Screening for Bladder Cancer
For screening to be cost-effective a disease has to have sufficient prevalence and there need to be tests that can result in early detection and improved survival. While bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in men, overall the incidence of bladder cancer is too low to justify screening in the general population. Risk stratification based on known risk factors such as age, gender, smoking history, or occupational exposures may allow identification of a population with sufficient incidence of disease to justify screening. There will need to be optimization of testing for detection and evidence of improved survival from early diagnosis. There is potential for screening to detect disease prior to muscle invasion, which could result in a survival benefit. The cost implications of screening will also be important to consider.
In this chapter we will review the epidemiology of bladder cancer and risk factors for the disease, highlight previous bladder cancer screening trials, and discuss cost issues associated with screening.
KeywordsBladder cancer Screening Urine markers Risk factors Cost-effectiveness
- 3.NCI. NCI cancer screening overview. 2007. http://www.cancer.gov/cancerinfo/pdq/screening/overview. Accessed 26 Aug 2007.
- 4.Wilson J, Jungers GE. Principles and practice of screening for disease. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1968. p. 163.Google Scholar
- 7.Vickers AJ, Bennette C, Kibel AS, Black A, Izmirlian G, Stephenson AJ, et al. Who should be included in a clinical trial of screening for bladder cancer? A decision analysis of data from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. Cancer. 2013;119(1):143–9. Epub 2012/06/28.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Garcia-Closas M, Malats N, Silverman D, Dosemeci M, Kogevinas M, Hein DW, et al. NAT2 slow acetylation, GSTM1 null genotype, and risk of bladder cancer: results from the Spanish Bladder Cancer Study and meta-analyses. Lancet. 2005;366(9486):649–59. Epub 2005/08/23.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Rodgers M, Nixon J, Hempel S, Aho T, Kelly J, Neal D, et al. Diagnostic tests and algorithms used in the investigation of haematuria: systematic reviews and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10(18):iii–iv, xi-259. Epub 2006/05/30.Google Scholar
- 18.Lotan Y, Bensalah K, Ruddell T, Shariat SF, Sagalowsky AI, Ashfaq R. Prospective evaluation of the clinical usefulness of reflex fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in patients with atypical cytology for the detection of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. J Urol. 2008;179(6):2164–9. Epub 2008/04/22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Hedelin H, Jonsson K, Salomonsson K, Boman H. Screening for bladder tumours in men aged 60-70 years with a bladder tumour marker (UBC) and dipstick-detected haematuria using both white-light and fluorescence cystoscopy. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2006;40(1):26–30. Epub 2006/02/03.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.van Oers JM, Lurkin I, van Exsel AJ, Nijsen Y, van Rhijn BW, van der Aa MN, et al. A simple and fast method for the simultaneous detection of nine fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 mutations in bladder cancer and voided urine. Clin Can Res. 2005;11(21):7743–8. Epub 2005/11/10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 50.Krahn MD, Coombs A, Levy IG. Current and projected annual direct costs of screening asymptomatic men for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen. CMAJ Can Med Assoc J. 1999;160(1):49–57. Epub 1999/02/06.Google Scholar