Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Epidemiological aspects of cancer screening in Germany

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Since 1971, a statutory early detection programme has operated in Germany which comprises health-insurance-paid annual examinations of the breast, cervix, prostate, rectum, and the skin. Since the programme is conceptualised as opportunistic screening, the attendance rates have been low and only reached about 50% among females and 13% among males by the end of the 1990s. Based on these figures and present knowledge on the efficacy of screening modalities, we assessed past benefits and the future potential of cancer screening in Germany.

Methods

We used published data on the efficacy of screening procedures and German attendance rates, and internationally available data on incidence and mortality in Germany and, for cervical cancer, in other countries. Incidence and mortality rates have been standardised to the world standard, and screening benefit has been given as the population preventable fraction given in percentage.

Results

The past benefits of the statutory early detection programme ranged around 2.0–6.5%. Since the upper limit was due to generous assumptions regarding efficacy or inclusion of treatment effects, the true value might be closer to the estimates of the effect of cervical cancer screening (2.0–4.7%). The achievable future benefit of exploiting the theoretical potential of more exhaustive screening could provide a further mortality reduction of about 3.4% (50% compliance) or 4.7% (70% compliance).

Conclusions

Screening partially requires an expensive medical infrastructure and is not without risks for the participants. The overall benefit is critically dependent upon the quality of the programme and its in-time control. Any benefit may be annulled by poor quality while costs are overflowing. Well-organised high-quality screening may be a sound basis for cancer control. To preserve or increase the impact of screening and control its expenses: (a) further research efforts are needed towards new or better targeted screening tools or modalities; (b) the efficacy of new modalities has to be evaluated carefully in advance; (c) the programme has to be reconceptualised as organised screening; (d) in-time quality control based on the collection of the basic performance data must be an intrinsic part of the programme.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig 1a,b
Fig 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adami H-O, Day NE, Trichopoulos D, Willett WC (2001) Primary and secondary prevention in the reduction of cancer morbidity and mortality. Eur J Cancer 37:S118–S127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous (1985) Cancer of the cervix: death by incompetence. Lancet ii:363–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Auvinen A, Rietbergen J, Gohagen J, Denis L, Schröder F (1996) Prospective evaluation plan for randomized trials of prostate cancer screening. J Med Screening 3:97–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Auvinen A, Alexander FE, de Koning HJ, Miller AB (2002) Should we start population screening for prostate cancer? Randomised trials are still needed. Int J Cancer 97:377–378

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ballard-Barbash R, Klabunde C, Paci E, Broeders M, Coleman EA, Fracheboud J, Bouchard F, Rennert G, Shapiro S (1999) Breast cancer screening in 21 countries: delivery of services, notification of results and outcomes ascertainment. Eur J Cancer 8:417–426

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bange J, Prechtl D, Cheburkin Y, Specht K, Harbeck N, Schmitt M, Knyazeva T, Müller S, Gärtner S, Sures I, Wang H, Imyanitov E, Häring H-U, Knayzev P, Iacobelli S, Höfler H, Ullrich A (2002) Cancer progression and tumor cell motility are associated with the FGFR4 Arg388 Allele. Cancer Res 62:840–847

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Becker N (2001) Epidemiologic aspects of cancer prevention in Germany. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 127:9–19

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Becker N (2002) Screening from the epidemiological point of view. Der Radiologe 42:592–600 (in German)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Becker N, Wahrendorf J (1997) Atlas of cancer mortality in the Federal Republic of Germany (1981–1990), 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo

  • Begg CB, Huang Y, Berwick M (1996) Separate estimation of primary and secondary cancer prevention impact: analysis of a case-control study of skin self-examination and melanoma. J Am Assoc 91:1381–1387

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentvelsen FM, Schröder FH (1993) Modalities available for screening for prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer 29A:804–811

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berwick M, Beg CB, Fine JA, Roush GC, Barnhill RL (1996) Screening for cutaneous melanoma by skin self-examination. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:17–23

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blanks RG, Moss SM, McGahan CE, Quinn MJ, Babb PJ (2000) Effect of NHS breast screening programme on mortality from breast cancer in England and Wales, 1990–8: comparison of observed with predicted mortality. BMJ 321:665–669

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bollmann R (2001) Diagnostik der CIN und des invasiven Zervixkarzinoms. Zentralbl Gynäkol 123:206–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Bundesausschuß der Ärzte und Krankenkassen (1996) Richtlinien des Bundesausschusses der Ärzte und Krankenkassen über die Früherkennung von Krebserkrankungen (Krebsfrüherkennungs-Richtlinien). In: Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung (Hrsg) Verträge der Kassenärztlichen Bundesvereinigung mit Sozialversicherungs- und anderen Kostenträgern sowie Richtlinien des Bundesausschusses der Ärzte und Krankenkassen Dienstauflage der Kassenärztlichen Bundesvereinigung. Deutscher Ärzte, Köln, Bd 1

  • Chamberlain J, Day NE, Hakama M, Miller AB, Prorok PC (1986) UICC workshop of the project on evaluation of screening programmes for gastrointestinal cancer. Int J Cancer 37:329–334

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain J, Miller AB (eds) (1988) Screening for gastro-intestinal cancer. Hans Huber, Toronto

  • Christiansen CL, Wang F, Barton MB, Kreuter W, Elmore JG, Gelfand AE, Fletcher SW (2000) Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammogramms. JNCI 92:1657–1666

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman D, Day N, Douglas G, Farmery E, Lynge E, Philip J, Segnan N (1993) European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening Europe Against Cancer Programme. Eur J Cancer 29A [Suppl 4]:S1–S38

  • Cuzick J (1999) Screening for cancer: future potential. Eur J Cancer 35:1925–1932

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Day NE, Baines CJ, Chamberlain J, Hakama M, Miller AB, Prorok P (1986) UICC project on screening for cancer: report of the workshop on screening for breast cancer. Int J Cancer 38:303–308

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Day NE, Miller AB (eds) (1988) Screening for breast cancer. Hans Huber, Toronto

  • Dean PB, Pamilo M for Mammography Working Group, Radiological Society of Finland (1999) Screening mammography in Finland–15 million examinations with 97 percent specificity. Acta Oncologica [Suppl 13]:47–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Devesa SS, Silverman DT, Young JL, Pollack ES, Brown CC, Horm JW, Percy CL, Myers MH, McKay FW, Fraumeni JF Jr (1987) Cancer incidence and mortality trends among whites in the United States, 1947–84. JNCI 79:701–770

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Doll R, Payne P, Waterhouse J (1966) Cancer incidence in five continents: a technical report. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, International Union Against Cancer

    Google Scholar 

  • Doll R, Muir C, Waterhouse J (1970) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol II. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, International Union Against Cancer

  • Elwood JM (1996) Skin self-examination and melanoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:3–5

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Esserman L, Cowley H, Eberle C, Kirkpatrick A, Chang S, Berbaum K, Gale A (2002) Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:369–375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faul P (1982) Experience with the German annual preventive checkup examination. In: Jacobi GH, Hohenfellner R (eds) Prostate cancer international perspectives in urology, vol 3. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore London

  • Flatten G (1988) Prävention–Eine bewährte Strategie ärztlichen Handelns Zentralinstitut für die kassenärztliche Versorgung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Deutscher Ärzte, Köln

  • Friedman GD, Hiatt RA, Quesenberry CP, Selby JV (1991) Case-control study of screening for prostatic cancer by digital rectal examinations. Lancet 337:1526–1529

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frischbier H-J Hoeffken W, Robra B-P (eds) (1994) Mammographie in der Krebsfrüherkennung Qualitätssicherung und Akzeptanz Ergebnisse der Deutschen Mammographie-Studie. Enke, Stuttgart

  • Greenland P, Sondik EJ (eds) (1986) NCI Monographs. Cancer control objectives for the nation: 1985–2000. Public Health Service, National Cancer Institute 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakama M, Chamberlain J, Day NE, Miller AB, Prorok PC (1985) Evaluation of screening programmes for gynaecological cancer. Br J Cancer 52:669–673

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hakama M, Miller AB, Day NE (eds) (1986) Screening for cancer of the uterine cervix. IARC Scientific Publications No 76. IARC, Lyon

  • Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MHE, Moss SM, Amar SS, Balfour TW, James PD, Mangham CM (1996) Randomised controlled trial of fecal occult blood: screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 348:1472–1447

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herrinton LJ, Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP, Weiss NS (1995) Case-control study of digital-rectal screening in relation to mortality from cancer of the distal rectum. Am J Epidemiol 142:961–964

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herwig E (1975) Krankheitsfrüherkennung–Krebs–Frauen und Männer Aufbereitung und Interpretation der Untersuchungsergebnisse aus den gesetzlichen Früherkennungsmaßnahmen 1972 Zentralinstitut für die kassenärztliche Versorgung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Deutscher Ärzte, Köln

