Knowledge and practices regarding prostate cancer screening in Spanish men: The importance of personal and clinical characteristics (PROSHADE study).

INTRODUCTION: Patients' decisions on prostate cancer (PCa) opportunistic screening may vary. This study aimed to assess how demographic and health-related characteristics may influence knowledge and decisions regarding PCa screening. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among men aged over 40, randomly sampled from the Spanish population, 2022. The survey underwent development and content validation using a modified Delphi method and was administered via telephone. Binomial logistic regression was used to explore the relationship between respondents' characteristics and participants' knowledge and practices concerning PCa and the PSA test. RESULTS: Out of 1,334 men, 1,067 (80%) respondents were interviewed with a mean age of 58.6 years (sd 11.9). Most had secondary or university studies (787, 73.8%) and 61 (5.7%) self-reported their health status as bad or very bad. Most of the respondents (1,018, 95.4%) had knowledge regarding PCa with nearly 70% expressed significant concern about its potential development (720, 70.8%), particularly among those under 64 years (p = 0.001). Out of 847 respondents, 573 (67.7%) reported that they have knowledge regarding the PSA test: 374 (65.4%) reported receiving information from a clinicians, 324 (86.6%) information about the benefits of the test and 189 (49,5%) about its risks, with differences based on educational background. In a multivariable analysis (adjusted for age, educational level and previous prostate problems), respondents with higher levels of education were more likely to have higher knowledge regarding the PSA test (OR 1.75, 95%CI 1.24-2.50, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although most of the patients reported to have knowledge regarding PCa, half of the interviewed men reported knowledge about PSA test. Differences in knowledge prostate cancer screening and undesirable consequences highlight the need to develop and provide tailored information for patients.

The impact of exposure to tobacco smoke and e-cigarettes on asthma-related outcomes: Systematic review informing the EAACI guidelines on environmental science for allergic diseases and asthma.

To inform the clinical practice guidelines' recommendations developed by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology systematic reviews (SR) assessed using GRADE on the impact of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) and active smoking on the risk of new-onset asthma/recurrent wheezing (RW)/low lung function (LF), and on asthma-related outcomes. Only longitudinal studies were included, almost all on combustion cigarettes, only one assessing e-cigarettes and LF. According to the first SR (67 studies), prenatal ETS increases the risk of RW (moderate certainty evidence) and may increase the risk of new-onset asthma and of low LF (low certainty evidence). Postnatal ETS increases the risk of new-onset asthma and of RW (moderate certainty evidence) and may impact LF (low certainty evidence). Combined in utero and postnatal ETS may increase the risk of new-onset asthma (low certainty evidence) and increases the risk of RW (moderate certainty evidence). According to the second SR (24 studies), ETS increases the risk of severe asthma exacerbations and impairs asthma control and LF (moderate certainty evidence). According to the third SR (25 studies), active smoking increases the risk of severe asthma exacerbations and of suboptimal asthma control (moderate certainty evidence) and may impact asthma-related quality-of-life and LF (low certainty evidence).

Latin America and the Caribbean Code Against cancer 1st edition: Environment, occupation, and cancer.

Within the framework of the Latin America and Caribbean region (LAC) Code Against Cancer 1st edition, the current work presents recommendations to reduce exposure to environmental and occupational carcinogenic agents relevant for LAC. Using the methodology established by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in the World Code Against Cancer Framework and experience from developing the European Code Against Cancer 4th edition, a working group of LAC cancer-prevention experts reviewed the list of Group I IARC carcinogenic agents, identified prevalent environmental and occupational exposures in the region, and proposed evidence-based cancer prevention recommendations suited to the epidemiological, socioeconomic, and cultural conditions of LAC countries. Two sets of recommendations were drafted: those targeting the general public and a second set for policymakers. Outdoor and indoor air pollution, ultra-violet radiation and occupational exposures to silica dust, asbestos, benzene, diesel, and welding fumes were identified as prevalent carcinogens in LAC and as agents that could be reduced or eliminated to prevent cancers. Recommendations for additional risk factors were not included due to insufficient data of their attributable burden in LAC (sunbeds, radon, aflatoxin), or lack of a clear preventive action to be taken by the individual (arsenic in drinking water, medical radiation), or lack of evidence of carcinogenicity effect (bisphenol A, phthalates, and pesticides). A broad consensus was reached on environmental and occupational carcinogenic exposures present throughout the LAC region and on individual-level and public policy-level recommendations to reduce or eliminate these exposures. Key educational content for the dissemination of these recommendations was also developed as part of LAC Code Against Cancer 1st Edition.

Latin America and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer 1st edition: Tobacco and nicotine-related products, secondhand smoke, and alcohol and cancer.

Tobacco, secondhand smoke (SHS), and alcohol, all carcinogens, are leading preventable cancer risk factors in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Since 2000, smoking and SHS exposure have significantly decreased in the region. Yet alcohol consumption remains high. The entry of nicotine-related products such as electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) threatens achievements made in tobacco control and chronic diseases prevention, including cancer. E-cigs use is likely associated with smoking initiation among adolescents who had never smoked and dual use with combustible tobacco products. Therefore, the LAC Code Against Cancer recommends to the public actions they can take to reduce their risk of cancer: 1. Don't smoke or use any type of tobacco. If you do, quitting is possible, with professional help if needed. Don't use e-cigarettes either, as they lead to tobacco use. 2. Make your home a smoke-free place. Respect and promote laws that ensure smoke-free spaces to protect our health. and 3. Avoid drinking alcoholic beverages. This helps prevent several types of cancer. The Code recommends to policymakers a package of cost-effective policies based on the MPOWER and SAFER to prevent cancer at the population level. It also recommends that primary care health professionals: 1. Ask all their patients and their families whether they smoke or vape, inform them about the harms of smoking and vaping, and promote tobacco and nicotine related products cessation strategies among users. 2. Inform about the harms of exposure to SHS, especially among children, and promote smoke-free environments, and 3. Prevent alcohol use by their patients and their families, use tools to assess use, intensity, and frequency, and apply brief counseling intervention to support alcohol abstinence in primary care.

Latin America and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer 1st Edition: Medical interventions including hormone replacement therapy and cancer screening.

Prostate, breast, colorectal, cervical, and lung cancers are the leading cause of cancer in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) accounting for nearly 50% of cancer cases and cancer deaths in the region. Following the IARC Code Against Cancer methodology, a group of Latin American experts evaluated the evidence on several medical interventions to reduce cancer incidence and mortality considering the cancer burden in the region. A recommendation to limit the use of HRT was issued based on the risk associated to develop breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer and on growing concerns related to the over-the-counter and without prescription sales, which in turn bias estimations on current use in LAC. In alignment with WHO breast and cervical cancer initiatives, biennial screening by clinical breast examination (performed by trained health professionals) from the age of 40 years and biennial screening by mammography from the age of 50 years to 74, as well as cervical screening by HPV testing (either self-sampling or provider-sampling) every 5-10 years for women aged 30-64 years, were recommended. The steadily increasing rates of colorectal cancer in LAC also led to recommend colorectal screening by occult blood testing every two years or by endoscopic examination of the colorectum every 10 years for both men and women aged 50-74 years. After evaluating the evidence, the experts decided not to issue recommendations for prostate and lung cancer screening; while there was insufficient evidence on prostate cancer mortality reduction by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, there was evidence of mortality reduction by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) targeting high-risk individuals (mainly heavy and/or long-term smokers) but not individuals with average risk to whom recommendations of this Code are directed. Finally, the group of experts adapted the gathered evidence to develop a competency-based online microlearning program for building cancer prevention capacity of primary care health professionals.

Latin American and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer 1st edition: Infections and cancer.

About 13% of all cancers around the world are associated with infectious agents, particularly in low-resource settings. The main infectious agents associated with cancer are Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), that causes gastric cancer, human papillomavirus (HPV) that causes cervical, vulvar, vaginal, penile, anal, and oropharyngeal cancer, hepatitis B and C viruses that cause liver cancer, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), associated with cancers of the cervix, Kaposi sarcoma (KS) and non-Hodgkin´s lymphoma. In Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), about 150,000 cancer cases are caused annually by infections. The LAC Cancer Code Against Cancer consists of a set of 17 evidence-based and individual-level cancer prevention recommendations targeted to the general population, suited to the epidemiological, socioeconomic, and cultural conditions of the region, and tailored to the availability and accessibility of health-care systems. The recommendations with respect to infection-driven malignancies include testing and treating for H. pylori in the context of specific public health programs, vaccination against HPV and Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) and detection and treatment of chronic infections with HBV, Hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HIV, in addition to the promotion of safe sex and use of condoms to prevent sexually transmitted infections (STI). Countries, policy makers, health care systems and individuals should consider the adoption of these recommendations to help reduce the incidence and mortality of infection-related cancers in LAC, to improve quality of life of individuals and reduce the costs of cancer care in the region.

Latin American and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer 1st edition: Weight, physical activity, diet, breastfeeding, and cancer.

In Latin America and the Caribbean a considerable proportion of the population have excess body weight, do not meet the recommendations of physical activity and healthy diet, and have suboptimal rates of breastfeeding. Excess body weight is associated with at least 15 cancer sites, physical activity protects against three cancers, with some evidence suggesting a protective effect for eight more cancer sites, and sedentary behavior probably increases the risk of five cancer sites. Fiber and wholegrains protect against colorectal cancer, high intake of fruits and vegetables could reduce the risk of aerodigestive cancers; processed and red meat increase the risk of colorectal cancer; and very hot beverages are associated with esophageal cancer. Moreover, sugar-sweetened beverages and ultra-processed foods are a convincing cause for excess body weight, increasing cancer risk through this pathway, with some emerging evidence suggesting also direct pathways. Breastfeeding protects against breast cancer, and could protect against ovarian cancer. Taking this evidence into account, the Latin America and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer recommends the general public to maintain a healthy body weight, be physically active and limit sedentary behavior, eat a healthy diet (eat plenty of vegetables, fruits, wholegrains and legumes; avoid sugar-sweetened beverages and processed meat; and limit ultra-processed foods, red meat and very hot beverages), and breastfeed. Moreover, the Latin America and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer also includes a set of public policy recommendations for cancer prevention to inform policy makers and civil society about the need of policies to shape healthy environments and create opportunities to facilitate the adoption of the recommendations directed to the public.

PROSHADE Protocol: Designing and Evaluating a Decision Aid for Promoting Shared Decision Making in Opportunistic Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Mix-Method Study.

Background: Opportunistic prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening may reduce prostate cancer mortality risk but is associated with false positive results, biopsy complications and overdiagnosis. Although different organisations have emphasised the importance of shared decision making (SDM) to assist men in deciding whether to undergo prostate cancer screening, recent evaluations show that the available decision aids fail to facilitate SDM, mainly because they do not consider the patients' perspective in their design. We aim to systematically develop and test a patient decision aid to promote SDM in prostate cancer screening, following the Knowledge to Action framework. Methods: (1) Feasibility study: a quantitative survey evaluating the population and clinician (urologists and general practitioners) knowledge of the benefits and risks derived from PSA determination and the awareness of the available recommendations. Focus groups to explore the challenges patients and clinicians face when discussing prostate cancer screening, the relevance of a decision aid and how best to integrate it into practice. (2) Patient decision aid development: Based on this data, an evidence-based multicomponent SDM patient decision aid will be developed. (3) User-testing: an assessment of the prototype of the initial patient decision aid through a user-testing design based on mix-methods (questionnaire and semi-structured review). The decision aid will be refined through several iterative cycles of feedback and redesign. (4) Validation: an evaluation of the patient decision aid through a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Discussion: The designed patient decision aid will provide balanced information on screening benefits and risks and should help patients to consider their personal preferences and to take a more active role in decision making. Conclusions: The well-designed patient decision aid (PDA) will provide balanced information on screening benefits and risks and help patients consider their personal preferences.

Benefits and harms of annual, biennial, or triennial breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC).

BACKGROUND: Although mammography screening is recommended in most European countries, the balance between the benefits and harms of different screening intervals is still a matter of debate. This review informed the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (BC) recommendations. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to identify RCTs, observational or modelling studies, comparing desirable (BC deaths averted, QALYs, BC stage, interval cancer) and undesirable (overdiagnosis, false positive related, radiation related) effects from annual, biennial, or triennial mammography screening in women of average risk for BC. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We included one RCT, 13 observational, and 11 modelling studies. In women 50-69, annual compared to biennial screening may have small additional benefits but an important increase in false positive results; triennial compared to biennial screening may have smaller benefits while avoiding some harms. In younger women (aged 45-49), annual compared to biennial screening had a smaller gain in benefits and larger harms, showing a less favourable balance in this age group than in women 50-69. In women 70-74, there were fewer additional harms and similar benefits with shorter screening intervals. The overall certainty of the evidence for each of these comparisons was very low. CONCLUSIONS: In women of average BC risk, screening intervals have different trade-offs for each age group. The balance probably favours biennial screening in women 50-69. In younger women, annual screening may have a less favourable balance, while in women aged 70-74 years longer screening intervals may be more favourable.

Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of preoperative MRI in the management of Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). METHODS: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or cohort studies assessing the impact of preoperative breast MRI in surgical outcomes, treatment change or loco-regional recurrence. We provided pooled estimates for odds ratios (OR), relative risks (RR) and proportions and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We included 3 RCTs and 23 observational cohorts, corresponding to 20,415 patients. For initial breast-conserving surgery (BCS), the RCTs showed that MRI may result in little to no difference (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.00) (low certainty); observational studies showed that MRI may have no difference in the odds of re-operation after BCS (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.61) (low certainty); and uncertain evidence from RCTs suggests little to no difference with respect to total mastectomy rate (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.27) (very low certainty). We also found that MRI may change the initial treatment plans in 17% (95% CI 12 to 24%) of cases, but with little to no effect on locoregional recurrence (aHR = 1.18; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.76) (very low certainty). CONCLUSION: We found evidence of low to very low certainty which may suggest there is no improvement of surgical outcomes with pre-operative MRI assessment of women with DCIS lesions. There is a need for large rigorously conducted RCTs to evaluate the role of preoperative MRI in this population. KEY POINTS: • Evidence of low to very low certainty may suggest there is no improvement in surgical outcomes with pre-operative MRI. • There is a need for large rigorously conducted RCTs evaluating the role of preoperative MRI to improve treatment planning for DCIS.

Efficacy and safety of treatment with biologicals for severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: A systematic review for the EAACI guidelines.

This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of biologicals for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) compared with the standard of care. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs. Critical and important CRSwNP-related outcomes were considered. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. RCTs evaluated (dupilumab-2, omalizumab-4, mepolizumab-2, and reslizumab-1) included 1236 adults, with follow-up of 20-64 weeks. Dupilumab reduces the need for surgery (NFS) or oral corticosteroid (OCS) use (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.20-0.39, moderate certainty) and improves with high certainty smell evaluated with UPSIT score (mean difference (MD) +10.54; 95% CI +9.24 to +11.84) and quality of life (QoL) evaluated with SNOT-22 (MD -19.14; 95% CI -22.80 to -15.47), with fewer treatment-related adverse events (TAEs) (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.89-1.02, moderate certainty). Omalizumab reduces NFS (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.78-0.92, high certainty), decreases OCS use (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.10-1.38, moderate certainty), and improves high certainty smell (MD +3.84; 95% CI +3.64 to +4.04) and QoL (MD -15.65; 95% CI -16.16 to -15.13), with increased TAE (RR 1.73; 95% CI 0.60-5.03, moderate certainty). There is low certainty for mepolizumab reducing NFS (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.64-0.94) and improving QoL (MD -13.3; 95% CI -23.93 to -2.67) and smell (MD +0.7; 95% CI -0.48 to +1.88), with increased TAEs (RR 1.64; 95% CI 0.41-6.50). The evidence for reslizumab is very uncertain.

Digital breast tomosynthesis compared to diagnostic mammographic projections (including magnification) among women recalled at screening mammography: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC).

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic mammography projections (DxMM) have been traditionally used in the assessment of women recalled after a suspicious screening mammogram. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) reduces the tissue overlap effect, thus improving image assessment. Some studies have suggested DBT might replace DxMM with at least equivalent performance. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the replacement of DxMM with DBT in women recalled at screening. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify diagnostic paired cohort studies or RCTs comparing DBT vs DxMM, published in English that: reported accuracy outcomes, recruited women recalled for assessment at mammography screening, and included a reference standard. Subgroup analysis was performed over lesion characteristics. We provided pooled accuracy estimates and differences between tests using a quadrivariate model. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We included ten studies that reported specificity and sensitivity. One study included 7060 women while the remaining included between 52 and 738 women. DBT compared with DxMM showed a pooled difference for the sensitivity of 2% (95% CI 1%-3%) and a pooled difference for the specificity of 6% (95%CI 2%-11%). Restricting the analysis to the six studies that included women with microcalcification lesions gave similar results. In the context of a prevalence of 21% of breast cancer (BC) in recalled women, DBT probably detects 4 (95% CI 2-6) more BC cases and has 47 (95%CI 16-87) fewer false-positive results per 1000 assessments. The certainty of the evidence was moderate due to risk of bias. CONCLUSION: The evidence in the assessment of screen-recalled findings with DBT is sparse and of moderate certainty. DBT probably has higher sensitivity and specificity than DxMM. Women, health care providers and policymakers might value as relevant the reduction of false-positive results and related fewer invasive diagnostic procedures with DBT, without missing BC cases.

Recommendations from the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer for multigene testing to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early breast cancer, hormone receptor positive, HER-2 negative.

