Cancer screening programs in Japan: Progress and challenges.

National screening programs for gastric, colorectal, lung, breast, and cervical cancers are offered in Japan. The initial introduction of cancer screening programs was decided based on experts' opinions. Since 2003, the research groups funded by the National Cancer Center have published screening guidelines for gastric, colorectal, lung, prostate, cervical, and breast cancers. Although such guidelines have increasingly contributed to promoting evidence-based screening, it is still insufficient. Cancer screenings have mainly been provided in communities and workplaces. Compared with the average of OECD countries, participation rates in breast and cervical cancer screening are lower. Participation rates cannot be accurately calculated due to a lack of comprehensive cancer screening registries at the national level. Alternatively, estimates are derived from questionnaire surveys conducted on randomly selected samples from the national population. The quality assurance system has been limited to community-based screening and was not adapted to workplace screening until 2018. While there is a long history of cancer screening, the complex program delivery system might be a barrier to increasing the participation rate. Continued efforts are necessary to offer evidence-based cancer screening and establish an effective quality assurance system.

Cancer screening programs in South-east Asia and Western Pacific.

BACKGROUND: The burden of cancer can be altered by screening. The field of cancer screening is constantly evolving; from the initiation of program for new cancer types as well as exploring innovative screening strategies (e.g. new screening tests). The aim of this study was to perform a landscape analysis of existing cancer screening programs in South-East Asia and the Western Pacific. METHODS: We conducted an overview of cancer screening in the region with the goal of summarizing current designs of cancer screening programs. First, a selective narrative literature review was used as an exploration to identify countries with organized screening programs. Second, representatives of each country with an organized program were approached and asked to provide relevant information on the organizations of their national or regional cancer screening program. RESULTS: There was wide variation in the screening strategies offered in the considered region with only eight programs identified as having an organized design. The majority of these programs did not meet all the essential criteria for being organized screening. The greatest variation was observed in the starting and stopping ages. CONCLUSIONS: Essential criteria of organized screening are missed. Improving organization is crucial to ensure that the beneficial effects of screening are achieved in the long-term. It is strongly recommended to consider a regional cancer screening network.

The Effect of Nationwide Organized Cancer Screening Programs on Gastric Cancer Mortality: A Synthetic Control Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Nationwide organized gastric cancer (GC) screening programs have been running for decades in South Korea and Japan. This study conducted a quasi-experimental analysis to assess the population impact of these programs on GC mortality. METHODS: We used the flexible synthetic control method (SCM) to estimate the effect of the screening programs on age-standardized GC mortality and other upper gastrointestinal (UGI) diseases (esophageal cancer and peptic ulcer) among people aged ≥40 years. World Health Organization mortality data and country-level covariates from the World Bank and the Global Burden of Diseases study were used for the analyses. We compared postintervention trends in outcome with the counterfactual trend of the synthetic control and estimated average postintervention rate ratios (RRs) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A series of sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The preintervention fits were acceptable for the analyses of South Korea and Japan's GC mortality but poor for Japan's other UGI disease mortality. The average postintervention RRs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.71-0.96) for GC mortality and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.57-0.90) for other UGI disease mortality in South Korea. The RR reached 0.59 by the 15th year after the initiation of nationwide screening. For Japan, the average RRs were 0.97 (95% CI, 0.88-1.07) for GC mortality and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.68-1.28) for other UGI disease mortality. Sensitivity analysis reveals the result for Japan may potentially be biased. CONCLUSIONS: South Korea's nationwide GC screening has apparent benefits, whereas the Japanese program's effectiveness is uncertain. The experiences of South Korea and Japan could serve as a reference for other countries.

Radiographic and endoscopic screening to reduce gastric cancer mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Previous systematic reviews naïvely combined biased effects of screening radiography or endoscopy observed in studies with various designs. We aimed to synthesize currently available comparative data on gastric cancer mortality in healthy, asymptomatic adults by explicitly classifying the screening effects through study designs and types of intervention effects. Methods: We searched multiple databases through October 31, 2022 for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies of any design that compared gastric cancer mortality among radiographic or endoscopic screening and no screening in a community-dwelling adult population were included. The method included a duplicate assessment of eligibility, double extraction of summary data, and validity assessment using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Bayesian three-level hierarchical random-effects meta-analysis synthesized data corrected for self-selection bias on the relative risk (RR) for per-protocol (PP) and intention-to-screen (ITS) effects. The study registration number at PROSPERO is CRD42021277126. Findings: We included seven studies in which a screening program was newly introduced (median attendance rate, 31%; at moderate-to-critical risk of bias), and seven cohort and eight case-control studies with ongoing screening programs (median attendance rate, 21%; all at critical risk of bias); thus, data of 1,667,117 subjects were included. For the PP effect, the average risk reduction was significant for endoscopy (RR 0.52; 95% credible interval: 0.39-0.79) but nonsignificant for radiography (0.80; 0.60-1.06). The ITS effect was not significant for both radiography (0.98; 0.86-1.09) and endoscopy (0.94; 0.71-1.28). The magnitude of the effects depended on the assumptions for the self-selection bias correction. Restricting the scope to East Asian studies only did not change the results. Interpretation: In limited-quality observational evidence from high-prevalence regions, screening reduced gastric cancer mortality; however, the effects diminished at a program level. Funding: National Cancer Center Japan; and Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development.

Forthcoming Step in Gastric Cancer Prevention: How Can Risk Stratification Be Combined with Endoscopic Screening for Gastric Cancer?

Although the concern for gastric cancer prevention has increased, gastric cancer has remained a heavy burden worldwide and is not just a local issue in East Asian countries. However, as several screening programs (listed below) have shown some success, it is important to determine whether the situation is changing in some other countries and whether similar methods should be recommended. Endoscopic screening has been performed as a national program in South Korea and Japan, and the results have shown a reduction in gastric cancer mortality. Although the efficacy of Helicobacter pylori eradication has been established, the efficacy of the screen-and-treat strategy is presently being evaluated in randomized controlled trials. The serum pepsinogen test and endoscopic examination can divide high-risk subjects with severe gastric atrophy from average-risk subjects. Risk stratification is anticipated to contribute to an efficient method of prediction of gastric cancer development when combined with endoscopic screening. Countries with a high incidence rate should realize the immediate need to reduce gastric cancer death directly by endoscopic screening and should recognize screen-and-treat as a second option to reduce future risk. However, all forms of gastric cancer prevention programs have some harms and potential to increase unnecessary examinations. A balance of the benefits and harms should be always considered. Although further study is needed to obtain sufficient evidence for gastric cancer prevention, the best available method should be examined in the context of each country.

Comparative accuracy of cervical cancer screening strategies in healthy asymptomatic women: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

To compare all available accuracy data on screening strategies for identifying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade ≥ 2 in healthy asymptomatic women, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to October 2020 for paired-design studies of cytology and testing for high-risk genotypes of human papillomavirus (hrHPV). The methods used included a duplicate assessment of eligibility, double extraction of quantitative data, validity assessment, random-effects network meta-analysis of test accuracy, and GRADE rating. Twenty-seven prospective studies (185,269 subjects) were included. The combination of cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or higher grades) and hrHPV testing (excepting genotyping for HPV 16 or 18 [HPV16/18]) with the either-positive criterion (OR rule) was the most sensitive/least specific, whereas the same combination with the both-positive criterion (AND rule) was the most specific/least sensitive. Compared with standalone cytology, non-HPV16/18 hrHPV assays were more sensitive/less specific. Two algorithms proposed for primary cytological testing or primary hrHPV testing were ranked in the middle as more sensitive/less specific than standalone cytology and the AND rule combinations but more specific/less sensitive than standalone hrHPV testing and the OR rule combination. Further research is needed to assess these results in population-relevant outcomes at the program level.

An Approach to the Primary and Secondary Prevention of Gastric Cancer in the United States.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gastric cancer (GC) remains a leading cause of mortality among certain racial, ethnic, and immigrant groups in the United States (US). The majority of GCs are diagnosed at advanced stages, and overall survival remains poor. There exist no structured national strategies for GC prevention in the US. METHODS: On March 5-6, 2020 a summit of researchers, policy makers, public funders, and advocacy leaders was convened at Stanford University to address this critical healthcare disparity. After this summit, a writing group was formed to critically evaluate the effectiveness, potential benefits, and potential harms of methods of primary and secondary prevention through structured literature review. This article represents a consensus statement prepared by the writing group. RESULTS: The burden of GC is highly inequitably distributed in the US and disproportionately falls on Asian, African American, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaskan Native populations. In randomized controlled trials, strategies of Helicobacter pylori testing and treatment have been demonstrated to reduce GC-specific mortality. In well-conducted observational and ecologic studies, strategies of endoscopic screening have been associated with reduced GC-specific mortality. Notably however, all randomized controlled trial data (for primary prevention) and the majority of observational data (for secondary prevention) are derived from non-US sources. CONCLUSIONS: There exist substantial, high-quality data supporting GC prevention derived from international studies. There is an urgent need for cancer prevention trials focused on high-risk immigrant and minority populations in the US. The authors offer recommendations on how strategies of primary and secondary prevention can be applied to the heterogeneous US population.

Effectiveness of decision aids on cancer-screening decision-making: an umbrella review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Although systematic reviews have shown how decision aids about cancer-related clinical decisions improve selection of key options and shared decision-making, whether or not particular decision aids, defined by their specific presentation formats, delivery methods and other attributes, can perform better than others in the context of cancer-screening decisions is uncertain. Therefore, we planned an overview to address this issue by using standard umbrella review methods to repurpose existing systematic reviews and their component comparative studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects from inception through 31 December 2021 with no language restriction and perform full-text evaluation of potentially relevant articles. We will include systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials or non-randomised studies of interventions that assessed a decision aid about cancer-screening decisions and compared it with an alternative tool or conventional management in healthy average-risk adults. Two reviewers will extract data and rate the study validity according to standard quality assessment measures. Our primary outcome will be intended and actual choice and adherence to selected options. The secondary outcomes will include attributes of the option-selection process, achieving shared decision-making and preference-linked psychosocial outcomes. We will qualitatively assess study, patient and intervention characteristics and outcomes. We will also take special care to investigate the presentation format, delivery methods and quality of the included decision aids and assess the degree to which the decision aid was delivered and used as intended. If appropriate, we will perform random-effects model meta-analyses to quantitatively synthesise the results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not applicable as this is a secondary analysis of publicly available data. The review results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021235957.

Emerging technologies for cervical cancer screening.

Cervical cancer remains a concern worldwide, and cervical cancer screening plays an important role in reducing the burden of this disease. Although cytology is still the main strategy for cervical cancer screening, it has gradually changed to human papillomavirus testing. The specificity of human papillomavirus testing is lower than that of cytology, which leads to an increased rate of colposcopy after positive results. To decrease colposcopic examinations, an efficient triage method is needed for human papillomavirus screening. New biomarkers have been developed and evaluated for primary screening and triage of abnormal cytology or human papillomavirus-positive results. Their sensitivity and specificity were estimated and compared with those of cytology. In the present study, the following new techniques were examined: p16/Ki67 dual staining, DNA methylation, micro-ribonucleic acid, chromosomal abnormalities, Claudins and DNA ploidy. Evaluation studies of p16/Ki67 dual staining and DNA methylation were more advanced than those of other options. When p16/Ki67 dual staining was used for triage for human papillomavirus testing, the sensitivity of 2 or greater cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+) detection was higher than that of cytology without decreased specificity. Although there are several types of DNA methylation, sensitivity and specificity were moderate for detecting CIN2+. S5 classifier is a commercialized product that consists of viral methylation, and high sensitivity with decreased specificity has been reported. Considering its combination with self-sampling, DNA methylation is a highly anticipated technique along with human papillomavirus testing for the next generation of cervical cancer screening. However, the backgrounds for cervical cancer screening differ among countries and further study is needed to identify the best available method.

National Data Analysis and Systematic Review for Human Resources for Cervical Cancer Screening in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Although cervical cancer screening has been performed as a national program since 1983 in Japan, the participation rate has remained below 20%. Equity of access is a basic requirement for cancer screening. However, taking smears from the cervix has been limited to gynecologists or obstetricians in Japan and it might be a barrier for accessibility. We examined the current access and its available human resources for cervical cancer screening in Japan. METHODS: We analyzed the number of gynecologists and obstetricians among 47 prefectures based on a national survey. A systematic review was performed to clarify disparity and use of human resources in cervical cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment for cervical cancers in Japan. Candidate literature was searched using Ovid-MEDLINE and Ichushi-Web until the end of January 2020. Then, a systematic review regarding accessibility to cervical cancer screening was performed. The results of the selected articles were summarized in the tables. RESULTS: Although the total number of all physicians in Japan increased from 1996 to 2016, the proportion of gynecologists and obstetricians has remained at approximately 5% over the last 2 decades. 43.6% of municipalities have no gynecologists and obstetricians in 2016. Through a systematic review, 4 English articles and 1 Japanese article were selected. From these 5 articles, the association between human resources and participation rates in cervical cancer screening was examined in 2 articles. CONCLUSIONS: The human resources for taking smears for cervical cancer screening has remained insufficient with a huge disparity among municipalities in Japan. To improve accessibility for cervical cancer screening another option which may be considered could be involving general physicians as potential smear takers.

Correction to: Tailored message interventions versus typical messages for increasing participation in colorectal cancer screening among a non-adherent population: A randomized controlled trial.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

A study protocol for expanding the screening interval of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer based on individual risks: prospective cohort study of gastric cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: The Japanese government has recommended a 2-year endoscopic screening interval for gastric cancer. However, insufficient resources have constrained participation in endoscopic screening for gastric cancer. One way to avoid endoscopic screening harms and provide equal access is to define the appropriate screening interval. METHODS: To expand screening interval from more than 2 years for low-risk group, a single-arm cohort of endoscopic screening started. At the baseline screening, the participants underwent endoscopic screening for gastric cancer, Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) antibody test, and serum pepsinogen test (first year), and followed after 2 and 4 years (within the first 5 years). We also assessed H. pylori infection and atrophy status on images of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy at the baseline. A new screening model will be developed by dividing the participants into high-risk and low-risk groups based on demographics, history of H. pylori eradication, serological testing, and endoscopic diagnosis. The cumulative gastric cancer incidence after negative results at baseline are compared between the low-risk group on the 3rd screening round after 4 years from baseline and the total screening group on the 2nd screening round after 2 years. If the cumulative gastric cancer incidence in the low-risk group on the 3rd screening round is lower than that in the total screening group on the 2nd screening round, the screening interval can be expanded to 4 years in the low-risk group. DISCUSSION: To reduce mortality from gastric cancer, a high participation rate of the target population is required. The screening interval of endoscopic screening can be changed if the individual risks for H. pylori infection are clarified. Our goal in this study is to obtain relevant data that can be used to improve the efficient use of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer by referring to individual risks in Japan. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN000025839 (University Hospital Medical Information Network, Japan).

Helicobacterpylori eradication treatment for gastric carcinoma prevention in asymptomatic or dyspeptic adults: systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Recent meta-analyses of eradication therapy in Helicobacter pylori-infected adults reported significant reductions in gastric carcinoma risk. However, concerns about supporting unfocused screening and eradication programme in healthy, asymptomatic populations have arisen. We performed a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis to provide an accurate interpretation of randomised evidence on the preventive effectiveness of eradication therapy on gastric carcinoma risk. METHODS: We searched databases including PubMed, Cochrane Central and Embase for reference and citation tracking without language restrictions, from inception through 31 July 2018. Paired investigators independently selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing eradication therapy with placebo or no treatment for asymptomatic or dyspeptic H. pylori-infected adults with no previous gastric carcinoma. The main outcome was gastric carcinoma incidence; secondary outcomes included gastric carcinoma-specific, non-gastric carcinoma and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 5 population-based and 2 outpatient care-based RCTs involving 7303 adults were eligible. Eradication algorithms were heterogeneous, and unsuccessful eradication and reinfection were frequently observed. A Bayesian meta-analysis with competing risk outcomes found low-certainty evidence that eradication therapy might be more likely than control to reduce gastric carcinoma risk (HR=0.65; 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.41 to 1.0; I2 =11%). The CrIs included the null effects across the subgroup and sensitivity analyses, apart from those based on particular models that excluded two RCTs that enrolled subjects with specific histological findings only (HR=0.55; CrI 0.30 to 0.89; I2 =14%). The uncertainty of the average 41% risk reduction in gastric carcinoma-specific mortality included a clinically important mortality risk increase (HR=0.59 favouring eradication therapy; CrI 0.25 to 1.20; I2 =13%; low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the effectiveness of eradication therapy in preventing gastric carcinoma in H. pylori-infected, high-risk populations. Rigorously conducted large RCTs of healthy infected adults only would provide evidence of the true efficacy of successful eradication. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014009245.

Treatment of Patients With Early-Stage Colorectal Cancer: ASCO Resource-Stratified Guideline.

PURPOSE: To provide resource-stratified, evidence-based recommendations on the treatment and follow-up of patients with early-stage colorectal cancer. METHODS: ASCO convened a multidisciplinary, multinational Expert Panel that reviewed existing guidelines and conducted a modified ADAPTE process and a formal consensus process with additional experts for one round of formal ratings. RESULTS: Existing sets of guidelines from 12 guideline developers were identified and reviewed; adapted recommendations from six guidelines form the evidence base and provide evidence to inform the formal consensus process, which resulted in agreement of 75% or more on all recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: For nonmaximal settings, the recommended treatments for colon cancer stages nonobstructing, I-IIA: in basic and limited, open resection; in enhanced, adequately trained surgeons and laparoscopic or minimally invasive surgery, unless contraindicated. Treatments for IIB-IIC: in basic and limited, open en bloc resection following standard oncologic principles, if not possible, transfer to higher-level facility; in emergency, limit to life-saving procedures; in enhanced, laparoscopic en bloc resection, if not possible, then open. Treatments for obstructing, IIB-IIC: in basic, resection and/or diversion; in limited or enhanced, emergency surgical resection. Treatment for IIB-IIC with left-sided: in enhanced, may place colonic stent. Treatment for T4N0/T3N0 high-risk features or stage II high-risk obstructing: in enhanced, may offer adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment for rectal cancer cT1N0 and cT2n0: in basic, limited, or enhanced, total mesorectal excision principles. Treatment for cT3n0: in basic and limited, total mesorectal excision, if not, diversion. Treatment for high-risk patients who did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy: in basic, limited, or enhanced, may offer adjuvant therapy. Treatment for resectable cT3N0 rectal cancer: in enhanced, base neoadjuvant chemotherapy on preoperative factors. For post-treatment surveillance, a combination of medical history, physical examination, carcinoembryonic antigen testing, imaging, and endoscopy is performed. Frequency depends on setting. Maximal setting recommendations are in the guideline. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines . NOTICE: It is the view of the American Society of Clinical Oncology that health care providers and health care system decision makers should be guided by the recommendations for the highest stratum of resources available. The guidelines are intended to complement but not replace local guidelines.

Early Detection for Colorectal Cancer: ASCO Resource-Stratified Guideline.

PURPOSE: To provide resource-stratified, evidence-based recommendations on the early detection of colorectal cancer in four tiers to clinicians, patients, and caregivers. METHODS: American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a multidisciplinary, multinational panel of medical oncology, surgical oncology, surgery, gastroenterology, health technology assessment, cancer epidemiology, pathology, radiology, radiation oncology, and patient advocacy experts. The Expert Panel reviewed existing guidelines and conducted a modified ADAPTE process and a formal consensus-based process with additional experts (Consensus Ratings Group) for two round(s) of formal ratings. RESULTS: Existing sets of guidelines from eight guideline developers were identified and reviewed; adapted recommendations form the evidence base. These guidelines, along with cost-effectiveness analyses, provided evidence to inform the formal consensus process, which resulted in agreement of 75% or more. CONCLUSION: In nonmaximal settings, for people who are asymptomatic, are ages 50 to 75 years, have no family history of colorectal cancer, are at average risk, and are in settings with high incidences of colorectal cancer, the following screening options are recommended: guaiac fecal occult blood test and fecal immunochemical testing (basic), flexible sigmoidoscopy (add option in limited), and colonoscopy (add option in enhanced). Optimal reflex testing strategy for persons with positive screens is as follows: endoscopy; if not available, barium enema (basic or limited). Management of polyps in enhanced is as follows: colonoscopy, polypectomy; if not suitable, then surgical resection. For workup and diagnosis of people with symptoms, physical exam with digital rectal examination, double contrast barium enema (only in basic and limited); colonoscopy; flexible sigmoidoscopy with biopsy (if contraindication to latter) or computed tomography colonography if contraindications to two endoscopies (enhanced only).

Update version of the Japanese Guidelines for Gastric Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: Although the incidence and mortality of gastric cancer have gradually decreased, its burden remains in East Asian countries. Gastric cancer screening has been performed in Japan since 1983, and the introduction of new screening techniques has been eagerly anticipated. OBJECTIVE: To promote evidence-based screening, the Japanese guidelines for gastric cancer screening have been revised based on the new studies. METHODS: The guidelines for gastric cancer screening have been developed according to a previously established method. To assess evidence regarding the effectiveness of the screening methods, a systematic review was conducted based on an analytic framework including clinical questions aiming at reducing mortality from gastric cancer. The following methods were assessed for gastric cancer screening: upper gastrointestinal series (radiographic screening), gastrointestinal endoscopy (endoscopic screening), Helicobacter pylori antibody test and serum pepsinogen tests. Based on the balance of the benefits and harms of each screening method, recommendations for population-based and opportunistic screenings were formulated. FINDINGS: After the Japanese guidelines for gastric cancer screening were published in 2005, several observational studies on radiographic and endoscopic screenings have been reported. Three case-control studies have evaluated mortality reduction from gastric cancer by endoscopic screening. Notably, evidence of the H. pylori antibody and serum pepsinogen tests was insufficient. Although false-positive results, false-negative results, and complications were observed in endoscopic and radiographic screenings, the complication rates were higher in endoscopic screening than in radiographic screening. Overdiagnosis was not estimated directly in both methods. RECOMMENDATIONS: Radiographic and endoscopic screenings for gastric cancer are recommended for population-based and opportunistic screenings. The H. pylori antibody and serum pepsinogen tests are not recommended for population-based screening because of insufficient evidence.

Association between age factors and strategies for promoting participation in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings.

BACKGROUND: Despite the long history of cancer screening in Japan, the participation rates in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings have not increased. Strategies for improving the participation rates have been proposed, but differences in their effects among different age groups remain unclear. METHODS: The Japanese government conducted a national survey in all municipalities in Japan in 2010 to investigate whether the implementation of promotion strategies increased participation in cancer screening. We investigated the association between age factors and strategies for promoting participation in cancer screening based on this national survey. Multiple regression analysis with generalized linear model was performed using the participation rates in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings as dependent variables, and the following strategies for promoting participation as independent variables: 1) personal invitation letters, 2) household invitation letters, 3) home visits by community nurses, 4) screenings in medical offices, and 5) free cancer screening programs. RESULTS: One thousand six hundred thirty nine municipalities for gastric cancer screening and 1666 municipalities for colorectal cancer screening were selected for the analysis. In gastric and colorectal cancer screenings, the participation rates of individuals aged 60-69 years was higher than those of other age groups. Personal and household invitation letters were effective promotion strategies for all age groups, which encouraged even older people to participate in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings. Screening in medical offices and free screenings were not effective in all age groups. Home visits were effective, but their adoption was limited to small municipalities. CONCLUSIONS: To clarify whether promotion strategies can increase the participation rate in cancer screening among different age groups, 5 strategies were assessed on the basis of a national survey. Although personal and household invitation letters were effective strategies for promoting participation in cancer screening for all age groups, these strategies equally encouraged older people to participate in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings. If resource for sending invitation letters are limited, priority should be given to individuals who are in their 50s and 60s for gastric and colorectal cancer screening.

Frequency of unsatisfactory cervical cytology smears in cancer screening of Japanese women: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The Bethesda system (TBS) has been used for cervical cytological diagnosis in Japan since 2008. Evaluation of specimen adequacy is the most important aspect of quality assurance and for precise diagnosis in TBS. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to assess the unsatisfactory specimen rate in the primary cervical cancer screening setting in Japan. Ovid Medline and Ichushi-Web databases were searched from inception through to May 2017. Prospective and retrospective studies that reported the proportion of unsatisfactory specimens in healthy asymptomatic Japanese women in a cervical cancer screening program were eligible for inclusion; 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The random-effects model meta-analysis calculated summary estimates of the unsatisfactory rate of 0.60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18-1.96%; I2 = 99%) for conventional cytology and 0.04% (95% CI, 0.00-0.35%; I2 = 99%) for liquid-based cytology (LBC). However, comparative results between conventional and liquid-based cytology, based on four direct and nine comparative studies, showed no significant difference (summary odds ratio = 3.5 × 10-2 favoring LBC [95% CI, 6.9 × 10-4 -1.7]; I2 = 98%). In the subgroup analyses and meta-regressions, use of non-cotton devices for conventional cytology and use of a particular platform for LBC were associated with lower unsatisfactory rates. Meta-regression also suggested chronological improvement in unsatisfactory rates for both tests. In Japanese cervical cancer screening programs, conventional cytology remains prevalent. Future research needs to focus on evaluating the impact of screening programs using LBC by comparing the accuracy, performance, and cost-effectiveness with conventional cytology in the Japanese population.