Screening guidelines for non-AIDS defining cancers in HIV-infected individuals

Current Opinion in Oncology

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 518-525

  Mani, Deepthi ^a   Aboulafia, David M ^b,c  

^a Multicare Good Samaritan Medical Center   (United States)

^b VIRGINIA MASON MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer screening; HIV AIDS; Non AIDS defining malignancies

Indexed keywords

ANUS CANCER; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTED PATIENT; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; LUNG CANCER; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; REVIEW; COMPLICATION; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTION; MALE; MASS SCREENING; NEOPLASMS; PROCEDURES;

EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HIV INFECTIONS; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; NEOPLASMS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC;

EID: 84883255153     PISSN: 10408746     EISSN: 1531703X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/CCO.0b013e328363e04a     Document Type: Review

References (59)

1. Palella FJ Jr, Baker RK, Moorman AC, et al. Mortality in the highly active antiretroviral therapy era: changing causes of death and disease in the HIV outpatient study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2006; 43: 27-34.
2. Croswell JM, Ransohoff DF, Kramer BS. Principles of cancer screening: lessons from history and study design issues. Semin Oncol 2010; 37: 202-215.
3. Shiels M, Pfeiffer R, Gail M, et al. Cancer burden in the HIV-infected population in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103: 753-762.
4. Marcus PM, Bergstralh EJ, Fagerstrom RM, et al. Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 1308.
5. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 395-409.
6. Sigel K, Brown S, Wisnivesky Y, et al. Chest CT scan findings and implications for lung cancer screening in asymptomatic HIV infected patients [Abstract 907]. In: Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, March 5-8, Seattle, Washington; 2012; http://www.retroconference.org/2012b/PDFs/ 907.pdf. [Accessed 8 May 2013].
7. Bach PB, Mirkin JN, Oliver TK, et al. Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA 2012; 307: 2418-2429. This report summarizes the systematic review conducted by a multisociety collaborative effort examining the risks and benefits of LDCT screening for lung cancer and forms the basis of the American College of Chest Physicians and the American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guidelines.
8. McMahon PM, Kong CY, Bouzan C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening for lung cancer in the United States. J Thorac Oncol 2011; 6: 1841-1848.
9. French National Institute for Health and Medical Research-French National Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral Hepatitis (Inserm-ANRS). Early lung cancer diagnosis in HIV infected population with an important smoking history with low dose CT: a pilot study (EP48 HIV CHEST). http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ show/NCT01207986. [Accessed 8 May 2013]
10. Brock M. Screening for lung cancer in the HIV patient (NA-00036809). http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01748136. [Accessed 8 May 2013]
11. Wender R, Fontham ET, Barrera E Jr, et al. American Cancer Society lung cancer screening guidelines. CA Cancer J Clin 2013; 63: 87-105. An initial guideline for lung cancer screening with LDCT based on the results of the National Lung Screening Trial, issued by the American Cancer Society.
12. Helleberg M, Afzal S, Kronborg G, et al. Mortality attributable to smoking among HIV-1-infected individuals: a nationwide, population-based cohort study. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 56: 727-734. This Danish cohort study showed that the loss of life-years associated with smoking was larger than that associated with HIV in a setting wherein HIV care is free and well organized.
13. Sahasrabuddhe VV, Shiels MS, McGlynn KA, Engels EA. The risk of hepatocellular carcinoma among individuals with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome in the United States. Cancer 2012; 118: 6226-6233. This study analyzes the population-based registry linkage data from the US HIV/AIDS Cancer Match Study (1980-2009) and demonstrates that HCC incidence has steadily increased among individuals with AIDS in the United States over the past 3 decades. Individuals with AIDS have a four-fold higher HCC risk than the general population, and the magnitude of this relative excess has remained relatively unchanged over time, including in the HAART era.
14. Bruix J, Sherman M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 2010; 42: 1208-1236.
15. Zhang BH, Yang BH, Tang ZY. Randomized controlled trial of screening for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2004; 130: 417-422.
16. Aghoram R, Cai P, Dickinson JA. Alpha-foetoprotein and/or liver ultrasonography for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 9:CD002799. A Cochrane review on the RCTs for HCC screening, which concludes that there is not enough evidence to support or refute the value of alpha-fetoprotein or ultrasound screening, or both, of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive patients.
17. Miro JM, Montejo M, Castells L, et al. Outcome of HCV/HIV-coinfected liver transplant recipients: a prospective and multicenter cohort study. Am J Transplant 2012; 12: 1866-1876.
