[Cancer screening - principles, evaluation and implementation]
- PMID: 23535546
- DOI: 10.1024/0040-5930/a000390
[Cancer screening - principles, evaluation and implementation]
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.
Similar articles
-
Cancer overdiagnosis and overtreatment.Curr Opin Urol. 2012 May;22(3):203-9. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32835259aa. Curr Opin Urol. 2012. PMID: 22472510 Review.
-
[Is the mass screening for prostate cancer justifiable?].Orv Hetil. 2007 Jul 1;148(26):1213-6. doi: 10.1556/OH.2007.28121. Orv Hetil. 2007. PMID: 17588854 Hungarian.
-
PSA-based screening for prostate cancer: how does it compare with other cancer screening tests?Eur Urol. 2008 Aug;54(2):262-73. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.05.032. Epub 2008 May 27. Eur Urol. 2008. PMID: 18556114 Review.
-
Detection of prostate cancer: the impact of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).Can J Urol. 2005 Feb;12 Suppl 1:2-6; discussion 92-3. Can J Urol. 2005. PMID: 15780157 Review.
-
Screening for prostate cancer (PC)--an update on recent findings of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).Urol Oncol. 2008 Sep-Oct;26(5):533-41. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2008.03.011. Urol Oncol. 2008. PMID: 18774469 Clinical Trial.
Cited by
-
Incidence of advanced-stage breast cancer in regular participants of a mammography screening program: a prospective register-based study.BMC Cancer. 2020 Mar 4;20(1):174. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-6646-5. BMC Cancer. 2020. PMID: 32131766 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
