Adherence to follow-up and resource use after abnormal FIT-screening: Evaluation of the Danish colorectal cancer screening program.

Background and study aims The effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening programs depends on adherence to surveillance protocols for screening-positive individuals. We evaluated adherence in the Danish population-based screening program and estimated the volume of diagnostic resources required to achieve this adherence. Patients and methods In this register- and population-based study, we included individuals with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening from 2014 to 2017 and followed them until mid-2022. All endoscopic, imaging, and surgical procedures performed at public and private hospitals were identified. Adherence to national protocols was reported in terms of proportions and timeliness. Use of diagnostic and surveillance procedures was estimated during a 4-year post-screening period. Results Among 82,221 individuals with a positive FIT test, 84% had a baseline colonoscopy within 1 month. After removal of intermediate or high-risk adenomas, 12% and 6%, respectively, did not have any follow-up. Only ~50% had timely surveillance. Approximately 10% to 20%, depending on their referral diagnosis, did not have a second surveillance colonoscopy. In addition, 12% with a negative colonoscopy had a second colonoscopy within 4 years. Conclusions High adherence to baseline colonoscopy after positive FIT-screening is followed by lower adherence throughout the adenoma surveillance program. Better adherence to the guidelines could potentially improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the screening program.

Comparisons of assessment pathways after abnormal mammography screening in Denmark, Norway, and Spain.

PURPOSE: To ensure high-quality screening programmes and effective utilization of resources, it is important to monitor how cancer detection is affected by different strategies performed at recall assessment. This study aimed to describe procedures performed at recall assessment and compare and evaluate the performance of the assessment in Denmark, Norway, and Spain in terms of screen-detected cancer (SDC) and interval cancer (IC) rates. METHODS: We included women aged 50-69 years from Denmark, Norway, and Spain, who were recalled for assessment after screening mammography, and recorded all procedures performed during six months after diagnosis, and the timing of the procedures. Women were followed for two years and screen-detected and interval cancer, and sensitivity of recall was calculated and compared. RESULTS: In total, data from 24,645 Danish, 30,050 Norwegian, and 41,809 Spanish women were included in the study. Most of the women had some assessment within 2 months in all three countries. SDC rates were higher in Denmark (0.57) and Norway (0.60) compared to Spain (0.38), as were the IC rates, i.e. 0.25 and 0.18 vs. 0.12, respectively. The sensitivity of the diagnostic follow-up was somewhat higher in Denmark (98.3%) and Norway (98.2%), compared to Spain (95.4%), but when excluding non-invasive assessment pathways, the sensitivities were comparable. CONCLUSION: This comparison study showed variation in the assessment procedures used in the three countries as well as the SDC and IC rates and the sensitivity of recall.

Value of a catch-up HPV test in women aged 65 and above: A Danish population-based nonrandomized intervention study.

BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) test is replacing cytology as the primary cervical cancer screening test due to superior sensitivity, but in most countries women ≥65 years have never had an HPV test despite they account for around 50% of cervical cancer deaths. We explored the effect of a catch-up HPV test among 65- to 69-year-old women without previous record of HPV-based screening. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This population-based nonrandomized intervention study (quasi-experimental design) included Danish women aged 65 to 69 with no record of cervical cancer screening in the last ≥5.5 years and no HPV-exit test at age 60 to 64 at the time of study inclusion. Eligible women residing in the Central Denmark Region were invited for HPV screening either by attending clinician-based sampling or requesting a vaginal self-sampling kit (intervention group, n = 11,192). Women residing in the remaining four Danish regions received standard care which was the opportunity to have a cervical cytology collected for whatever reason (reference group, n = 33,387). Main outcome measures were detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) per 1,000 women eligible for the screening offer and the benefit-harm ratio of the intervention and standard practice measured as the number of colposcopies needed to detect one CIN2+ case. The minimum follow-up time was 13 months for all tested women (range: 13 to 25 months). In the intervention group, 6,965 (62.2%) were screened within 12 months from the date of study inclusion and 743 (2.2%) women had a cervical cytology collected in the reference group. The CIN2+ detection was significantly higher in the intervention group (3.9, 95% confidence interval (CI): [2.9, 5.3]; p < 0.001; n = 44/11,192) as compared to the reference group (0.3, 95% CI: [0.2, 0.6]; n = 11/33,387). For the benefit-harm ratio, 11.6 (95% CI: [8.5, 15.8]; p = 0.69; n = 511/44) colposcopies were performed to detect one CIN2+ in the intervention group as compared to 10.1 (95% CI: [5.4, 18.8]; n = 111/11) colposcopies in the reference group. The study design entails a risk of confounding due to the lack of randomization. CONCLUSIONS: The higher CIN2+ detection per 1,000 eligible women in the intervention group supports that a catch-up HPV test could potentially improve cervical cancer prevention in older women. This study informs the current scientific debate as to whether women aged 65 and above should be offered a catch-up HPV test if they never had an HPV test. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04114968.

Colorectal cancer screening participation among citizens not recommended to be screened: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening recommend screening of average-risk adults only. In addition, screening of individuals with active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) might result in too many false-positive cases. However, the organisers of CRC screening programmes are often uninformed of whom to exclude due to an elevated CRC risk or active IBD. It is therefore unknown how often high-risk individuals (i.e. individuals with a previous diagnosis of CRC or polyps associated with hereditary CRC syndromes and certain patient groups with a diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or multiple polyps) and individuals with active IBD participate in CRC screening following invitation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from the first two years of the Danish CRC screening programme (2014-2015). Information on invitations, participations and FIT test results were obtained from the national screening database, while information on previous CRC, hereditary CRC syndromes, IBD or multiple polyps diagnoses were obtained from the Danish Cancer Registry and the Danish Patient Register. Screening participation rates and FIT-positive rates were calculated and compared for high-risk invitees, invitees having IBD and an average risk group of remaining invitees not diagnosed with colorectal polyps in 10 years preceding the invitation. RESULTS: When invited to CRC screening, 28-48% of high-risk residents (N: 29; 316; 5584) and 55% of residents with IBD (N: 2217; 6927) chose to participate. The participation rate was significantly higher (67%) among residents without previous colorectal disease, i.e. the average risk group (N = 585,624). In this average group 6.7% of the participants had a positive FIT test. The proportion of positive FIT results was higher among all disease groups (7.7-14.8%), though not statistically significant for participants with prior CRC diagnosis and participants with high-risk IBD. CONCLUSION: When high-risk residents and residents with IBD receive an invitation to CRC screening, many participate despite being recommended not to. The screening program was not intended for these groups and further research is needed as several of these groups have a higher rate of positive screening result than the average risk population.

Variations in pathways and resource use in follow-up after abnormal mammography screening: a nationwide register-based study.

PURPOSE: Mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality, but a successful screening programme depends on both high participation and a sufficient follow-up of abnormalities. This study investigated patterns of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography in Denmark, and whether the variation was associated with health care resource use. METHODS: We included 19,458 women aged 50-69 years with an abnormal screening mammography during a 3-year period of 2014-2016. Women were followed until the end of 2018. Their follow-up pathway was categorized in terms of the timeliness, appropriateness (i.e. whether all recommended diagnostic tests were utilized), and the ratio of benign vs. malignant surgeries. Further, we estimated health care resource use including post-diagnostic imaging and surgery procedures. RESULTS: Ninety-seven percent of women had a diagnostic follow-up test within 6 months and 94% of those had diagnostic procedures in accordance with the recommendations. The proportion with timely follow-up (i.e. within 1 month) was 83%, but varied significantly between administrative regions (p < 0.001), and also between women with a screen-detected cancer and those with a false-positive mammogram (87% vs. 81%, p < 0.001). The ratio between having a benign versus a malignant surgery was 1:8, but it varied depending on which tests were used for diagnosis. The average number of procedures was, generally, in accordance with the recommendations. CONCLUSION: In most cases, follow-up after abnormal screening mammography followed national recommendations. We nevertheless found that this was not always the case in certain subgroups and administrative regions.

Gaps between recommendations and their implementation: A register-based study of follow-up after abnormalities in cervical cancer screening.

Follow-up after screen-detected abnormalities is crucial for the success of cervical cancer screening programs but is usually not closely monitored in official screening statistics. We determined how the follow-up deviated from the recommendations in the Danish organized program. Using Danish nationwide population-based registers, the follow-up pathways of 60,199 women aged 23-59 with non-negative screening samples from 2012 to 2014 were mapped until end of 2018. We studied the timeliness and appropriateness of follow-up tests after cervical cytology screening and the total resource use in accordance with the national recommendations. Regression analyses were used to determine variations in adherence according to age, provider type, region, and history of abnormalities. Among women referred for immediate colposcopy, 91.3% (95% CI: 90.9%-91.6%) attended within four months as recommended, whereas up to about half of the women with a recommendation for a repeat test received this test either too early or very late. Overall, only 43% (95% CI: 42.9%-43.7%) of women with non-negative screening tests received the recommended follow-up, whereas 18% (95% CI: 17.6%-18.2%) received more than was recommended, 35% (95% CI: 34.4%-35.1%) received some follow-up but less than recommended and 4% (95% CI: 3.9%-4.2%) were not followed up at all. These proportions varied by screening diagnosis, woman's age, type of health care provider, region, and history of abnormalities. On average, women underwent more tests of each type than recommended by the guidelines. Deviations from follow-up recommendations are very frequent even in organized cervical screening programs and should be routinely monitored by screening program statistics.

Screening participation after a false positive result in organized cervical cancer screening: a nationwide register-based cohort study.

Our aim was to investigate whether receiving a false positive (FP) cervical cytology result affected subsequent cervical cancer screening participation. This Danish nationwide register-based cohort study included 502,380 women aged 22.5-45 attending cervical cancer screening in 2012-2014 with a normal (n = 501,003) or FP (n = 1,377) cytology screening result. A FP result was defined as a cervical cytology showing high grade cytological abnormalities followed by a normal or 'Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade 1' biopsy result. Women were categorized as subsequent participants if they had a cervical cytology within 24-42 months after their last screening or surveillance test. We compared subsequent participation among women with a normal versus a FP result, using odds ratios including 95% confidence intervals. Participation was slightly higher among women with FP results than among women with normal results (71.5% vs. 69.2%, p = 0.058). After adjustment for age and screening history, women with FP results participated significantly more than women with normal results (OR: 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.35). Women receiving a FP result did not participate less in subsequent cervical cancer screening than women receiving a normal result. In fact, the use of opportunistic screening seemed to be increased among women receiving a FP result.