IntroductionThe Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England began operating in 2006 with the aim of full roll out across England by December 2009. Subjects aged 60–69 are being invited to complete three guaiac faecal occult blood tests (6 windows) every 2 years. The programme aims to reduce mortality from colorectal cancer by 16% in those invited for screening.MethodsAll subjects eligible for screening in the National Health Service in England are included on one database, which is populated from National Health Service registration data covering about 98% of the population of England. This analysis is only of subjects invited to participate in the first (prevalent) round of screening.ResultsBy October 2008 almost 2.1 million had been invited to participate, with tests being returned by 49.6% of men and 54.4% of women invited. Uptake ranged between 55–60% across the four provincial hubs which administer the programme but was lower in the London hub (40%). Of the 1.08 million returning tests 2.5% of men and 1.5% of women had an abnormal test. 17 518 (10 608 M, 6910 F) underwent investigation, with 98% having a colonoscopy as their first investigation. Cancer (n=1772) and higher risk adenomas (n=6543) were found in 11.6% and 43% of men and 7.8% and 29% of women investigated, respectively. 71% of cancers were ‘early’ (10% polyp cancer, 32% Dukes A, 30% Dukes B) and 77% were left-sided (29% rectal, 45% sigmoid) with only 14% being right-sided compared with expected figures of 67% and 24% for left and right side from UK cancer registration.ConclusionIn this first round of screening in England uptake and fecal occult blood test positivity was in line with that from the pilot and the original European trials. Although there was the expected improvement in cancer stage at diagnosis, the proportion with left-sided cancers was higher than expected.

The NHS BCSP provides high-quality colonoscopy, as demonstrated by high caecal intubation rate, ADR and comfort scores, and low adverse event rates. Quality is achieved by ensuring BCSP colonoscopists meet a high standard before starting screening and through ongoing quality assurance. Measuring total adenoma detection (MAP and MAP+) as adjuncts to ADR may further enhance quality assurance.

Objective To investigate the relation between women's reported use of breast and cervical screening and sociodemographic characteristics. Design Cross sectional multipurpose survey. Setting Private households, Great Britain. Population 3185 women aged 40-74 interviewed in the National Statistics Omnibus Survey 2005-7. Main outcome measures Ever had a mammogram, ever had a cervical smear, and, for each, timing of most recent screen. Results 91% (95% confidence interval 90% to 92%) of women aged 40-74 years reported ever having had a cervical smear, and 93% (92% to 94%) of those aged 53-74 years reported ever having had a mammogram; 3% (2% to 4%) of women aged 53-74 years had never had either breast or cervical screening. Women were significantly more likely to have had a mammogram if they lived in households with cars (compared with no car: one car, odds ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 1

In a project coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) 31 experts from 11 European countries and IARC have developed supplements to the current European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. The supplements take into account the potential of primary testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) and vaccination against HPV infection to improve cervical cancer prevention and control and will be published by the European Commission in book format. They include 62 recommendations or conclusions for which the strength of the evidence and the respective recommendations is graded. While acknowledging the available evidence for more efficacious screening using HPV primary testing compared to screening based on cytology, the authors and editors of the supplements emphasize that appropriate policy and programme organization remain essential to achieve an acceptable balance between benefit and harm of any screening or vaccination programme. A summary of the supplements and all of the graded recommendations are presented here in journal format to make key aspects of the updated and expanded guidelines known to a wider professional and scientific community.

HE PROVISION OF SCREENING mammography differs greatly between the United States and the United Kingdom. In the United States, screening is provided in diverse settings, such as private practice, health maintenance organizations, and academic medical centers 1 ; whereas in the United Kingdom, a single organized screening program run by the National Health Service provides virtually all mammographic screening for women aged 50 years or older. 2,3 There are also differences between the ages of women screened; the recommended interval between mammographic examinations; the proportion of women recalled for additional imaging examinations, such as diagnostic mammography or ultrasound; and the methods used to further evaluate findings considered suspicious for cancer. 4-6 However, it is not clear if there are actual differences in the performance and outcomes of screening mammography between the 2 countries. Comparing the performance of screening mammography between the 2 countries may suggest methods to improve mammography practice. We compared recall (the percentage of mammograms in which there is a recommendation for prompt additional testing, clinical evaluation, or percutaneous biopsy), surgical biopsy, and cancer detection rates for screening mammography among similarly aged women between the United States and the United Kingdom.