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
Review
. 2022 Apr;17(2):208-223.
doi: 10.1159/000517182. Epub 2021 Aug 12.

Risk-Adjusted Cancer Screening and Prevention (RiskAP): Complementing Screening for Early Disease Detection by a Learning Screening Based on Risk Factors

Affiliations
Review

Risk-Adjusted Cancer Screening and Prevention (RiskAP): Complementing Screening for Early Disease Detection by a Learning Screening Based on Risk Factors

Rita K Schmutzler et al. Breast Care (Basel). 2022 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Risk-adjusted cancer screening and prevention is a promising and continuously emerging option for improving cancer prevention. It is driven by increasing knowledge of risk factors and the ability to determine them for individual risk prediction. However, there is a knowledge gap between evidence of increased risk and evidence of the effectiveness and efficiency of clinical preventive interventions based on increased risk. This gap is, in particular, aggravated by the extensive availability of genetic risk factor diagnostics, since the question of appropriate preventive measures immediately arises when an increased risk is identified. However, collecting proof of effective preventive measures, ideally by prospective randomized preventive studies, typically requires very long periods of time, while the knowledge about an increased risk immediately creates a high demand for action.

Summary: Therefore, we propose a risk-adjusted prevention concept that is based on the best current evidence making needed and appropriate preventive measures available, and which is constantly evaluated through outcome evaluation, and continuously improved based on these results. We further discuss the structural and procedural requirements as well as legal and socioeconomical aspects relevant for the implementation of this concept.

Keywords: Breast cancer; ELSI ethical, legal, social implications; Evidence-generating care; Risk-adjusted prevention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

    1. Lichtenstein P, Holm NV, Verkasalo PK, Iliadou A, Kaprio J, Koskenvuo M, et al. Environmental and heritable factors in the causation of cancer--analyses of cohorts of twins from Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. N Engl J Med. 2000 Jul 13;343((2)):78–85. - PubMed
    1. Mucci LA, Hjelmborg JB, Harris JR, Czene K, Havelick DJ, Scheike T, et al. Familial Risk and Heritability of Cancer Among Twins in Nordic Countries. JAMA. 2016 Jan 5;315((1)):68–76. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rhiem K, Bücker-Nott HJ, Hellmich M, Fischer H, Ataseven B, Dittmer-Grabowski C, et al. Benchmarking of a checklist for the identification of familial risk for breast and ovarian cancers in a prospective cohort. Breast J. 2019 May;25((3)):455–60. - PubMed
    1. Andermann A, Blancquaert I, Déry V. Genetic screening: a conceptual framework for programmes and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010 Apr;15((2)):90–7. - PubMed
    1. Brand A, Lal JA, Public Health Genomics European N. European Best Practice Guidelines for Quality Assurance, Provision and Use of Genome-based Information and Technologies: the 2012 Declaration of Rome. Drug Metabol Drug Interact. 2012;27((3)):177–82. - PubMed