By Ian Ségal
December 18, 2024
(Image Source: Fitzsimmons, 2024)
Cancer prevention and screening efforts have significantly reduced mortality for specific cancer types by emphasizing prevention and early detection. Evidence-based interventions, such as HPV vaccination and routine screenings like mammograms and colonoscopies, have played a pivotal role in improving health outcomes. These successes highlight the importance of integrating scientific research, policy changes, and community engagement into public health strategies. However, disparities in access to care, particularly among underserved populations, remain a critical challenge. Socioeconomic barriers, geographic limitations, and systemic inequities often hinder participation in preventive measures, underscoring the need for targeted interventions to ensure equitable access.
At the same time, the evolving landscape of cancer risk factors, including the rise of lifestyle-related cancers, calls for a broader approach to prevention. Public health efforts must address social determinants of health, promote healthy behaviors, and adapt to advancements in precision medicine, which offers personalized prevention strategies but raises concerns about accessibility and cost. Community engagement, transparent communication, and culturally sensitive outreach are essential to overcoming misinformation and fostering trust in preventive measures. By addressing these challenges, cancer prevention and screening efforts can continue to advance, reducing disparities and improving outcomes for all populations.
Colorectal Cancer Screening: Successes and Challenges
One notable example of success is the progress made in colorectal cancer screening. Studies have shown that screening sigmoidoscopy can reduce the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer, particularly in the distal colon (Brenner et al., 2014). Randomized controlled trials and observational studies have demonstrated a much more significant reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality with screening sigmoidoscopy compared to screening colonoscopy, which has a more limited reach (Brenner et al., 2014). This finding highlights the importance of selecting the most effective screening tools based on evidence and tailoring them to specific populations and cancer types.
(Image Source: Washington School of Medicine in St. Louis, 2022)
However, evidence for the effectiveness of screening colonoscopy remains limited, despite some recent studies from the United States, Germany, and Switzerland suggesting a positive effect (Brenner et al., 2014). This gap in evidence underscores the need for further research to clarify the comparative effectiveness of different screening modalities. Additionally, it raises questions about how healthcare systems can balance implementing evidence-based practices with the need to provide access to a range of screening options that may be more acceptable or feasible for certain populations.
Colorectal cancer screening guidelines, such as those from the European Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Working Group, recommend screening individuals between the ages of 50 and 74 using fecal occult blood tests (FOBT) as the only screening method approved throughout the European Union (Bénard et al., 2018). This recommendation reflects the importance of cost-effective and scalable screening methods that can be implemented across diverse healthcare systems. However, it also highlights the need for ongoing evaluation of emerging technologies, such as fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and multi-target stool DNA tests, which may offer improved sensitivity and specificity compared to traditional FOBT.
Policy and Community-Based Interventions
In the United States, policy changes have played a pivotal role in expanding access to colorectal cancer screening. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has helped eliminate cost-sharing for colorectal cancer screening, acknowledging the benefits of early detection and treatment (Kim et al., 2017). This policy shift has been particularly impactful in reducing financial screening barriers, disproportionately affecting low-income and uninsured populations. Community-based programs, such as Against Colorectal Cancer In Our Neighborhoods (ACCION), have also successfully increased screening rates among medically underserved minority populations (Kim et al., 2017). These programs highlight the importance of culturally tailored interventions that address the unique barriers specific communities face, such as language barriers, mistrust of the healthcare system, and limited health literacy.
(Image Source: National Cancer Institute, 2023)
Improving healthcare coordination and boosting evidence-based cancer screening rates are key strategies in evolving health policy. The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model offers the potential infrastructure to provide care coordination and implement components of the Remind, Recall, and Outreach (RRO) approach, which has been shown to increase breast and colorectal cancer screening rates (Fortuna et al., 2013). By integrating preventive care into routine healthcare delivery, the PCMH model can help ensure that patients receive timely and appropriate screenings. Moreover, using health information technology, such as electronic health records (EHRs) and patient portals, can facilitate the implementation of RRO strategies and improve communication between patients and providers.
Tailored Messaging and Behavioral Interventions
Tailored messaging and addressing social norms associated with colorectal cancer screening procedures are also important factors in improving screening prevalence. Studies have found that messages highlighting the maintenance of independence or preservation of masculinity norms can promote screening adherence among men who adhere closely to traditional masculinity norms (Christy et al., 2013). This finding underscores the importance of understanding the cultural and psychological factors influencing health behaviors and designing interventions that resonate with target populations.
(Image Source: Schatzberg, 2024)
Additionally, small media, such as educational booklets and videos, has been found to have a modest impact on colorectal cancer screening uptake (Honein-AbouHaidar et al., 2016). While these interventions may not be sufficient on their own, they can be valuable components of a broader strategy to increase awareness and motivation for screening.
Challenges in Other Cancer Types
While progress has been made in colorectal cancer screening, challenges remain in other cancer types. For cervical cancer screening, there is a lack of studies investigating the protective benefit of screening among older women, and no studies have reported cervical cancer mortality outcomes related to age and screening history (Peirson et al., 2013). This gap in evidence highlights the need for more research to inform screening guidelines for older women, particularly as the population ages and the prevalence of comorbidities increases.
(Image Source: Olumese, 2024)
Additionally, disparities in access to cervical cancer screening persist, particularly among low-income, uninsured, and immigrant populations. Addressing these disparities will require targeted interventions that reduce structural barriers, such as providing mobile screening units, offering free or low-cost services, and integrating screening into primary care settings.
Efforts to promote breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening through special events have employed various strategies, such as reducing structural barriers, providing one-on-one or group education, and distributing educational materials (Escoffery et al., 2014). However, the effectiveness of these approaches varies, and more research is needed to identify the most impactful interventions. For example, while educational campaigns can increase awareness, they may not be sufficient to overcome deeply ingrained cultural beliefs or mistrust of the healthcare system. Similarly, reducing structural barriers, such as offering extended clinic hours or transportation assistance, may improve access but not address other barriers, such as fear of diagnosis or lack of perceived risk.
Conclusion and Future Directions
The research highlights the importance of a multifaceted cancer prevention and screening approach that addresses structural and individual-level factors. Continued efforts to improve healthcare coordination, tailor messaging, and address social norms are crucial in reducing cancer mortality through early detection and prevention.
Moreover, integrating innovative technologies, such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, into cancer screening programs holds promise for improving the accuracy and efficiency of screening processes. By leveraging these advancements and fostering collaboration across sectors, healthcare systems can build on existing successes and address persistent cancer prevention and screening challenges.
(Image Source: Ciupka, 2022)
References
Brenner, H., Stock, C., & Hoffmeister, M. (2014). Effect of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. BMJ, 348(apr09 1), g2467-g2467. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g2467
Bénard, F., Barkun, A., Martel, M., & Renteln, D. (2018). Systematic review of colorectal cancer screening guidelines for average-risk adults: Summarizing the current global recommendations. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 24(1), 124-138. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v24.i1.124
Christy, S., Mosher, C., & Rawl, S. (2013). Integrating men’s health and masculinity theories to explain colorectal cancer screening behavior. American Journal of Men’s Health, 8(1), 54-65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988313492171
Ciupka, B. (2022, November 1). Cancer research: Is it worth your dime?. Cancer Research: Is it Worth Your Dime? https://www.nfcr.org/blog/cancer-research-is-it-worth-your-dime/
Escoffery, C., Rodgers, K. C., Kegler, M. C., Haardörfer, R., Howard, D. H., Liang, S., Pinsker, E., Roland, K. B., Allen, J. D., Ory, M. G., Bastani, R., Fernandez, M. E., Risendal, B. C., Byrd, T. L., & Coronado, G. D. (2014b). A systematic review of special events to promote breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening in the United States. BMC Public Health, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-274
Fitzsimmons, E. (2024, October 18). October 18: The Week in Cancer News. Cancer Today. https://www.cancertodaymag.org/cancer-talk/october-18-the-week-in-cancer-news-2/
Fortuna, R. J., Idris, A., Winters, P., Humiston, S. G., Scofield, S., Hendren, S., Ford, P., Li, S. X., & Fiscella, K. (2013). Get screened: A randomized trial of the incremental benefits of reminders, recall, and outreach on cancer screening. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 29(1), 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2586-y
Honein-AbouHaidar, G. N., Kastner, M., Vuong, V., Perrier, L., Daly, C., Rabeneck, L., Straus, S., & Baxter, N. N. (2016). Systematic review and meta-study synthesis of qualitative studies evaluating facilitators and barriers to participation in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 25(6), 907–917. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-15-0990
Kim, B., Lairson, D., Chung, T., Kim, J., & Shokar, N. (2017). Budget impact analysis of against colorectal cancer in our neighborhoods (Accion): A successful community-based colorectal cancer screening program for a medically underserved minority population. Value in Health, 20(6), 809-818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.025
National Cancer Institute. (2023, June 20). Cancer prevention interventions available today. Cancer Prevention Interventions Available Today. https://prevention.cancer.gov/news-and-events/infographics/cancer-prevention-interventions-available-today
Olumese, A. (2024, February 2). Breakthrough discovery stops cancer cells from becoming invisible. Breakthrough Discovery Stops Cancer Cells From Becoming Invisible. https://studyfinds.org/stop-cancer-cells-invisible/
Peirson, L., Fitzpatrick‐Lewis, D., Ciliska, D., & Warren, R. (2013). Screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-35
Schatzberg, A. (2024, July 29). Behavioral Health Messaging Strategies. https://www.valant.io/resources/blog/behavioral-health-messaging-strategies/
Washington School of Medicine in St. Louis. (2022, August 24). Who is eligible for colorectal cancer screening in 2022? Who is Eligible for Colorectal Cancer Screening in 2022? https://surgery.wustl.edu/who-is-eligible-for-colorectal-cancer-screening-in-2022/
ความคิดเห็น