Marking the end of another busy year for the Cancer Prevention Group, we have hand picked 15 of our published research highlights for your festive enjoyment (with group members in green).
Wishing our readers a rejuvenating Christmas break. We look forward to sharing more with you in 2024!
| Paper Title | Objective(s) | Journal & Authors |
| Years of life lost due to cancer in the United Kingdom from 1988 to 2017 | A range of summary statistics are used to measure the impact of different cancers on society. This study investigated the application of Years of Life Lost (YLL) – a statistic placing greater weight on cancer deaths in younger individuals – in routine cancer statistics, using cancer mortality data from 1988 to 2017. | British Journal of Cancer Amar S Ahmad, Judith Offman, Christine Delon, Bernard V North, Jon Shelton, Peter Sasieni |
| Future cancer risk after urgent suspected cancer referral in England when cancer is not found: a national cohort study | Following referral for investigation of urgent suspected cancer within the English National Health Service, 7% of referred individuals are diagnosed with cancer. This study aimed to investigate the risk of cancer occurrence within 1–5 years, following an initial finding of no cancer from an urgent suspected cancer referral. | Lancet Oncology Suzanne E Scott, Carolynn Gildea, Brian D Nicholson, Ruth E Evans, Jo Waller, Debs Smith, Arnie Purushotham, Thomas Round |
| Helping pregnant smokers quit: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of electronic cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy | This multi-centre randomised control trial sought to measure the effectiveness and safety of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation method in pregnant females. To do this, the effectiveness and safety of e-cigarettes in pregnancy was compared with that of nicotine patches. 1,140 pregnant daily smokers were randomised to receive either: an e-cigarette intervention, or nicotine patches. | Health Technology Assessment Dunja Przulj, Francesca Pesola, Katie Myers Smith, Hayden McRobbie, Tim Coleman, Sarah Lewis, Christopher Griffith, Robert Walton, Rachel Whitemore, Miranda Clark, Michael Ussher, Lesley Sinclair, Emily Seager, Sue Cooper, Linda Bauld, Felix Naughton, Peter Sasieni, Isaac Manyonda, Peter Hajek |
| Modelled mortality benefits of multi-cancer early detection screening in England | Blood-based, multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests are capable of detecting a shared cancer signal from any site in the body, with a single, low false-positive rate. MCED screening could offer a key contribution to early cancer diagnosis. In this study, potential benefits of MCED screening were modelled through a natural history (‘interception’) model, for estimating longer-term benefits to a cohort screened between ages 50-79 years. | British Journal of Cancer Peter Sasieni, Rebecca Smittenaar, Earl Hubbell, John Broggio, Richard D Neal, Charles Swanton |
| Managing an extension of screening intervals: Avoiding boom and bust in health care workloads | National-level cancer screening programmes continue to collect evidence on the costs and benefits of extending screening intervals. Extending screening intervals however bring with them the possibility of yearly variations in screening workload, making health service planning difficult. This study explored and compared three different screening extension scenarios, to build a better picture of how such variation could be diminished – and how any transitions might be successfully managed. | International Journal of Cancer Francesca Pesola, Matejka Rebolj, Peter Sasieni |
| Predictors of the experience of a Cytosponge test: analysis of patient survey data from the BEST3 trial | Barrett’s Oesophagus, a precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma, can be diagnosed using a Cytopsponge cell collection device. The BEST3 trial investigated whether detection of Barrett’s is created by using a Cytosponge-trefoil factor 3 (TFF3) test. This study sought to understand patients’ experience of the Cytosponge, by identifying factors associated with least positive experiences. | BMC Gastroenterology Bhagabati Ghimire, Rebecca Landy, Roberta Maroni, Samuel G Smith, Irene Debiram-Beecham, Peter Sasieni, Rebecca C Fitzgerald, Greg Rubin, Fiona M Walter, Jo Waller, BEST3 Consortium, Judith Offman |
| A case-control study to evaluate the impact of the breast screening programme on breast cancer incidence in England | The English National Health Service Breast Screening Programme was first introduced in 1988. Subsequent improvements in diagnostic techniques and treatments have meant the need for up-to-date evaluation of the programme’s benefits on risk of death from breast cancer. A London pilot case-control study previously indicated a 39% mortality reduction from mammography screening. This study sought to evaluate the benefits England-wide, looking at women aged 47-89 years who died of primary breast cancer in 2010 or 2011. | Cancer Medicine Roberta Maroni, Nathalie J Massat, Dharmishta Parmar, Amanda Dibden, Jack Cuzick, Peter Sasieni, Stephen Duffy |
| Widening the offer of human papillomavirus self-sampling to all women eligible for cervical screening: Make haste slowly | Self-collection of samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has the potential to increase the uptake of cervical screening among under-screened women. With self-sampling becoming increasingly available in high-income settings, it is important to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of a wider move to cervical self-sampling. This review looked at the current evidence around the ‘early-adopter’ programme, to determine how well (and consistently) thresholds relating to uptake and detection sensitivity were being met. | International Journal of Cancer Matejka Rebolj, Alexandra Sargent, Sisse Helle Njor, Kate Cuschieri |
| Awareness and knowledge about HPV and primary HPV screening among women in Great Britain: An online population-based survey | Cervical cancer screening via human papillomavirus (HPV) primary testing is now being implemented on a global scale. This study explored HPV awareness, together with knowledge about primary screening, in Great Britain, ahead of extended screening intervals being introduced in England. | Journal of Medical Screening Jo Waller, Frances Waite, Laura AV Marlow |
| The impact of age-relevant and generic infographics on knowledge, attitudes and intention to attend cervical screening: A randomized controlled trial | With cervical screening uptake rates falling in England, it is important to evaluate multiple evidence-based avenues to attempt to remedy this. Infographics are one such avenue. The offer the potential to strengthen intention to attend, increase positive attitudes and improve knowledge. Age targeting could improve these outcomes further. This study tested the impact of both generic and age-targeted infographics on intentions, knowledge and attitudes related to cervical screening, among women aged 25-64 (n = 2,095). | British Journal of Health Psychology Frances Waite, Laura AV Marlow, Martin Nemec, Jo Waller |
| Unpacking the Lay Epidemiology of Cervical Cancer: A Focus Group Study on the Perceptions of Cervical Cancer and Its Prevention among Women Late for Screening in Norway | Non-attendance for cervical cancer screening is commonly understood in terms of a knowledge deficit: as a lack of ‘appropriate’ or ‘correct’ knowledge of disease risks and prevention. Few studies have explored lay interpretations of cervical cancer to date. This study addressed how cervical cancer epidemiology and prevention is interpreted among ‘lay’ individuals, among women late for cervical cancer screening in Norway. | Healthcare Gunvor Aasbø, Bo T Hansen, Jo Waller, Mari Nygård, Kari N Solbrække |
| Exploring the psychosexual impact and disclosure experiences of women testing positive for high-risk cervical human papillomavirus | This study explored the psychosexual impact and disclosure experiences of women testing HPV-positive following cervical screening. Via interviews with 21 women of screening age in England (aged 24-65 years), the nature and impact of disclosure experiences on women’s current, past and future interpersonal and sexual relationships were explored. | British Journal of Health Psychology Kirsty F Bennett, Jo Waller, Julia V Bailey, Laura AV Marlow |
| Do age-targeted messages increase cervical screening intentions in women aged 50-64 years with weak positive intentions? A randomised control trial in Great Britain | Over 20% of women aged 50-64 in Britain have not attending cervical screening within the recommended 5-year interval. This study aimed to investigate the impact of five messages on the strength of intention to attend, in women aged 50-64 with weak positive screening intentions for their next invitation. | Preventive Medicine Frances Waite, Laura AV Marlow, Martin Nemec, Jo Waller |
| Psychological Impact of the Galleri test (sIG(n)al): protocol for a longitudinal evaluation of the psychological impact of receiving a cancer signal in the NHS-Galleri trial | This protocol outlines a proposed project embedded in the NHS-Galleri trial, a large clinical trial of a multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood test, across eight Cancer Alliances in England. The project aims to explore the psychological impact of having a cancer signal detected following a MCED blood test. The project looks at anxiety as the primary outcome for determining psychological impact, alongside psychological consequences of screening, reassurance/concern about the test result, understanding of results and help-/health-seeking behaviours. | BMJ Open Laura AV Marlow, Ninian Schmeising-Barnes, Jane Warwick, Jo Waller |
| Lung adenocarninoma promotion by air pollutants | This study sought to address the limited understanding of how environmental exposures promote cancer formation. Specifically, it looked at particulate matter (PM2.5 — air pollutant particles) and their association with lung cancer. In doing so, it also revisited a 70-year-old theory of tumorigenesis, building a more complex picture of the multi-layer cellular events ultimately leading to cancer development. | Nature William Hill, Emilia L Lim, Clare E Weeden, Claudia Lee, Marcellus Augustine, Kezhong Chen, Feng-Che Kuan, Fabio Marongiu, Edward J Evans Jr, David A Moore, Felipe S Rodrigues, Oriol Pich, Bjorn Bakker, Hongui Cha, Renelle Myers, Febe van Maldegem, Jesse Boumelha, Selvaraju Veeriah, Andrew Rowan, Cristina Naceur-Lombardelli, Takahiro Karasaki, Monica Sivakumar, Swapnanil De, Deborah R Caswell, Ai Nagano, James RM Black, Carlos Martínez-Ruiz, Min Hyung Ryu, Ryan D Huff, Shijia Li, Marie-Julie Favé, Alastair Magness, Alejandro Suárez-Bonnet, Simon L Priestnall, Margreet Lüchtenborg, Katrina Lavelle, Joanna Pethick, Steven Hardy, Fiona E McRonald, Meng-Hung Lin, Clara I Troccoli, Moumita Ghosh, York E Miller, Daniel T Merrick, Robert L Keith, Maise Al Bakir, Chris Bailey, Mark S Hill, Lao H Saal, Yilun Chen, Anthony M George, Christopher Abbosh, Nnennaya Kanu, Se-Hoon Lee, Nicholas McGranahan, Christine D Berg, Peter Sasieni, Richard Houlston, Clare Turnbull, Stephen Lam, Philip Awadalla, Eva Grönroos, Julian Downward, Tyler Jacks, Christopher Carlsten, Ilaria Malanchi, Allan Hackshaw, Kevin Litchfield, TRACERx Consortium, James DeGregori, Mariam Jamal-Hanjani, Charles Swanton |
.
The views expressed are those of the author. Posting of the blog does not signify that the Cancer Prevention Group endorses those views or opinions.