Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2025

Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
Test performance metrics for breast, cervical, colon, and lung cancer screening: a systematic review
Kevin Selby1, Mai Sedki2, Emma Levine3
1Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Background:
Multiple quality metrics have been recommended to ensure consistent, high-quality execution of screening tests for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. However, minimal data exist evaluating the evidence base supporting these recommendations and the consistency of definitions and concepts included within and between cancer types.
Methods:
We performed a systematic review for each cancer type using MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from 2010 to April 2020 to identify guidelines from screening programs or professional organizations containing quality metrics for tests used in breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening. We abstracted metrics' definitions, target performance levels, and related supporting evidence for test completeness, adequacy (sufficient visualization or collection), accuracy, and safety.
Results:
We identified 11 relevant guidelines with 20 suggested quality metrics for breast cancer, 5 guidelines with 9 metrics for cervical cancer, 13 guidelines with 18 metrics for colorectal cancer (CRC), and 3 guidelines with 7 metrics for lung cancer. These included 54 metrics related to adequacy (n = 6), test completeness (n = 3), accuracy (n = 33), and safety (n = 12). Target performance levels were defined for 30 metrics (56%). Ten (19%) were supported by evidence, all from breast and CRC, with no evidence cited to support metrics from cervical and lung cancer screening.
Conclusions:
Considerably more guideline-recommended test performance metrics exist for breast and CRC screening than cervical or lung cancer. The domains covered are inconsistent among cancers, and few targets are supported by evidence. Clearer evidence-based domains and targets are needed for test performance metrics.
Registration:
PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020179139.
More Related Videos
07:13Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model
Published on: April 18, 2025
08:14MicroRNA Based Liquid Biopsy: The Experience of the Plasma miRNA Signature Classifier MSC for Lung Cancer Screening
Published on: October 26, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Serum Laboratory Studies, Stool Test, Breath Test
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...
Cancer Survival Analysis
Pulmonary Function Tests
Pulmonary Function Tests are crucial diagnostic tools for assessing respiratory function, particularly in patients with chronic respiratory disorders. They comprehensively evaluate lung volumes, ventilatory function, breathing mechanics, diffusion, and gas exchange. These tests help diagnose pulmonary diseases and play a significant role in monitoring disease progression, evaluating disability, and assessing response to therapy.
PFTs involve using a spirometer, a...