Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 36
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Lancet Oncol ; 21(9): 1165-1172, 2020 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32800099

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The appropriate age range for breast cancer screening remains a matter of debate. We aimed to estimate the effect of mammographic screening at ages 40-48 years on breast cancer mortality. METHODS: We did a randomised, controlled trial involving 23 breast screening units across Great Britain. We randomly assigned women aged 39-41 years, using individual randomisation, stratified by general practice, in a 1:2 ratio, to yearly mammographic screening from the year of inclusion in the trial up to and including the calendar year that they reached age 48 years (intervention group), or to standard care of no screening until the invitation to their first National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) screen at approximately age 50 years (control group). Women in the intervention group were recruited by postal invitation. Women in the control group were unaware of the study. The primary endpoint was mortality from breast cancers (with breast cancer coded as the underlying cause of death) diagnosed during the intervention period, before the participant's first NHSBSP screen. To study the timing of the mortality effect, we analysed the results in different follow-up periods. Women were included in the primary comparison regardless of compliance with randomisation status (intention-to-treat analysis). This Article reports on long-term follow-up analysis. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN24647151. FINDINGS: 160 921 women were recruited between Oct 14, 1990, and Sept 24, 1997. 53 883 women (33·5%) were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 106 953 (66·5%) to the control group. Between randomisation and Feb 28, 2017, women were followed up for a median of 22·8 years (IQR 21·8-24·0). We observed a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality at 10 years of follow-up, with 83 breast cancer deaths in the intervention group versus 219 in the control group (relative rate [RR] 0·75 [95% CI 0·58-0·97]; p=0·029). No significant reduction was observed thereafter, with 126 deaths versus 255 deaths occurring after more than 10 years of follow-up (RR 0·98 [0·79-1·22]; p=0·86). INTERPRETATION: Yearly mammography before age 50 years, commencing at age 40 or 41 years, was associated with a relative reduction in breast cancer mortality, which was attenuated after 10 years, although the absolute reduction remained constant. Reducing the lower age limit for screening from 50 to 40 years could potentially reduce breast cancer mortality. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.


Asunto(s)
Factores de Edad , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Mamografía/normas , Adulto , Anciano , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Mamoplastia , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sistema de Registros , Reino Unido
2.
Cancer ; 124(6): 1197-1206, 2018 03 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29211316

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening significantly reduced prostate cancer mortality (rate ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.91). The US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) trial indicated no such reduction but had a wide 95% CI (rate ratio for prostate cancer mortality, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36). Standard meta-analyses are unable to account for key differences between the trials that can impact the estimated effects of screening and the trials' point estimates. METHODS: The authors calibrated 2 microsimulation models to individual-level incidence and mortality data from 238,936 men participating in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. A cure parameter for the underlying efficacy of screening was estimated by the models separately for each trial. The authors changed step-by-step major known differences in trial settings, including enrollment and attendance patterns, screening intervals, PSA thresholds, biopsy receipt, control arm contamination, and primary treatment, to reflect a more ideal protocol situation and differences between the trials. RESULTS: Using the cure parameter estimated for the ERSPC, the models projected 19% to 21% and 6% to 8%, respectively, prostate cancer mortality reductions in the ERSPC and PLCO settings. Using this cure parameter, the models projected a reduction of 37% to 43% under annual screening with 100% attendance and biopsy compliance and no contamination. The cure parameter estimated for the PLCO trial was 0. CONCLUSIONS: The observed cancer mortality reduction in screening trials appears to be highly sensitive to trial protocol and practice settings. Accounting for these differences, the efficacy of PSA screening in the PLCO setting is not necessarily inconsistent with ERSPC results. Cancer 2018;124:1197-206. © 2017 American Cancer Society.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Anciano , Biopsia , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Análisis de Supervivencia , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
3.
Health Expect ; 21(4): 764-773, 2018 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29457677

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes using a guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBt) reduce CRC mortality. Interval cancers are diagnosed between screening rounds: reassurance from a negative gFOBt has the potential to influence the pathway to diagnosis of an interval colorectal cancer. METHODS: Twenty-six semi-structured face-to-face interviews were carried out in Scotland and England, with individuals diagnosed with an interval colorectal cancer following a negative gFOBt result. RESULTS: Participants reported they were reassured by a negative gFOBt, interpreting their result as an "all clear". Therefore, most did not suspect cancer as a possible cause of symptoms and many did not recall their screening result during symptom appraisal. Among those who did consider cancer, and did think about their screening test result, reassurance from a negative gFOBt led some to "downplay" the seriousness of their symptoms with some interviewees explicitly stating that their negative test result contributed to a delayed decision to seek help. CONCLUSION: Screening participants need to be informed of the limitations of screening and the ongoing risk of developing colorectal cancer even when in receipt of a negative result: the importance of minimizing delay in seeking medical advice for colorectal symptoms should be emphasized.


Asunto(s)
Concienciación , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Conducta de Búsqueda de Ayuda , Tamizaje Masivo , Sangre Oculta , Anciano , Inglaterra , Femenino , Guayaco , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Investigación Cualitativa , Escocia , Factores de Tiempo
4.
Ann Intern Med ; 167(7): 449-455, 2017 Oct 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28869989

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The ERSPC (European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer) found that screening reduced prostate cancer mortality, but the PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial) found no reduction. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality relative to no screening differed between the ERSPC and PLCO. DESIGN: Cox regression of prostate cancer death in each trial group, adjusted for age and trial. Extended analyses accounted for increased incidence due to screening and diagnostic work-up in each group via mean lead times (MLTs), which were estimated empirically and using analytic or microsimulation models. SETTING: Randomized controlled trials in Europe and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Men aged 55 to 69 (ERSPC) or 55 to 74 (PLCO) years at randomization. INTERVENTION: Prostate cancer screening. MEASUREMENTS: Prostate cancer incidence and survival from randomization; prostate cancer incidence in the United States before screening began. RESULTS: Estimated MLTs were similar in the ERSPC and PLCO intervention groups but were longer in the PLCO control group than the ERSPC control group. Extended analyses found no evidence that effects of screening differed between trials (P = 0.37 to 0.47 [range across MLT estimation approaches]) but strong evidence that benefit increased with MLT (P = 0.0027 to 0.0032). Screening was estimated to confer a 7% to 9% reduction in the risk for prostate cancer death per year of MLT. This translated into estimates of 25% to 31% and 27% to 32% lower risk for prostate cancer death with screening as performed in the ERSPC and PLCO intervention groups, respectively, compared with no screening. LIMITATION: The MLT is a simple metric of screening and diagnostic work-up. CONCLUSION: After differences in implementation and settings are accounted for, the ERSPC and PLCO provide compatible evidence that screening reduces prostate cancer mortality. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Anciano , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Factores de Tiempo , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
5.
Health Expect ; 20(4): 584-592, 2017 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27414462

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening using a faecal occult blood test (FOBt) has the potential to reduce cancer-related mortality. Symptom vigilance remains crucial as a proportion of cancers will be diagnosed between screening rounds. A negative FOBt has the potential to influence how participants respond to future symptoms of CRC. OBJECTIVE: To explore (i) understanding of a negative FOBt and (ii) the potential impact of a negative FOBt upon future symptom appraisal and help-seeking behaviour. DESIGN: Qualitative methodology utilizing focus groups with participants who received a negative FOBt within the National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in Coventry and Lothian. Topics explored included: experience of screening participation, interpretation and understanding of a negative result, symptom awareness and attitudes towards help-seeking. RESULTS: Four broad themes were identified: (i) emotional response to a negative FOBt, (ii) understanding the limitations of FOBt screening, (iii) symptom knowledge and interpretation and (iv) over-reassurance from a negative FOBt. Participants were reassured by a negative FOBt, but there was variability in the extent to which the result was interpreted as an "all clear". Some participants acknowledged the residual risk of cancer and the temporal characteristic of the result, while others were surprised that the result was not a guarantee that they did not have cancer. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Participants recognized that reassurance from a negative FOBt could lead to a short-term delay in help-seeking if symptoms developed. Screening programmes should seek to emphasize the importance of the temporal nature of FOBt results with key messages about symptom recognition and prompt help-seeking behaviour.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Conducta de Búsqueda de Ayuda , Tamizaje Masivo , Sangre Oculta , Anciano , Concienciación , Inglaterra , Femenino , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Escocia
6.
Br J Cancer ; 115(12): 1479-1486, 2016 Dec 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27875518

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England offers biennial guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBt). There is a socioeconomic gradient in participation and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups have worse colorectal cancer survival than more advantaged groups. We compared the effectiveness and cost of an enhanced reminder letter with the usual reminder letter on overall uptake of gFOBt and the socioeconomic gradient in uptake. METHODS: We enhanced the usual reminder by including a heading 'A reminder to you' and a short paragraph restating the offer of screening in simple language. We undertook a cluster-randomised trial of all 168 480 individuals who were due to receive a reminder over 20 days in 2013. Randomisation was based on the day of invitation. Blinding of individuals was not possible, but the possibility of bias was minimal owing to the lack of direct contact with participants. The enhanced reminder was sent to 78 067 individuals and 90 413 received the usual reminder. The primary outcome was the proportion of people adequately screened and its variation by quintile of Index of Multiple Deprivation. Data were analysed by logistic regression with conservative variance estimates to take account of cluster randomisation. RESULTS: There was a small but statistically significant (P=0.001) increase in participation with the enhanced reminder (25.8% vs 25.1%). There was significant (P=0.005) heterogeneity of the effect by socioeconomic status with an 11% increase in the odds of participation in the most deprived quintile (from 13.3 to 14.1%) and no increase in the least deprived. We estimated that implementing the enhanced reminder nationally could result in up to 80 more people with high or intermediate risk colorectal adenomas and up to 30 more cancers detected each year if it were implemented nationally. The intervention incurred a small one-off cost of £78 000 to modify the reminder letter. CONCLUSIONS: The enhanced reminder increases overall uptake and reduces the socioeconomic gradient in bowel cancer screening participation at little additional cost.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Sistemas Recordatorios , Factores Socioeconómicos , Anciano , Análisis por Conglomerados , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino
7.
Lancet Oncol ; 16(9): 1123-1132, 2015 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26206144

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Age-specific effects of mammographic screening, and the timing of such effects, are a matter of debate. The results of the UK Age trial, which compared the effect of invitation to annual mammographic screening from age 40 years with commencement of screening at age 50 years on breast cancer mortality, have been reported at 10 years of follow-up and showed no significant difference in mortality between the trial groups. Here, we report the results of the UK Age trial after 17 years of follow-up. METHODS: Women aged 39-41 from 23 UK NHS Breast Screening Programme units years were randomly assigned by individual randomisation (1:2) to either an intervention group offered annual screening by mammography up to and including the calendar year of their 48th birthday or to a control group receiving usual medical care (invited for screening at age 50 years and every 3 years thereafter). Both groups were stratified by general practice. We compared breast cancer incidence and mortality by time since randomisation. Analyses included all women randomly assigned who could be traced with the National Health Service Central Register and who had not died or emigrated before entry. The primary outcome measures were mortality from breast cancer (defined as deaths with breast cancer coded as the underlying cause of death) and breast cancer incidence, including in-situ, invasive, and total incidence. Because there is an interest in the timing of the mortality effect, we analysed the results in different follow-up periods. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN24647151. FINDINGS: Between Oct 14, 1990, and Sept 25, 1997, 160 921 participants were randomly assigned; 53 883 women in the intervention group and 106 953 assigned to usual medical care were included in this analysis. After a median follow-up of 17 years (IQR 16·8-18·8), the rate ratio (RR) for breast cancer mortality was 0·88 (95% CI 0·74-1·04) from tumours diagnosed during the intervention phase. A significant reduction in breast cancer mortality was noted in the intervention group compared with the control group in the first 10 years after diagnosis (RR 0·75, 0·58-0·97) but not thereafter (RR 1·02, 0·80-1·30) from tumours diagnosed during the intervention phase. The overall breast cancer incidence during 17 year follow-up was similar between the intervention group and the control group (RR 0·98, 0·93-1·04). INTERPRETATION: Our results support an early reduction in mortality from breast cancer with annual mammography screening in women aged 40-49 years. Further data are needed to fully understand long-term effects. Cumulative incidence figures suggest at worst a small amount of overdiagnosis. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and the American Cancer Society. Past funding was received from the Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, the UK Department of Health, and the US National Cancer Institute.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mama/patología , Mamografía , Adulto , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Femenino , Humanos , Estados Unidos
8.
Lancet ; 384(9959): 2027-35, 2014 Dec 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25108889

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The European Randomised study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has shown significant reductions in prostate cancer mortality after 9 years and 11 years of follow-up, but screening is controversial because of adverse events such as overdiagnosis. We provide updated results of mortality from prostate cancer with follow-up to 2010, with analyses truncated at 9, 11, and 13 years. METHODS: ERSPC is a multicentre, randomised trial with a predefined centralised database, analysis plan, and core age group (55-69 years), which assesses prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in eight European countries. Eligible men aged 50-74 years were identified from population registries and randomly assigned by computer generated random numbers to screening or no intervention (control). Investigators were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was prostate cancer mortality in the core age group. Analysis was by intention to treat. We did a secondary analysis that corrected for selection bias due to non-participation. Only incidence and no mortality data at 9 years' follow-up are reported for the French centres. This study is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN49127736. FINDINGS: With data truncated at 13 years of follow-up, 7408 prostate cancer cases were diagnosed in the intervention group and 6107 cases in the control group. The rate ratio of prostate cancer incidence between the intervention and control groups was 1·91 (95% CI 1·83-1·99) after 9 years (1·64 [1·58-1·69] including France), 1·66 (1·60-1·73) after 11 years, and 1·57 (1·51-1·62) after 13 years. The rate ratio of prostate cancer mortality was 0·85 (0·70-1·03) after 9 years, 0·78 (0·66-0·91) after 11 years, and 0·79 (0·69-0·91) at 13 years. The absolute risk reduction of death from prostate cancer at 13 years was 0·11 per 1000 person-years or 1·28 per 1000 men randomised, which is equivalent to one prostate cancer death averted per 781 (95% CI 490-1929) men invited for screening or one per 27 (17-66) additional prostate cancer detected. After adjustment for non-participation, the rate ratio of prostate cancer mortality in men screened was 0·73 (95% CI 0·61-0·88). INTERPRETATION: In this update the ERSPC confirms a substantial reduction in prostate cancer mortality attributable to testing of PSA, with a substantially increased absolute effect at 13 years compared with findings after 9 and 11 years. Despite our findings, further quantification of harms and their reduction are still considered a prerequisite for the introduction of populated-based screening. FUNDING: Each centre had its own funding responsibility.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Anciano , Europa (Continente) , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antígeno Prostático Específico/análisis
9.
N Engl J Med ; 366(11): 981-90, 2012 Mar 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22417251

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Several trials evaluating the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing on prostate-cancer mortality have shown conflicting results. We updated prostate-cancer mortality in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer with 2 additional years of follow-up. METHODS: The study involved 182,160 men between the ages of 50 and 74 years at entry, with a predefined core age group of 162,388 men 55 to 69 years of age. The trial was conducted in eight European countries. Men who were randomly assigned to the screening group were offered PSA-based screening, whereas those in the control group were not offered such screening. The primary outcome was mortality from prostate cancer. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 11 years in the core age group, the relative reduction in the risk of death from prostate cancer in the screening group was 21% (rate ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 0.91; P=0.001), and 29% after adjustment for noncompliance. The absolute reduction in mortality in the screening group was 0.10 deaths per 1000 person-years or 1.07 deaths per 1000 men who underwent randomization. The rate ratio for death from prostate cancer during follow-up years 10 and 11 was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.85; P=0.003). To prevent one death from prostate cancer at 11 years of follow-up, 1055 men would need to be invited for screening and 37 cancers would need to be detected. There was no significant between-group difference in all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses after 2 additional years of follow-up consolidated our previous finding that PSA-based screening significantly reduced mortality from prostate cancer but did not affect all-cause mortality. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49127736.).


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Causas de Muerte , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/prevención & control , Riesgo
10.
N Engl J Med ; 367(7): 595-605, 2012 Aug 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22894572

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: After 11 years of follow-up, the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) reported a 29% reduction in prostate-cancer mortality among men who underwent screening for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. However, the extent to which harms to quality of life resulting from overdiagnosis and treatment counterbalance this benefit is uncertain. METHODS: On the basis of ERSPC follow-up data, we used Microsimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN) to predict the number of prostate cancers, treatments, deaths, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained after the introduction of PSA screening. Various screening strategies, efficacies, and quality-of-life assumptions were modeled. RESULTS: Per 1000 men of all ages who were followed for their entire life span, we predicted that annual screening of men between the ages of 55 and 69 years would result in nine fewer deaths from prostate cancer (28% reduction), 14 fewer men receiving palliative therapy (35% reduction), and a total of 73 life-years gained (average, 8.4 years per prostate-cancer death avoided). The number of QALYs that were gained was 56 (range, -21 to 97), a reduction of 23% from unadjusted life-years gained. To prevent one prostate-cancer death, 98 men would need to be screened and 5 cancers would need to be detected. Screening of all men between the ages of 55 and 74 would result in more life-years gained (82) but the same number of QALYs (56). CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of PSA screening was diminished by loss of QALYs owing to postdiagnosis long-term effects. Longer follow-up data from both the ERSPC and quality-of-life analyses are essential before universal recommendations regarding screening can be made. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and others.).


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Calidad de Vida , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Anciano , Errores Diagnósticos/efectos adversos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/efectos adversos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/psicología , Europa (Continente) , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
11.
Epidemiology ; 26(4): 590-6, 2015 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25767987

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Ongoing breast cancer screening programs can only be evaluated using observational study designs. Most studies have observed a reduction in breast cancer mortality, but design differences appear to have resulted in different estimates. Direct comparison of case-control and trial analyses gives more insight into this variation. Here, we performed case-control analyses within the randomized UK Age Trial. METHODS: The Age Trial assessed the effect of screening on breast cancer mortality in women ages 40-49 years. In our approach, case subjects were defined as breast cancer deaths between trial entry (1991-1997) and 2004. Women were ages 39-41 years at entry. For every case subject, five control subjects were selected. All case subjects were included in analyses of screening invitation (356 case subjects, 1,780 controls), whereas analyses of attendance were restricted to women invited to screening (105 case subjects, 525 age-matched controls). Odds ratios (OR) were estimated with conditional logistic regression. We used and compared two methods to correct for self-selection bias. RESULTS: Screening invitation resulted in a breast cancer mortality reduction of 17% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -36%, +6%), similar to trial results. Different exposure definitions and self-selection adjustments influenced the observed breast cancer mortality reduction. Depending on the method, "ever screened" appeared to be associated with a small reduction (OR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.40, 1.89) or no reduction (OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.48, 2.14) using the two methods of correction. Recent attendance resulted in an adjusted mortality reduction of 36% (95% CI: -69%, +31%) or 45% (95% CI: -71%, +5%). CONCLUSIONS: Observational studies, and particularly case-control studies, are an important monitoring tool for breast cancer screening programs. The focus should be on diminishing bias in observational studies and gaining a better understanding of the influence of study design on estimates of mortality reduction.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/mortalidad , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Mamografía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Sesgo de Selección , Reino Unido/epidemiología
12.
Endoscopy ; 46(3): 203-11, 2014 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24473907

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Adenoma detection is a key objective of colonoscopy, particularly in the context of colorectal cancer screening. The aim of this observational study was to identify the technical colonoscopy factors associated with adenoma detection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study analyzed data from the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. The indication for all colonoscopies was a positive fecal occult blood test. The relationships between the following colonoscopy factors and adenoma detection (one or more adenomas, advanced adenomas, right-sided adenomas, and total number of adenomas) were examined in multivariable analyses: bowel preparation quality, cecal intubation, withdrawal time, rectal retroversion, colonoscopist experience, antispasmodic use, sedation use, and start time of procedure. The following patient factors were controlled for: age, sex, body mass index, smoking, alcohol, deprivation, and geographical location. RESULTS: A total of 31088 colonoscopies were analyzed. The following technical factors increased the relative risk of adenoma detection (P < 0.001 in multivariable analysis unless otherwise stated): cecal intubation, increased withdrawal time, higher quality bowel preparation, intravenous antispasmodic use, earlier procedure start time within a session (P = 0.018), and greater colonoscopist experience. Detection of advanced and right-sided adenomas also increased with these factors. Adenoma detection did not differ between sedated and unsedated colonoscopy (P = 0.143). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated important associations between colonoscopy practice and adenoma detection. Use of intravenous antispasmodic was associated with increased adenoma detection. The effect of the start time of colonoscopy suggests that endoscopist fatigue may have a deleterious impact on adenoma detection.


Asunto(s)
Adenoma/diagnóstico , Colonoscopía/normas , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Anciano , Ciego , Competencia Clínica , Colon Ascendente/patología , Sedación Profunda/estadística & datos numéricos , Inglaterra , Femenino , Humanos , Intubación Gastrointestinal , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Parasimpatolíticos/administración & dosificación , Factores de Tiempo
13.
Gut ; 61(7): 1050-7, 2012 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21940723

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Colonoscopy is central to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Success of CRC screening is dependent on colonoscopy quality. The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) offers biennial faecal occult blood (FOB) testing to 60-74 year olds and colonoscopy to those with positive FOB tests. All colonoscopists in the screening programme are required to meet predetermined standards before starting screening and are subject to ongoing quality assurance. In this study, the authors examine the quality of colonoscopy in the NHS BCSP and describe new and established measures to assess and maintain quality. DESIGN: The NHS BCSP database collects detailed data on all screening colonoscopies. Prospectively collected data from the first 3 years of the programme (August 2006 to August 2009) were analysed. Colonoscopy quality indicators (adenoma detection rate (ADR), polyp detection rate, colonoscopy withdrawal time, caecal intubation rate, rectal retroversion rate, polyp retrieval rate, mean sedation doses, patient comfort scores, bowel preparation quality and adverse event incidence) were calculated along with measures of total adenoma detection. RESULTS: 2,269,983 individuals returned FOB tests leading to 36,460 colonoscopies. Mean unadjusted caecal intubation rate was 95.2%, and mean withdrawal time for normal procedures was 9.2 min. The mean ADR per colonoscopist was 46.5%. The mean number of adenomas per procedure (MAP) was 0.91; the mean number of adenomas per positive procedure (MAP+) was 1.94. Perforation occurred after 0.09% of procedures. There were no procedure-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The NHS BCSP provides high-quality colonoscopy, as demonstrated by high caecal intubation rate, ADR and comfort scores, and low adverse event rates. Quality is achieved by ensuring BCSP colonoscopists meet a high standard before starting screening and through ongoing quality assurance. Measuring total adenoma detection (MAP and MAP+) as adjuncts to ADR may further enhance quality assurance.


Asunto(s)
Adenoma/diagnóstico , Colonoscopía/normas , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Adenoma/epidemiología , Anciano , Colonoscopía/efectos adversos , Colonoscopía/métodos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sangre Oculta , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Medicina Estatal , Reino Unido
14.
Breast Cancer Res ; 14(6): R152, 2012 Nov 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23194032

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to mammography screening, defined as the diagnosis of screen-detected cancers that would not have presented clinically in a women's lifetime in the absence of screening, has emerged as a highly contentious issue, as harm caused may question the benefit of mammographic screening. Most studies included women over 50 years old and little information is available for younger women. METHODS: We estimated the overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to screening in women aged 40 to 49 years using data from a randomised trial of annual mammographic screening starting at age 40 conducted in the UK. A six-state Markov model was constructed to estimate the sensitivity of mammography for invasive and in situ breast cancer and the screen-detectable mean sojourn time for non-progressive in situ, progressive in situ, and invasive breast cancer. Then, a 10-state simulation model of cancer progression, screening, and death, was developed to estimate overdiagnosis attributable to screening. RESULTS: The sensitivity of mammography for invasive and in situ breast cancers was 90% (95% CI, 72 to 99) and 82% (43 to 99), respectively. The screen-detectable mean sojourn time of preclinical non-progressive and progressive in situ cancers was 1.3 (0.4 to 3.4) and 0.11 (0.05 to 0.19) years, respectively, and 0.8 years (0.6 to 1.2) for preclinical invasive breast cancer. The proportion of screen-detected in situ cancers that were non-progressive was 55% (25 to 77) for the first and 40% (22 to 60) for subsequent screens. In our main analysis, overdiagnosis was estimated as 0.7% of screen-detected cancers. A sensitivity analysis, covering a wide range of alternative scenarios, yielded a range of 0.5% to 2.9%. CONCLUSION: Although a high proportion of screen-detected in situ cancers were non-progressive, a majority of these would have presented clinically in the absence of screening. The extent of overdiagnosis due to screening in women aged 40 to 49 was small. Results also suggest annual screening is most suitable for women aged 40 to 49 in the United Kingdom due to short cancer sojourn times.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Mamografía/efectos adversos , Adulto , Carcinoma in Situ/diagnóstico , Errores Diagnósticos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reino Unido
15.
N Engl J Med ; 360(13): 1320-8, 2009 Mar 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19297566

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer was initiated in the early 1990s to evaluate the effect of screening with prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing on death rates from prostate cancer. METHODS: We identified 182,000 men between the ages of 50 and 74 years through registries in seven European countries for inclusion in our study. The men were randomly assigned to a group that was offered PSA screening at an average of once every 4 years or to a control group that did not receive such screening. The predefined core age group for this study included 162,243 men between the ages of 55 and 69 years. The primary outcome was the rate of death from prostate cancer. Mortality follow-up was identical for the two study groups and ended on December 31, 2006. RESULTS: In the screening group, 82% of men accepted at least one offer of screening. During a median follow-up of 9 years, the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer was 8.2% in the screening group and 4.8% in the control group. The rate ratio for death from prostate cancer in the screening group, as compared with the control group, was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.98; adjusted P=0.04). The absolute risk difference was 0.71 death per 1000 men. This means that 1410 men would need to be screened and 48 additional cases of prostate cancer would need to be treated to prevent one death from prostate cancer. The analysis of men who were actually screened during the first round (excluding subjects with noncompliance) provided a rate ratio for death from prostate cancer of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: PSA-based screening reduced the rate of death from prostate cancer by 20% but was associated with a high risk of overdiagnosis. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49127736.)


Asunto(s)
Tamizaje Masivo , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Biopsia , Tacto Rectal , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cooperación del Paciente , Próstata/patología , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Calidad de Vida , Sistema de Registros , Análisis de Regresión , Riesgo , Ultrasonografía
16.
BJU Int ; 107(12): 1912-7, 2011 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20950305

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: • To assess possible excess mortality associated with prostate biopsy among screening participants of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: • From three centres in the ERSPC (Finland, The Netherlands and Sweden) 50,194 screened men aged 50.2-78.4 years were prospectively followed. A cohort of 12,959 first-time screening-positive men (i.e. with biopsy indication) was compared with another cohort of 37,235 first-time screening-negative men. • Overall mortality rates (i.e. other cause than prostate cancer mortality) were calculated and the 120-day and 1-year cumulative mortality were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method, with a log-rank test for statistical significance. • Incidence rate ratios (RR) and statistical significance were evaluated using Poisson regression analyses, adjusting for age, total PSA level, screening centre and whether a biopsy indication was present, or whether a biopsy was actually performed or not. RESULTS: • There was no statistically significant difference in cumulative 120-day other cause mortality between the two groups of men: 0.24% (95% CI, 0.17-0.34) for screening-positive men vs 0.24% (95% CI, 0.20-0.30) for screening-negative men (P= 0.96). This implied no excess mortality for screening-positive men. • Screening-positive men who were not biopsied (n= 1238) had a more than fourfold risk of other cause mortality during the first 120 days compared to screening-negative men: RR, 4.52 (95% CI, 2.63-7.74) (P < 0.001), adjusted for age, whereas men who were actually biopsied (n= 11,721) had half the risk: RR, 0.41 (95% CI, 0.23-0.73) (P= 0.002), adjusted for age. • Only 14/31 (45%) of the screening-positive men who died within 120 days were biopsied and none died as an obvious complication to the biopsy. CONCLUSION: • Prostate biopsy is not associated with excess mortality and fatal complications appear to be very rare.


Asunto(s)
Biopsia con Aguja/mortalidad , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Sepsis/mortalidad , Anciano , Métodos Epidemiológicos , Finlandia/epidemiología , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Antígeno Prostático Específico/metabolismo , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Sepsis/etiología , Suecia/epidemiología
17.
BMC Cancer ; 10: 35, 2010 Feb 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20144221

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) is known to be positively associated with breast cancer risk but its relationship with mammographic density, a marker of susceptibility to breast cancer, is unclear. This study aims to investigate whether mammographic density varies by SES and to identify the underlying anthropometric, lifestyle and reproductive factors leading to such variation. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study of mammographic density in 487 pre-menopausal women, SES was assessed from questionnaire data using highest achieved level of formal education, quintiles of Census-derived Townsend scores and urban/rural classification of place of residence. Mammographic density was measured on digitised films using a computer-assisted method. Linear regression models were fitted to assess the association between SES variables and mammographic density, adjusting for correlated variables. RESULTS: In unadjusted models, percent density was positively associated with SES, with an absolute difference in percent density of 6.3% (95% CI 1.6%, 10.5%) between highest and lowest educational categories, and of 6.6% (95% CI -0.7%, 12.9%) between highest and lowest Townsend quintiles. These associations were mainly driven by strong negative associations between these SES variables and lucent area and were attenuated upon adjustment for body mass index (BMI). There was little evidence that reproductive factors explained this association. SES was not associated with the amount of dense tissue in the breast before or after BMI adjustment. The effect of education on percent density persisted after adjustment for Townsend score. Mammographic measures did not vary according to urban/rural place of residence. CONCLUSIONS: The observed SES gradients in percent density paralleled known SES gradients in breast cancer risk. Although consistent with the hypothesis that percent density may be a mediator of the SES differentials in breast cancer risk, the SES gradients in percent density were mainly driven by the negative association between SES and BMI. Nevertheless, as density affects the sensitivity of screen-film mammography, the higher percent density found among high SES women would imply that these women have a higher risk of developing cancer but a lower likelihood of having it detected earlier.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Mama/patología , Mamografía/métodos , Adulto , Índice de Masa Corporal , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Estadísticos , Premenopausia , Análisis de Regresión , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Clase Social
18.
Med Phys ; 37(9): 4530-9, 2010 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20964170

