A blueprint for cancer screening and early detection: Advancing screening’s contribution to cancer control

Abstract

From the mid‐20th century, accumulating evidence has supported the introduction of screening for cancers of the cervix, breast, colon and rectum, prostate (via shared decisions), and lung. The opportunity to detect and treat precursor lesions and invasive disease at a more favorable stage has contributed substantially to reduced incidence, morbidity, and mortality. However, as new discoveries portend advancements in technology and risk‐based screening, we fail to fulfill the greatest potential of the existing technology, in terms of both full access among the target population and the delivery of state‐of‐the art care at each crucial step in the cascade of events that characterize successful cancer screening. There also is insufficient commitment to invest in the development of new technologies, incentivize the development of new ideas, and rapidly evaluate promising new technology. In this report, the authors summarize the status of cancer screening and propose a blueprint for the nation to further advance the contribution of screening to cancer control.

Identification of Circulating MicroRNAs as a Promising Diagnostic Biomarker for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Early Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

“…Therefore, identification of CIN or early CC is extremely significant. So far, a large number of methods for screening CIN or early CC have been developed, such as HPV DNA testing [8], papanicolaou (pap) smear [9], liquid-based cytology (LBC) [10], joint test, and colposcopy, leading to the reduction of the incidence and mortality rate of CC [11][12][13]. Nevertheless, existing screening methods were complained of some limitations, including false-positive rate [14] or false-negative rate [15][16][17], possibility of overdiagnosis [18], probability of missed diagnosis [19], invasive procedure (cervical scraping or tissue biopsy), the difference between interobserver and intraobserver, and variation among pathologists [20], which made the triage of screening CC more complicated [21].…”

The American Cancer Society 2035 challenge goal on cancer mortality reduction

“…Previous articles in this ACS cancer control blueprint series have summarized knowledge, opportunities (including the proportion of potentially preventable cancer cases and deaths), and unanswered questions in cancer control, including the prevention and early detection of cancer . The blueprint series includes an article about the strengths and shortcomings of our current health care system, as well as an article outlining current knowledge, opportunities, and research questions that must be answered to improve the delivery of survivorship care .…”

“…It is hoped that a glimpse at what is possible in terms of cancer prevention and control, as outlined in this article and in the other ACS cancer control blueprint articles, will motivate Americans and American institutions to intensify cancer prevention and control efforts.…”

Successes and Challenges of Implementing a Lung Cancer Screening Program in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A Qualitative Analysis Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

“…(6-9) However, LDCT uptake has been poor with only a small percent of the eligible population reporting having received LDCT. (10)(11)(12) These low levels of screening are particularly challenging in limited-resource settings, such as federally quali ed health centers (FQHCs). (11,13,14) Research to understand the low uptake of LDCT has been limited and primarily focused on qualitative examinations of perceptions of cancer screening intentions among patients and providers, along with quantitative examinations of the association between uptake and patients' socio-demographic characteristics.…”

“…(10)(11)(12) These low levels of screening are particularly challenging in limited-resource settings, such as federally quali ed health centers (FQHCs). (11,13,14) Research to understand the low uptake of LDCT has been limited and primarily focused on qualitative examinations of perceptions of cancer screening intentions among patients and providers, along with quantitative examinations of the association between uptake and patients' socio-demographic characteristics. (15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20) Beyond individual level factors, implementation challenges likely also affect LDCT uptake.…”