programas cribado cancer

ACTUALIZACIÓN BIBLIOGRÁFICA

Nota Bibliográfica

Esta Nota es una recopilación de publicaciones (artículos, informes, libros) sobre cribado de cáncer resultado de una revisión no sistemática de la literatura.

Podéis dirigir vuestros comentarios o sugerencias sobre la Nota a:

Josep A Espinás. Pla Director d'Oncología de Catalunya.
Correo electrónico: Esta dirección electrónica esta protegida contra spam bots. Necesita activar JavaScript para visualizarla

Nota bibliográfica cribado c miscelánea 2013-06

Adriaensen WJ, Mathei C, Buntinx FJ, Arbyn M. A framework provided an outline toward the proper evaluation of potential screening strategies. J Clin Epidemiol 2013 Jun;66(6):639-647. DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.09.018; PMID:23395357.
 
CONCLUSION: Our framework provides an outline toward the proper evaluation of potential screening strategies before considering implementation.

 

Nota bibliográfica cribado c miscelánea 2013-05

Mitka M. Evidence lacking for benefit from oral cancer screening. JAMA 2013 May 8;309(18):1884. DOI:10.1001/jama.2013.4913; 10.1001/jama.2013.4913. PMID:23652503.

Pinsky PF, Zhu C, Skates SJ, Black A, Partridge E, Buys SS, et al. Potential effect of the risk of ovarian cancer algorithm (ROCA) on the mortality outcome of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) trial. Int J Cancer 2013 May 1;132(9):2127-2133. DOI:10.1002/ijc.27909; 10.1002/ijc.27909. PMID:23065684.

Recently, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Trial reported no mortality benefit for annual screening with CA-125 and transvaginal ultrasound (TVU). Currently ongoing is the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS), which utilizes the risk of ovarian cancer algorithm (ROCA), a statistical tool that considers current and past CA125 values to determine ovarian cancer risk. In contrast, PLCO used a single cutoff for CA125, based on current levels alone. We investigated whether having had used ROCA in PLCO could have, under optimal assumptions, resulted in a significant mortality benefit by applying ROCA to PLCO CA125 screening values. A best-case scenario assumed that all cancers showing a positive screen result earlier with ROCA than under the PLCO protocol would have avoided mortality; under a stage-shift scenario, such women were assigned survival equivalent to Stage I/II screen-detected cases. Updated PLCO data show 132 intervention arm ovarian cancer deaths versus 119 in usual care (relative risk, RR = 1.11). Forty-three ovarian cancer cases, 25 fatal, would have been detected earlier with ROCA, with a median (minimum) advance time for fatal cases of 344 (147) days. Best-case and stage-shift scenarios gave 25 and 19 deaths prevented with ROCA, for RRs of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.69-1.17) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.74-1.23), respectively. Having utilized ROCA in PLCO would not have led to a significant mortality benefit of screening. However, ROCA could still show a significant effect in other screening trials, including UKCTOCS.

 

Nota bibliográfica cribado c miscelánea 2013-02

Edgren G, Lagiou P, Trichopoulos D, Adami H. Screening, case finding or primary cancer prevention in the developing world? Eur J Epidemiol 2013 02/27:1-4. DOI:10.1007/s10654-013-9788-9. Enlace:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10654-013-9788-9 

   

Nota bibliográfica cribado c miscelánea 2013-01

Lee SJ, Boscardin WJ, Stijacic-Cenzer I, Conell-Price J, O'Brien S, Walter LC. Time lag to benefit after screening for breast and colorectal cancer: meta-analysis of survival data from the United States, Sweden, United Kingdom, and Denmark. BMJ 2012 Jan 8;346:e8441. DOI:10.1136/bmj.e8441. PMID:23299842

CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that screening for breast and colorectal cancer is most appropriate for patients with a life expectancy greater than 10 years. Incorporating time lag estimates into screening guidelines would encourage a more explicit consideration of the risks and benefits of screening for breast and colorectal cancer.

 

Nota bibliográfica cribado c, miscelánea 2012-11

Hudson B, Zarifeh A, Young L, Wells JE. Patients' expectations of screening and preventive treatments. Ann Fam Med 2012 Nov;10(6):495-502. DOI:10.1370/afm.1407; 10.1370/afm.1407. PMID:23149525.

CONCLUSION Patients overestimated the risk reduction achieved with 4 examples of screening and preventive medications. A lower level of education was associated with higher minimum benefit to justify intervention use. This tendency to overestimate benefits may affect patients' decisions to use such interventions, and practitioners should be aware of this tendency when discussing these interventions with patients.

   

Página 3 de 8

balidea
web desarrollada y mantenida por :