BACKGROUND: Predicting the risk of recurrence and response to chemotherapy in women with early breast cancer is crucial to optimise adjuvant treatment. Despite the common practice of using multigene tests to predict recurrence, existing recommendations are inconsistent. Our aim was to formulate healthcare recommendations for the question "Should multigene tests be used in women who have early invasive breast cancer, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy?" METHODS: The European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC) Guidelines Development Group (GDG), a multidisciplinary guideline panel including experts and three patients, developed recommendations informed by systematic reviews of the evidence. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence to Decision frameworks were used. Four multigene tests were evaluated: the 21-gene recurrence score (21-RS), the 70-gene signature (70-GS), the PAM50 risk of recurrence score (PAM50-RORS), and the 12-gene molecular score (12-MS). RESULTS: Five studies (2 marker-based design RCTs, two treatment interaction design RCTs and 1 pooled individual data analysis from observational studies) were included; no eligible studies on PAM50-RORS or 12-MS were identified and the GDG did not formulate recommendations for these tests. CONCLUSIONS: The ECIBC GDG suggests the use of the 21-RS for lymph node-negative women (conditional recommendation, very low certainty of evidence), recognising that benefits are probably larger in women at high risk of recurrence based on clinical characteristics. The ECIBC GDG suggests the use of the 70-GS for women at high clinical risk (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence), and recommends not using 70-GS in women at low clinical risk (strong recommendation, low certainty of evidence).

Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: A systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Mammography screening is generally accepted in women aged 50-69, but the balance between benefits and harms remains controversial in other age groups. This study systematically reviews these effects to inform the European Breast Cancer Guidelines. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or systematic reviews of observational studies in the absence of RCTs comparing invitation to mammography screening to no invitation in women at average breast cancer (BC) risk. We extracted data for mortality, BC stage, mastectomy rate, chemotherapy provision, overdiagnosis and false-positive-related adverse effects. We performed a pooled analysis of relative risks, applying an inverse-variance random-effects model for three age groups (<50, 50-69 and 70-74). GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We identified 10 RCTs including 616,641 women aged 38-75. Mammography reduced BC mortality in women aged 50-69 (relative risk (RR) 0.77, 95%CI (confidence interval) 0.66-0.90, high certainty) and 70-74 (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.54-1.09, high certainty), with smaller reductions in under 50s (RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.76-1.02, moderate certainty). Mammography reduced stage IIA+ in women 50-69 (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.64-1.00, very low certainty) but resulted in an overdiagnosis probability of 23% (95%CI 18-27%) and 17% (95%CI 15-20%) in under 50s and 50-69, respectively (moderate certainty). Mammography was associated with 2.9% increased risk of invasive procedures with benign outcomes (low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: For women 50-69, high certainty evidence that mammography screening reduces BC mortality risk would support policymakers formulating strong recommendations. In other age groups, where the net balance of effects is less clear, conditional recommendations will be more likely, together with shared decision-making.

Adherence to breast cancer guidelines is associated with better survival outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies in EU countries.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) clinical guidelines offer evidence-based recommendations to improve quality of healthcare for patients with or at risk of BC. Suboptimal adherence to recommendations has the potential to negatively affect population health. However, no study has systematically reviewed the impact of BC guideline adherence -as prognosis factor- on BC healthcare processes and health outcomes. The objectives are to analyse the impact of guideline adherence on health outcomes and on healthcare costs. METHODS: We searched systematic reviews and primary studies in MEDLINE and Embase, conducted in European Union (EU) countries (inception to May 2019). Eligibility assessment, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted by one author and crosschecked by a second. We used random-effects meta-analyses to examine the impact of guideline adherence on overall survival and disease-free survival, and assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. RESULTS: We included 21 primary studies. Most were published during the last decade (90%), followed a retrospective cohort design (86%), focused on treatment guideline adherence (95%), and were at low (80%) or moderate (20%) risk of bias. Nineteen studies (95%) examined the impact of guideline adherence on health outcomes, while two (10%) on healthcare cost. Adherence to guidelines was associated with increased overall survival (HR = 0.67, 95%CI 0.59-0.76) and disease-free survival (HR = 0.35, 95%CI 0.15-0.82), representing 138 more survivors (96 more to 178 more) and 336 patients free of recurrence (73 more to 491 more) for every 1000 women receiving adherent CG treatment compared to those receiving non-adherent treatment at 5 years follow-up (moderate certainty). Adherence to treatment guidelines was associated with higher costs, but adherence to follow-up guidelines was associated with lower costs (low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Our review of EU studies suggests that there is moderate certainty that adherence to BC guidelines is associated with an improved survival. BC guidelines should be rigorously implemented in the clinical setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ( CRD42018092884 ).

Monitoring and evaluation of breast cancer screening programmes: selecting candidate performance indicators.

BACKGROUND: In the scope of the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC) the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) subgroup was tasked to identify breast cancer screening programme (BCSP) performance indicators, including their acceptable and desirable levels, which are associated with breast cancer (BC) mortality. This paper documents the methodology used for the indicator selection. METHODS: The indicators were identified through a multi-stage process. First, a scoping review was conducted to identify existing performance indicators. Second, building on existing frameworks for making well-informed health care choices, a specific conceptual framework was developed to guide the indicator selection. Third, two group exercises including a rating and ranking survey were conducted for indicator selection using pre-determined criteria, such as: relevance, measurability, accurateness, ethics and understandability. The selected indicators were mapped onto a BC screening pathway developed by the M&E subgroup to illustrate the steps of BC screening common to all EU countries. RESULTS: A total of 96 indicators were identified from an initial list of 1325 indicators. After removing redundant and irrelevant indicators and adding those missing, 39 candidate indicators underwent the rating and ranking exercise. Based on the results, the M&E subgroup selected 13 indicators: screening coverage, participation rate, recall rate, breast cancer detection rate, invasive breast cancer detection rate, cancers > 20 mm, cancers ≤10 mm, lymph node status, interval cancer rate, episode sensitivity, time interval between screening and first treatment, benign open surgical biopsy rate, and mastectomy rate. CONCLUSION: This systematic approach led to the identification of 13 BCSP candidate performance indicators to be further evaluated for their association with BC mortality.

Healthcare providers' adherence to breast cancer guidelines in Europe: a systematic literature review.

PURPOSE: Clinical guidelines' (CGs) adherence supports high-quality care. However, healthcare providers do not always comply with CGs recommendations. This systematic literature review aims to assess the extent of healthcare providers' adherence to breast cancer CGs in Europe and to identify the factors that impact on healthcare providers' adherence. METHODS: We searched for systematic reviews and quantitative or qualitative primary studies in MEDLINE and Embase up to May 2019. The eligibility assessment, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted by one author and cross-checked by a second author. We conducted a narrative synthesis attending to the modality of the healthcare process, methods to measure adherence, the scope of the CGs, and population characteristics. RESULTS: Out of 8137 references, we included 41 primary studies conducted in eight European countries. Most followed a retrospective cohort design (19/41; 46%) and were at low or moderate risk of bias. Adherence for overall breast cancer care process (from diagnosis to follow-up) ranged from 54 to 69%; for overall treatment process [including surgery, chemotherapy (CT), endocrine therapy (ET), and radiotherapy (RT)] the median adherence was 57.5% (interquartile range (IQR) 38.8-67.3%), while for systemic therapy (CT and ET) it was 76% (IQR 68-77%). The median adherence for the processes assessed individually was higher, ranging from 74% (IQR 10-80%), for the follow-up, to 90% (IQR 87-92.5%) for ET. Internal factors that potentially impact on healthcare providers' adherence were their perceptions, preferences, lack of knowledge, or intentional decisions. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of breast cancer patients are not receiving CGs-recommended care. Healthcare providers' adherence to breast cancer CGs in Europe has room for improvement in almost all care processes. CGs development and implementation processes should address the main factors that influence healthcare providers' adherence, especially patient-related ones. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42018092884).

Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis: A Synopsis of the European Breast Guidelines.

Description: The European Commission Initiative for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis guidelines (European Breast Guidelines) are coordinated by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre. The target audience for the guidelines includes women, health professionals, and policymakers. Methods: An international guideline panel of 28 multidisciplinary members, including patients, developed questions and corresponding recommendations that were informed by systematic reviews of the evidence conducted between March 2016 and December 2018. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to structure the process and minimize the influence of competing interests by enhancing transparency. Questions and recommendations, expressed as strong or conditional, focused on outcomes that matter to women and provided a rating of the certainty of evidence. Recommendations: This synopsis of the European Breast Guidelines provides recommendations regarding organized screening programs for women aged 40 to 75 years who are at average risk. The recommendations address digital mammography screening and the addition of hand-held ultrasonography, automated breast ultrasonography, or magnetic resonance imaging compared with mammography alone. The recommendations also discuss the frequency of screening and inform decision making for women at average risk who are recalled for suspicious lesions or who have high breast density.