.1177/09691413241248528
Tong Li, M Luke Marinovich, Nick Ormiston-Smith, Brooke Nickel, Andrea Findlay, Nehmat Houssami
This study aimed to estimate participation in private breast screening in Queensland, Australia, where public-funded screening is implemented, and to identify factors associated with the screening setting, using an online survey (999 female respondents aged 40-74). Screening-specific and socio-demographic factors were collected. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with screening setting (public vs private) and screening recency (<2 vs ≥2 years). Participation estimates were 53.2% (95% confidence interval, CI: 50.0%-56.3%) and 10.9% (9.0%-13.0%) for national screening program and private screening, respectively. In the screening setting model, participation in private screening was significantly associated with longer time since last screening (>4 versus <2 years, odds ratio (OR) = 7.3, 95%CI: 4.1-12.9, p < 0.001), having symptoms (OR = 9.5, 5.8-15.5, p < 0.001), younger age (40-49 versus 50-74 years, OR = 1.8, 1.1-3.0, p = 0.018) and having children <18 years in household (OR = 2.4, 1.5-3.9, p < 0.001). In the screening recency model, only screening setting was statistically significant and private screening was associated with screening recency ≥2 years (OR = 4.0, 2.8-5.7, p < 0.001). Around one in nine women screen outside of the BreastScreen Queensland program. Clinical and socio-demographic factors associated with participation in private screening were identified, providing knowledge relevant to the program's endeavours to improve screening participation.
本研究旨在通过在线调查(999 名年龄在 40-74 岁之间的女性受访者),估计澳大利亚昆士兰州私人乳腺筛查的参与情况,并确定与筛查环境相关的因素。调查收集了筛查特定因素和社会人口因素。采用多变量逻辑回归法确定与筛查环境(公立与私立)和筛查次数(4 次与 p p = 0.018)以及有无子女 p p = 0.018 相关的因素。
{"title":"Factors associated with private or public breast cancer screening attendance in Queensland, Australia: A retrospective cross-sectional study.","authors":"Tong Li, M Luke Marinovich, Nick Ormiston-Smith, Brooke Nickel, Andrea Findlay, Nehmat Houssami","doi":"10.1177/09691413241248528","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241248528","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to estimate participation in private breast screening in Queensland, Australia, where public-funded screening is implemented, and to identify factors associated with the screening setting, using an online survey (999 female respondents aged 40-74). Screening-specific and socio-demographic factors were collected. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with screening setting (public vs private) and screening recency (<2 vs ≥2 years). Participation estimates were 53.2% (95% confidence interval, CI: 50.0%-56.3%) and 10.9% (9.0%-13.0%) for national screening program and private screening, respectively. In the screening setting model, participation in private screening was significantly associated with longer time since last screening (>4 versus <2 years, odds ratio (OR) = 7.3, 95%CI: 4.1-12.9, <i>p</i> < 0.001), having symptoms (OR = 9.5, 5.8-15.5, <i>p</i> < 0.001), younger age (40-49 versus 50-74 years, OR = 1.8, 1.1-3.0, <i>p</i> = 0.018) and having children <18 years in household (OR = 2.4, 1.5-3.9, <i>p</i> < 0.001). In the screening recency model, only screening setting was statistically significant and private screening was associated with screening recency ≥2 years (OR = 4.0, 2.8-5.7, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Around one in nine women screen outside of the BreastScreen Queensland program. Clinical and socio-demographic factors associated with participation in private screening were identified, providing knowledge relevant to the program's endeavours to improve screening participation.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"258-262"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141288801","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-12-01Epub Date: 2024-08-07DOI: 10.1177/09691413241264471
Sarah L Nicholson, Heidi Douglas, Stephen Halcrow, Patsy Whelehan
{"title":"Response to the letter: \"Ethics of screening promotion: A slippery slope to forced marketing?\"","authors":"Sarah L Nicholson, Heidi Douglas, Stephen Halcrow, Patsy Whelehan","doi":"10.1177/09691413241264471","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241264471","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"268"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141898919","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-03-21DOI: 10.1177/09691413241232899
Jessica O'Driscoll, Therese Mooney, Paul Kearney, Yvonne Williams, Suzanne Lynch, Alissa Connors, Aideen Larke, Sorcha McNally, Ann O'Doherty, Laura Murphy, Kathleen E Bennett, Patricia Fitzpatrick, Maeve Mullooly, Fidelma Flanagan
Objective: Many population-based breast screening programmes temporarily suspended routine screening following the COVID-19 pandemic onset. This study aimed to describe screening mammography utilisation and the pattern of screen-detected breast cancer diagnoses following COVID-19-related screening disruptions in Ireland.
Methods: Using anonymous aggregate data from women invited for routine screening, three time periods were examined: (1) January-December 2019, (2) January-December 2020, and (3) January-December 2021. Descriptive statistics were conducted and comparisons between groups were performed using chi-square tests.
Results: In 2020, screening mammography capacity fell by 67.1% compared to 2019; recovering to 75% of mammograms performed in 2019, during 2021. Compared to 2019, for screen-detected invasive breast cancers, a reduction in Grade 1 (14.2% vs. 17.2%) and Grade 2 tumours (53.4% vs. 58.0%) and an increase in Grade 3 tumours (32.4% vs. 24.8%) was observed in 2020 (p = 0.03); whereas an increase in Grade 2 tumours (63.3% vs. 58.0%) and a reduction in Grade 3 tumours (19.6% vs. 24.8%) was found in 2021 (p = 0.02). No changes in oestrogen receptor-positive or nodal-positive diagnoses were observed; however the proportion of oestrogen/progesterone receptor-positive breast cancers significantly increased in 2020 (76.2%; p < 0.01) and 2021 (78.7%; p < 0.001) compared to 2019 (67.8%).
Conclusion: These findings demonstrate signs of a grade change for screen-detected invasive breast cancers early in the pandemic, with recovery evident in 2021, and without an increase in nodal positivity. Future studies are needed to determine the COVID-19 impact on long-term breast cancer outcomes including mortality.
{"title":"Examining the impact of COVID-19 disruptions on population-based breast cancer screening in Ireland.","authors":"Jessica O'Driscoll, Therese Mooney, Paul Kearney, Yvonne Williams, Suzanne Lynch, Alissa Connors, Aideen Larke, Sorcha McNally, Ann O'Doherty, Laura Murphy, Kathleen E Bennett, Patricia Fitzpatrick, Maeve Mullooly, Fidelma Flanagan","doi":"10.1177/09691413241232899","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241232899","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Many population-based breast screening programmes temporarily suspended routine screening following the COVID-19 pandemic onset. This study aimed to describe screening mammography utilisation and the pattern of screen-detected breast cancer diagnoses following COVID-19-related screening disruptions in Ireland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using anonymous aggregate data from women invited for routine screening, three time periods were examined: (1) January-December 2019, (2) January-December 2020, and (3) January-December 2021. Descriptive statistics were conducted and comparisons between groups were performed using chi-square tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 2020, screening mammography capacity fell by 67.1% compared to 2019; recovering to 75% of mammograms performed in 2019, during 2021. Compared to 2019, for screen-detected invasive breast cancers, a reduction in Grade 1 (14.2% vs. 17.2%) and Grade 2 tumours (53.4% vs. 58.0%) and an increase in Grade 3 tumours (32.4% vs. 24.8%) was observed in 2020 (<i>p</i> = 0.03); whereas an increase in Grade 2 tumours (63.3% vs. 58.0%) and a reduction in Grade 3 tumours (19.6% vs. 24.8%) was found in 2021 (<i>p</i> = 0.02). No changes in oestrogen receptor-positive or nodal-positive diagnoses were observed; however the proportion of oestrogen/progesterone receptor-positive breast cancers significantly increased in 2020 (76.2%; <i>p</i> < 0.01) and 2021 (78.7%; <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared to 2019 (67.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings demonstrate signs of a grade change for screen-detected invasive breast cancers early in the pandemic, with recovery evident in 2021, and without an increase in nodal positivity. Future studies are needed to determine the COVID-19 impact on long-term breast cancer outcomes including mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"182-190"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11330080/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140177640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-05-26DOI: 10.1177/09691413241255623
Nicholas J Wald, Stephen W Duffy, Allan Hackshaw
{"title":"Risk stratification in medical screening.","authors":"Nicholas J Wald, Stephen W Duffy, Allan Hackshaw","doi":"10.1177/09691413241255623","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413241255623","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"119-120"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141155510","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}