  • IARC (2002) Breast cancer screening. IARC Handbooks of cancer prevention, Volume 7. International Agency for Research on Cancer World Health Organization. IARC, Lyon

  • Junkermann H, Becker N, Peitgen H-O (2001) Konzept und Durchführung der Modellprojekte für Mammographiescreening in Deutschland. Radiologe 41:328–336

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al (1999) Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 354:99–104

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kakinuma R, Ohmatsu H, Kaneko M, et al (1999) Detection failures in spiral CT screening for lung cancer: analysis of CT findings. Radiology 212:61–66

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaneko M, Eguchi K, Ohmatsu H, et al (1996) Peripheral lung cancer: screening and detection with low-dose spiral CT versis radiography. Radiology 201:798–802

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kim H-J, Fay MP, Feuer EJ, Midthune DN (2000) Permutation tests for joinpoint regression with applications to cancer rates. Stat Med 19:335–351

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuroishi T, Hirose K, Suzuki T, Tominaga S (2000) Effectiveness of mass screening for breast cancer in Japan. Breast Cancer 7:1–8

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kreienberg R (2001) Früherkennung von Karzinomen der Zervix, Vulva, Vagina. Der Gynäkologe 11:1079–1085

  • Koss LG (1989) The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection: a triumph and a tragedy. JAMA 261:737–743

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jörgensen OD, Sondergaard O (1996) Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal occult-blood test. Lancet 348:14467–14471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuska B (2002) Mass breast cancer screening in the Netherlands: 10 years and counting. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:1764–1766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi F, Lucchini F, Negri E, Franceschi S, la Vacchia C (2000) Cervical cancer mortality in young women in Europe: patterns and trends. Eur J Cancer 36:2266–2271

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, Snover DC, Bradley GM, Schuman LM, Ederer F (1993) Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med 328:1365–1371

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mandel JS, Church TR, Ederer F, Bond JH (1999) Colorectal cancer mortality: effectiveness of biennial screening for fecal occult blood. J Natl Cancer Inst 91:434–437

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller AB (1978) Screening iN CAncer: a report of a UICC international workshop. UICC Technical Report Series–vol 40, Toronto, Canada, April 24–27. UICC, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller AB (ed) (1985) Screening for cancer. Academic, Toronto Montreal

  • Miller AB (2002) The (in)efficiency of cervical screening in Europe. Eur J Cancer 38:321–326

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller AB, Chamberlain J, Day NE, Hakama M, Prorok PC (1990) Report on a workshop of the UICC project on evaluation of screening for cancer. Int J Cancer 46:761–769

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller AB, Chamberlain J, Day NE, Hakama M, Prorok PC (1991) Cancer screening. UICC, Cambridge New York

  • Möhner M, Stabenow R, Eisinger B (1994) Atlas of cancer incidence in the GDR 1961–1989 (German/English). Ullstein Mosby, Berlin Wiesbaden

  • Morrison AS (1992) Screening in chronic disease monographs in epidemiology and biostatistics, vol 19. Oxford University, New York Oxford

  • Muir C, Waterhouse J, Mack T, Powell J, Whelan S (1987) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol V. IARC Scientific Publications No 88. IARC, Lyon

  • Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, Bastian LA, Hasselblad V, Hickey JD, Matchar DB (2000) Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 132:810–819

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nieminen P, Kallio M, Anttila A, Hakama M (1999) Organised vs spontaneous PAP-smear screening for cervical cancer: a case-control study. Int J Cancer 83:55–58

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson S, Andersson I, Karlberg I, Bjurstam N, Frodis E, Hakansson S (2000) Implementation of service screening with mammography in Sweden: from pilot study to nationwide programme. J Med Screening 7:14–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parkin DM, Muir CS, Whelan SL, Gao YT, Ferlay J, Powell J (1992) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol VI. IARC Scientific Publications No 120. IARC, Lyon

  • Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J, Raymond L, Young J (1997) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol VII. IARC Scientific Publications No 143. IARC, Lyon

  • Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J, Teppo L, Thomas DB (2002) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol VII. IARC Scientific Publications No 155. IARC, Lyon

  • Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S (eds) (2001) European guidelines for quality assurance in mammography screening, 3rd edn. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg

  • Pontén J, Adami H-O, Bergström R, Dillner J, Friberg L-G, Gustafsson L, Miller AB, Parkine M, Sparén P, Trichopoulos D (1995) Strategies for global control of cervical cancer. Int J Cancer 60:1–26

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prorok PC, Chamberlain J, Day NE, Hakama M, Miller AB (1984) UICC Workshop on the evaluation of screening programmes for cancer. Int J Cancer 34:1–4

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rittgen W, Becker N (2001) Statistical issues in quality control of organized mammography screening. J Epidemiol Biostatistic 6:425–432

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Robra B-P, Schwartz FW (1986) Experiences with a nationwide screening program for colorectal cancer in the Federal Republic of Germany. In: Hardcastle JD (ed) (1986) Haemoccult screening for the early detection of colorectal cancer. Schattauer, Stuttgart New York

  • Robra B-P, Dierks M-L (1990) Entwicklung der Teilnahme an den Krebsfrüherkennungsuntersuchungen der Frau. Gynäkologe 23:308–311

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothman KJ, Greenland S (1998) Modern epidemiology. Lippincott–Raven, Philadelphia, pp 55 and pp 295

  • Sano T, Oyama T, Kashiwabara K, Fukuda T, Nakajima T (1998a) Immunohistochemical overexpression of p16 protein associated with intact retinoblastoma protein expression in cervical cancer and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Pathol Int 48:580–585

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sano T, Oyama T, Kashiwabara K, Fukuda T, Nakajima T (1998b) Expression status of p16 protein is associated with human papillomavirus oncogenic potential in cervical and genital lesions. Am J Path 153:1741–1748

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schenck U, von Karsa L (2000) Cervical cancer screening in Germany. Eur J Cancer 36:2221–2226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider A, Zahm DM, Kirchmayr R, Schneider VL (1996) Screening for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3: validity of cytologic study, cervicography, and human papillomavirus detection. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174:1534–1541

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider A, Hoyer H, Lotz B, Leistritza S, Kühne-Heid R, Nindl I, Müller B, Haerting J, Dürst M (2000) Screening for high-grade cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia and cancer by testing for high-risk HPV, routine cytology or colposcopy. Int J Cancer (Pred Oncol) 89:529–534

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz K-D, Albert U-S, Kreienberg R, Fischer F (2001) Brustkrebs-Früherkennung in Deutschland. Manual I und II. Konzertierte Aktion Brustkrebs-Früherkennung in Deutschland, Marburg

  • Shapiro S, Coleman EA, Broeders M, Codd M, de Koning H, Fracheboud J, Moss S, Paci E, Stachenko S, Ballard-Barbash R (1998) Breast cancer screening programmes in 22 countries: current policies, administration, and guidelines. Int J Epidemiol 27:735–742

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sone S, Takashima S, Li F, et al (1998) Mass screening for lung cancer with mobile spiral computed tomography scanner. Lancet 351:1242–1245

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stockton D, Davies T, Day N, McCann J (1997) Retrospective study of reasons for improved survival in patients with breast cancer in East Anglia: earlier diagnosis or better treatment? BMJ 314:472–475

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ballegooijen M, van den Akker-van Marle E, Patnick J, Lynge E, Arbyn M, Anttila A, Ronco G, Dik J, Habbema F (2000) Overview of important cervical cancer screening process values in European Union (EU) countries, and tentative predictions of the corresponding effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Eur J Cancer 36:2177–2188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Klaveren RJ, Habbema JDF, Pedersen JH, de Koning HJ, Oudkerk M, Hoogsteden HC (2001) Lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography. Eur Resp J 18:857–866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang H, Karesen R, Hervik A, Thoresen SO (2001) Mammography screening in Norway: results from the first screening round in four counties and cost-effectiveness of a modeled nationwide screening. CCC 12:39–45

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waterhouse J, Muir C, Correa P, Powell J (1976) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol III. IARC Scientific Publications No 15. IARC, Lyon

  • Waterhouse J, Muir C, Shanmugaratnam K, Powell J in collaboration with Peacham D, Whelan S (1982) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol III. IARC Scientific Publications No 42. IARC, Lyon

  • Willett WC, Colditz GA, Mueller NE (1996) Strategies for minimizing cancer risk. Sci Am 58–63

  • Wilson JMG, Jungner G (1968) Principles and practice of screening for disease. Public Health Papers 34. WHO, Geneva

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank Roland Stabenow, Gemeinsames Krebsregister, for making East German cancer incidence data available, Anthony B. Miller for many helpful discussions and support in writing the article, Evi Deeg for preparing the graphics, and Heike Weis for text editing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Abteilung Klinische Epidemiologie, Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Nikolaus Becker

Authors
  1. Nikolaus Becker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikolaus Becker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Becker, N. Epidemiological aspects of cancer screening in Germany. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 129, 691–702 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-003-0494-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-003-0494-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation