Quantification of harms in cancer screening trials: Literature review

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 347, Issue 7927, 2013, Pages

  Heleno, Bruno ^a   Thomsen, Maria F ^a   Rodrigues, David S ^b   Jørgensen, Karsten J ^c   Brodersen, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b NOVA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Portugal)

^c University of Copenhagen   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INVASIVE PROCEDURE; MORTALITY; OVERDIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOSOCIAL DISORDER; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW;

CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; STRESS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; UNNECESSARY PROCEDURES;

EID: 84885198452     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f5334     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Brawley OW, Kramer BS Cancer screening in theory and in practice. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:293-300.
2. Raffle A, Gray M. Screening: evidence and practice. Oxford University Press, 2007.
3. Croswell JM, Ransohoff DF, Kramer BS Principles of cancer screening: lessons from history and study design issues. Semin Oncol 2010; 37:202-15.
4. Holland W, Stewart S. Screening in disease prevention: what works? 1st ed. Radcliffe, 2005.
5. Marshall KG. Prevention. How much harm? How much benefit? 3. Physical, psychological and social harm. CMAJ 1996; 155:169-76.
6. Barratt A, Irwig L. Users' guides to the medical literature: XVII. how to use guidelines and recommendations about screening. JAMA 1999; 281:2029-34.
7. Woolf SH. Potential of screening to reduce the burden of cancer. In: Curry SJ, Byers T, Hewitt ME, National Cancer Policy Board (US), eds. Fulfilling the potential of cancer prevention and early detection. National Academies Press, 2003:156-223.
8. Alibhai SMH. Cancer screening: the importance of outcome measures. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2006; 57:215-24.
9. Irwig L, McCaffery K, Salkeld G., Bossuyt P. Informed choice for screening: implications for evaluation. BMJ 2006; 332:1148-50.
10. Brodersen J, Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC. The benefits and harms of screening for cancer with a focus on breast screening. Pol Arch Med Wewn 2010; 120:89-94.
11. Newman TB, Kohn MA Screening tests. Evidence-based diagnosis. Cambridge University Press, 2009:116-37.
12. Dans LF, Silvestre MAA, Dans AL Trade-off between benefit and harm is crucial in health screening recommendations. Part I: general principles. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64:231-9.
13. Harris R, Sawaya GF, Moyer V.A., Calonge N. Reconsidering the criteria for evaluating proposed screening programs: reflections from 4 current and former members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Epidemiol Rev 2011; 33:20-35.
14. Papanikolaou PN, Ioannidis JPA. Availability of large-scale evidence on specific harms from systematic reviews of randomized trials. Am J Med 2004; 117:582-9.
15. Chou R, Aronson N, Atkins D., Ismaila AS, Santaguida P, Smith DH, et al AHRQ Series Paper 4: Assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63:502-12.
16. Ioannidis JPA, Evans SJW, Gøtzsche PC, O'Neill RT, Altman DG, Schulz K, et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141:781-8.
17. Ioannidis JP, Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG. Reporting of safety data from randomised trials. Lancet 1998; 352:1752-3.
18. Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore R.A., Collins SL Reporting of adverse effects in clinical trials should be improved: lessons from acute postoperative pain. J Pain Symptom Manage 1999; 18:427-37.
19. Ioannidis JP, Lau J. Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas. JAMA 2001; 285:437-43.
20. Loke YK, Derry S. Reporting of adverse drug reactions in randomised controlled trials - a systematic survey. BMC Clin Pharmacol 2001; 1:3.
21. Bryant J, Loveman E, Cave C., Chase D, Milne R. Endocrinology trial design: adverse event reporting in randomised controlled trials of recombinant human GH in GH-deficient adults. J Endocrinol 2002; 175:545-52.
22. Martin RCG 2nd, Brennan MF, Jaques DP. Quality of complication reporting in the surgical literature. Ann Surg 2002; 235:803-13.
23. Papanikolaou PN, Churchill R, Wahlbeck K., Ioannidis JPA. Safety reporting in randomized trials of mental health interventions. Am J Psychiatry 2004; 161:1692-7.
24. Ethgen M, Boutron I, Baron G., Giraudeau B, Sibilia J, Ravaud P. Reporting of harm in randomized, controlled trials of nonpharmacologic treatment for rheumatic disease. Ann Intern Med 2005; 143:20-5.
25. Lee P, Fischer H, Rochon P., Gill S, Herrmann N, Bell C., et al. Published randomized controlled trials of drug therapy for dementia often lack complete data on harm. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61:1152-60.
26. Chowers MY, Gottesman BS, Leibovici L, Pielmeier U., Andreassen S, Paul M. Reporting of adverse events in randomized controlled trials of highly active antiretroviral therapy: systematic review. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009; 64:239-50.
27. Pitrou I, Boutron I, Ahmad N., Ravaud P. Reporting of safety results in published reports of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169:1756-61.
28. Breau RH, Gaboury I, Scales Jr CD, Fesperman SF, Watterson JD, Dahm P. Reporting of harm in randomized controlled trials published in the urological literature. J Urol 2010; 183:1693-7.
29. De Vries T.W., Roon EN van. Low quality of reporting adverse drug reactions in paediatric randomised controlled trials. Arch Dis Child 2010; 95:1023-6.
