Russian Journal of OncologyRussian Journal of OncologyРоссийский онкологический журнал1028-99842412-9119Eco-Vector4004410.17816/onco40044ArticlesСтатьиReview ArticleTHE CURRENT STATE OF SCREENING PROGRAMS IN ONCOLOGYСОВРЕМЕННОЕ СОСТОЯНИЕ СКРИНИНГОВЫХ ПРОГРАММ В ОНКОЛОГИИKomarovaL. EКомароваЛюдмила Егоровна

д-р биол. наук, проф., руководитель научно-организационного отдела

orgotdel@ronc.ruФГБУ «Российский онкологический научный центр им. Н.Н. Блохина» РАМН15102013185NO5 (2013)№5 (2013)485122072020Copyright ©; 2013, Eco-VectorCopyright ©; 2013, ООО "Эко-Вектор"2013Eco-VectorООО "Эко-Вектор"https://rjonco.com/1028-9984/article/view/40044

The main task carried out in the world of oncology screening programs is the active involvement of public in order to identify asymptomatic and early forms of cancer. The mortality rate reduction in the group of screening participants is the effectiveness evidence of such programs organization and conduct. In recent years, the issues of benefits and possible negative aspects of screening in reducing mortality from certain forms of cancer continue to be debated.

Основной задачей проводимых в мире программ скрининга в области онкологии является активное привлечение населения с целью выявления бессимптомных и ранних форм рака. Доказательством эффективности организации и проведения таких программ является снижение смертности в группе участников скрининга. В последние годы продолжает оставаться обсуждаемой проблема о пользе и возможных негативных сторонах скрининга с точки зрения снижения смертности при отдельных формах рака.

population screeningmammography screening for breast cancerPSA test for prostate cancerlow-dose computer tomography during lung cancerrisk groupsпопуляционный скринингмаммографический скрининг рака молочной железыПСА-тест на рак предстательной железынизкодозная компьюторная томография при раке легкогогруппы рискаBretthauer M., Kalager M. Priciples, effectiveness and caveats in screening for cancer. Br. J. Surg. 2013; 100 (1): 55—6. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8995).Philippe Autier. Disparities in breast cancer mortality trends between 30 European countries: retrospective trend analysis of WHO mortality database. Br. Med. J. 2010; 341: c3620 (Published on line2010 August 11.)Paajanen H., Varjo R. et al. Effect of screening mammography on surgery of breast cancer in Finland: a population — based analysis during the years 1985—2004. Ann. Surg. 2006; 72 (2): 167—71.Zaridze D.G. Prevention of cancer: a guide for doctors. Moscow, OOO”IMN-Press; 2009 (in Russian). (Заридзе Д.Г. Профилактика рака, руководство для врачей. М., ООО «ИМН-Пресс»; 2009).Olsen A.H., Lynge E. et al. Breast cancer mortality in Norway after the introduction of mammography screening. Int. J. Cancer. 2013; 132 (1): 208—14. doi: 10, 1002/ijc. 27609.Indep. UK panel on breast cancer, Lancet. 2012; 380 (9855): 1778—86.Puliti D., Duffy S. W., Maccinesi G. et al. Overdiagnosis in mam-mographic scraaning for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review. J. Med. Screen. 2012; 19 (Suppl. 1): 42—56.Falk R.S., Hofvind S., Skaane P. et al. Overdiagnosis among women attending a population-based mammography screening programme. Int. J. Cancer. 2013 Jan 25, doi: 10. 1002/ijc. 28052.Kalager M., Adami H.O. et al. Overdiagnosis of invasive cancer due to mammography screening: results from the Norwegian screening programme. Ann. Intern. Med. 2012; 156 (7): 491—9. doi: 10, 1059/0003-4819-156-7-201204030-00005.Armstrong K., Moye E., Williams S. et al. Screening mammography in women 40—49 years of age: a systematic review for the American College of Physicians. Ann. Intern. Med. 2007; 146 (7): 516—26.US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 2009; 151: 716—26.The cancer genome atlas network. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumors. Nature. 2012; 490: 61—70.Collin S.M., Martin R.M., Metcalfe C. et al. Prostate-cancer mortality in the USA and UK in 1975—2004: an ecological study. Lancet Oncol. 2008; 9(5): 445—52.Andriole G.L., Crawford E.D. et al. Prostate cancer screening in the randomized prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow up. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2012; 104 (2): 125—32.Schroder F.H., Hugosson J., Roobol M.J. et al. Prostate-cancer mortality at 11 years follow-up. New Engl. J. Med. 2012; 366: 981—90.Bach P.B., Mirkin J.N. et al. Benefits and harms of CT screening: a systematic review. Jama, 2012; 307 (22): 2418—29.Kobayashi H., YamadaY. et al. A randomized study of screening for ovarian cancer: a multicenter study in Japan. Int. J. Gynecol Cancer, 2008; 18: 441—20.Partridge E., Kreimer A.R. et al. Results from four rounds of ovarian cancer screening in a randomized trial. Obstetn and Gynecol. 2009; 113: 775—82.Buys S.S., Partridge E., Black A. et al. Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized. J. A. M. A. 2011; 305 (22): 2295—303. doi: 10, 1001/Jama 20011, 766.van Nagtll J.R. Jr., Miller R.W., DeSimone C.P. et al. Longterm survival of women with epithelial ovarian cancer detected by ultrasonographic screening. Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 118 (6): 1212—21.