PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12572696

Screening.

Abstract

Screening for cancer is currently entering a very promising period as new technologies become available for assessment. However, this great opportunity also presents significant problems, starting with how do you select the likeliest method for evaluation? How do you do trials where the technology will be out-moded by the time the result is known? Indeed, how can all promising technologies be evaluated? There is a need for a renewal of methodological thinking on this topic at present. Randomised trials, which currently rely on death as the primary outcome, are very long and very complicated to undertake and run. There is an urgent need for biological markers, which are true surrogate end-points, to help reduce sample size and make trials more feasible, so that more trials can be done. For those screening modalities of demonstrated effectiveness, the key issue at present is how to maximise the outcome in population screening when the technology is transferred from the research setting to the public health setting. It is essential to remember that screening, per se, has never prevented a cancer nor prevented a cancer death. It is impossible to separate the issues of screening with those of adequate treatment: the best results in a screening programme will come when treatment is excellent. Screening is the first, and sometimes key, stage in a global management programme for the cancer in question. As the aim at present is to strive to maximise the effectiveness of population-based programmes, this aspect should be foremost in all thought processes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Boyle. 2003. Screening.. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.03.00406003

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

High tumor amplification burden is associated with TP53 mutations in the pan-cancer setting.

Next-generation sequencing data is fundamentally changing the clinical management of patients with cancer. The most frequent genomic alterations in malignancy are mutations and amplifications, with a subset of tumors having multiple amplifications - "amplificators". We sought to understand the molecular correlates of high tumor amplification burden in a pan-cancer context. Using both national registries and a single-institution dataset, our results demonstrate that cancers with TP53 mutations (as compared to those with wild-type TP53) exhibited significantly higher tumor amplification burden across all datasets. Amplifications, generally associated with overexpression, may be potentially actionable secondary consequences of TP53 mutations.

Biomarkers, Tumor↗

Immune biomarkers and response to checkpoint inhibition of BRAFV600 and BRAF non-V600 altered lung cancers.

BACKGROUND: While 2-4% of lung cancers possess alterations in BRAF, little is known about the immune responsiveness of these tumours. METHODS: Clinical and genomic data were collected from 5945 patients with lung cancers whose tumours underwent next-generation sequencing between 2015 and 2018. Patients were&#xa0;followed through 2020. RESULTS: In total, 127 patients with metastatic BRAF-altered lung cancers were identified: 29 tumours had Class I mutations, 59 had Class II/III alterations, and 39 had variants of unknown significance (VUS). Tumour mutation burden was higher in Class II/III than Class I-altered tumours (8.8 mutations/Mb versus 4.9, P&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001), but this difference was diminished when stratified by smoking status. The overall response rate to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) was 9% in Class I-altered tumours and 26% in Class II/III (P&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.25), with median time on treatment of 1.9 months in both groups. Among patients with Class I-III-altered tumours, 36-month HR for death in those who ever versus never received ICI was 1.82 (1.17-6.11). Nine patients were on ICI for >2 years (two with Class I mutations, two with Class II/III alterations, and five with VUS). CONCLUSIONS: A subset of patients with BRAF-altered lung cancers achieved durable disease control on ICI. However, collectively no significant clinical benefit was seen.

Biomarkers, Tumor↗