Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Opinion on cancer screening: Impact on prescription and participation rates

Date

09 Oct 2016

Session

Poster display

Presenters

Jean-François Morère

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2016) 27 (6): 462-468. 10.1093/annonc/mdw385

Authors

J. Morère1, J. Viguier2, S. Couraud3, L. Guibaudet4, J. Blay5, A.B. Cortot6, C. Lhomel7, L. Greillier8, X. Pivot9, F. Eisinger10

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, Hopital Paul Brousse, 94800 - Villejuif/FR
  • 2 Medical Oncology, CHRU Bretonneau, 37044 - Tours/FR
  • 3 Respiratory Diseases And Thoracic Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, 69495 - Pierre Bénite/FR
  • 4 Statistics, KantarHealth, Paris/FR
  • 5 Medical Oncology, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon/FR
  • 6 Pneumology And Thoracic Oncology, DRC / CHRU of Lille, Lille/FR
  • 7 Oncology/hematology Institutionnal, Roche, Boulogne-Billancourt/FR
  • 8 Multidisciplinary Oncology And Therapeutic Innovations, Hopital Nord, Marseille/FR
  • 9 Service Oncologie Medicale, CHU Besançon, Hôpital Jean Minjoz, 25030 - Besançon/FR
  • 10 Cancer Control, Institute Paoli Calmettes, Marseille/FR
More

Resources

Abstract 1571

Background

The aim of the EDIFICE surveys is to improve insight into screening programs in France. We hypothesized that individual opinions may affect physicians' and laypersons' attitudes toward prescribing or participating in screening, respectively; we assessed physicians' and laypersons' opinions, focusing on colorectal (CRC), breast (BC), cervical (CC), prostate (PC) and lung (LC) cancer screening.

Methods

The 4th nationwide observational survey was conducted by phone interviews using the quota method. A representative sample of 1463 individuals with no history of cancer (age 40-75 y; 726 men [m], 737 women [w]) was interviewed from 12 June-10 July 2014. A mirror survey on a representative sample of 301 physicians (201 general practitioners [GP, 131 m, 70 w] and 100 oncologists [65 m, 35 w]) was conducted from 9 July-8 August. We analyzed replies stating screening to be more reassuring than worrying.

Results

In general, screening was more reassuring than worrying, more so for physicians than for laypersons (CRC 65% vs 51%, CC 74% vs 62%, PC 59% vs 43%, P 

Conclusions

Physicians tend to be more reassured by screening than laypersons, and oncologists more so than GP, with the exception of PC screening. The official guidelines for CRC and BC screening are a good setting for GPs' medical practice. The most widely used screening programs (CRC, BC, PC) enable GP to make objective prescriptions, regardless of individual opinions. In the absence of guidelines (PC), prescription rates are correlated with physicians' confidence in screening. Reassurance in screening has a positive impact on laypersons' participation rates.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

EDIFICE surveys are funded by Roche

Funding

EDIFICE surveys are funded by Roche

Disclosure

Jean F. Morère,Sébastien Couraud, Jean-Yves Blay, Alexis B. Cortot, Laurent Greillier, Xavier B. Pivot, François Eisinger: Honorarium fees from Roche. C. Lhomel: Employee of Roche.

All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Resources from the same session

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings