Singal Amit G, Daher Darine, Narasimman Manasa, Yekkaluri Sruthi, Liu Yan, Cerda Vanessa, Banala Chaitra, Khan Aisha, Lee MinJae, Seif El Dahan Karim, Murphy Caitlin C, Kramer Jennifer R, Hernaez Ruben
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, TX, USA.
Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2025 Feb 1;117(2):262-269. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djae228.
The value of hepatocellular carcinoma screening is defined by the balance of benefits from early tumor detection vs harms because of false-positive results. We evaluated the value of a mailed outreach strategy for hepatocellular carcinoma screening in patients with cirrhosis.
We conducted a multicenter pragmatic randomized clinical trial comparing mailed outreach for hepatocellular carcinoma screening (n = 1436) and usual care with visit-based screening (n = 1436) among patients with cirrhosis at 3 health systems from March 2018 to September 2021. Outcomes of interest were early stage hepatocellular carcinoma detection (ie, screening benefit) and diagnostic evaluation for false-positive or indeterminate results (ie, screening harm). Screening harm was categorized as mild, moderate, and severe based on number and type of diagnostic exams. All patients were included in intention-to-screen analyses.
Of 125 patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (67 outreach and 58 usual care), 71.2% were found at an early stage per the Milan criteria. Early tumor detection did not statistically significantly differ between the outreach and usual care arms (64.2% vs 79.3%; P = .06). The proportion of patients with physical harms also did not differ between the outreach and usual care arms (10.8% vs 10.7%; P = .95) with 5.9% in both arms having mild harms; 4.0% and 3.8%, respectively, with moderate harms; and 0.9% and 1.0%, respectively, with severe harms.
Most patients enrolled in hepatocellular carcinoma screening were detected at an early stage, and a minority experienced physical harms. A mailed outreach strategy did not increase early hepatocellular carcinoma detection or physical harms compared with usual care.
NCT02582918 and NCT03756051.
肝细胞癌筛查的价值取决于早期肿瘤检测的益处与假阳性结果导致的危害之间的平衡。我们评估了邮寄外展策略在肝硬化患者肝细胞癌筛查中的价值。
我们进行了一项多中心实用随机临床试验,比较了2018年3月至2021年9月期间3个医疗系统中肝硬化患者的邮寄外展肝细胞癌筛查(n = 1436)和基于就诊的常规筛查(n = 1436)。感兴趣的结果是早期肝细胞癌检测(即筛查益处)和对假阳性或不确定结果的诊断评估(即筛查危害)。根据诊断检查的数量和类型,将筛查危害分为轻度、中度和重度。所有患者均纳入意向性筛查分析。
在125例诊断为肝细胞癌的患者中(67例接受外展筛查,58例接受常规筛查),根据米兰标准,71.2%的患者在早期被发现。外展筛查组和常规筛查组之间的早期肿瘤检测在统计学上无显著差异(64.2%对79.3%;P = 0.06)。外展筛查组和常规筛查组之间身体受到危害的患者比例也无差异(10.8%对10.7%;P = 0.95),两组中5.9%的患者有轻度危害;分别有4.0%和3.8%的患者有中度危害;分别有0.9%和1.0%的患者有重度危害。
大多数参加肝细胞癌筛查的患者在早期被发现,少数患者受到身体危害。与常规护理相比,邮寄外展策略并未增加早期肝细胞癌检测率或身体危害。
NCT02582918和NCT03756051。