An examination of the role of opportunistic smear taking in the NHS cervical screening programme using data from the CSEU cervical screening cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to study the prevalence of opportunistic smear taking in the NHS cervical screening programme between 1999 and 2003 and the relationship of this to screening interval policy.

DESIGN

A cohort study of nearly 2 million women, with data on screening at ages 20-64 years from 1988 to 2003 has been constructed. Data from 1999 to 2003 have been used in this analysis. Screening episodes have been divided into those where the primary smear was initiated by the national call/recall system (invitational), normally at 3- or 5-yearly intervals, and those initiated by the GP or woman (opportunistic). Opportunistic smears were further classified as routine (occurring within 6 months of 3 or 5 years) or sporadic (occurring at other times).

SETTING

NHS cervical screening programme.

POPULATION

Four Health Authorities in England (now Primary Care Trusts) with supplementary studies on national data.

METHODS

Screening episodes have been defined. All episodes start with a primary smear defined as being invitational or opportunistic in origin.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Proportion of primary smear that were invitational or opportunistic.

RESULTS

In total, 72% of incident screen primary smears were invitational and 28% were opportunistic. The proportion of opportunistic primary smears was 17 and 43% in 3- or 5-yearly screening policy areas, respectively, resulting in a considerably reduced average screening interval for women aged 20-64 years in 5-year policy areas.

CONCLUSION

The NHS cervical screening programme is strongly influenced by opportunistic smear taking. In particular, nominally 5-year policy areas experienced much higher levels of opportunistic smear taking than those with a 3-year policy, causing the average interval in the 5-year areas to be much shorter than the policy would suggest. In future, with the change in national policy for inviting women aged 25-49 years every 3 years and those aged 50-64 years every 5 years, the level of opportunistic smear taking, particularly in the older group of women, needs to be carefully monitored. A lack of compliance may result in greater than predicted costs with little or no additional cancer prevention.

Does the accuracy of single reading with CAD (computer-aided detection) compare with that of double reading?: A review of the literature

AIM

To examine current evidence to determine whether the accuracy of single reading with computed-aided detection (CAD) compares with that of double reading.

METHODS

We performed a literature review to identify studies where both protocols had been investigated and compared. We identified eight studies that compared single reading with CAD against double reading, of which six reported on comparisons of both sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

Of the six studies identified, three showed no differences in either sensitivity or specificity. One showed single reading with CAD had a higher sensitivity at the same specificity, another that single reading with CAD had a higher specificity at the same sensitivity. However, one study, in a real-life setting, showed that single reading with CAD had a higher sensitivity but a lower specificity.

CONCLUSION

As the majority of the studies were not in a real-life setting, used test sets, lacked sufficient training in the use of CAD and simulated double reading (using a protocol of recall if one suggests), current evidence is therefore limited as to the accuracy, in terms of sensitivity and specificity, of single reading with CAD in comparison with the most common practice in the UK of double reading using a protocol of consensus or arbitration.

The effect of data quality at the time of introduction of population-based screening on the estimate of programme impact using surrogate outcome measures

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine the availability and quality of surrogate outcome measure data to enable the evaluation of the breast screening programme. As the observed effect on mortality of a screening programme occurs many years after the introduction of screening, surrogate outcome measures offer an attractive alternative, allowing estimates of the effect to be calculated earlier.

METHODS

The exercise was undertaken by the Oxford Cancer Intelligence Unit and the Cancer Screening Evaluation Unit in collaboration with cancer registries in England, Scotland and Wales.

RESULTS

The conclusion of the exercise was that, in general, the available data quality was insufficient to allow a precise estimate of the overall mortality reduction from breast screening to be made using surrogate measures.

CONCLUSIONS

When a screening programme is started, it is vital that forward planning is undertaken to ensure that the necessary information is ready to be collected before the start of the programme. The use of surrogate measures is dependent on high-quality data in the uninvited group of women (pre-screening or from a staggered start over areas), and improving data quality over time after the start of the programme is of very limited value for a surrogate measures approach. The collection of appropriate high-quality information before the programme starts is, therefore, critical to measuring the success of the programme. Cancer registries and staff within the screening programme need to be ready to collect the appropriate data before the introduction of a screening programme. The exercise undertaken therefore has important implications where new screening programmes are being considered.

Improving the NHS cervical screening laboratory performance indicators by making allowance for population age, risk and screening interval

OBJECTIVE

One of the key performance measures in the monitoring of the NHS cervical screening programme is the targeting of laboratories with very high or low percentages (outside the 10th-90th percentile) of adequate smears that have moderate dyskaryosis or worse. These laboratories are assumed to include those laboratories that may have extremes of sensitivity and specificity. A clear limitation with this methodology is that laboratories do not examine smears from women with the same underlying risk, age distribution or screening interval and adjustment for these factors should considerably improve the method.

METHODS

This paper describes a method that allows for these confounding variables and a new age-risk-interval adjusted moderate dyskaryosis or worse rate (ARI-adjusted mod+ rate) can be calculated. The adjusted rate is the rate of moderate or worse dyskaryotic smears that the laboratory would have detected had it been screening women with an English 'average' age-risk-interval. All laboratories can therefore be compared using this method.

RESULTS

The methodology is illustrated using data from the NHSCSP South West Region. The particularly low percentage of moderate or worse smears detected by one or two laboratories can be shown to be due to a local screened population with a very low risk because of a high mean age, relatively short screening interval and census variables associated with a low risk, rather than any under-calling by the associated laboratories.

CONCLUSIONS

The ARI-adjusted mod+ rate requires to be calculated for all laboratories in England if it is to be used as a primary performance indicator. Alternatively, it can be used to further examine laboratories that are deemed to be outliers using the current methodology.

Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer

Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) is the most sensitive tool for screening women who are at high familial risk of breast cancer. Our aim in this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of X-ray mammography (XRM), CE MRI or both strategies combined. In total, 649 women were enrolled in the MARIBS study and screened with both CE MRI and mammography resulting in 1881 screens and 1–7 individual annual screening events. Women aged 35–49 years at high risk of breast cancer, either because they have a strong family history of breast cancer or are tested carriers of a BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53 mutation or are at a 50% risk of having inherited such a mutation, were recruited from 22 centres and offered annual MRI and XRM for between 2 and 7 years. Information on the number and type of further investigations was collected and specifically calculated unit costs were used to calculate the incremental cost per cancer detected. The numbers of cancer detected was 13 for mammography, 27 for CE MRI and 33 for mammography and CE MRI combined. In the subgroup of BRCA1 (BRCA2) mutation carriers or of women having a first degree relative with a mutation in BRCA1 (BRCA2) corresponding numbers were 3 (6), 12 (7) and 12 (11), respectively. For all women, the incremental cost per cancer detected with CE MRI and mammography combined was £28 284 compared to mammography. When only BRCA1 or the BRCA2 groups were considered, this cost would be reduced to £11 731 (CE MRI vs mammography) and £15 302 (CE MRI and mammography vs mammography). Results were most sensitive to the unit cost estimate for a CE MRI screening test. Contrast-enhanced MRI might be a cost-effective screening modality for women at high risk, particularly for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Further work is needed to assess the impact of screening on mortality and health-related quality of life.

Is radiologists' volume of mammography reading related to accuracy? A critical review of the literature

The current UK quality assurance guidelines for radiologists in the NHS breast screening programme require those reporting screening mammograms to read a minimum of 5000 cases per year. We aimed to review the evidence for this and to assess whether there was justification for lowering the required level. A literature search was conducted to identify relevant studies where accuracy of reporting mammograms was related to reading volume. Three of the five studies reviewed suggested a positive association between reading volume and sensitivity, but there were few data on volumes above 5000 cases per year. The available evidence did not provide any basis for reducing the threshold volume. Further work is needed, in a UK or European setting, to study the relationship between reading volume and accuracy at higher volume levels and also the separate effects of reading volume and reading experience.

The effect of changing from one to two views at incident (subsequent) screens in the NHS breast screening programme in England: impact on cancer detection and recall rates

AIM

To assess the effect on cancer detection and recall rates of changing from one to two views for incident (subsequent) screens.

METHODS

Controlled, comparative, observational study of programmes in NHS breast screening programme in England.

SUBJECTS

women aged 50-64 years were screened by the NHSBSP between 1 April 2001 and 31 March 2003.

RESULTS

The effect of changing to two-view mammography was a 20% increase in overall incident screen cancer detection rate, with the biggest effect seen for small (<15 mm) invasive cancers. This increased detection rate was achieved with an 11% drop-in recall rate.

CONCLUSION

The introduction of two-view mammography for incident screens has resulted in considerable improvements in overall NHS breast screening performance.

Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS)

BACKGROUND

Women genetically predisposed to breast cancer often develop the disease at a young age when dense breast tissue reduces the sensitivity of X-ray mammography. Our aim was, therefore, to compare contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) with mammography for screening.

METHODS

We did a prospective multicentre cohort study in 649 women aged 35-49 years with a strong family history of breast cancer or a high probability of a BRCA1, BRCA2, or TP53 mutation. We recruited participants from 22 centres in the UK, and offered the women annual screening with CE MRI and mammography for 2-7 years.

FINDINGS

We diagnosed 35 cancers in the 649 women screened with both mammography and CE MRI (1881 screens): 19 by CE MRI only, six by mammography only, and eight by both, with two interval cases. Sensitivity was significantly higher for CE MRI (77%, 95% CI 60-90) than for mammography (40%, 24-58; p=0.01), and was 94% (81-99) when both methods were used. Specificity was 93% (92-95) for mammography, 81% (80-83) for CE MRI (p<0.0001), and 77% (75-79) with both methods. The difference between CE MRI and mammography sensitivities was particularly pronounced in BRCA1 carriers (13 cancers; 92%vs 23%, p=0.004).

INTERPRETATION

Our findings indicate that CE MRI is more sensitive than mammography for cancer detection. Specificity for both procedures was acceptable. Despite a high proportion of grade 3 cancers, tumours were small and few women were node positive. Annual screening, combining CE MRI and mammography, would detect most tumours in this risk group.

Monitoring and evaluating the performance of the UK NHS Cervical Screening Programme: monitoring performance by using cytology outcomes adjusted for population characteristics

Current quality assurance measures used in the NHS cervical screening programme (NHSCSP) include a review of laboratories with percentages of moderate/severe and borderline/mild smear results outside the 10th-90th percentiles. The method is limited by the fact that many of these outlier smear percentages may reflect laboratories covering populations with low or high risk and/or short or long average screening intervals. This paper outlines a new approach to aid the detection of outlier laboratories, by using data collected at the primary care trust (PCT) or health authority (HA) level and making allowances for population characteristics and screening interval. The setting is the NHSCSP in England using annual data provided by HAs. Data from the screening year 2000-01 is used to illustrate the methodology, although the methods can also be applied to data at the PCT level (now being collected for 2002-03 onwards). Percentages of smear results have been analysed against a series of explanatory variables using logistic regression models. These explanatory variables include Townsend deprivation index, uptake-corrected ethnic minority composition, a measure of screening interval, area type and region. An expected percentage of borderline/mild and moderate/severe smears is estimated from the models and an observed : predicted ratio (OPRmod/sev and OPRbord/mild) calculated. Low values are suggestive of relative undercalling and high values overcalling, after allowance for population characteristics. Analysis of data for 2000-01 showed that the OPRmod/sev for the 99 HAs varied from 0.68 to 1.44. Laboratories with low percentages of moderate/severe smears, but associated with PCTs or HAs with OPRmod/sev values closer to unity may not need to be investigated as their observed rates are consistent with predicted rates based on population characteristics. The method could also be directly applied to laboratories if further information on the population covered by each laboratory were routinely collected.

