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
. 1995 Feb;28(1):41-8.
doi: 10.1016/0009-9120(94)00069-8.

An epidemiological perspective on cancer screening

Affiliations
Review

An epidemiological perspective on cancer screening

A B Miller. Clin Biochem. 1995 Feb.

Abstract

Objective: To provide an epidemiological perspective on cancer screening.

Methods and results: For screening to be applicable as public health policy, the disease has to be an important health problem, there has to be evidence that early detection results in improved outcome, that adequate facilities for diagnosis, therapy, and subsequent management of true and false positives are available, that screening is acceptable to the target groups, and that programs are cost effective in the population. Although it is relatively easy to demonstrate that screening results in earlier detection of cancer, survival is a biassed measure of its effectiveness. The only valid design to study the efficacy of screening is the randomized trial. Cervical cancer screening was introduced before these requirements were recognized. There is, however, good evidence of its effectiveness; the challenge is to make programs cost effective. For breast cancer, studies show little or no evidence of effectiveness of mammography screening in women age 40-49. For women age 50-69, there is good evidence of effectiveness in trials comparing screening with no screening. These support the introduction of population-based programs for this age group. The challenge is to put the research results into practice to ensure cost-effective programs. For colo-rectal cancer, there is some evidence that both screening sigmoidoscopy and the fecal occult blood test will reduce mortality. It is not clear, however, whether programs using either or both these tests will be cost effective. For lung cancer, there is good evidence of no benefit for screening. For ovarian, prostate, mouth, and skin cancer, although early detection has been demonstrated, there is no evidence of reduction in mortality in the target groups; indeed, prostate screening could result in lowering the overall quality of life.

Conclusion: Screening, which offers a fairly rapid return from appropriate investment, should remain part of our armamentarium for cancer control.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources