1
|
Dunlop KLA, Singh N, Robbins HA, Zahed H, Johansson M, Rankin NM, Cust AE. Implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population: A scoping review. Prev Med 2024; 181:107897. [PMID: 38378124 PMCID: PMC11106520 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2024.107897] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2023] [Revised: 02/10/2024] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 02/22/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Risk-tailored screening has emerged as a promising approach to optimise the balance of benefits and harms of existing population cancer screening programs. It tailors screening (e.g., eligibility, frequency, interval, test type) to individual risk rather than the current one-size-fits-all approach of most organised population screening programs. However, the implementation of risk-tailored cancer screening in the population is challenging as it requires a change of practice at multiple levels i.e., individual, provider, health system levels. This scoping review aims to synthesise current implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population, identifying barriers, facilitators, and associated implementation outcomes. METHODS Relevant studies were identified via database searches up to February 2023. Results were synthesised using Tierney et al. (2020) guidance for evidence synthesis of implementation outcomes and a multilevel framework. RESULTS Of 4138 titles identified, 74 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies in this review focused on the implementation outcomes of acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness, reflecting the pre-implementation stage of most research to date. Only six studies included an implementation framework. The review identified consistent evidence that risk-tailored screening is largely acceptable across population groups, however reluctance to accept a reduction in screening frequency for low-risk informed by cultural norms, presents a major barrier. Limited studies were identified for cancer types other than breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS Implementation strategies will need to address alternate models of delivery, education of health professionals, communication with the public, screening options for people at low risk of cancer, and inequity in outcomes across cancer types.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate L A Dunlop
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Nehal Singh
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Hilary A Robbins
- International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, Lyon, France
| | - Hana Zahed
- International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, Lyon, France
| | - Mattias Johansson
- International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, Lyon, France
| | - Nicole M Rankin
- Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Anne E Cust
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
LA Dunlop K, Smit AK, Keogh LA, Newson AJ, Rankin NM, Cust AE. Acceptability of risk-tailored cancer screening among Australian GPs: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract 2024; 74:BJGP.2023.0117. [PMID: 38373853 PMCID: PMC10904141 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp.2023.0117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2023] [Accepted: 05/22/2023] [Indexed: 02/21/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer screening that is tailored to individual risk has the potential to improve health outcomes and reduce screening-related harms, if implemented well. However, successful implementation depends on acceptability, particularly as this approach will require GPs to change their practice. AIM To explore Australian GPs' views about the acceptability of risk-tailored screening across cancer types and to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementation. DESIGN AND SETTING A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with Australian GPs. METHOD Interviews were carried out with GPs and audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were first analysed inductively then deductively using an implementation framework. RESULTS Participants (n = 20) found risk-tailored screening to be acceptable in principle, recognising potential benefits in offering enhanced screening to those at highest risk. However, they had significant concerns that changes in screening advice could potentially cause confusion. They also reported that a reduced screening frequency or exclusion from a screening programme for those deemed low risk may not initially be acceptable, especially for common cancers with minimally invasive screening. Other reservations about implementing risk-tailored screening in general practice included a lack of high-quality evidence of benefit, fear of missing the signs or symptoms of a patient's cancer, and inadequate time with patients. While no single preferred approach to professional education was identified, education around communicating screening results and risk stratification was considered important. CONCLUSION GPs may not currently be convinced of the net benefits of risk-tailored screening. Development of accessible evidence-based guidelines, professional education, risk calculators, and targeted public messages will increase its feasibility in general practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate LA Dunlop
- The Daffodil Centre, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW and Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Sydney
| | - Amelia K Smit
- The Daffodil Centre, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW and Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Sydney
| | - Louise A Keogh
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne
| | - Ainsley J Newson
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Health Ethics, University of Sydney, Sydney
| | - Nicole M Rankin
- Evaluation and Implementation Science Unit, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne
| | - Anne E Cust
- The Daffodil Centre, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW and Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Sydney
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Smith AL, Smit AK, Laginha BI, Singh N, Gallo B, Martin L, Cust AE. Implementing systematic melanoma risk assessment and risk-tailored surveillance in a skin cancer focussed dermatology clinic: A qualitative study of feasibility and acceptability to patients and clinic staff. Cancer Med 2024; 13:e6976. [PMID: 38379327 PMCID: PMC10839129 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6976] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2023] [Revised: 01/10/2024] [Accepted: 01/18/2024] [Indexed: 02/22/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND International bodies recommend that melanoma risk assessment should be integrated into skin cancer care provision, but evidence to support implementation is lacking. AIM To explore the acceptability and feasibility of implementing personalised melanoma risk assessment and tailored patient education and skin surveillance within routine clinical care. METHODS This prospective qualitative implementation study was informed by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Personalised, systematic melanoma risk assessment was implemented in the dermatology clinic at the Melanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, Australia February-May 2021. Pre- and post-implementation observations and semi-structured interviews with patients and staff were conducted (September 2020-March 2021). Observational notes and interview transcript data were analysed thematically using the TFA as a classifying framework. RESULTS A total of 37 h of observations were made, and 29 patients and 12 clinic staff were interviewed. We found that the delivery of personalised melanoma risk estimates did not impact on patient flow through the clinic. Dermatologists reported that the personalised risk information enhanced their confidence in assessing patient risk and recommending tailored surveillance schedules. Most patients reported that the risk assessment and tailored information were a beneficial addition to their care. Among patients whose risk deviated from their expectations, some reported feeling worried, confused or mistrust in the risk information, including those at lower risk who were recommended to decrease surveillance frequency. CONCLUSIONS It is feasible and acceptable to patients and clinic staff to calculate and deliver personalised melanoma risk information and tailored surveillance as part of routine clinical care within dermatology clinics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A. L. Smith
- The Daffodil CentreThe University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSWSydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| | - A. K. Smit
- The Daffodil CentreThe University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSWSydneyNew South WalesAustralia
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public HealthThe University of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| | - B. I. Laginha
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie UniversitySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| | - N. Singh
- The Daffodil CentreThe University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSWSydneyNew South WalesAustralia
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie UniversitySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| | - B. Gallo
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| | - L. Martin
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
- Faculty of Medicine and HealthUniversity of New South WalesSydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| | - A. E. Cust
- The Daffodil CentreThe University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSWSydneyNew South WalesAustralia
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public HealthThe University of SydneySydneyNew South WalesAustralia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Dunlop KLA, Keogh LA, Smith AL, Aranda S, Aitken J, Watts CG, Smit AK, Janda M, Mann GJ, Cust AE, Rankin NM. Acceptability and appropriateness of a risk-tailored organised melanoma screening program: Qualitative interviews with key informants. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0287591. [PMID: 38091281 PMCID: PMC10718433 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287591] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2022] [Accepted: 06/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/18/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION In Australia, opportunistic screening (occurring as skin checks) for the early detection of melanoma is common, and overdiagnosis is a recognised concern. Risk-tailored cancer screening is an approach to cancer control that aims to provide personalised screening tailored to individual risk. This study aimed to explore the views of key informants in Australia on the acceptability and appropriateness of risk-tailored organised screening for melanoma, and to identify barriers, facilitators and strategies to inform potential future implementation. Acceptability and appropriateness are crucial, as successful implementation will require a change of practice for clinicians and consumers. METHODS This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Key informants were purposively selected to ensure expertise in melanoma early detection and screening, prioritising senior or executive perspectives. Consumers were expert representatives. Data were analysed deductively using the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) checklist. RESULTS Thirty-six participants were interviewed (10 policy makers; 9 consumers; 10 health professionals; 7 researchers). Key informants perceived risk-tailored screening for melanoma to be acceptable and appropriate in principle. Barriers to implementation included lack of trial data, reluctance for low-risk groups to not screen, variable skill level in general practice, differing views on who to conduct screening tests, confusing public health messaging, and competing health costs. Key facilitators included the perceived opportunity to improve health equity and the potential cost-effectiveness of a risk-tailored screening approach. A range of implementation strategies were identified including strengthening the evidence for cost-effectiveness, engaging stakeholders, developing pathways for people at low risk, evaluating different risk assessment criteria and screening delivery models and targeted public messaging. CONCLUSION Key informants were supportive in principle of risk-tailored melanoma screening, highlighting important next steps. Considerations around risk assessment, policy and modelling the costs of current verses future approaches will help inform possible future implementation of risk-tailored population screening for melanoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate L. A. Dunlop
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Louise A. Keogh
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Andrea L. Smith
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Sanchia Aranda
- School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Joanne Aitken
- Viertel Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Council Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Caroline G. Watts
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Surveillance, Evaluation & Research Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Amelia K. Smit
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Monika Janda
- Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia
| | - Graham J. Mann
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- John Curtin School of Medical Research, Australian National University, Acton, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
- Centre for Cancer Research, Westmead Institute for Medical Research, The University of Sydney, Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Anne E. Cust
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Nicole M. Rankin
- Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ladabaum U, Ko CW. Colorectal Cancer Risk Prediction to Tailor Screening: Will We Embrace It or KISS It Goodbye? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21:3236-3237. [PMID: 37100217 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2023.04.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 04/28/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Uri Ladabaum
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Cynthia W Ko
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Brigden T, Mitchell C, Redrup Hill E, Hall A. Ethical and legal implications of implementing risk algorithms for early detection and screening for oesophageal cancer, now and in the future. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0293576. [PMID: 37903120 PMCID: PMC10615292 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293576] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2023] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 11/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Oesophageal cancer has significant morbidity and mortality but late diagnosis is common since early signs of disease are frequently misinterpreted. Project DELTA aims to enable earlier detection and treatment through targeted screening using a novel risk prediction algorithm for oesophageal cancer (incorporating risk factors of Barrett's oesophagus including prescriptions for acid-reducing medications (CanPredict)), together with a non-invasive, low-cost sampling device (CytospongeTM). However, there are many barriers to implementation, and this paper identifies key ethical and legal challenges to implementing these personalised prevention strategies for Barrett's oesophagus/oesophageal cancer. METHODS To identify ethical and legal issues relevant to the deployment of a risk prediction tool for oesophageal cancer into primary care, we adopted an interdisciplinary approach, incorporating targeted informal literature reviews, interviews with expert collaborators, a multidisciplinary workshop and ethical and legal analysis. RESULTS Successful implementation raises many issues including ensuring transparency and effective risk communication; addressing bias and inequity; managing resources appropriately and avoiding exceptionalism. Clinicians will need support and training to use cancer risk prediction algorithms, ensuring that they understand how risk algorithms supplement rather than replace medical decision-making. Workshop participants had concerns about liability for harms arising from risk algorithms, including from potential bias and inequitable implementation. Determining strategies for risk communication enabling transparency but avoiding exceptionalist approaches are a significant challenge. Future challenges include using artificial intelligence to bolster risk assessment, incorporating genomics into risk tools, and deployment by non-health professional users. However, these strategies could improve detection and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Novel pathways incorporating risk prediction algorithms hold considerable promise, especially when combined with low-cost sampling. However immediate priorities should be to develop risk communication strategies that take account of using validated risk algorithms, and to ensure equitable implementation. Resolving questions about liability for harms arising should be a longer-term objective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanya Brigden
- PHG Foundation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Colin Mitchell
- PHG Foundation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | | | - Alison Hall
- PHG Foundation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Verkerk AO, Wilders R. The Action Potential Clamp Technique as a Tool for Risk Stratification of Sinus Bradycardia Due to Loss-of-Function Mutations in HCN4: An In Silico Exploration Based on In Vitro and In Vivo Data. Biomedicines 2023; 11:2447. [PMID: 37760888 PMCID: PMC10525944 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11092447] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2023] [Revised: 08/30/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/29/2023] Open
Abstract
These days, in vitro functional analysis of gene variants is becoming increasingly important for risk stratification of cardiac ion channelopathies. So far, such risk stratification has been applied to SCN5A, KCNQ1, and KCNH2 gene variants associated with Brugada syndrome and long QT syndrome types 1 and 2, respectively, but risk stratification of HCN4 gene variants related to sick sinus syndrome has not yet been performed. HCN4 is the gene responsible for the hyperpolarization-activated 'funny' current If, which is an important modulator of the spontaneous diastolic depolarization underlying the sinus node pacemaker activity. In the present study, we carried out a risk classification assay on those loss-of-function mutations in HCN4 for which in vivo as well as in vitro data have been published. We used the in vitro data to compute the charge carried by If (Qf) during the diastolic depolarization phase of a prerecorded human sinus node action potential waveform and assessed the extent to which this Qf predicts (1) the beating rate of the comprehensive Fabbri-Severi model of a human sinus node cell with mutation-induced changes in If and (2) the heart rate observed in patients carrying the associated mutation in HCN4. The beating rate of the model cell showed a very strong correlation with Qf from the simulated action potential clamp experiments (R2 = 0.95 under vagal tone). The clinically observed minimum or resting heart rates showed a strong correlation with Qf (R2 = 0.73 and R2 = 0.71, respectively). While a translational perspective remains to be seen, we conclude that action potential clamp on transfected cells, without the need for further voltage clamp experiments and data analysis to determine individual biophysical parameters of If, is a promising tool for risk stratification of sinus bradycardia due to loss-of-function mutations in HCN4. In combination with an If blocker, this tool may also prove useful when applied to human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hiPSC-CMs) obtained from mutation carriers and non-carriers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arie O. Verkerk
- Department of Medical Biology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
- Department of Experimental Cardiology, Heart Center, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald Wilders
- Department of Medical Biology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| |
Collapse
|