Gastric cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Gastric cancer
cancer screening
early detection of cancer
gastrointestinal endoscopy
preventive medicine
Journal
Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology
ISSN: 1502-7708
Titre abrégé: Scand J Gastroenterol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0060105
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2022
10 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
10
5
2022
medline:
1
10
2022
entrez:
9
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Gastric cancer (GC) screening is recommended in high-risk populations, although screening methods and intervals vary. In intermediate-risk populations, screening through esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) may be considered depending on local resources. The aim of this study was to compare GC screening methods regarding effect on mortality, diagnostic yield and adherence. Systematic review and meta-analysis including studies evaluating population-based GC screening. Search was conducted in three online databases (MEDLINE, Scopus and clinicaltrials.gov), along with manual search. Forty-four studies were included. Studies in upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) demonstrated that GC screening was associated with significantly lower GC mortality rates (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.55 - 0.73). Benefits on mortality were also found in EGD and serum pepsinogen (PG) studies. EGD was associated with significantly higher GC (0.55%, 95% CI 0.39 - 0.75%) and early-GC (EGC) detection rates (0.48%, 95% CI 0.34 - 0.65%) when compared to UGIS (GC 0.19%, 95% CI 0.10 - 0.31%; EGC 0.08%, 95% CI 0.04 - 0.13%) and PG (GC 0.10%, 95% CI 0.05 - 0.16%; EGC 0.10%, 95% CI 0.04 - 0.19%). Non-invasive methods tended to higher adherence rates when compared to EGD. Regardless of the screening method, individualized recruitment performed better. Screening positively impacted GC mortality rates. EGD was associated with higher diagnostic yield, while UGIS and PG tended to higher adherence rates. Screening uptake was predominantly impacted by recruitment strategies independently of the adopted method.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Gastric cancer (GC) screening is recommended in high-risk populations, although screening methods and intervals vary. In intermediate-risk populations, screening through esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) may be considered depending on local resources. The aim of this study was to compare GC screening methods regarding effect on mortality, diagnostic yield and adherence.
METHODS
Systematic review and meta-analysis including studies evaluating population-based GC screening. Search was conducted in three online databases (MEDLINE, Scopus and clinicaltrials.gov), along with manual search.
RESULTS
Forty-four studies were included. Studies in upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS) demonstrated that GC screening was associated with significantly lower GC mortality rates (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.55 - 0.73). Benefits on mortality were also found in EGD and serum pepsinogen (PG) studies. EGD was associated with significantly higher GC (0.55%, 95% CI 0.39 - 0.75%) and early-GC (EGC) detection rates (0.48%, 95% CI 0.34 - 0.65%) when compared to UGIS (GC 0.19%, 95% CI 0.10 - 0.31%; EGC 0.08%, 95% CI 0.04 - 0.13%) and PG (GC 0.10%, 95% CI 0.05 - 0.16%; EGC 0.10%, 95% CI 0.04 - 0.19%). Non-invasive methods tended to higher adherence rates when compared to EGD. Regardless of the screening method, individualized recruitment performed better.
DISCUSSION
Screening positively impacted GC mortality rates. EGD was associated with higher diagnostic yield, while UGIS and PG tended to higher adherence rates. Screening uptake was predominantly impacted by recruitment strategies independently of the adopted method.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35531944
doi: 10.1080/00365521.2022.2068966
doi:
Substances chimiques
Pepsinogen A
9001-10-9
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM