Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 1;31(7):1298-1304.
doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-0024.

Stage Shift as an Endpoint in Cancer Screening Trials: Implications for Evaluating Multicancer Early Detection Tests

Affiliations

Stage Shift as an Endpoint in Cancer Screening Trials: Implications for Evaluating Multicancer Early Detection Tests

Lukas Owens et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. .

Abstract

Background: Disease-specific mortality is a consensus endpoint in cancer screening trials. New liquid biopsy-based screening tests, including multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests, are creating a need to reduce the typically lengthy screening trial process. Endpoints based on the reduction in late-stage disease (stage shift) have been proposed but it is unclear how well they predict the impact of screening on disease-specific mortality across a variety of cancers potentially detectable by MCED tests.

Methods: We develop a mathematical formulation relating the reduction in late-stage cancer to the expected reduction in disease-specific mortality if cases diagnosed early via screening receive a corresponding shift in mortality. We investigate the similarity between the expected mortality reduction and the observed mortality reduction in published trials of screening for breast, lung, ovarian, and prostate cancer.

Results: The expected mortality reduction for a given stage shift varies significantly depending on cancer- and stage-specific survival distributions, with some cancer types showing little possibility for mortality improvement even under substantial stage shift. The expected mortality reduction fails to consistently match the mortality outcomes of published trials.

Conclusions: In MCED, any mortality benefit is likely to vary substantially across target cancers. Stage shift does not appear to be a reliable basis for inference about mortality reduction across cancers potentially detectable by MCED tests.

Impact: Stage shift may be an appealing endpoint for evaluation of cancer screening tests but it appears to be an unreliable predictor of mortality benefit; furthermore, the same stage shift can mean different things for different cancers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: Dr. Etzioni reported receiving personal fees from Grail prior to conducting the submitted work. Dr. Etzioni also holds shares in Seno Medical. The other authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Mortality reduction for selected hypothetical cancer screening trials
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Actual (blue cross) versus expected (orange circle) mortality reduction in published trials. Dashed line is the y = x line; slope of the orange line is the stage-shift multiplier (ρ) in each trial; blue error bars are 95% confidence intervals for actual trial results.

References

    1. Connor RJ, Chu KC, and Smart CR. “Stage-shift cancer screening model”. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42.11:1083–1095. - PubMed
    1. Wever EM, Draisma G, Heijnsdijk EAM, de Koning HJ. “How does early detection by screening affect disease progression? Modeling estimated benefits in prostate cancer screening”. Med Decision Making 2011; 31.4:550–558. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Feuer EJ, Mariotto A, Merrill A. “Modeling the impact of the decline in distant stage disease on prostate carcinoma mortality rates”. Cancer 2002; 95.4: 870–880. - PubMed
    1. Koopmann BDM, Harinck F, Kroep S, Konings ICAW, Naber SK, Lansdrop-Vogelaar I et al. “Identifying key factors for the effectiveness of pancreatic cancer screening: A model-based analysis”. Int. J. Cancer 2021; 149.2: 337–346. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Clarke CA, Hubbell E, Kurian AW, Colditz GA, Hartman A, Gomez SL. “Projected Reductions in Absolute Cancer-Related Deaths from Diagnosing Cancers Before Metastasis, 2006–2015”. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev 2020; 29.5: 895–902. - PubMed

Publication types