18. Terrault NA, Roland ME, Schiano T, et al. Outcomes of liver transplant recipients with hepatitis C and human immunodeficiency virus coinfection. Liver Transpl 2012; 18: 716-726.
19. Vibert E, Duclos-Vallée JC, Ghigna MR, et al. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: the impact of human immunodeficiency virus infection. Hepatology 2011; 53: 475-482.
20. Curry MP. HIV and hepatitis C virus: special concerns for patients with cirrhosis. J Infect Dis 2013; 207 (Suppl 1):S40-S44.
21. Park LS, Tate JP, Justice AC, et al. FIB-4 index is associated with hepatocellular carcinoma risk in HIV-infected patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011; 20: 2512-2517.
22. Morgan RL, Baack B, Smith BD, et al. Eradication of hepatitis C virus infection and the development of hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158 (5 Pt 1): 329-337. This systematic review summarizes the evidence from 30 observational studies examining the risk for HCC among HCV-infected persons who have been treated and either achieved a sustained virologic response (SVR) or did not respond to therapy. Attaining treatment-related SVR among persons with HCV is associated with a reduction in the relative risk (0.24) for HCC.
23. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011; 61: 69-90.
24. Goedert JJ, Schairer C, McNeel TS, et al. Risk of breast, ovary, and uterine corpus cancers among 85 268 women with AIDS. Br J Cancer 2006; 95: 642-648.
25. Dauby N, De Wit S, Delforge M, et al. Characteristics of non-AIDS-defining malignancies in the HAART era: a clinico-epidemiological study. J Int AIDS Soc 2011; 14: 16.
26. Hessol NA, Napolitano LA, Smith D, et al. HIV tropism and decreased risk of breast cancer. PLoS One 2010; 5:e14349.
27. Warner E. Clinical practice. Breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1025-1032.
28. Bleyer A, Welch HG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 1998-2005. This study analyzes the trends in early and late-stage breast cancer from 1976 to 2008 and demonstrates that despite substantial increases in the number of cases of early-stage breast cancer detected, screening mammography has only marginally reduced the rate at which women present with advanced cancer. The authors estimated that breast cancer was overdiagnosed in 1.3 million U.S. women in the past 30 years.
29. Kalager M, Adami HO, Bretthauer M, Tamimi RM. Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer due to mammography screening: results from the Norwegian screening program. Ann Intern Med 2012; 156: 491-499. A registry-based study from Norway comparing incidence of invasive breast cancer from 1996 to 2005 in counties where the screening programme was and was not implemented, which estimated that 6-10 women were overdiagnosed for every 2500 women invited for screening.
30. Tonelli M, Connor Gorber S, Joffres M, et al. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in averagerisk women aged 40-74 years. CMAJ 2011; 183: 1991-2001.
31. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 716-726.
32. Lee SJ, Boscardin WJ, Stijacic-Cenzer I, et al. Time lag to benefit after screening for breast and colorectal cancer: meta-analysis of survival data from the United States, Sweden, United Kingdom, and Denmark. BMJ 2013; 346:e8441. A meta-analysis of survival data from RCTs on breast or colorectal cancer screening, which suggests that screening for breast and colorectal cancer is most appropriate for patients with a life expectancy greater than 10 years.
33. Patel P, Hanson D, Sullivan P, et al. Incidence and types of cancer among HIVinfected persons compared with the general population in the United States, 1992-2003. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148: 728-736.
34. Shiels MS, Cole SR, Kirk GD, Poole C. A meta-analysis of the incidence of non-AIDS cancers in HIV-infected individuals. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2009; 52: 611-622.
35. Grulich AE, Li Y, McDonald A, et al. Rates of non-AIDS defining cancers in people with HIV infection before and after AIDS diagnosis. AIDS 2002; 16: 1155-1161.
36. Chapman C, Aboulafia DM, Dezube BJ, Pantanowitz L. Human immunodeficiency virus-associated adenocarcinoma of the colon: clinicopathologic findings and outcome. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2009; 8: 215-219.
37. Shiels MS, Pfeiffer RM, Engels EA. Age at cancer diagnosis among persons with AIDS in the United States. Ann Intern Med 2010; 153: 452-460.
38. Doubeni CA, Weinmann S, Adams K, et al. Screening colonoscopy and risk for incident late-stage colorectal cancer diagnosis in average-risk adults: a nested case-control study. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158: 312-320. This study found that screening for colorectal cancer with colonoscopy in averagerisk persons is associated with a reduction in the risk for late-stage colorectal cancer of about 70%.
39. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149: 627-637.
40. Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin 2008; 58: 130-160.
41. Green BB, Wang CY, Anderson ML, et al. An automated intervention with stepped increases in support to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158: 301-311. This 2-year RCT found that, compared with usual care, patients completed recommended screening more often when electronic health record linked reminders and FOBT kits were sent to them. Follow-up telephonic calls by medical assistants and, if required, nursing assistance each resulted in additional but smaller incremental improvements in adherence.
