Search

Background: Lung cancer (LC) screening (LCS) with annual low-dose computed tomography scans has been seen to reduce the specific and overall mortality in selected populations. However, participation is key to successful screening programs. The EDIFICE (etude sur le dépistage des cancers et ses facteurs de compliance [survey on cancer screening and compliance factors]) nationwide observational surveys are used to assess behavior related to cancer screening programs in France., Materials and Methods: Using comprehensive multivariate stepwise logistic regression analyses of data from current and former cigarette smokers, we sought to identify the explanatory factors associated with the intention to participate in an LCS program., Results: Of the 1463 respondents with no personal history of cancer, 263 (36.4%) of the current cigarette smokers and 170 (26.3%) of the former cigarette smokers stated their willingness to participate in an LCS program. The explanatory factors differed between current cigarette smokers (already screened for LC: odds ratio [OR], 2.81; < 30 pack-years: OR, 2.69; intention to quit smoking: OR, 1.96; no social vulnerability: OR, 2.15) and former cigarette smokers (comorbidities: OR, 0.31). The usual eligibility criteria were not significantly explanatory., Conclusion: Our findings highlight the discrepancy that exists between target populations and individuals who actually intend to participate in a screening program for LC, with subsequent potential effects on the participation rates and, thus, on the efficacy of screening., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The EDIFICE programme began in 2005 and set out to provide a clearer insight over time into the participation of the French population in cancer screening. EDIFICE 3 was conducted in 2011 by phone interviews among a representative sample of 1603 individuals aged between 40 and 75 years using the quota method. The analysis focused on the target populations (50-74 years) of the national screening programmes for breast and colorectal cancer. The same populations were also assessed with respect to prostate cancer screening. In 2005, 93% of the sample population had undergone at least one mammogram in their lifetime; this figure reached 94% in 2008 and 95% in 2011. Compliance with recommended intervals improved between 2005 and 2011, and significantly so for women aged 65-74 years. In 2005, 25% of respondents reported having undergone at least one colorectal cancer screening test; this figure reached 38% in 2008 and 59% in 2011. Recommended intervals were respected by 30 and 51% in 2008 and 2011, respectively. In 2005, 2008 and 2011, a total of 36, 49 and 50% of men reported having undergone at least one prostate cancer screening test. This rate decreased significantly in men aged 50-59 years between 2008 and 2011 (44 vs. 37%, P≤0.05). Attendance rates in national screening programmes are high and stable for breast cancer, and although currently improving for colorectal cancer, the European guideline target has not yet been reached. Despite the absence of recommendations for prostate cancer screening, participation remains constant.

Purpose: Our previously published data showed rapidly increasing rates of prostate cancer screening in men aged 50-74, which rose from 36% in 2005 to 48% in 2008. Based on men's reported intentions at that time, this was expected to rise to 70% in 2011. Here we report the actual rate of prostate cancer screening., Method: Three nationwide observational telephone surveys (EDIFICE opinion polls) were conducted in 2005, 2008, and 2011. The overall target was a representative sample of > 1,500 individuals living in France and aged 40-75 years, including 481 men aged 50-74 years., Results: Within this male population, the rate of screening reported remained stable between 2008 and 2011 (48 and 49%, respectively). However, comparison of privileged versus disadvantaged populations showed significant differences, with a relative decrease in screening among those of higher socioprofessional status (p = 0.03) and from higher-income groups (p = 0.02). For households with a monthly income above 2,500€, the screening rate decreased from 61% in 2008 to 51% in 2011 (p = 0.05), while for those with an income below 2,500€, it increased from 36% in 2008 to 44 % in 2011 (p = 0.18)., Conclusion: A plateau or even a reduction in prostate cancer screening is currently being observed; this is possibly due to progressive recognition among the population at large of the controversy surrounding prostate cancer screening, whereas this speculation was formerly limited to health-care professionals. After previously being more likely to undergo prostate cancer screening, it is the younger, wealthier populations that are currently showing the most noteworthy step backwards.

The Cochrane analysis exploring the risk/benefit ratio of breast cancer screening resulted in a controversy worldwide spread by the mass media. Our survey sought to assess the impact of this controversy in terms of breast cancer screening awareness and attendance. A nationwide observational study, recorded in the EDIFICE iterative surveys, with a representative sample of 451 women aged 40-75 years, living in France, was carried out in the 3 months after the start of the controversy in January 2013. Of the 405 women with no personal history of cancer, 69 (17%) declared having heard of the controversy (aware group). Women remembering the controversy were more likely to belong to higher socioprofessional categories and to have a higher level of education. The most frequently remembered issues were overdiagnosis (38%), unreliability (16%) and radiation risk (9%). Compared with women who were unaware of the controversy, the aware group knew more about the limits of breast cancer screening (undiagnosed cancers, 20 vs. 7%, P<0.05 and risk of false positives, 20 vs. 2%, P<0.05) and were more likely to change their opinion for the worse over the mass media debate (8.7 vs. 1.2%, P<0.05). Nevertheless, only 1% of the aware-group declared their intention to subsequently undergo screening less frequently. The low impact of the controversy on the behaviour of women with respect to screening suggests that it should not be seen as a threat to screening attendance rates, but more as an opportunity to improve awareness.

The past 20 years have seen major advances in screening for different cancer types. Screening is however destined to evolve, in terms of target populations, procedures used and the overall positioning of screening in the fight against the different forms of cancer. At the same time, screening is expected progressively to become more closely tailored to the level of risk; the type of tests and the frequency with which they are used will be adjusted in a more personalized approach. A critical issue is also to provide the population at large with more extensive information on the advantages and disadvantages, particularly of screening programmes known for the potentially high rate of overdiagnosis. These issues and their evolution are considered herein, in the context of screening for different forms of cancer (breast, prostate, colorectal, lung, cervical and melanoma).

This analysis aimed to assess the extent to which exposure to cancer risk factors and attendance of screening programmes are influenced by social characteristics. The validated Evaluation of deprivation and health inequalities in public health centres (EPICES) index was used to measure social deprivation. A sample of the general population (N=1603) was assessed to search for potential correlations between screening attendance, risk factors and any components of the EPICES score. In 2011, 33% of the population studied was classified as 'vulnerable'. Sex had no significant impact on this rating (32% men, 35% women), whereas occupational status did. Vulnerable individuals were more likely already to have cancer (10 vs. 7%; nonsignificant difference; odds ratio 1.43 [0.98-2.10]). The mean BMI was 26.0 kg/m (SD 4.9) for the vulnerable population versus 24.8 kg/m (SD 3.9) in the nonvulnerable population (P<0.01). The prevalence of current smoking was higher in the vulnerable group (38 vs. 23%, odds ratio 2.03 [1.61-2.56]). In contrast, no statistically significant difference was observed between attendance rates for nationwide organized cancer screening programmes (breast and colorectal; target age group 50-74 years) by the vulnerable and nonvulnerable groups. Social indicators of vulnerable populations are associated with increased rates of risk factors for cancer, but not with screening attendance. Our data support the previously reported marked impact of organized programmes that reduce or even remove inequalities in access to cancer screening. However, although the organized programmes have indeed enabled population-wide, nonselective access to screening, primary prevention as it stands today remains inadequate in the underserved population and further improvements are warranted.

Background: Based on international and national recommendations, organized breast cancer screening in France raises questions of medical ethics built around the key concepts of individual autonomy and public health policy. Because of the evolving knowledge, professionals and institutions involved in the program must review the ethical values associated with this medical practice., Methods: The ethical aspects of organized breast cancer screening were studied. In response to newly acquired knowledge highlighted by a review of texts governing this practice in France, proposals for changes resulting from reflections of a working group coordinated by the National Cancer Institute are presented., Results: Ethical issues raised by screening must find expression in the general principles of the program's organization: acceptability of screening, efficiency, adverse effects, equity of access, free care…, but also at different stages of the procedure: information delivery, first and second invitations, refusal of further diagnostic investigation…, Conclusion: A better match between breast cancer screening and recently developed knowledge requires optimal information delivery to women targeted by the program as well as a stronger role for the referring healthcare professional., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Background: The French national screening programme for colorectal cancer (CRC) was rolled out nationwide from 2008. It targets men and women aged 50-74 who are invited every 2 years to perform a guaiac faecal occult blood test, followed, if positive, by a colonoscopy. This paper presents the evaluation of the programme for the 46 French districts that conducted a comprehensive screening campaign during 2008-2009, targeting 9.7 million people., Methods: National database gathering information on people who were screened was used to estimate indicators reflecting the programme performance., Results: Participation was 34.3%, with nearly three million people being tested. The percentage of positive tests was 2.8%. Completion of colonoscopies following a positive test was 88%. For men, 36.8% of the results of colonic explorations were normal, 40.1% were adenomas, and 9.0% were CRC, based on the most pejorative lesion. For women, corresponding figures were 55.9%, 25.7% and 5.8%. A CRC was detected for 7.5% of people who had a colonic exploration. The advanced adenoma detection rate among those screened was 4.9‰ and the CRC detection rate was 1.9‰. The description of CRC could only be made for 21 districts, for which 1441 invasive colonic adenocarcinomas were diagnosed; of these, 43% were stage I, 23% stage II, 25% stage III and 9% stage IV., Conclusion: This first evaluation since the programme was rolled out provides an inventory of CRC screening in France and points out some improvements expected, especially in terms of participation which is below the European recommendations. Future evaluations will analyse trends in these indicators., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immunochemical faecal occult blood tests have greater sensitivity for colorectal cancer screening than guaiac-based tests; however the number of positive tests required is still under discussion., Methods: A direct comparison of Hemoccult II with two immunochemical quantitative tests (OC-Sensor and FOB-Gold) using a 2-sample strategy was performed in over 30,000 patients undergoing colorectal cancer screening in France., Results: Positivity ratio between immunochemical tests and Hemoccult II varied between 2.2 (OC-Sensor) and 2.4 (FOB-Gold) for the lowest cut-off value and 1.5-1.4 for the highest cut-off value. The positive predictive value for colorectal cancer was similar for immunochemical tests and Hemoccult II, and significantly higher for immunochemical tests for advanced adenomas. The detection rate of both colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas was higher with immunochemical tests than with Hemoccult II. With the 2-sample strategy and the lowest cut-off value the detection rate of colorectal cancer almost doubled and for advanced adenomas quadrupled., Conclusion: For colorectal cancer screening with immunochemical faecal occult blood tests, an acceptable strategy would be 2-day sampling with at least one positive test at a cut-off between 150 and 200 ng/mL (OC-Sensor) and 176 and 234 ng/mL (FOB-Gold). Data on the ease of test interpretation and cost-effectiveness now necessary to make definitive choices., (Copyright © 2012 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In France, mammography screening is offered to women aged between 50 and 74 years. EDIFICE, the iterative nationwide survey, collected data on a national level about consumers utilization of available cancer screening procedures. This analysis compared data from a subset of 241 women aged between 40 and 50 years with that of 488 women aged between 50 and 74 years. Multivariate analysis showed the following significant factors to be linked with screening attendance for women younger than 50 years: age, with a threshold value at 44 years; awareness of the recommended screening period (2 years); consultation within the last 12 months with a general practitioner or a gynaecologist; and long standing local programme for colon cancer screening. Notwithstanding the debate on risk/benefit of breast cancer screening for women in their 40s, we observed more differences with regard to attendance between women aged 40-45 years versus that of 46-74 years than between women aged 40-49 years versus that of 50-74 years. The issue that is unanswered as yet is, do women make a kind of heuristic for starting breast cancer screening, leading them to a threshold choice of 45 years or alternatively to a collective answer of standard age minus 5 years!

Characteristics of primary-care providers have been associated with their patients' participation in breast cancer screening. A nationwide observational survey, 'EDIFICE', was conducted by telephone from December 2007 to January 2008 on a representative sample of 600 general practitioners (GPs) working in France, to investigate how a GP's characteristics may influence patient participation in screening for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer. For breast cancer screening, systematic recommendation was associated with female physicians [odds ratio (OR) =1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-3.1]. This systematic recommendation was also correlated with systematic referral for colorectal cancer (OR=1.5; 95% CI=1.0-2.5) and prostate cancer screening (OR=2.7; 95% CI=1.8-4.1). For colorectal cancer screening, the sex of the GP had no significant impact. However, systematic recommendation for both breast and prostate cancer screening was shown to be associated with systematic recommendation for colorectal cancer screening (OR=2.7; 95% CI=1.6-4.7 and OR=1.8; 95% CI=1.1-3.0, respectively). For prostate cancer screening, there was no significant sex specificity. However, systematic recommendation for both breast and colorectal cancer screening was associated with an advice on prostate cancer screening (OR=2.9; 95% CI=2.0-4.4 and OR=2.0; 95% CI=1.3-3.2, respectively). The age of the GP was not associated with a higher rate of systematic recommendation for screening for the three types of cancer. Male GPs were more likely than female GPs to perform digital rectal examinations on male patients (69 vs. 54%; OR=1.86; 95% CI=1.31-2.63). There is a global pattern of physicians being screening-prone (as suggested by the cross impact of recommendations from one cancer type to another). Although the frequency of systematic recommendation for breast cancer screening is higher with female GPs, systematic recommendation for prostate cancer is not higher among male GPs. The factors associated with systematic recommendation for screening are both a matter of concern and a target for action, to improve adherence of individuals through GP commitment.

