Disaggregating the mortality reductions due to cancer screening: model-based estimates from population-based data

Colorectal cancer mortality after randomized implementation of FIT-based screening - a nationwide cohort study

Objective

Evidence of reduction in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality following CRC screening based on the faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is insufficient. This study aimed to analyse if CRC mortality was reduced after implementing FIT-based screening.

Setting

The Danish national CRC screening programme.

Methods

This nationwide cohort study included residents aged 50–71 years invited to the prevalence round of the screening programme. Invitation order was decided by randomising on birth month; the first two birth months to be invited were classified as invited and the five last were classified as not-yet-invited and given a pseudo invitation data. Follow-up was from (pseudo)invitation date until 31 December 2017, emigration or death. Relative risk (RR) of CRC death was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

A total of 897,812 residents were included (29% invited and 71% not-yet-invited). The median follow-up was 3.3 years. The RR of CRC death at end of follow-up was 0.83 (95% CI 0.66; 1.03) among those invited to screening compared with those not yet invited. For men aged 60–71 years, this RR was 0.68 (95% CI 0.49; 0.94). For those participating in screening compared with a similar group of not-yet-invited residents, the RR was 0.71 (95% CI 0.46–1.08). For male participants aged 60–71 years, this RR was 0.49 (95% CI 0.27−0.89). For women and men aged 50–59 years, RRs were small and statistically non-significant.

Conclusion

This nationwide study showed that even within a median follow-up of only 3.3 years, implementing FIT-based CRC screening reduced CRC mortality among older men.

Instrumental variable estimation of early treatment effect in randomized screening trials

The primary analysis of randomized screening trials for cancer typically adheres to the intention-to-screen principle, measuring cancer-specific mortality reductions between screening and control arms. These mortality reductions result from a combination of the screening regimen, screening technology and the effect of the early, screening-induced, treatment. This motivates addressing these different aspects separately. Here we are interested in the causal effect of early versus delayed treatments on cancer mortality among the screening-detectable subgroup, which under certain assumptions is estimable from conventional randomized screening trial using instrumental variable type methods. To define the causal effect of interest, we formulate a simplified structural multi-state model for screening trials, based on a hypothetical intervention trial where screening detected individuals would be randomized into early versus delayed treatments. The cancer-specific mortality reductions after screening detection are quantified by a cause-specific hazard ratio. For this, we propose two estimators, based on an estimating equation and a likelihood expression. The methods extend existing instrumental variable methods for time-to-event and competing risks outcomes to time-dependent intermediate variables. Using the multi-state model as the basis of a data generating mechanism, we investigate the performance of the new estimators through simulation studies. In addition, we illustrate the proposed method in the context of CT screening for lung cancer using the US National Lung Screening Trial data.

UKCTOCS update: applying insights of delayed effects in cancer screening trials to the long-term follow-up mortality analysis

BACKGROUND

During trials that span decades, new evidence including progress in statistical methodology, may require revision of original assumptions. An example is the continued use of a constant-effect approach to analyse the mortality reduction which is often delayed in cancer-screening trials. The latter led us to re-examine our approach for the upcoming primary mortality analysis (2020) of long-term follow-up of the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (LTFU UKCTOCS), having initially (2014) used the proportional hazards (PH) Cox model.

METHODS

We wrote to 12 experts in statistics/epidemiology/screening trials, setting out current evidence, the importance of pre-specification, our previous mortality analysis (2014) and three possible choices for the follow-up analysis (2020) of the mortality outcome: (A) all data (2001-2020) using the Cox model (2014), (B) new data (2015-2020) only and (C) all data (2001-2020) using a test that allows for delayed effects.

RESULTS

Of 11 respondents, eight supported changing the 2014 approach to allow for a potential delayed effect (option C), suggesting various tests while three favoured retaining the Cox model (option A). Consequently, we opted for the Versatile test introduced in 2016 which maintains good power for early, constant or delayed effects. We retained the Royston-Parmar model to estimate absolute differences in disease-specific mortality at 5, 10, 15 and 18 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision to alter the follow-up analysis for the primary outcome on the basis of new evidence and using new statistical methodology for long-term follow-up is novel and has implications beyond UKCTOCS. There is an urgent need for consensus building on how best to design, test, estimate and report mortality outcomes from long-term randomised cancer screening trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN22488978 . Registered on 6 April 2000.

Objectives, design and main findings until 2020 from the Rotterdam Study

The Rotterdam Study is an ongoing prospective cohort study that started in 1990 in the city of Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The study aims to unravel etiology, preclinical course, natural history and potential targets for intervention for chronic diseases in mid-life and late-life. The study focuses on cardiovascular, endocrine, hepatic, neurological, ophthalmic, psychiatric, dermatological, otolaryngological, locomotor, and respiratory diseases. As of 2008, 14,926 subjects aged 45 years or over comprise the Rotterdam Study cohort. Since 2016, the cohort is being expanded by persons aged 40 years and over. The findings of the Rotterdam Study have been presented in over 1700 research articles and reports. This article provides an update on the rationale and design of the study. It also presents a summary of the major findings from the preceding 3 years and outlines developments for the coming period.

Inter- and intra-provincial variation in screen-detected breast cancer across five Canadian provinces: a CanIMPACT study

OBJECTIVE

Breast cancer screening aims to identify cancers in early stages when prognosis is better and treatments less invasive. We describe inter- and intra-provincial variation in the percentage of screen-detected cases under publicly funded healthcare systems and factors related to having screen- vs non-screen-detected breast cancer across five Canadian provinces.

METHODS

Women aged 40+ diagnosed with incident breast cancer from 2007 to 2012 in five Canadian provinces were identified from their respective provincial cancer registries. Standardized provincial datasets were created linking screening, health administrative, and claims data. Province-specific logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association of demographic and healthcare utilization factors in each province with the odds of screen-detected cancer.

RESULTS

There was significant inter- and intra-provincial variation by age. Screen detection ranged from 42% to 52% in ages 50-69 but women aged 50-59 had approximately 4-8% lower screen detection than those aged 60-69 in all provinces. Screening associations with income quintile and rurality varied across provinces. Those least likely to be screen-detected within a province were consistently in the lowest income quintile; OR ranged from 0.62-0.89 relative to highest income quintile/urban patients aged 50-69. Lack of visits to primary care 30 months prior to diagnosis was also consistently associated with lower odds of screen detection (OR range, 0.37-0.76).

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer screen detection rates in the Canadian provinces examined are relatively high. Associations with income-rurality indicate a need for greater attention and/or targeted outreach to specific communities and/or provincial regions to improve access to breast cancer screening services intra-provincially.