Factors Associated with Oral Cancerous and Precancerous Lesions in an Underserved Community: A Cross-Sectional Study

Cancer risk factors and access to cancer prevention services for people experiencing homelessness

Cancer is one of the most pressing global health issues, and populations with complex needs, such as people experiencing homelessness, have higher cancer incidence and mortality rates compared with the housed population. We mapped the evidence on cancer risk factors as well as barriers and facilitators to cancer prevention services among people experiencing homelessness, which is key to localising research gaps and identifying strategies for tailored interventions adapted to people experiencing homelessness. The results of 40 studies contribute to an understanding of the dynamic, interactive factors at different levels that determine access to cancer prevention services: socioeconomic, psychological, and physical factors (individual level); practical support and relational loops between health-care providers and people experiencing homelessness (interpersonal level); housing and regular medical care (system level); and interventions to facilitate access to cancer prevention (policy level). Furthermore, studies reported higher prevalence of various cancer-associated risk factors among people experiencing homelessness with the most common being tobacco use, ranging from 26% to 73%. The results show the importance of interventions to facilitate cancer prevention services through social support and low-threshold interventions (eg, navigation programmes), and training health-care staff in creating supportive and trusting environments that increase the likelihood of the continuity of care among people experiencing homelessness.

Methods, Detection Rates, and Survival Outcomes of Screening for Head and Neck Cancers: A Systematic Review

Importance

Head and neck cancers (HNCs) are often diagnosed at advanced clinical stages during their symptomatic phase, leading to a reduced treatment window and poor survival. Screening programs have been suggested as a mitigation strategy.

Objective

To examine the effectiveness of current HNC screening programs in improving diagnosis and survival in adults.

Evidence Review

This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses-guided systematic review involved use of peer-reviewed, English-language journal articles identified from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials between January 1, 2001, and July 15, 2022. Snowballing was applied to retrieve more studies. Eligible articles were original clinical trials and observational studies presenting a universal or risk-targeted screening program of primary HNC in the adult population. Reporting quality was assessed using the JBI's critical appraisal tools.

Findings

Database searches yielded 3646 unique citations with an additional 8 studies found via snowballing. Five reviewers assessed the full text of 106 studies. Sixteen articles were ultimately included in the review, involving 4.7 million adults (34.1%-100% male; median age, 30-59 years). Fifteen studies were based in Asia and 1 in Europe (Portugal). Five reported data from randomized clinical trials. An oral inspection conducted once or once every 2 to 3 years was described in 11 studies for screening oral cancer, while multistep screening involving Epstein-Barr virus serologic testing for nasopharyngeal carcinoma delivered every 1 to 4 years was presented in 5. In 4 trials and 6 observational studies, screening significantly increased the detection of localized (stage I/II) tumor or was associated with an increased proportion of diagnoses, respectively, regardless of the population and cancer subsites. Universal screening of asymptomatic adults improved 3- to 5-year overall survival but did not increase cancer-specific survival in 4 trials. Targeted screening improved overall and cancer-specific survival or was associated with improved survival outcomes in 2 trials and 2 observational studies, respectively. Studies had low to medium risks of bias.

Conclusions and Relevance

Evidence from the existing literature suggests that a risk-targeted screening program for oral and nasopharyngeal cancers could improve diagnosis and patient survival. Screening adherence, societal cost-effectiveness, and optimal risk stratification of such a program warrant future research, especially in low-incidence settings outside Asia.