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To compare and evaluate intensity-based registration methods for computation of serial x-ray mammogram correspondence. METHODS: X-ray mammograms were simulated from MRIs of 20 women using finite element methods for modeling breast compressions and employing a MRI/x-ray appearance change model. The parameter configurations of three registration methods, affine, fluid, and free-form deformation (FFD), were optimized for registering x-ray mammograms on these simulated images. Five mammography film readers independently identified landmarks (tumor, nipple, and usually two other normal features) on pairs of diagnostic and corresponding prediagnostic digitized images from 52 breast cancer cases. Landmarks were independently reidentified by each reader. Target registration errors were calculated to compare the three registration methods using the reader landmarks as a gold standard. Data were analyzed using multilevel methods. RESULTS: Between-reader variability varied with landmark (p < 0.01) and screen (p = 0.03), with between-reader mean distance (mm) in point location on the diagnostic/prediagnostic images of 2.50 (95% CI 1.95, 3.15)/2.84 (2.24, 3.55) for nipples and 4.26 (3.43, 5.24)/4.76 (3.85, 5.84) for tumors. Registration accuracy was sensitive to the type of landmark and the amount of breast density. For dense breasts (> or = 40%), the affine and fluid methods outperformed FFD. For breasts with lower density, the affine registration surpassed both fluid and FFD. Mean accuracy (mm) of the affine registration varied between 3.16 (95% CI 2.56, 3.90) for nipple points in breasts with density 20%-39% and 5.73 (4.80, 6.84) for tumor points in breasts with density < 20%. CONCLUSIONS: Affine registration accuracy was comparable to that between independent film readers. More advanced two-dimensional nonrigid registration algorithms were incapable of increasing the accuracy of image alignment when compared to affine registration.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador/métodos , Mamografía/métodos , Radiología/métodos , Adulto , Algoritmos , Automatización , Femenino , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Teóricos , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador
19.
Breast Cancer Res ; 11(3): R33, 2009.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19490643

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Mammographic breast density is one of the strongest known markers of susceptibility to breast cancer. To date research into density has relied on a single measure (for example, percent density (PD)) summarising the average level of density for the whole breast, with no consideration of how the radiodense tissue may be distributed. This study aims to investigate the spatial distribution of density within the breast using 493 mammographic images from a sample of 165 premenopausal women (~3 medio-lateral oblique views per woman). METHODS: Each breast image was divided into 48 regions and the PD for the whole breast (overall PD) and for each one of its regions (regional PD) was estimated. The spatial autocorrelation (Moran's I value) of regional PD for each image was calculated to investigate spatial clustering of density, whether the degree of clustering varied between a woman's two breasts and whether it was affected by age and other known density correlates. RESULTS: The median Moran's I value for 165 women was 0.31 (interquartile range: 0.26, 0.37), indicating a clustered pattern. High-density areas tended to cluster in the central regions of the breast, regardless of the level of overall PD, but with considerable between-woman variability in regional PD. The degree of clustering was similar between a woman's two breasts (mean within-woman difference in Moran's I values between left and right breasts = 0.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.01, 0.01); P = 0.76) and did not change with aging (mean within-woman difference in I values between screens taken on average 8 years apart = 0.01 (95% CI = -0.01, 0.02); P = 0.30). Neither parity nor age at first birth affected the level of spatial autocorrelation of density, but increasing body mass index (BMI) was associated with a decrease in the degree of spatial clustering. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to demonstrate that the distribution of radiodense tissue within the breast is spatially autocorrelated, generally with the high-density areas clustering in the central regions of the breast. The degree of clustering was similar within a woman's two breasts and between women, and was little affected by age or reproductive factors although it declined with increasing BMI.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Mamografía/métodos , Adulto , Índice de Masa Corporal , Mama/patología , Análisis por Conglomerados , Susceptibilidad a Enfermedades , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo
20.
Eur Urol ; 76(1): 43-51, 2019 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30824296

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has previously demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening decreases prostate cancer (PCa) mortality. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether PSA screening decreases PCa mortality for up to 16yr and to assess results following adjustment for nonparticipation and the number of screening rounds attended. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicentre population-based randomised screening trial was conducted in eight European countries. Report includes 182160 men, followed up until 2014 (maximum of 16yr), with a predefined core age group of 162389 men (55-69yr), selected from population registry. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The outcome was PCa mortality, also assessed with adjustment for nonparticipation and the number of screening rounds attended. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The rate ratio of PCa mortality was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.89, p<0.001) at 16yr. The difference in absolute PCa mortality increased from 0.14% at 13yr to 0.18% at 16yr. The number of men needed to be invited for screening to prevent one PCa death was 570 at 16yr compared with 742 at 13yr. The number needed to diagnose was reduced to 18 from 26 at 13yr. Men with PCa detected during the first round had a higher prevalence of PSA >20ng/ml (9.9% compared with 4.1% in the second round, p<0.001) and higher PCa mortality (hazard ratio=1.86, p<0.001) than those detected subsequently. CONCLUSIONS: Findings corroborate earlier results that PSA screening significantly reduces PCa mortality, showing larger absolute benefit with longer follow-up and a reduction in excess incidence. Repeated screening may be important to reduce PCa mortality on a population level. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes from prostate cancer in a large European population. We found that repeated screening reduces the risk of dying from prostate cancer.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Anciano , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Factores de Tiempo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA