Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013 Apr;70(4):195-203.
doi: 10.1024/0040-5930/a000390.

[Cancer screening - principles, evaluation and implementation]

[Article in German]
Affiliations
Review

[Cancer screening - principles, evaluation and implementation]

[Article in German]
Matthias Egger et al. Ther Umsch. 2013 Apr.

Abstract

Screening for malignant disease aims to reduce the population risk of impaired health due to the tumor in question. Screening does not only entail testing but covers all steps required to achieve the intended reduction in risk, from the appropriate information of the population to a suitable therapy. Screening tests are performed in individuals free or unaware of any symptoms associated with the tumor. An essential condition is a recognizable pathological abnormality, which occurs without symptoms and represents a pre-clinical, early stage of the tumor. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment have only recently been recognized as important problems of screening for malignant disease. Overdiagnosis is defined as a screening-detected tumor that would never have led to symptoms. In prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer 50 % - 70 % of screening-detected cancers represent such overdiagnoses. Similarly, in the case of mammography screening 20 % - 30 % of screening-detected breast cancers are overdiagnoses. The evaluation of screening interventions is often affected by biases such as healthy screenee effects or length and lead time bias. Randomized controlled trials are therefore needed to examine the efficacy and effectiveness of screening interventions and to define the rate of adverse outcomes such as unnecessary diagnostic evaluations, overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Unfortunately there is no independent Swiss body comparable to the National Screening Committee in the United Kingdom or the United States Preventive Services Task Force, which examines screening tests and programs and develops recommendations. Clearly defined goals, a central organization responsible for inviting eligible individuals, documentation and quality assurance and balanced information of the public are important attributes of successful screening programs. In Switzerland the establishment of such programs is hampered by the highly fragmented, Federal health system which allows patients to access specialists directly.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources