England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme FIT Pilot · Diana1 Blackbird M&NWH Result Diana 2 Robin...

4
WEO CRCSC EWG ‘FIT for Screening’ Barcelona, 23 October 2015 Slide set no. 2 Stephen Halloran 1 England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme FIT Pilot Prof Stephen P. Halloran Acknowledgements Prof Sue Moss Chris Mathews BCSP Southern Hub BCSP Midlands & NW Hubs Presentation messages - 15 min 1. Model for future pilots ‘within programme’ easy to replicate with minimise disruption 2. Monitoring analytical performance across sites 4 instruments & 2 sites 1. FIT system designed to maximise uptake Emphasis on ‘hard to reach’ groups 2. Exploiting Quantitative FIT Implications & opportunities 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 90010001100 OC Sensor Diana analyser results ngHb/mL Mean OC Sensor Diana result ngHb/mL April 2014 FIT Pilot Bowel Cancer Screening in England July 2006 2010 2010 2013 17 million gFOBt analysed > 300,000 positives > 306,000 colonoscopies Found 23,000 cancers 73,000 advanced adenomas 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Gender Area deprivation % Uptake 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% IT Info. Finance Training Minimal impact upon BCSP Cut-off 20ug /g (?positivity >6.5%) FIT in place of guaiac FOBT 1 in 28 invitations will be FIT 40,000 FIT tests (single kit) Effectively randomised 2014 FIT Pilot FIT FIT FIT and NHS Bowel Cancer Screening in England

Transcript of England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme FIT Pilot · Diana1 Blackbird M&NWH Result Diana 2 Robin...

Page 1: England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme FIT Pilot · Diana1 Blackbird M&NWH Result Diana 2 Robin M&NWH result y=x Line of best fit y=0.997x + 0.1122 FIT Pilot QA data – 4 Analysers

WEO CRCSC EWG ‘FIT for Screening’ Barcelona, 23 October 2015

Slide set no. 2 Stephen Halloran

1

England Bowel Cancer Screening

Programme FIT Pilot

Prof Stephen P. Halloran

Acknowledgements • Prof Sue Moss • Chris Mathews • BCSP Southern Hub • BCSP Midlands & NW Hubs

Presentation messages - 15 min

1. Model for future pilots ‘within programme’ – easy to replicate with minimise disruption

2. Monitoring analytical performance across sites 4 instruments & 2 sites

1. FIT system designed to maximise uptake – Emphasis on ‘hard to reach’ groups

2. Exploiting Quantitative FIT – Implications & opportunities

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 90010001100

OC

Se

nso

r Dia

na

anal

yse

r re

sult

s n

gHb

/mL

Mean OC Sensor Diana result ngHb/mL

April 2014 FIT Pilot

Bowel Cancer Screening in England

July 2006

2010

2010

2010

2013

17 million gFOBt analysed > 300,000 positives

> 306,000 colonoscopies Found

23,000 cancers 73,000 advanced adenomas

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Gender Area deprivation%

Up

take

50%55%60%65%70%

IT

Info.

Finan

ce Tr

ain

ing

– Minimal impact upon BCSP

– Cut-off 20ug /g (?positivity >6.5%)

– FIT in place of guaiac FOBT

– 1 in 28 invitations will be FIT

– 40,000 FIT tests (single kit)

– Effectively randomised

2014 FIT Pilot FIT

FIT

FIT and NHS Bowel Cancer Screening

in England

Page 2: England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme FIT Pilot · Diana1 Blackbird M&NWH Result Diana 2 Robin M&NWH result y=x Line of best fit y=0.997x + 0.1122 FIT Pilot QA data – 4 Analysers

WEO CRCSC EWG ‘FIT for Screening’ Barcelona, 23 October 2015

Slide set no. 2 Stephen Halloran

2

Both Hubs • Population 27.8 m • gFOBT Kits = 1,126,087 • FIT Kits = 40,930

Southern Hub Less Deprivation • Population 14.7 m • gFOBT Kits = 588,317 • FIT Kits = 21,641

Midlands & North West Hub More Deprivation • Population 13.1 m • gFOBT Kits = 537,770

• FIT Kits = 19,289

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100

OC

Sen

sor

Dia

na

anal

yser

res

ult

s n

gHb

/mL

Mean OC Sensor Diana result ngHb/mL

Diana 1 Wren SH result

Diana 2 Lark SH result

Diana1 Blackbird M&NWH Result

Diana 2 Robin M&NWH result

y=x

Line of best fit y=0.997x + 0.1122

FIT Pilot QA data – 4 Analysers on 2 sites 5 batches of 30 samples in both Hubs

April – October 2014

150 - Samples 5 - Batches 4 - Analysers 2 - Sites 7 - Months

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73

% R

etu

rne

d w

ith

+ve

re

sult

s

Period Sent to result (days)

Period in days – kit sent to final result (subjects with +ve result)

BCS01

BCS01

BCS02

BCS02

All Episodes – Uptake

50% 55% 60% 65% 70%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

FIT

gFOBt

50% 55% 60% 65% 70%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

FIT

gFOBt

7.0%

7.1% Increase

7.3%

290,000 More screened each year

0 – 5 previous screening invitations

Incident Episode – Uptake

82% 84% 86% 88% 90% 92%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

FIT

gFOBt

82% 84% 86% 88% 90% 92%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

FIT

gFOBt

4.2% Increase

4.1%

4.3%

1 – 5 previous participation episodes

First Episode – Uptake

40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

FIT

gFOBt

40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

FIT

gFOBt

10.9% Increase

9.7%

12.2%

1st invitation (60 year olds)

Page 3: England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme FIT Pilot · Diana1 Blackbird M&NWH Result Diana 2 Robin M&NWH result y=x Line of best fit y=0.997x + 0.1122 FIT Pilot QA data – 4 Analysers

WEO CRCSC EWG ‘FIT for Screening’ Barcelona, 23 October 2015

Slide set no. 2 Stephen Halloran

3

Prevalent Episode - Uptake

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

FIT

gFOBt

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

FIT

gFOBt

11.6% Increase

11.8%

11.3%

No previous response to 1 – 5 invitations

Age & Sex – Uptake

45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75%

All Age

60-64

65-69

70-74

All Age

60-64

65-69

70-74

Mal

eFe

mal

e

FIT

gFOBt

45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75%

All Age

60-64

65-69

70-74

All Age

60-64

65-69

70-74

Mal

eFe

mal

e

FIT

gFOBt

10.6%

Deprivation – Uptake

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

gFOBt

FIT

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

gFOBt

FIT

Deprivation – Uptake

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

gFOBt

FIT

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

Deprivation – Uptake

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

gFOBt

FIT

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

6.7% 6.0%

6.8%

8.0%

7.9%

% Positivity & Deprivation

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

IMD 1 (Posh) IMD 2 IMD 3 IMD 4 IMD 5 (Poor)

FIT Cut-off - 20 ug Hb/g Faeces

Page 4: England Bowel Cancer Screening Programme FIT Pilot · Diana1 Blackbird M&NWH Result Diana 2 Robin M&NWH result y=x Line of best fit y=0.997x + 0.1122 FIT Pilot QA data – 4 Analysers

WEO CRCSC EWG ‘FIT for Screening’ Barcelona, 23 October 2015

Slide set no. 2 Stephen Halloran

4

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0%

Mid & NW

Southern

Both

% Positivity & Screening Episode

First Screening Episode

Incident Episode

Prevalent Episode

FIT Cut-off - 20 ug Hb/g Faeces

Outcome at Colonoscopy

10.1%

8.3%

19.5%

17.5%

30.6%

14.0%

4.0%

FIT 20

FIT 40

FIT 100

FIT 150

FIT 180

gFOBT Cancer

High-risk Adenoma

Low-risk Adenoma

Abnormal

Normal

Intermediate-risk Adenoma ug Hb/g Faeces

Sex & FIT threshold – % Positivity

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

9.0%

10.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220

% F

IT P

osi

tivi

ty

% M

isse

d n

eo

pla

sms

rela

tive

to

th

ose

de

tect

ed

usi

ng

20

ug

/g c

ut-

off

FIT (OC-Sensor) Cut-off (ug/g)

Personal Characteristics Influence Screening Outcomes

More positive tests in…

• Male

• Elderly

• Deprived

• Screening non-compliant

FIT cut-off at a high threshold disproportionally disadvantages… • Female

• Elderly

• Screening non-compliant

FIT – An opportunity to personalise population-based screening?

Better Screening by….

…focusing on populations… and on individuals?

‘Personalising population-based screening’ – PPS

1. Intelligent use of FIT data

2. FIT & personal risk – Multivariate risk scores

3. …ready to join the ‘Personalised Medicine’ band wagon?