Colorectal Cancer Screening Implementation of a public health programme An Expert Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening Cancer Society of Finland, Finnish.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Bowel Cancer screening programme The Facts Third most common Cancer in the UK. The Second most common cause of cancer deaths in the UK (approx 16,100.
Advertisements

Health system of Serbia - European models of financing Wednesday, 2nd March, 2011, Danas Conference Center, GTC Avenija 19, Vladimira Popovića
Spotlight on Colorectal Cancer Screening 1 1. Home Screening for Colon Cancer
1 THE POSSIBLE INFLUENCE OF THE MEDICAL STAFF INVOLVED IN THE ORGANIZED CERVICAL CANCER (CC) SCREENING OVER THE RESPONSIVENESS TO THE CENTRALLY ISSUED.
Detecting Cancer Earlier Network Service 2014/15 Includes £40k for opportunistic targeted endorsement of bowel screening.
Improving the Economic Efficiency of Clinical Trials.
The primary care excellence model Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake with a Patient Navigator Dr. Brian Mitchell, Co-Investigator Northern Ontario.
Otis W. Brawley, M.D. Chief Medical and Scientific Officer Executive Vice President American Cancer Society Professor of Hematology, Medical Oncology,
Cervical cancer screening in Estonia: present situation Piret Veerus Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics National Institute for Health Development.
Early Detection of breast cancer Anthony B. Miller, MD, FRCP Associate Director, Research, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada.
Integrated Cancer Screening Colorectal Cancer Screening.
Breast Cancer screening in the NHS Dr D J Rohan Subasinghe.
Bowel Screening in Scotland – Current Challenges and Possible Solutions Prof. Bob Steele Ninewells Hospital, University of Dundee.
Mobilizing Newcomers and Immigrants to Cancer Screening Programs funded by Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) The views expressed herein do not necessarily.
HSB examples from Finland Nea Malila Mass Screening Registry, Cancer Society of Finland and University of Tampere, Tampere School of Public Health.
Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Massachusetts, Bureau of Health Statistics, Research and Evaluation Massachusetts Department of Public Health.
FIRST TWO AND HALF YEAR OF NATIONAL SCREENING PROGRAM FOR COLORECTAL CANCERS IN REPUBLIC CROATIA Miroslava Katicic 1, Milan Kujundzic 2, Davor Stimac 3,
END-OF-LIFE CARE IN A PHYSICIAN’S WORK IN FINNISH HEALTH CENTRES Kosunen E, Hautala K, Fält A, Hinkka H, Lammi UK, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen P. Medical School.
Epidemiology of a Chronic Disease Exercise By Mary Murphy April 2008
Increasing awareness and early diagnosis of cancer An update from Primary Care Jo Preston Service Improvement Facilitator NECN Dr Bill Hall Primary Care.
Organ Transplants Presentation
Colorectal Screening NZ Bowel Screening Pilot. WHO Screening criteria  Impt Health condition  Identifiable Latent or early stage  Understand natural.
Maternal Mortality in Afghanistan: Prioritizing women Dr. Sayed M. Amin Fatimie Ambassador Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.
1 Cervical cancer screening in Lithuania 2005 Maiori, Italy Juozas Kurtinaitis Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University
INCIDENCE AND SURVIVAL TRENDS OF COLORECTAL CANCER FROM 2002 TO 2011 BE Ansa; E Alema-Mensah; MD Claridy; JQ Sheats; B Fontenot, and SA Smith Georgia Regents.
Public State Initiatives in Colorectal Screening: The Colorado Experience Tim Byers MD MPH University of Colorado School of Medicine
HPV VACCINATION Dr Frida Mghamba 2 nd East Africa WE CAN Summit 11 th September 2014.
SETTING UP THE SERVICE BY LYNN TOBIN. HOW DID WE GET HERE? ABUNDENCE OF EVIDENCE PROVIDING JUSTIFICATION FOR BOWEL CANCER SCREENING.
“The African American Prostate Cancer Crisis in Numbers”
Cervical cancer screening: problems and barriers in Estonia Piret Veerus Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics National Institute for Health Development.
PREPARED BY National Bowel Screening Programme Meeting 19 August 2015.
EUROCHIP-2 results in Lithuania Varenna October 18, 2007 Presented by Ruta Kurtinaitiene
Dr Andrea Micheli Descriptive Epidemiology and Health Planning Unit Fondazione IRCCS “Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori” Milan Public Health Programme EUROPEAN.
Cheshire & Merseyside Bowel Cancer Screening Programme April 2008.
Do all colorectal polyps require pathological examination? Aim To assess whether it is possible to omit the pathological examination of some polyps without.
Colorado Colorectal Screening Program Holly Wolf University of Colorado School of Medicine
Cheshire & Merseyside Bowel Cancer Screening Programme April 2008.
Breast cancer facts Daniela Cazares. Fact #1 In the US, 1 in 8 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in their lifetime.
First results of a pilot population-based faecal occult blood colorectal cancer screening program B. DENIS, P. PERRIN, J.F. EBELIN, P. WEBER, E. KALTENBACH,
M O N T E N E G R O Negotiating Team for the Accession of Montenegro to the European Union Working Group for Chapter 28 – Consumer and Health Protection.
Medical Advisory Board Quality assurance Maine Cancer Registry US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Cancer Treatment Centers and Cancer Treating.
Insert name of presentation on Master Slide Bowel Screening in Welsh Prisons Hayley Heard Head of Programme.
«Population Matters in the Russian Federation» FIRST Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Protection of the Russian Federation Sergey F. VELMYAYKIN.
Phase II: Targeting Non-Adherence with Colorectal Cancer Pre- Screening Appointments and Colonoscopies using Nurse Navigation, Gretchen Junko DO, Gabriel.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم.
Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines
WellOne Primary Medical and Dental Care
The Burden of Colorectal Cancer in Arkansas
Overview of the performance indicators recommended by European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening Dr. Rasa Vansevičiūtė, Lithuania.
A Quality improvement initiative
Bowel cancer screening update GP education event 28 Nov 2017
WellOne Primary Medical and Dental Care
Prevention and Early Diagnosis of Cancer Ongar Health Centre Patient Forum 7th March 2018 Sue White Cancer Research UK Facilitator.
Common indicators related to organization and invitation
SAMPLE – Preliminary Results
BOWEL CANCER SCREENING 11/7/18
Kathleen England Neville Calleja 20th October 2017
Feeling Rushed? Does Late Start Time Predict Poor Quality Colonoscopy?
Colorectal Natural History Model
Bowel Screening in Wales
Ruggli M.1), Stebler D.1), Besancon L.1), Vaucher F.1)
Reporting in CRC screening
National Cancer Center
The experience of Cervical Cancer
Task Force on Cervical Cancer Screening in Estonia
Citation: Cancer Care Ontario
BOWEL CANCER SCREENING IN LEWISHAM
Challenges in Evaluating Screening & Prevention Interventions
Rīga Stradiņš University, Liepāja branch
TrueNTH A big thank you to everyone who is involved in the TrueNTH Global Registry study. We are on target to reach our current recruitment target of.
Presentation transcript:

Colorectal Cancer Screening Implementation of a public health programme An Expert Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening Cancer Society of Finland, Finnish Cancer Registry, Mass Screening Registry

Aims of colorectal cancer screening The main aim is to reduce mortality from colorectal cancer Reduction about % is expected based on randomised screening trials Means: detecting cancer at an early stage –survival of patients –quality of life of patients –savings in treatment Collecting data of missing information (feasibility, compliance, test results)

What is the current situation in Finland? A population based screening programme was launched in September 2004 –testing feasibility in Finland –gradual implementation in the target population –gradual expansion over regions –colonoscopy possible using existing resources evaluation of the programme The programme is running for the third year –expansion over regions succesful so far –colonoscopy resources have been found –population attitudes positive and encouraging

Target population Age years Men and women Gradual start among 50% of target population Randomisation into screening or control arms at individual level Eventually, implementation to all year olds Repeated screening every second year

Randomisation

Implementation

Evaluation Randomised design allows unbiased comparison between the screening and control arms Cancers and deaths followed through national registries Both screened and the control population can be followed through register linkage Colonoscopy use: those screened (active data collection); controls (hospital discharge registry) First years: performance, compliance, positivity rate, colonoscopies After six years randomisation will gradually cease

Procedure of screening Mail invitation Three day specimen collection (faecal cards) Guaiac based test, no rehydration Any positive test window is regarded as a positive test result Those being positive are sent to their local contact person (nurses) for colonoscopy referral Further surveillance and treatment according to usual care

FOB-test

Launch in September 2004 In 22 municipalities (out of 444) Only one screening centre for the entire country (5,3 million people) Totally 4539 invited in 2004 Compliance 75,3% (no reminder so far) Positivity rate 1,8% Renewals 3.9% (missing specimens, too old, wrong side)

Colonoscopies in test positive persons in 2004 –54 colonoscopies done –no finding in 5 people No colonoscopy for 9 people because: –4 did not want to, 3 had been colonoscopied recently and 2 were in surveillance No sedatives were used, no in-hospital treatments for primary colonoscopy –one was admitted to surgery directly after second (immediate) colonoscopy and big polyp removal Primary colonoscopy completed in 2 months for most (50/54)

Findings

First results (September 2004–February 2006)

Test results Overall compliance good, 72%, in males 65% and in women 79% Positive tests among those who were screened: 1.9% total; males 2.7%, females 1.3% Compliance to colonoscopy has been high, 90% –4% decline, 6% have been in surveillance –in colonoscopy, 10% cancers, 30% adenomas (data collected from 268 colonoscopies so far) New test kits to 2.3%, males 2.6% and females 2.4% of those screened

How do we proceed in Finland By January 2006 up to 160 municipalities, still recruiting more Total number of invitations around in 2006 First preliminary ”evaluation” in 2007 –first participants with re-invitation to screening Data collection of primary screening online, colonoscopy results have to be asked for from hospitals and introduces some delay in reporting Publication draft to be sent for review in fall