Gastrointestinal cancer screening: screening may release new research funding to improve health service also in routine clinics

Abstract

We are far from having seen the ideal method of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and the downsides of screening have not been fully addressed. Funding of adequately sized screening trials with a 10–15-year perspective for endpoints CRC mortality and incidence is difficult to get. Also, with such time horizons, there will always be an ongoing study to be awaited before feeling obliged to invest in the next. New, promising screening methods may, however, emerge far more often than every 10th year, and the knowledge gap may easily widen unless research is made a key responsibility for any ongoing cancer screening program. Previous lost battles on screening research may be won if accepting that scientific evidence may be obtained within the framework of screening programs – provided that they are designed as platforms for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER). Accepting that CER-based screening programs should be preferred to non-CER programs and seriously compete for their funding sources, then CER screening programs may not be considered so much as contenders for ordinary clinical research funds. Also, CER within a screening framework may benefit patients in routine clinics as shown by screening research in Nordic countries. The Nordic countries have been early contributors to research on CRC screening, but slow in implementing screening programs.

Key Words:

• benefit
• comparative effectiveness
• gastrointestinal cancer
• harm
• screening

Declaration of interest: The author reports no conflicts of interest. The author alone is responsible for the content and writing of the paper.