Pietro Diana1,2, Tobias Klatte3, Daniele Amparore4,5, Riccardo Bertolo5,6, Umberto Carbonara5,7, Selcuk Erdem5,8, Alexandre Ingels5,9,10, Onder Kara5,11, Laura Marandino5,12, Michele Marchioni5,13,14, Stijn Muselaers5,15, Nicola Pavan5,16, Angela Pecoraro4,5, Alessio Pecoraro17, Eduard Roussel5,18, Riccardo Campi19,20,21. 1. Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Cartagena 340-350, 08025, Barcelona, Spain. pietros.diana@gmail.com. 2. Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Institute IRCCS, Rozzano, Italy. pietros.diana@gmail.com. 3. Department of Urology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 4. Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, San Luigi Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy. 5. European Association of Urology (EAU) Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Renal Cancer Working Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Urology, San Carlo Di Nancy Hospital, Rome, Italy. 7. Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation-Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy. 8. Division of Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, Istanbul University Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey. 9. Department of Urology, University Hospital Henri Mondor, APHP, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94010, Créteil, France. 10. Biomaps, UMR1281, INSERM, CNRS, CEA, Université Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France. 11. Department of Urology, Kocaeli University School of Medicine, Izmit, Turkey. 12. Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. 13. Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Laboratory of Biostatistics, University "G. D'Annunzio" Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy. 14. Department of Urology, SS Annunziata Hospital, "G. D'Annunzio" University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy. 15. Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 16. Urology Clinic, Department of Medical, Surgical and Health Science, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy. 17. Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. 18. Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 19. European Association of Urology (EAU) Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Renal Cancer Working Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands. riccardo.campi@gmail.com. 20. Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. riccardo.campi@gmail.com. 21. Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. riccardo.campi@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To systematically review studies focused on screening programs for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and provide an exhaustive overview on their clinical impact, potential benefits, and harms. METHODS: A systematic review of the recent English-language literature was conducted according to the European Association of Urology guidelines and the PRISMA statement recommendations (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021283136) using the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Risk-of-bias assessment was performed according to the QUality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. RESULTS: Overall, nine studies and one clinical trials were included. Eight studies reported results from RCC screening programs involving a total of 159 136 patients and four studies reported screening cost-analysis. The prevalence of RCC ranged between 0.02 and 0.22% and it was associated with the socio-demographic characteristics of the subjects; selection of the target population decreased, overall, the screening cost per diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increasing interest in RCC screening programs from patients and clinicians there is a relative lack of studies reporting the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and the optimal modality for RCC screening. Targeting high-risk individuals and/or combining detection of RCC with other health checks represent pragmatic options to improve the cost-effectiveness and reduce the potential harms of RCC screening.
PURPOSE: To systematically review studies focused on screening programs for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and provide an exhaustive overview on their clinical impact, potential benefits, and harms. METHODS: A systematic review of the recent English-language literature was conducted according to the European Association of Urology guidelines and the PRISMA statement recommendations (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021283136) using the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Risk-of-bias assessment was performed according to the QUality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. RESULTS: Overall, nine studies and one clinical trials were included. Eight studies reported results from RCC screening programs involving a total of 159 136 patients and four studies reported screening cost-analysis. The prevalence of RCC ranged between 0.02 and 0.22% and it was associated with the socio-demographic characteristics of the subjects; selection of the target population decreased, overall, the screening cost per diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increasing interest in RCC screening programs from patients and clinicians there is a relative lack of studies reporting the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and the optimal modality for RCC screening. Targeting high-risk individuals and/or combining detection of RCC with other health checks represent pragmatic options to improve the cost-effectiveness and reduce the potential harms of RCC screening.
Authors: Riccardo Campi; Grant D Stewart; Michael Staehler; Saeed Dabestani; Markus A Kuczyk; Brian M Shuch; Antonio Finelli; Axel Bex; Börje Ljungberg; Umberto Capitanio Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2021-01-03
Authors: Kyle J Foreman; Neal Marquez; Andrew Dolgert; Kai Fukutaki; Nancy Fullman; Madeline McGaughey; Martin A Pletcher; Amanda E Smith; Kendrick Tang; Chun-Wei Yuan; Jonathan C Brown; Joseph Friedman; Jiawei He; Kyle R Heuton; Mollie Holmberg; Disha J Patel; Patrick Reidy; Austin Carter; Kelly Cercy; Abigail Chapin; Dirk Douwes-Schultz; Tahvi Frank; Falko Goettsch; Patrick Y Liu; Vishnu Nandakumar; Marissa B Reitsma; Vince Reuter; Nafis Sadat; Reed J D Sorensen; Vinay Srinivasan; Rachel L Updike; Hunter York; Alan D Lopez; Rafael Lozano; Stephen S Lim; Ali H Mokdad; Stein Emil Vollset; Christopher J L Murray Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-10-16 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Umberto Capitanio; Karim Bensalah; Axel Bex; Stephen A Boorjian; Freddie Bray; Jonathan Coleman; John L Gore; Maxine Sun; Christopher Wood; Paul Russo Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-09-19 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Sabrina H Rossi; Tobias Klatte; Juliet A Usher-Smith; Kate Fife; Sarah J Welsh; Saeed Dabestani; Axel Bex; David Nicol; Paul Nathan; Grant D Stewart; Edward C F Wilson Journal: Eur Urol Focus Date: 2019-09-14
Authors: Chanan Reitblat; Paul A Bain; Michael E Porter; David N Bernstein; Thomas W Feeley; Markus Graefen; Santosh Iyer; Matthew J Resnick; C J Stimson; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Boris Gershman Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 20.096