Protocol for a national multi-centre study of magnetic resonance imaging screening in women at genetic risk of breast cancer

The protocol of the national multicentre study of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) as a method of screening for breast cancer in women at genetic risk is described. The sensitivity and specificity of contrast-enhanced MRI will be compared with two-view X-ray mammography in a comparative trial. Approximately 500 women below the age of 50 at high genetic risk of breast cancer will be recruited per year for 3 years, with annual MRI and X-ray examination continuing for up to 5 years. A symptomatic cohort will be measured in the initial phase of the study to ensure consistent reporting between centres. The MRI examination will comprise an initial high-sensitivity screening measurement, followed by a high-specificity measurement in equivocal cases. Retrospective analysis will identify the most specific indicators of malignancy. Sensitivity and specificity, together with diagnostic performance, diagnostic impact and therapeutic impact will be assessed with reference to pathology, follow-up and changes in diagnostic certainty and therapeutic decisions. The psychological impact of screening in this high-risk group will be ascertained.

Does individual programme size affect screening performance? Results from the United Kingdom NHS breast screening programme

OBJECTIVE

The size (number of women screened) of the 95 individual NHS breast screening programmes (NHSBSPs) varies by a factor of 10. This study investigates the impact of size on the performance of individual programmes.

METHOD

Data were collated from the 95 United Kingdom screening programmes on the standard statistical returns for the past 5 years (1 April 1995-31 March 2000). Additional information was obtained from questionnaires. The number of women screened between 1 April 1999 and 31 March 2000 determined the size of a programme. The bottom 25% were defined as small, the middle 50% as medium, and the top 25% as large. On average large programmes screened about four times as many women as small programmes and medium programmes about twice as many. Performance was evaluated using cancer detection rates, referral rates for assessment, and positive predictive value (PPV) of assessment using PPV referral diagrams.

RESULTS

The performance of smaller programmes was shown to be marginally poorer than medium and large sized programmes in that they detected fewer cancers and had a lower PPV. The smallest 25% of programmes had an invasive cancer detection rate 13% less than the medium and large programmes. However, if these programmes had an equivalent detection rate to the medium/large programmes the national detection rate would only increase by about 2%. This is because the 75% of programmes described as medium and large screen about 90% of all women. It is therefore important to place the clinical importance of these findings in context when considering any envisaged possible solutions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the performance of smaller programmes was shown to be poorer than that of the larger programmes, it is not clear from this study exactly why this is so. A likely contributory factor based on experience of evaluating the NHSBSP is that performance problems in larger programmes have been easier to detect by quality assurance staff. The size of the small programmes and the few screen detected cancers (and inherent statistical instability in detection rates) mean that problems are difficult to identify. As a consequence small programmes which are genuinely performing marginally below specific standards are likely to receive less attention than larger programmes, and even under close scrutiny the causes are less likely to be found.

The UK national study of magnetic resonance imaging as a method of screening for breast cancer (MARIBS)

The UK national study of magnetic resonance imaging as a method of screening for breast cancer (MARIBS) is in progress. The study design, accrual to date, and related research projects are described. Revised accrual rates and expected recruitment are given. 15 cancers have been detected to date, from a total of 1236 screening measurements. This event rate and the tumour grades reported are compared with recent reports from other studies in women at high risk of breast cancer.

Reasons for variation in coverage in the NHS cervical screening programme

In order to investigate reasons for variation in coverage of cervical screening, data from standard Department of Health returns were obtained for all Health Authorities for 1998/1999. Approximately 80% of the variation between health authorities is explained by differences in age distribution and area classification. Considerable differences between Health Authority and Office of National Statistics (ONS) population figures in City and Urban (London) areas for the age group 25-29 years and for City (London) for age group 30-34 years, suggest an effect of list inflation in these groups. Coverage as a performance indicator may be more accurately represented using the age range 35-64 years. Using this narrower age range, the percentage of health authorities meeting the 80% 5-year coverage target increases from 87% to 90%.

Routine breast screening for women aged 65-69: results from evaluation of the demonstration sites

Routine programme data and specially designed surveys from 3 demonstration sites were analysed to determine the implications of extending the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP), to include routine invitations for women up to 69 years. All women aged 65-69 and registered with GPs in these areas received routine invitations for breast screening along with those aged 50-64. Overall uptake was 71% in women aged 65-69 compared with 78% in younger women, but was > or = 90% in both groups who had previously attended within 5 years. Recall rates were lower for older women, but with a higher positive predictive value for cancer. The percentages of invasive cancer in different prognostic categories were similar in the 2 age groups. Older women took no longer to screen than younger women. The costs per woman invited or per woman screened were also similar to those for women aged 50-64, whilst the cost per cancer detected was some 34% lower in older women. Breast screening is as cost effective for women aged 65-69 as for those aged 50-64, with a higher cancer detection rate balancing shorter life expectancy. The proposed extension to the national programme will have considerable workforce implications for the NHSBSP and require additional resources.

Results from the UK NHS breast screening programme 1994-1999

OBJECTIVE

To present results from the NHS breast screening programme (NHSBSP) from 1994 through to 1999 and to examine the extent to which interim targets are being achieved.

METHODS

Data were collated from all screening programmes in the UK on standard statistical returns. Performance of the screening programme was evaluated using calculated targets based on comparison with the Swedish two counties (STC) randomised controlled trial.

RESULTS

In the early years of screening (1988-1993), the NHS programme was detecting more DCIS but considerably less invasive cancers than expected, based on the STC trial. Since the screening year 1993/94 (1 April to 31 March) the standardised detection ratio (SDR) measure of the detection of invasive cancers has increased by 36% from 0.83 to 1.13. The SDR has been greater than 1 since 1996197 suggesting that the NHSBSP has only been screening as efficiently as the STC trial since this date. Uptake for screening has been relatively stable over time at approximately 75%.

CONCLUSIONS

The NHSBSP has made considerable advances in performance since its inception in 1988 and screening uptake and age standardised invasive cancer detection rates are (by 1999) well in excess of targets. The early years of screening were characterised by good uptake but a low sensitivity for the detection of invasive cancers. It is anticipated that the screening programme will have an increasing impact on breast cancer mortality, particularly in the 55-69 year age group over the coming years.

Faecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer at Nottingham: details of the verification process

Cause specific mortality statistics derived from death certificates are highly dependent upon the accuracy of certification by the attending physician. In the Nottingham colorectal cancer screening trial, there were 12,624 deaths among the screening group and 12,515 among the control group during the period under consideration. There was no significant difference in all cause mortality rate (excluding deaths due to colorectal cancer) between the two study groups (rate ratio = 1.01, 95% confidence interval = 0.99 to 1.03). Disease specific mortality rates did not differ significantly between the two groups either. Overall, the agreement between verified and certified cause of death was 86%. Using the certified cause of death would have resulted in an underestimation bias of 6.27% for colorectal cancer deaths.

Pilot trial of interleukin-2 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for the mobilization of progenitor cells in advanced breast cancer patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy: expansion of immune effectors within the stem-cell graft and post-stem-cell infusion

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether administration of interleukin-2 (IL-2) with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) improves mobilization of immune effector cells into the stem-cell graft of patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autografting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a trial of stem-cell mobilization with IL-2 and G-CSF in advanced breast cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, thiotepa, and carboplatin and stem cells followed by IL-2. The trial defined immune, hematologic, and clinical effects of IL-2 in this setting.

RESULTS

Of 32 patients enrolled, nine received G-CSF alone for mobilization. Twenty-one of 23 patients mobilized with IL-2 plus G-CSF had stem cells collected with more mononuclear cells than those receiving G-CSF (19.3 v 10.4 x 10(8)/kg; P =.006), but fewer CD34(+) progenitor cells (6.9 v 22.0 x 10(6)/kg; P =.049). The IL-2 plus G-CSF-mobilized patients had greater numbers of activated T (CD3(+)/CD25(+)) cells (P =.009), natural killer (NK; CD56(+)) cells (P =.007), and activated NK (CD56 bright(+)) cells (P: =.039) than those patients mobilized with G-CSF. NK (P =.042) and lymphokine-activated killer (LAK) (P =.016) activity was increased in those mobilized with IL-2 + G-CSF, whereas G-CSF-mobilized patients had a decline in cytolytic activity. In the third week posttransplantation, immune reconstitution was superior in those mobilized with IL-2 plus G-CSF based on greater numbers of activated T cells (P =.003), activated NK cells (P =.04), and greater LAK activity (P =.003). The 16 of 21 IL-2 + G-CSF-mobilized patients with adequate numbers of stem cells (> 1.5 x 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg) collected engrafted rapidly posttransplantation.

CONCLUSION

The results demonstrate that G-CSF + IL-2 can enhance the number and function of antitumor effector cells in a mobilized autograft without impairing the hematologic engraftment, provided that CD34 cell counts are more than 1.5 x 10(6) cells/kg. Mobilization of CD34(+) stem cells does seem to be adversely affected. In those mobilized with IL-2 and G-CSF, post-stem-cell immune reconstitution of antitumor immune effector cells was enhanced.

Lung cancer screening: improved survival but no reduction in deaths--the role of "overdiagnosis"

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of lung cancer screening consistently show an excess number of cancer cases and longer survival in screened groups, but no difference in mortality between screened and control populations.

METHODS

The current study reviewed the various types of biases that confuse comparisons based on intermediate endpoints such as stage distribution and survival and the reasons for basing evaluations in RCTs of screening for early cancers on mortality from a specific cancer.

RESULTS

Four RCTs all showed improved stage of disease and survival in screened subjects, but there was no difference in mortality between screened and unscreened populations. The possible explanations for the higher incidence are chance (failed randomization) or "overdiagnosis" (detection of cases by screening that otherwise would never have surfaced). Analysis of the trial results confirmed that chance alone was a very unlikely explanation. Evidence suggests that some overdiagnosis of lung cancer is likely in screened subjects. This is a consistent observation in all other programs of screening for early cancers (breast, prostate, and neuroblastoma).

CONCLUSIONS

Overdiagnosis of cancer cases resulting from the screening process itself will give rise to excess cases of disease, and may, at least in part, explain the observations in the randomized trials.

Lung cancer screening: improved survival but no reduction in deaths--the role of "overdiagnosis"

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of lung cancer screening consistently show an excess number of cancer cases and longer survival in screened groups, but no difference in mortality between screened and control populations.

METHODS

The current study reviewed the various types of biases that confuse comparisons based on intermediate endpoints such as stage distribution and survival and the reasons for basing evaluations in RCTs of screening for early cancers on mortality from a specific cancer.

RESULTS

Four RCTs all showed improved stage of disease and survival in screened subjects, but there was no difference in mortality between screened and unscreened populations. The possible explanations for the higher incidence are chance (failed randomization) or "overdiagnosis" (detection of cases by screening that otherwise would never have surfaced). Analysis of the trial results confirmed that chance alone was a very unlikely explanation. Evidence suggests that some overdiagnosis of lung cancer is likely in screened subjects. This is a consistent observation in all other programs of screening for early cancers (breast, prostate, and neuroblastoma).

CONCLUSIONS

Overdiagnosis of cancer cases resulting from the screening process itself will give rise to excess cases of disease, and may, at least in part, explain the observations in the randomized trials.