42. Silverberg MJ, Lau B, Justice AC, et al. Risk of anal cancer in HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected individuals in North America. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 54: 1026-1034. This is a large multicohort study. Both HIV-infected other men and women had substantially higher rates than HIV-uninfected men and women. This study confirmed that HIV-infected MSM experienced the greatest risk for anal cancer with incidence rates greater than 80 times as high as HIV-uninfected individuals.
43. New York State Department of Health AIDS Institute. Neoplastic complications of HIV infection. http://www.hivguidelines.org/wp-content/uploads/ 2009/05/NEOPLACOMPLIC.pdf. [Accessed 8 May 2013]
44. Betancourt EM, Wahbah MM, Been LC, et al. Anal cytology as a predictor of anal intraepithelial neoplasia in HIV-positive men and women. Diagn Cytopathol 2013. [Epub ahead of print]
45. Wentzensen N, Follansbee S, Borgonovo S, et al. Human papillomavirus genotyping, human papillomavirus mRNA expression, and p16/Ki-67 cytology to detect anal cancer precursors in HIV-infected MSM. AIDS 2012; 26: 2185-2192. This study evaluates the performance of several biomarkers for HPV-related carcinogenesis to detect anal precancers in HIV-infected MSM and demonstrates that molecular features of anal disease categories are similar to those of corresponding cervical lesions.
46. Landstra JM, Ciarrochi J, Deane FP, et al. The psychological impact of anal cancer screening on HIV-infected men. Psychooncology 2013; 22: 614-620. This prospective longitudinal survey of 291 men at a public HIV clinic in Sydney noted that anal cancer specific worry increased throughout the screening process.
47. Machalek DA, Poynten M, Jin F, et al. Anal human papillomavirus infection and associated neoplastic lesions in men who have sex with men: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: 487-500. This systematic review and meta-analysis presents a summary of all published estimates of data for anal HPV detection, cytological and histological abnormalities, and anal cancer in HIV-positive and HIV-negative MSM. On the basis of restricted data, rates of progression from AIN to anal cancer seem to be substantially lower than they are for cervical precancerous lesions.
48. Palefsky JM, Giuliano AR, Goldstone S, et al. HPV vaccine against anal HPV infection and anal intraepithelial neoplasia. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1576-1585.
49. Wilkin T, Lee JY, Lensing SY, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in HIV-1-infected men. J Infect Dis 2010; 202: 1246-1253.
50. Shiels MS, Goedert JJ, Moore RD, et al. Reduced risk of prostate cancer in U.S. men with AIDS. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010; 19: 2910-2915.
51. Wilt TJ, Ahmed HU. Prostate cancer screening and the management of clinically localized disease. BMJ 2013; 346:f325. A recent review article on the controversies surrounding prostate cancer screening, the management of clinically localized disease and the future research needs in this field.
52. Ilic D, Neuberger MM, Djulbegovic M, Dahm P. Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD004720. This systematic review of five randomized trials comparing prostate cancer screening vs. no screening in 341 342 men with no prior history of prostate cancer showed no significant difference in prostate cancer and all-cause mortality.
53. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, et al. Prostate cancer screening in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 104: 125-132. A report of the PLCO trial data after 13 years of follow-up showed no evidence of a mortality benefit for organized annual screening compared with opportunistic screening.
54. Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al., for the ERSPC Investigators. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1320-1328.
55. Heijnsdijk EA, Wever EM, Auvinen A, et al. Quality-of-life effects of prostatespecific antigen screening. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 595-605. This study used a microsimulation screening analysis model to extrapolate the ERSPC data and showed that the benefit of PSA screening was diminished by loss of quality adjusted life-years owing to postdiagnosis long-term effects.
56. Moyer VA, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2012; 157: 120-134. An update of the 2008 USPSTF recommendation statement on screening for prostate cancer, which now recommends against PSA-based screening in men of all age groups.
57. Gulati R,Gore JL, Etzioni R. Comparative effectiveness of alternative prostatespecific antigen-based prostate cancer screening strategies: model estimates of potential benefits and harms. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158: 145-153. This modeling study compared 35 screening strategies that differed by ages to start and stop screening, screening intervals and thresholds for biopsy. Compared with standard screening, using higher thresholds for biopsy referral for older men and screening men with initially low prostate-specific antigen levels less frequently seems to reduce harms of screening while preserving lives.
58. Wolf AM, Wender RC, Etzioni RB, et al., American Cancer Society Prostate Cancer Advisory Committee. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010; 60: 70-98.
59. Carroll P, Albertsen PC, Greene K, Babaian RJ, et al. Prostate-specific antigen best practice statement: 2009 update. www.auanet.org/content/ guidelinesand-quality-care/clinical-guidelines/main-reports/psa09.pdf. [Accessed 4 April 2013]