Screening for Bladder Cancer: Rationale, Limitations, Whom to Target, and Perspectives

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：St&eacute ; phane Larr&eacute ; ^a ; ^{slarre@chu-reims.fr} ; James W.F. Catto^b ; Michael S. Cookson^c ; Edward M. Messing^d ; Shahrokh F. Shariat^e ; Mark S. Soloway^f ; Robert S. Svatek^g ; Yair Lotan^h ; Alexandre R. Zlottaⁱ ; H. Barton Grossman^j
• 关键词：Urinary bladder neoplasms ; Mass screening ; Mandatory testing ; Early detection of cancer bladder neoplasms ; Review
• 刊名：European Urology
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：June, 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：63
• 期：6
• 页码：1049-1058
• 全文大小：593 K

文摘

Context

Bladder cancer (BCa) is the fourth most common cancer in men. Survival from the disease has not improved in the last 25 yr. Population-based screening theoretically provides the best opportunity to improve the outcomes of aggressive BCa.

Objective

To review the current literature regarding the usefulness and feasibility of screening for bladder cancer.

Evidence acquisition

We conducted a nonsystematic review restricted to English using the keywords urinary bladder neoplasms, mass screening, mandatory testing, and early detection of cancer. We retrieved 184 articles and selected 22.

Evidence synthesis

There was no level 1 evidence (obtained from a randomised controlled trial [RCT]) addressing the impact of screening on BCa survival or tumour downstaging. No study assessed the diagnostic performance of urinary markers in the context of screening. Two case-control series suggested a benefit of screening on survival, and a third found a nonsignificant beneficial trend in favour of screening. Two studies suggested downstaging of BCa at diagnosis. Other reports concluded that most cancers detected with screening were of low grade and that current urinary testing cannot detect all tumours. Screening is likely to be of benefit in high-risk populations using cost-efficient high-performing urinary biomarkers. There was insufficient evidence to define an efficient screening protocol.

Conclusions

Although BCa screening is theoretically feasible in a high-risk population, there is currently insufficient evidence to recommend it. This is due to insufficient data to define an efficient screening protocol with selection of an appropriate population and the lack of accurate and cost-effective urinary markers able to discriminate low-risk from high-risk cancers. Major improvements are needed in the evaluation of urinary biomarkers before evaluation in a RCT can be achieved.