Rafael Cardoso1, Feng Guo2, Thomas Heisser3, Harlinde De Schutter4, Nancy Van Damme4, Mef Christina Nilbert5, Anne Julie Tybjerg6, Anne-Marie Bouvier7, Véronique Bouvier8, Guy Launoy9, Anne-Sophie Woronoff10, Mélanie Cariou11, Michel Robaszkiewicz11, Patricia Delafosse12, Florence Poncet12, Paul M Walsh13, Carlo Senore14, Stefano Rosso15, Valery E P P Lemmens16, Marloes A G Elferink17, Sonja Tomšič18, Tina Žagar18, Arantza Lopez de Munain Marques19, Rafael Marcos-Gragera20, Montse Puigdemont21, Jaume Galceran22, Marià Carulla22, Antonia Sánchez-Gil23, María-Dolores Chirlaque24, Michael Hoffmeister2, Hermann Brenner25. 1. Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Faculty Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 2. Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Medical Faculty Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Belgian Cancer Registry, Brussels, Belgium. 5. Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark; Hvidovre University Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 6. Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark. 7. Digestive Cancer Registry of Burgundy, Dijon, France, INSERM U1231, University Hospital of Dijon, French Network of Cancer Registries (FRANCIM), Dijon, France. 8. Digestive Tumors Registry of Calvados, University Hospital of Caen, U1086 INSERM UCN - ANTICIPE, FRANCIM, Caen, France. 9. Normandie University, UniCaen, INSERM ANTICIPE, Caen, France; University Hospital of Caen, Caen, France. 10. Cancer Registry of Doubs, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire Besançon (CHRU) Besançon, France. 11. Digestive Tumors Registry of Finistère, CHRU Morvan, FRANCIM, Brest, France. 12. Cancer Registry of Isère, FRANCIM, Grenoble, France. 13. National Cancer Registry Ireland, Cork, Ireland. 14. Epidemiologia e screening - CPO, Turin, Italy. 15. Piedmont Cancer Registry, University Hospital 'Città della Salute e della Scienza', Turin, Italy. 16. Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, Netherlands; Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands. 17. Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, Netherlands. 18. Slovenian Cancer Registry, Institute of Oncology, Ljubljana, Slovenia. 19. Basque Country Cancer Registry, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain. 20. Epidemiology Unit and Girona Cancer Registry, Oncology Coordination Plan, Department of Health Government of Catalonia, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Girona, Spain; Descriptive Epidemiology, Genetics and Cancer Prevention Group, Biomedical Research Institute, Salt, Spain; Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública), Madrid, Spain. 21. Epidemiology Unit and Girona Cancer Registry, Oncology Coordination Plan, Department of Health Government of Catalonia, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Girona, Spain; Descriptive Epidemiology, Genetics and Cancer Prevention Group, Biomedical Research Institute, Salt, Spain. 22. Tarragona Cancer Registry, Epidemiology and Prevention Cancer Service, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Pere Virgili Health Research Institute (IISPV), Reus, Spain. 23. Department of Epidemiology, Regional Health Council, IMIB-Arrixaca, Murcia, Spain. 24. Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública), Madrid, Spain; Department of Epidemiology, Regional Health Council, IMIB-Arrixaca, Murcia, Spain; Department of Health and Social Sciences, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain. 25. Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: h.brenner@dkfz.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effects of recently implemented colorectal cancer screening programmes in Europe on colorectal cancer mortality will take several years to be fully known. We aimed to analyse the characteristics and parameters of screening programmes, proportions of colorectal cancers detected through screening, and stage distribution in screen-detected and non-screen-detected colorectal cancers to provide a timely assessment of the potential effects of screening programmes in several European countries. METHODS: We conducted this population-based study in nine European countries for which data on mode of detection were available (Belgium, Denmark, England, France, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Spain). Data from 16 population-based cancer registries were included. Patients were included if they were diagnosed with colorectal cancer from the year that organised colorectal cancer screening programmes were implemented in each country until the latest year with available data at the time of analysis, and if their age at diagnosis fell within the age groups targeted by the programmes. Data collected included sex, age at diagnosis, date of diagnosis, topography, morphology, clinical and pathological TNM information based on the edition in place at time of diagnosis, and mode of detection (ie, screen detected or non-screen detected). If stage information was not available, patients were not included in stage-specific analyses. The primary outcome was proportion and stage distribution of screen-detected versus non-screen detected colorectal cancers. FINDINGS: 228 667 colorectal cancer cases were included in the analyses. Proportions of screen-detected cancers varied widely across countries and regions. The highest proportions (40-60%) were found in Slovenia and the Basque Country in Spain, where FIT-based programmes were fully rolled out, and participation rates were higher than 50%. A similar proportion of screen-detected cancers was also found for the Netherlands in 2015, where participation was over 70%, even though the programme had not yet been fully rolled out to all age groups. In most other countries and regions, proportions of screen-detected cancers were below 30%. Compared with non-screen-detected cancers, screen-detected cancers were much more often found in the distal colon (range 34·5-51·1% screen detected vs 26·4-35·7% non-screen detected) and less often in the proximal colon (19·5-29·9% screen detected vs 24·9-32·8% non-screen detected) p≤0·02 for each country, more often at stage I (35·7-52·7% screen detected vs 13·2-24·9% non-screen detected), and less often at stage IV (5·8-12·5% screen detected vs 22·5-31·9% non-screen detected) p<0·0001 for each country. INTERPRETATION: The proportion of colorectal cancer cases detected by screening varied widely between countries. However, in all countries, screen-detected cancers had a more favourable stage distribution than cancers detected otherwise. There is still much need and scope for improving early detection of cancer across all segments of the colorectum, and particularly in the proximal colon and rectum. FUNDING: Deutsche Krebshilfe.