The EDIFICE survey was performed to ascertain how both the targeted general population and GPs in France deal with cancer screening and especially with screening programmes. The assessment of compliance to national official statements and professional guidelines, rates and trends of compliance, specific profiles of individuals who do and those who do not attend were investigated and are presented in this supplement.

The main lessons from the EDIFICE surveys can be summed up in five points. (i) Evidence talks but very quietly: cancer-screening practices in the French general population do not match scientific evidence; (ii) Give time to time: the rate of appropriation of screening behaviour is slow; (iii) Where there is a will there is a way: the organization of screening decreases inequalities for cancer screening; (iv) Do not aim only at the target: although monitoring of adhesion and compliance for the targeted population is mandatory, monitoring the utilization of screening resources, particularly in countries such as France that have no financial constraints (screening outside the official range is still almost fully reimbursed) is also useful; and (v) Trees do not reach the sky: we have observed a ceiling effect for breast cancer with 90-95% of women who have had a mammogram in their lifetime and 80-85% of women from the targeted population who had a mammogram within the previous 2 years. For colorectal cancer, even with the longstanding programme, the ceiling level observed in France is close to 60%.

In France, free faecal occult blood testing is offered to individuals aged between 50 and 74 years every 2 years as a method of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC). To assess how a proposed organized programme of CRC screening would be perceived among a representative sample of individuals living in France, aged between 40 and 75 years, and by a representative sample of general practitioners, two nationwide observational telephone surveys were carried out in 2005 (EDIFICE 1; 1601 individuals) and 2008 (EDIFICE 2; 1801 individuals). In 2008, 38% of individuals aged between 50 and 74 years reported undergoing screening for CRC; this corresponded to a statistically significant 13% increase in CRC screening rate compared with 2005 (P=0.01). When asked whether it was possible to screen for CRC, 94% of individuals who had undergone screening (N=350) responded positively compared with 87% of individuals who had not been screened. The main reason for individuals not to undergo screening was a lack of awareness (35% of men and 37% of women, P=not significant); the second reason was lack of advice and referral from their general practitioner (21% of women versus 15% of men, P=0.03). The French population is aware of the potential benefit of CRC screening; however, many do not undergo regular screening. It is therefore important to identify the hurdles associated with CRC screening.

In France, no official recommendations for or against systematic screening for prostate cancer have been issued yet. Therefore, individuals' choices with regard to screening or non-screening, and general practitioners' (GPs) recommendations for or against systematic screening should reflect personal preferences. Four nationwide observational studies (surveys) were conducted in France, two in 2005 and two in 2008, on a representative sample of participants aged between 40 and 75 years and a representative sample of GPs. In 2005, 36% of the male population interviewed, and aged between 50 and 75 years declared having undergone a screening test, compared with 49% in 2008 [odds ratio (OR)=1.63; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.25-2.12]. In 2008, the number of men interviewed who reported having undergone screening less than 1 year earlier increased from 51% in 2005 to 74% (OR=2.18; 95% CI=1.40-3.40). The screening rate for young men (45-49 years) was only 7% in 2008 (data not available in 2005). In 2005, 58% of GPs systematically recommended prostate cancer screening for their patients aged 50-74 years, whereas in 2008, the figure was 65% (OR=1.32; 95% CI=1.04-1.66). The sex or age of the GPs had no significant impact on this rate. In France, we have observed a highly significant increase in prostate cancer screening: more men are screened, more often, at a younger age and more frequently using a prostate-specific antigen blood test. In our surveys, the observed threshold age for onset of prostate cancer screening is 50 years, almost the same as that for approved organized breast and colorectal screening programmes.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is an important public health issue in France, justifying a screening policy adapted to individual risk. The general practitioner (GP) is most commonly the initiator of CRC screening. The EDIFICE 2 survey, carried out in 2008 among 600 GPs, showed that 83% of GPs were convinced of the importance of screening, but that only 30% of GPs systematically recommended the procedure. The main underlying reasons were that only 50% of GPs declared themselves sufficiently trained, GPs needed clear guidelines and information supports for patients and a better implication in the programme's overall organization. This important role was confirmed by patients as the second most important reason for not undergoing screening: the absence of recommendation from their treating physician. The optimization of the screening procedure thus requires a stronger implication of GPs, by confirming their pivotal role in CRC screening and by relying on clear reference documentation guaranteeing quality assurance of a national organized screening programme.

Regular mammography screening has been available in France, free of charge, for all women aged 50-74 years since 2005. Two nationwide surveys [EDIFICE 1 (507 women interviewed; age 50-74 years) and EDIFICE 2 (488 women)] recently collected data on individuals' access to cancer screening procedures. Two further surveys interviewed 600 general practitioners (GPs) each to determine their attitudes towards screening in general and screening for breast cancer in particular. The method of quotas ensured the populations surveyed were representative. In 2005, 93%, and in 2008, 94% of women reported having undergone a screening mammography. Anage-related effect was apparent in the 70-74 year subgroup in 2005, whereas in 2008, over 90% of women aged 50-74 years had had a mammography in their lifetime. In 2008, 66% of women had undergone a mammography as a part of an organized screening programme, versus 45% in 2005. In 2005, 15% of women reported having received no recommendation from their GP, whereas this figure fell to 4% in 2008. In both EDIFICE surveys, two thirds of GPs systematically recommended breast cancer screening to female patients aged 50-74 years; however, female GPs were more likely to systematically recommend this screening. In 2008, 77% of the GPs questioned were aware of the recommended frequency for breast cancer screening, compared with 71% in 2005. Results of studies such as EDIFICE may help increase the proportion of women who undergo breast cancer screening. Successful implementation of organized screening relies heavily on treating physicians. The impact of mammography in breast cancer screening may be further improved by systematic organized screening, by encouraging regular examination and by targeting women who give up screening.

In France, the age range for organized screening for breast cancer is 50-74 years. From a layperson's perspective, the public health message focusing on a specific target population may be difficult to understand. The aim of this study is to assess how women aged over 75 years deal with this absence of screening recommendations for their age group. The population-based survey, EDIFICE, was carried out by telephone in 2008. Women were interviewed with regard to their behaviour, and in particular relating to breast cancer screening. For 136 breast cancer-free women, aged 75 and above and who had undergone at least one mammography in their lifetime, the test had been done within the last 2 years for only 62 (51%) of them. In a multiregression analysis, only one item (i.e. already having undergone at least five mammographies) was statistically associated with a higher rate of attendance (odds ratio=3.3, 95% confidence interval=1.03-11.1). According to our data, for women aged 75 and above, an estimated 17,000,000 Euros are spent each year on breast cancer screening in France, the net benefit of which is still unknown.

Objective Cervical cancer screening coverage remains insufficient in most countries. Testing self-collected samples for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) could be an alternative to the Pap smear, but costs, sampling methods and transport issues hamper its wide use. Our objective was to compare diagnostic accuracy of 2 vaginal self-collection methods, a dry swab (vsc-DRY) or swab in liquid medium (vsc-LIQ), for detecting HR-HPV cervical infection assessed by a cervical clinician-collected sample in liquid medium (ccc-LIQ). Methods Women 20 to 65 years attending a Pap smear were recruited between September, 2009 and March, 2011. Each sample (3 per woman) underwent HPV DNA testing. Samples were classified as HR-HPV + with detection of at least one HR-HPV or probable HR-HPV type. Results Of 734 women included, 722 had complete HPV data. HR-HPV was detected in 20.9% of ccc-LIQ samples. Estimated sensitivity and specificity to detect HR-HPV in vsc-DRY samples were 88.7% and 92.5%, respectively, and in vsc-LIQ samples, 87.4% and 90.9%. Cytology findings were abnormal for 79 women (10.9%): among 27 samples of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, 25 were HR-HPV + in vsc-DRY, vsc-LIQ and ccc-LIQ samples. Among 6 samples of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, all were HR-HPV + in vsc-DRY samples, 1 was HR-HPV - in vsc-LIQ samples and 1 was HR-HPV - in ccc-LIQ samples. Conclusions Vaginal self-sampling with a dry swab is accurate to detect HR-HPV infection as compared with cervical clinician-collection and accurate as compared with cytology results. This cheap and easy-to-ship sampling method could be widely used in a cervical cancer screening program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]