First results from five multidisciplinary diagnostic centre (MDC) projects for non-specific but concerning symptoms, possibly indicative of cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-specific symptoms often experience longer times to diagnosis and poorer clinical outcomes than those with site-specific symptoms. This paper reports initial results from five multidisciplinary diagnostic centre (MDC) projects in England, piloting rapid referral for patients with non-specific symptoms. METHODS: The evaluation covered MDC activity from 1st December 2016 to 31st July 2018, with projects using a common dataset. Logistical regression analyses were conducted, with a diagnosis of any cancer as the dependent variable. Exploratory analysis was conducted on presenting symptoms and diagnoses of cancer, and on comparisons within these groupings. RESULTS: In total, 2961 patients were referred into the MDCs and 241 cancers were diagnosed. The pathway detected cancers across a broad range of tumour sites, including several rare and less common cancers. An association between patient age and cancer was identified (p < 0.001). GP 'clinical suspicion' was identified as a strong predictor of cancer (p = 0.006), with a reduced association with cancer observed in patients with higher numbers of GP consultation before referral (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The MDC model diagnoses cancer in patients with non-specific symptoms, with a conversion rate of 8%, demonstrating the diagnostic potential of a non-site-specific symptomatic referral pathway.

Impact of choice of volumetry software and nodule management guidelines on recall rates in lung cancer screening.

PURPOSE: Appropriate lung nodule management is essential to minimizing unnecessary patient recall in lung cancer screening. Two European guidelines provide differing recommendations in that participants with nodules ≥100 mm3 or ≥80 mm3 respectively should be recalled, at baseline. Nodule size estimation is known to vary between volumetry software packages (VSPs). The aim of this study was to examine the impact of choice of VSP on participant recall rates, when applying different European nodule management guidelines. An additional aim was to compare recall rates between 7 VSPs and manual diameter measurements. METHODS: 156 small-sized lung nodules (50-150 mm3) from the UK Lung Screening trial were measured using 7 different VSPs (VSP1-7) and also using manual diameter. The type of VSP used in the NELSON study (VSP1), on which European nodule management guidelines are based, provided the reference standard. Nodule size was compared using Bland Altman, and recall rates by Mcnemar's test. RESULTS: Compared to the reference standard, a 100 mm3 threshold for recall, resulted in no difference in recall rates only for VSP 5 & 7. Using an 80mm3 threshold resulted in no difference in recall rates for VSP2 & 6. Recall rates were significantly higher for VSP 4 regardless of threshold and when using manual diameter measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate nodule size thresholds for recall in screening depend on the type of volumetry software used. The results highlight the importance of benchmarking of volumetry packages.

Towards evidence-based follow-up intervals for breast cancer survivors: Estimates of the preclinical detectable phase of contralateral second breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Follow-up schemes in breast cancer survivors are predominantly consensus-based. To determine evidence-based follow-up intervals, estimates of sensitivity of the screening test(s) and duration of the preclinical detectable phase (PCDP) are key. We estimated the sensitivity and the duration of the PCDP of clinical breast examination (CBE) and mammography for the detection of contralateral second breast cancers (CBC) in breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Women with a CBC (N = 589) diagnosed in Florence between 1980 and 2005 were included. Test sensitivity and the duration of PCDP were estimated using a simple exponential model of PCDP duration. Analyses were stratified by follow-up period (0-5 vs. >5 years after primary diagnosis) and age at CBC diagnosis (<50 vs. ≥50 years). RESULTS: For CBE, test sensitivity was 55% and the duration of the PCDP 16 months. Mammography sensitivity was 91% and duration of the PCDP 35 months. Stratified analyses showed a higher test sensitivity for CBE for women aged <50 (70% vs. 51%). No difference in the duration of PCDP of CBE was found. For mammography, test sensitivity and the duration of the PCDP were higher for women with longer follow-up and in older women. CONCLUSIONS: Poor test sensitivity for CBE with a shorter duration of the PCDP compared with mammography were observed. Mammography had high test sensitivity and the potential to detect CBCs early. The estimated duration of the PCDP (35 months) was considerably longer than the recommended follow-up interval (12 months). Future studies are needed to determine whether a longer follow-up interval is appropriate.

The impact of mammography screening programmes on incidence of advanced breast cancer in Europe: a literature review.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have reported conflicting results on the impact of mammography service screening programmes on the advanced breast cancer rate (ABCR), a correlation that was firmly established in randomized controlled trials. We reviewed and summarized studies of the effect of service screening programmes in the European Union on ABCR and discussed their limitations. METHODS: The PubMed database was searched for English language studies published between 01-01-2000 and 01-06-2018. After inspection of titles and abstracts, 220 of the 8644 potentially eligible papers were considered relevant. Their abstracts were reviewed by groups of two authors using predefined criteria. Fifty studies were selected for full paper review, and 22 of these were eligible. A theoretical framework for their review was developed. Review was performed using a ten-point checklist of the methodological caveats in the analysis of studies of ABCR and a standardised assessment form designed to extract quantitative and qualitative information. RESULTS: Most of the evaluable studies support a reduction in ABCR following the introduction of screening. However, all studies were challenged by issues of design and analysis which could at least potentially cause bias, and showed considerable variation in the estimated effect. Problems were observed in duration of follow-up time, availability of reliable reference ABCR, definition of advanced stage, temporal variation in the proportion of unknown-stage cancers, and statistical approach. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that much of the current controversy on the impact of service screening programmes on ABCR is due to observational data that were gathered and/or analysed with methodological approaches which could not capture stage effects in full. Future research on this important early indicator of screening effectiveness should focus on establishing consensus in the correct methodology.

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.

CT screening for lung cancer: Is the evidence strong enough?

The prevailing questions at this time in both the public mind and the clinical establishment is, do we have sufficient evidence to implement lung cancer Computed Tomography (CT) screening in Europe? If not, what is outstanding? This review addresses the twelve major areas, which are critical to any decision to implement CT screening and where we need to assess whether we have sufficient evidence to proceed to a recommendation for implementation in Europe. The readiness level of these twelve categories in 2015 have been with colour coded, where green indicates we have sufficient evidence, amber is borderline evidence and red requires further evidence. Recruitment from the 'Hard to Reach' community still remains at red, while mortality data, cost effectiveness and screening interval are all categorised as amber. The integration of smoking cessation into CT screening programmes is still considered to be category amber. The US Preventive Services Task Force have recommended that CT screening is implemented in the USA utilising the NLST criteria, apart from continuing screening to 80 years of age. The cost effectiveness of the NLST was calculated to be $81,000/QALY, however, its well recognised that the costs of medical care in the USA, is far higher than that of Europe. Medicare have agreed to cover the cost of screening but have stipulated a number of stringent requirements for inclusion. To date we do not have good CT screening mortality data available in Europe and eagerly await the publication of the NELSON trial data in 2016 and then the pooled UKLS and NELSON data thereafter. However in the meantime we should start planning for implementation in Europe, especially in the areas of the radiological service provision and accreditation, as well as identifying novel mechanisms to recruit from the hardest to reach communities.

Overdiagnosis associated with breast cancer screening: A simulation study to compare lead-time adjustment methods.

OBJECTIVE: Estimating overdiagnosis associated with breast cancer screening may use annual incidence rates of cancer. We simulated populations invited to screening programmes to assess two lead-time adjustment methods. METHODS: Overdiagnosis estimates were computed using the compensatory drop method, which considered the decrease in incidence of cancers among older age groups no longer offered screening, and the method based on the decrease in incidence of late-stage cancers. RESULTS: The true value of overdiagnosis was 0% in all the data sets simulated. The compensatory drop method yielded an overdiagnosis estimate of -0.1% (95% credibility interval -0.5% to 0.5%) when participation rates among the population and risk of cancers were constant. However, if participation rates increased with calendar year as well as risk of cancer with birth cohorts, the overdiagnosis estimated was 11.0% (10.5-11.6%). Using the method based on the incidence of early- and late-stage cancers, overdiagnosis estimates were 8.9% (8.5-9.3%) and 17.6% (17.4-17.9%) when participation rates and risks of cancer were constant or increased with time, respectively. CONCLUSION: Adjustment for lead time based on the compensatory drop method is accurate only when participation rates and risks of cancer remain constant, whereas the adjustment method based on the incidence of early- and late-stage cancers results in overestimating overdiagnosis regardless of stability of participation rates and breast cancer risk.

Likely effect of adding flexible sigmoidoscopy to the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: impact on colorectal cancer cases and deaths.

BACKGROUND: From 2013, once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) at age 55 is being phased into the England National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (NHSBCSP), augmenting biennial guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) at ages 60-74. Here, we project the impact of this change on colorectal cancer (CRC) cases and deaths prevented in England by mid-2030. METHODS: We simulated the life-course of English residents reaching age 55 from 2013 onwards. Model inputs included population numbers, invitation rates and CRC incidence and mortality rates. The impact of gFOBT and FS alone on CRC incidence and mortality were derived from published trials, assuming an uptake of 50% for FS and 57% for gFOBT. For FS plus gFOBT, we assumed the gFOBT effect to be 75% of the gFOBT alone impact. RESULTS: By mid-2030, 8.5 million individuals will have been invited for once-only FS screening. Adding FS to gFOBT screening is estimated to prevent an extra 9627 (-10%) cases and 2207 (-12%) deaths by mid-2030. If FS uptake is 38% or 71%, respectively, an extra 7379 (-8%) or 13 689 (-15%) cases and 1691 (-9%) or 3154 (-17%) deaths will be prevented by mid-2030. CONCLUSIONS: Adding once-only FS at age 55 to the NHSBCSP will prevent ∼10,000 CRC cases and ∼2000 CRC deaths by mid-2030 if FS uptake is 50%. In 2030, one cancer was estimated to be prevented per 150 FS screening episodes, and one death prevented per 900 FS screening episodes. The actual reductions will depend on the FS invitation schedule and uptake rates.

A telephone reminder intervention to improve breast screening information and access.

OBJECTIVES: In the UK, women aged 50-70 are offered breast cancer screening every three years. Screening participation rates in London have been particularly low. Low rates have been associated with low socio-economic status, and some ethnic groups have been observed to be underserved by cancer screening. This paper reports on a telephone reminder intervention in London Newham, an area of high deprivation and ethnic diversity. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study of planned intervention. METHODS: Women invited for breast screening were telephoned to confirm receipt of the invitation letter, remind invitees of their upcoming appointment, and to provide further information. Aggregate data at general practice level on invitation to and attendance at breast screening and on numbers reached by telephone were analysed by logistic regression. RESULTS: For the 29 participating GP practices (10,928 invitees) overall uptake in 2010 was higher compared to the previous screening round in 2007 (67% vs. 51%; p < 0.001). On average 59% of invitees were reached by the reminder calls. A 10% increase in women reached resulted in an 8% increase in the odds of women attending their screening appointment (95% CI: 5%-11%), after adjusting for 2007 attendance rates. Practices with a higher proportion of South Asian women were associated with a larger uptake adjusted for 2007 uptake and population reached by the telephone intervention, (4% increase in odds of attendance per 10% increase in South Asian population, CI 1%-7%, p = 0.003) while practices with a higher proportion of black women were associated with a smaller uptake similarly adjusted. (11% decrease in odds of attendance per 10% increase in black population, CI 9%-16%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A language- and culture-sensitive programme of reminder calls substantially improved breast cancer screening uptake.

Evaluation of a service intervention to improve awareness and uptake of bowel cancer screening in ethnically-diverse areas.

BACKGROUND: Uptake of bowel cancer screening is lowest in London, in populations of lower socio-economic status, and in particular ethnic or religious groups. METHODS: We report on the evaluation of two interventions to improve uptake in an area including populations of low socio-economic status and considerable ethnic diversity. The interventions were face-to-face health promotion on bowel cancer screening at invitees' general practice and health promotion delivered by telephone only. Nine large general practices in East London were chosen at random to offer face-to-face health promotion, and nine other large practices to offer telephone health promotion, with 24 practices of similar size as comparators. Data at practice level were analysed by Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon tests and grouped-logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 2034 invitees in the telephone intervention practices, 1852 in the face-to-face intervention practices and 5227 in the comparison practices. Median gFOBt kit uptake in the target population (aged 59-70) was 46.7% in the telephone practices, 43.8% in the face-to-face practices and 39.1% in the comparison practices. Significant improvements in the odds of uptake were observed following telephone intervention in both males (OR=1.39, 95% CI=1.20-1.61, P<0.001) and females (OR=1.49, 95% CI=1.29-1.73, P<0.001), while the face-to-face intervention mainly impacted uptake in males (OR=1.23, 95% CI=1.10-1.36), P<0.001) but did not lead to a significant increase in females (OR=1.12, 95% CI=0.96-1.29, P=0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Personally delivered health promotion improved uptake of bowel cancer screening in areas of low socio-economic status and high ethnic diversity. The intervention by telephone appears to be the most effective method.

Translation of research results to simple estimates of the likely effect of a lung cancer screening programme in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable interest in the possibility of provision of lung cancer screening services in many developed countries. There is, however, no consensus on the target population or optimal screening regimen. METHODS: In this paper, we demonstrate the use of published results on lung cancer screening and natural history parameters to estimate the likely effects of annual and biennial screening programmes in different risk populations, in terms of deaths prevented and of human costs, including screening episodes, further investigation rates and overdiagnosis. RESULTS: Annual screening with the UK Lung Screening Study eligibility criteria was estimated to result in 956 lung cancer deaths prevented and 457 overdiagnosed cancers from 330,000 screening episodes. Biennial screening would result in 802 lung cancer deaths prevented and 383 overdiagnosed cancers for 180,000 screening episodes. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSION: The predictions suggest that the intervention effect could justify the human costs. The evidence base for low-dose CT screening for lung cancer pertains almost entirely to annual screening. The benefit of biennial screening is subject to additional uncertainty but the issue merits further empirical research.

A systematic review of the characteristics associated with recall rates, detection rates and positive predictive values of computed tomography screening for lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening has been shown to reduce mortality from lung cancer but at a substantial cost in diagnostic activity. The objective of this study was to investigate the characteristics of screening programmes associated with recall rates, detection rates and positive predictive values (PPVs). DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review of randomised trials and observational studies on LDCT screening for lung cancer. A meta-regression using random-effect logistic regressions was carried out to assess factors influencing recall rates for further investigation, cancer detection rates and PPVs of recall. RESULTS: We used data from 63 372 prevalent screens from 16 studies of LDCT screening for lung cancer and 79 302 incident screens from nine studies. In univariable analysis, the use of a cut-off size to define nodules warranting further investigation at prevalent screens reduced recall rates [odds ratio (OR) = 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.82 and OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.21-0.84 for cut-off sizes of 3-4 and 5-8 mm, respectively], without significant changes in detection rates and PPVs. The number of readers (1 or ≥2) was not associated with changes in recall rates, detection rates and PPVs at prevalent and incident screens. Using the volumetry software at incident screens significantly increased the PPV (OR = 5.02, 95% CI 1.65-15.28) as a result of a decrease in recall rates (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.12-0.51), without significant changes in detection rates. CONCLUSION: These results highlight the value of using a cut-off size for nodules warranting further investigation with lower recall rates at prevalent screens, whereas the volumetric assessment software at incident screens results in lower recall rates and higher PPVs. The presence of positron emission tomography in the work-up protocol might be associated with lower rates of surgical procedures for benign findings, although this hypothesis deserves further investigation.

Reduction in interval cancer rates following the introduction of two-view mammography in the UK breast screening programme.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of two-view mammography at incident (subsequent) screens in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) has led to an increased number of cancers detected at screen. However, the effect of two-view mammography on interval cancer rates has yet to be assessed. METHODS: Routine screening and interval cancer data were collated from all screening programmes in the United Kingdom for women aged 50-64, screened between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2005. Interval cancer rates were compared based on whether two-view mammography was in use at the last routine screen. RESULTS: The reduction in interval cancers following screening using two-view mammography compared with one view was 0.68 per 1,000 women screened. Overall, this suggests the introduction of two-view mammography at incident screen was accompanied by a 15-20% reduction in interval cancer rates in the NHSBSP. CONCLUSION: The introduction of two-view mammography at incident screens is associated with a reduction in incidence of interval cancers. This is consistent with previous publications on a contemporaneous increase in screen-detected cancers. The results provide further evidence of the benefit of the use of two-view mammography at incident screens.

A randomised trial of weekend and evening breast screening appointments.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to research interventions that improve access to and convenience of breast cancer screening services. METHODS: We conducted a randomised trial comparing invitations to out-of-hours appointments with standard office hour appointments. Women who were to be invited for routine breast screening were randomised (3 : 1 : 1 : 1) to one of these screening invitations: standard office hour appointment, office hour appointment with the option to change to an out-of-hours appointment, weekday evening appointment, or weekend appointment. RESULTS: A total of 9410 women were invited to an office hour, 3519 to an office hour with the option to change, 3271 to a weekday evening, and 3162 to a weekend appointment. The offer of an initial out-of-hours appointment was associated with a non-significant decrease in attendance rates (73.7% vs 74.1%). The highest attendance was observed in the group offered an initial office hour appointment with the option to change to out-of-hours (76.1% vs 73.3% for standard office hour, P=0.001), with 7% of invitees exercising the option to change. CONCLUSION: The optimum strategy for improving attendance at breast screening is to offer a traditional office hour appointment and including in the letter of invitation an option to change to an evening or weekend appointment if wished.

Evaluation of mammographic surveillance services in women aged 40-49 years with a moderate family history of breast cancer: a single-arm cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Women with a significant family history of breast cancer are often offered more intensive and earlier surveillance than is offered to the general population in the National Breast Screening Programme. Up to now, this strategy has not been fully evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the benefit of mammographic surveillance for women aged 40-49 years at moderate risk of breast cancer due to family history. The study is referred to as FH01. DESIGN: This was a single-arm cohort study with recruitment taking place between January 2003 and February 2007. Recruits were women aged < 50 years with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer conferring at least a 3% risk of breast cancer between ages 40 and 49 years. The women were offered annual mammography for at least 5 years and observed for the occurrence of breast cancer during the surveillance period. The age group 40-44 years was targeted so that they would still be aged < 50 years after 5 years of surveillance. SETTING: Seventy-four surveillance centres in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 6710 women, 94% of whom were aged < 45 years at recruitment, with a family history of breast cancer estimated to imply at least a 3% risk of the disease between the ages of 40 and 50 years. INTERVENTIONS: Annual mammography for at least 5 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary study end point was the predicted risk of death from breast cancer as estimated from the size, lymph node status and grade of the tumours diagnosed. This was compared with the control group from the UK Breast Screening Age Trial (Age Trial), adjusting for the different underlying incidence in the two populations. RESULTS: As of December 2010, there were 165 breast cancers diagnosed in 37,025 person-years of observation and 30,556 mammographic screening episodes. Of these, 122 (74%) were diagnosed at screening. The cancers included 44 (27%) cases of ductal carcinoma in situ. There were 19 predicted deaths in 37,025 person-years in FH01, with an estimated incidence of 6.3 per 1000 per year. The corresponding figures for the Age Trial control group were 204 predicted deaths in 622,127 person-years and an incidence of 2.4 per 1000 per year. This gave an estimated 40% reduction in breast cancer mortality (relative risk = 0.60; 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.98; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Annual mammography in women aged 40-49 years with a significant family history of breast or ovarian cancer is both clinically effective in reducing breast cancer mortality and cost-effective. There is a need to further standardise familial risk assessment, to research the impact of digital mammography and to clarify the role of breast density in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Research Register N0484114809. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 17, No. 11. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

Radiotherapy or tamoxifen after conserving surgery for breast cancers of excellent prognosis: British Association of Surgical Oncology (BASO) II trial.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of local recurrence (LR) after conservative surgery for early breast cancer without adjuvant therapy is unacceptably high even with favourable tumours. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of adjuvant therapies in tumours with excellent prognostic features. METHODS: Patients with primary invasive breast cancer <2 cm diameter, grade 1 or good prognosis special type, and node negative, treated by wide local excision (WLE) with clear margins were randomised into a 2 × 2 clinical trial of factorial design with or without radiotherapy and with or without tamoxifen. Trial entry was allowed to either comparison or both. FINDINGS: The actuarial breast cancer specific survival in 1135 randomised patients at 10 years was 96%. Analysis by intention to treat showed that LR after WLE was reduced in patients randomised to radiotherapy (RT) (HR 0.37, CI 0.22-0.61 p<0.001) and to tamoxifen (HR 0.33, CI 0.15 - 0.70 p<0.004). Actuarial analysis of patients entered into the four-way randomisation showed that LR after WLE alone was 1.9% per annum (PA) versus 0.7% with RT alone and 0.8% with tamoxifen alone. No patient randomised to both adjuvant treatments developed LR. Analysis by treatment received showed LR at 2.2%PA for surgery alone versus 0.8% for either adjuvant radiotherapy or tamoxifen and 0.2% for both treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Even in these patients with tumours of excellent prognosis, LR after conservative surgery without adjuvant therapy was still very high. This was reduced to a similar extent by either radiotherapy or tamoxifen but to a greater extent by the receipt of both treatments.