30. Haidich A-B, Birtsou C., Dardavessis T, Tirodimos I, Arvanitidou M. The quality of safety reporting in trials is still suboptimal: survey of major general medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64:124-35.
31. Vera-Badillo F.E., Shapiro R, Ocana A., Amir E, Tannock IF Bias in reporting of end points of efficacy and toxicity in randomized, clinical trials for women with breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2013; 24:1238-44.
32. Loke YK, Price D, Herxheimer A. Adverse effects. In: Higgins J, Green S, eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions [Internet]. Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org
33. Gøtzsche PC, Jørgensen KJ. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. John Wiley, 2013.
34. Hewitson P, Glasziou PP, Irwig L, Towler B., Watson E. Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. John Wiley, 2007.
35. Bach PB, Mirkin JN, Oliver T.K., Azzoli CG, Berry DA, Brawley OW, et al Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA 2012; 307:2418-29.
36. Wun YT, Dickinson JA Alpha-fetoprotein and/or liver ultrasonography for liver cancer screening in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. John Wiley, 2003.
37. Principles of screening. In: Levin B, Prorok PC, Schottenfeld D, Fraumeni JF, eds. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. Oxford University Press, 2006.
38. De Koning HJ. Assessment of nationwide cancer-screening programmes. Lancet 2000; 355:80-1.
39. Raffle AE, Alden B, Quinn M., Babb PJ, Brett MT Outcomes of screening to prevent cancer: analysis of cumulative incidence of cervical abnormality and modelling of cases and deaths prevented. BMJ 2003; 326:901.
40. Robinson MH, Hardcastle JD, Moss S.M., Amar SS, Chamberlain JO, Armitage NC, et al The risks of screening: data from the Nottingham randomised controlled trial of faecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer. Gut 1999; 45:588-92.
41. Zackrisson S, Andersson I, Janzon L., Manjer J, Garne JP Rate of over-diagnosis of breast cancer 15 years after end of Malmö mammographic screening trial: follow-up study. BMJ 2006; 332:689-92.
42. Andersson I, Janzon L. Reduced breast cancer mortality in women under age 50: updated results from the Malmö Mammographic Screening Program. J Natl Cancer Inst Monographs 1997; 22:63-7.
43. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, Buys SS, Chia D, Church TR, 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; 104:125-32.
44. Semiglazov VF, Moiseyenko VM, Bavli J.L., Migmanova NS, Seleznyov NK, Popova RT, et al The role of breast self-examination in early breast cancer detection (results of the 5-years USSR/WHO randomized study in Leningrad). Eur J Epidemiol 1992; 8:498-502.
45. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 2011; 365:395-409.
46. Varenhorst E, Carlsson P, Capik E., Löfman O, Pedersen KV Repeated screening for carcinoma of the prostate by digital rectal examination in a randomly selected population. Acta Oncol 1992; 31:815-21.
47. Welch HG, Black WC Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102s:605-13.
48. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, for the CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010; 340:c332.
49. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz K.F., Montori V., Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010; 340:c869.
50. Marcus PM, Bergstralh EJ, Zweig M.H., Harris A., Offord KP, Fontana RS Extended lung cancer incidence follow-up in the Mayo Lung Project and overdiagnosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98:748-56.
51. Miller AB, To T, Baines C.J., Wall C. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: breast cancer mortality after 11 to 16 years of follow-up. A randomized screening trial of mammography in women age 40 to 49 years. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137:305-12.
52. Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A., Johnson CC, Lamerato L, Isaacs C, et al Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA 2011; 305:2295-303.
53. Oken MM, Hocking WG, Kvale P.A., Andriole GL, Buys SS, Church TR, et al Screening by chest radiograph and lung cancer mortality. JAMA 2011; 306:1865-73.
54. Sandblom G, Varenhorst E, Löfman O, Rosell J., Carlsson P. Clinical consequences of screening for prostate cancer: 15 years follow-up of a randomised controlled trial in Sweden. Eur Urol 2004; 46:717-724.
55. Hardcastle JD, Armitage NC, Chamberlain J, Balfour T.W., Amar SS A control trial of faecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer: 2-year results. Br J Surg 1985; 72 suppl: S69-71.
56. Tabár L., Akerlund E, Gad A. Five-year experience with single-view mammography randomized controlled screening in Sweden. Recent Results Cancer Res 1984; 90:105-13.
57. Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A., Johns L, Waller M, Bobrow L. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality at 10 years' follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2006; 368:2053-60.
58. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb R.L., Buys SS, Chia D, Church TR, et al Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med 2009; 360:1310-9.
59. Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf S.H., Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, Teutsch SM, et al Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med 2001; 20(3s):21-35.
60. Jørgensen KJ, Klahn A, Gøtzsche PC. Are benefits and harms in mammography screening given equal attention in scientific articles? A cross-sectional study. BMC Med 2007; 5:12.