RSM logo
Journal of Medical Screening

Home Current issue Browse archive Alerts About the journal Feedback
 
J Med Screen 2008;15:122-129
doi:10.1258/jms.2008.007058
© 2008 Medical Screening Society

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Baker, S. G
Right arrow Articles by Prorok, P. C
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Original Articles

Early reporting for cancer screening trials

Stuart G Baker  , Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA

Barnett S Kramer , Office of Disease Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

Philip C Prorok , Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA

Correspondence to: Stuart G Baker, Sc. D., National Cancer Institute, EPN 3131, 6130 Executive Blvd MSC 7354, Bethesda, MD 20892-7354, USA; sb16i{at}nih.gov


Objective Many cancer screening trials involve a screening programme of one or more screenings with follow-up after the last screening. Usually a maximum follow-up time is selected in advance. However, during the follow-up period there is an opportunity to report the results of the trial sooner than planned. Early reporting of results from a randomized screening trial is important because obtaining a valid result sooner translates into health benefits reaching the general population sooner. The health benefits are reduction in cancer deaths if screening is found to be beneficial and more screening is recommended, or avoidance of unnecessary biopsies, work-ups and morbidity if screening is not found to be beneficial and the rate of screening drops.

Methods Our proposed method for deciding if results from a cancer screening trial should be reported earlier in the follow-up period is based on considerations involving postscreening noise. Postscreening noise (sometimes called dilution) refers to cancer deaths in the follow-up period that could not have been prevented by screening: (1) cancer deaths in the screened group that occurred after the last screening in subjects whose cancers were not detected during the screening program and (2) cancer deaths in the control group that occurred after the time of the last screening and whose cancers would not have been detected during the screening programme had they been randomized to screening (the number of which is unobserved). Because postscreening noise increases with follow-up after the last screening, we propose early reporting at the time during the follow-up period when postscreening noise first starts to overwhelm the estimated effect of screening as measured by a z-statistic. This leads to a confidence interval, adjusted for postscreening noise, that would not change substantially with additional follow-up. Details of the early reporting rule were refined by simulation, which also accounts for multiple looks.

Results For the re-analysis of the Health Insurance Plan trial for breast cancer screening and the Mayo Lung Project for lung cancer screening, estimates and confidence intervals for the effect of screening on cancer mortality were similar on early reporting and later.

Conclusion The proposed early reporting rule for a cancer screening trial with post-screening follow-up is a promising method for making results from the trial available sooner, which translates into health benefits (reduction in cancer deaths or avoidance of unnecessary morbidity) reaching the population sooner.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
S. G. Baker
Improving the Biomarker Pipeline to Develop and Evaluate Cancer Screening Tests
J Natl Cancer Inst, August 19, 2009; 101(16): 1116 - 1119.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



How Not to be a Doctor