BACKGROUND: The effects of recently implemented colorectal cancer screening programmes in Europe on colorectal cancer mortality will take several years to be fully known. We aimed to analyse the characteristics and parameters of screening programmes, proportions of colorectal cancers detected through screening, and stage distribution in screen-detected and non-screen-detected colorectal cancers to provide a timely assessment of the potential effects of screening programmes in several European countries. METHODS: We conducted this population-based study in nine European countries for which data on mode of detection were available (Belgium, Denmark, England, France, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Spain). Data from 16 population-based cancer registries were included. Patients were included if they were diagnosed with colorectal cancer from the year that organised colorectal cancer screening programmes were implemented in each country until the latest year with available data at the time of analysis, and if their age at diagnosis fell within the age groups targeted by the programmes. Data collected included sex, age at diagnosis, date of diagnosis, topography, morphology, clinical and pathological TNM information based on the edition in place at time of diagnosis, and mode of detection (ie, screen detected or non-screen detected). If stage information was not available, patients were not included in stage-specific analyses. The primary outcome was proportion and stage distribution of screen-detected versus non-screen detected colorectal cancers. FINDINGS: 228 667 colorectal cancer cases were included in the analyses. Proportions of screen-detected cancers varied widely across countries and regions. The highest proportions (40-60%) were found in Slovenia and the Basque Country in Spain, where FIT-based programmes were fully rolled out, and participation rates were higher than 50%. A similar proportion of screen-detected cancers was also found for the Netherlands in 2015, where participation was over 70%, even though the programme had not yet been fully rolled out to all age groups. In most other countries and regions, proportions of screen-detected cancers were below 30%. Compared with non-screen-detected cancers, screen-detected cancers were much more often found in the distal colon (range 34·5-51·1% screen detected vs 26·4-35·7% non-screen detected) and less often in the proximal colon (19·5-29·9% screen detected vs 24·9-32·8% non-screen detected) p≤0·02 for each country, more often at stage I (35·7-52·7% screen detected vs 13·2-24·9% non-screen detected), and less often at stage IV (5·8-12·5% screen detected vs 22·5-31·9% non-screen detected) p<0·0001 for each country. INTERPRETATION: The proportion of colorectal cancer cases detected by screening varied widely between countries. However, in all countries, screen-detected cancers had a more favourable stage distribution than cancers detected otherwise. There is still much need and scope for improving early detection of cancer across all segments of the colorectum, and particularly in the proximal colon and rectum. FUNDING: Deutsche Krebshilfe.
Authors: Rafael Cardoso; Feng Guo; Thomas Heisser; Harlinde De Schutter; Nancy Van Damme; Mef Christina Nilbert; Jane Christensen; Anne-Marie Bouvier; Véronique Bouvier; Guy Launoy; Anne-Sophie Woronoff; Mélanie Cariou; Michel Robaszkiewicz; Patricia Delafosse; Florence Poncet; Paul M Walsh; Carlo Senore; Stefano Rosso; Valery E P P Lemmens; Marloes A G Elferink; Sonja Tomšič; Tina Žagar; Arantza Lopez de Munain Marques; Rafael Marcos-Gragera; Montse Puigdemont; Jaume Galceran; Marià Carulla; Antonia Sánchez-Gil; María-Dolores Chirlaque; Michael Hoffmeister; Hermann Brenner Journal: Lancet Reg Health Eur Date: 2022-07-06