UK Lung Cancer RCT Pilot Screening Trial: baseline findings from the screening arm provide evidence for the potential implementation of lung cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening using low-dose CT (LDCT) was shown to reduce lung cancer mortality by 20% in the National Lung Screening Trial. METHODS: The pilot UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) is a randomised controlled trial of LDCT screening for lung cancer versus usual care. A population-based questionnaire was used to identify high-risk individuals. CT screen-detected nodules were managed by a pre-specified protocol. Cost effectiveness was modelled with reference to the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial mortality reduction. RESULTS: 247 354 individuals aged 50-75 years were approached; 30.7% expressed an interest, 8729 (11.5%) were eligible and 4055 were randomised, 2028 into the CT arm (1994 underwent a CT). Forty-two participants (2.1%) had confirmed lung cancer, 34 (1.7%) at baseline and 8 (0.4%) at the 12-month scan. 28/42 (66.7%) had stage I disease, 36/42 (85.7%) had stage I or II disease. 35/42 (83.3%) had surgical resection. 536 subjects had nodules greater than 50 mm(3) or 5 mm diameter and 41/536 were found to have lung cancer. One further cancer was detected by follow-up of nodules between 15 and 50 mm(3) at 12 months. The baseline estimate for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of once-only CT screening, under the UKLS protocol, was £8466 per quality adjusted life year gained (CI £5542 to £12 569). CONCLUSIONS: The UKLS pilot trial demonstrated that it is possible to detect lung cancer at an early stage and deliver potentially curative treatment in over 80% of cases. Health economic analysis suggests that the intervention would be cost effective-this needs to be confirmed using data on observed lung cancer mortality reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 78513845.

Recognition of cancer warning signs and anticipated delay in help-seeking in a population sample of adults in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Not recognising a symptom as suspicious is a common reason given by cancer patients for delayed help-seeking; but inevitably this is retrospective. We therefore investigated associations between recognition of warning signs for breast, colorectal and lung cancer and anticipated time to help-seeking for symptoms of each cancer. METHODS: Computer-assisted telephone interviews were conducted with a population-representative sample (N=6965) of UK adults age ≥ 50 years, using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer scale. Anticipated time to help-seeking for persistent cough, rectal bleeding and breast changes was categorised as >2 vs ≤ 2 weeks. Recognition of persistent cough, unexplained bleeding and unexplained lump as cancer warning signs was assessed (yes/no). Associations between recognition and help-seeking were examined for each symptom controlling for demographics and perceived ease of health-care access. RESULTS: For each symptom, the odds of waiting for >2 weeks were significantly increased in those who did not recognise the related warning sign: breast changes: OR=2.45, 95% CI 1.47-4.08; rectal bleeding: OR=1.77, 1.36-2.30; persistent cough: OR=1.30, 1.17-1.46, independent of demographics and health-care access. CONCLUSION: Recognition of warning signs was associated with anticipating faster help-seeking for potential symptoms of cancer. Strategies to improve recognition are likely to facilitate earlier diagnosis.

Differences in cancer awareness and beliefs between Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership): do they contribute to differences in cancer survival?

BACKGROUND: There are wide international differences in 1-year cancer survival. The UK and Denmark perform poorly compared with other high-income countries with similar health care systems: Australia, Canada and Sweden have good cancer survival rates, Norway intermediate survival rates. The objective of this study was to examine the pattern of differences in cancer awareness and beliefs across these countries to identify where these might contribute to the pattern of survival. METHODS: We carried out a population-based telephone interview survey of 19079 men and women aged ≥ 50 years in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer measure. RESULTS: Awareness that the risk of cancer increased with age was lower in the UK (14%), Canada (13%) and Australia (16%) but was higher in Denmark (25%), Norway (29%) and Sweden (38%). Symptom awareness was no lower in the UK and Denmark than other countries. Perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation were highest in the UK, in particular being worried about wasting the doctor's time (UK 34%; Canada 21%; Australia 14%; Denmark 12%; Norway 11%; Sweden 9%). CONCLUSION: The UK had low awareness of age-related risk and the highest perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation, but symptom awareness in the UK did not differ from other countries. Denmark had higher awareness of age-related risk and few perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation. This suggests that other factors must be involved in explaining Denmark's poor survival rates. In the UK, interventions that address barriers to prompt presentation in primary care should be developed and evaluated.