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

Poster display session

2379 - Recommended cancer screening and vulnerable populations: results from the EDIFICE 5 survey


10 Sep 2017


Poster display session


Cancers in Adolescents and Young Adults (AYA);  Cancer Prevention


Jean-François Morere


Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v502-v506. 10.1093/annonc/mdx383


J. Morere1, F. Eisinger2, J. Blay3, S. Couraud4, L. Brignoli-Guibaudet5, C. Lhomel6, A. Cortot7, L. Greillier8, J. Viguier9

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, Hopital Paul Brousse, 94804 - Villejuif/FR
  • 2 Aix Marseille Univ, Inserm, Sesstim, Institute Paoli Calmettes, 13274 - Marseille/FR
  • 3 Medical Oncology, Centre Leon Berard, 69008 - Lyon/FR
  • 4 Respiratory Diseases And Thoracic Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, 69495 - Pierre Bénite/FR
  • 5 Statistics, Kantarhealth, Paris/FR
  • 6 Medical, Roche - France, 9265000 - Boulogne-Billancourt/FR
  • 7 Pneumology-oncology, Hospital Albert Calmette, 59000 - Lille/FR
  • 8 Multidisciplinary Oncology And Therapeutic Innovations, Assistance Publique - Hopitaux de Marseille, 13915 - Marseille/FR
  • 9 Medical Oncology, CHRU Bretonneau, 37044 - Tours/FR


Abstract 2379


Based on data from the 2011, 2014 and 2016 EDIFICE surveys, we sought to identify potential links between impoverished living conditions and participation in screening in the context of organized programs (colorectal [CRC], breast [BC] and cervical cancers [CC]).


The EDIFICE observational phone surveys were conducted among representative population samples (age 40-75 yrs in 2011 [N = 1603] and 2014 [N = 1602]; age 50-75 years in 2016 [N = 1501]) using the quota method. Attitudes regarding screening were assessed in subgroups of individuals within the target age-groups for each screening program. Participation in screening and follow-up rates were assessed by asking if respondents had undergone at least one screening examination in their lifetime and within the recommended time frame (2 yrs for CRC and BC, 3 yrs for CC). Data were analyzed according to the validated EPICES vulnerability score.


For CRC, over the period 2011/2014/2016, participation increased in non-vulnerable subgroups (60% vs. 63%, NS and 63% vs. 68%, P = 0.05) as did follow-up rates (34% vs 33%, NS and 33% vs 40%, P = 0.01). Participation (60%/54%/53%) and follow-up (31%/30%/31%) were stable among vulnerable individuals. Participation was lower in vulnerable vs. non-vulnerable individuals in 2014 (P = 0.02) and 2016 (P 


The 2016 EDIFICE survey confirms the increasing impact of social vulnerability on recommended screening programs, particularly for CRC.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Kantar Health




J-F. Morere, F. Eisinger, J-Y. Blay, S. Couraud, A. Cortot, L. Greillier: Honorarium fees from Roche Edifice surveys were funded by Roche S.A. C. Lhomel: Employee of Roche Edifice surveys were funded by Roche S.A. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

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
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.