Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Ulusal Kanser Tarama Programı Sonuçları; Bir İl Örneği

Year 2021, Volume: 3 Issue: 2, 69 - 73, 01.07.2021
https://doi.org/10.38175/phnx.922780

Abstract

Amaç: Çalışmamızda ülkemizde yürütülmekte olan ulusal kanser tarama programı sonuçlarının ilimiz özelinde değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: İlimizde, Kanser Erken Teşhis Tarama ve Eğitim Merkezleri (KETEM) tarafından 01.09.2018-01.09.2019 tarihleri arasında kanser taraması yapılan bireylerin bilgileri kanser kayıtlarından retrospektif olarak taranmıştır. Kolorektal kanser taraması için gaitada gizli kan testi sonuçları, meme kanseri için mamografi sonuçları, serviks kanseri için ise HPV DNA ve Pap-Smear testi sonuçları değerlendirilmiştir.
Bulgular: Taranan bir yıllık süre içerisinde kolorektal kanser taraması için hedef nüfusun %17,1’ine ulaşıldığı tespit edildi. 777 test sonucunun pozitif, 35713 test sonucunun negatif olduğu belirlendi. Meme kanseri tarama programı kapsamında hedef nüfusun %12,8’ine ulaşıldığı belirlendi. Mamografi sonucu BIRADS 0 olanların oranının %9,7, BIRADS 1-2 olanların oranının %87,5, BIRADS 4-5 olanların oranının %0,9 olduğu tespit edildi. Serviks kanseri tarama programı kapsamında ise hedef nüfusun %33,5’ine ulaşıldığı tespit edildi. Test sonucu pozitif olanların oranının %4,0, negatif olanların oranın %95,6 olduğu saptandı.
Sonuç: Sonuç olarak ilimizde yürütülmekte olan kanser taramalarının kapsayıcılık oranı ülke ortalamalarıyla benzerdir. Bununla birlikte, etkin bir tarama için popülasyonun %70’ine ulaşmak gerekmektedir. Bu hedef için KETEM’lerle birlikte aile hekimlerinin, diğer ilgili uzman ve pratisyen hekimlerin gayretine ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır.

References

  • Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of ıncidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394-424.
  • Keskinkılıç B, Gültekin M, Karaca AS, Öztürk C, Boztaş G, Karaca M, et al. [Turkey Cancer Control Program]. Ankara: T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu; 2016. p. 18-49.
  • Kokanalı D, Üstün YE. [Reproductive health in older women]. The Journal of Gynecology-Obstetrics and Neonatology. 2019;16(2):97-100.
  • American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2012. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2012.
  • American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2006. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2006.
  • Kitchener HC, Castle PE, Cox JT. 7th: Achievements and limitations of cervical cytology screening. Vaccine. 2006;24(3):63-70.
  • Atalay BI, Emiral GÖ, Işıklı B, Alataş İÖ, Metintaş S, Önsüz MF. [Comparing the validity of occult blood tests in two different stools]. Turkish World Implementation and Research Center Public Health Journal. 2018;3(2):15-21.
  • Balleyguier C, Ayadi S, Van NK, Vanel D, Dromain C, Sigal R. BIRADS™ classification in mammography. European journal of radiology. 2007;61(2):192-194.
  • Güner H, editör. [Cancer screening]. Jinekolojik Onkoloji. 4. Baskı. Ankara: Rota Tıp Yayıncılık; 2010.
  • Lieberman DA. Screening for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1179-87.
  • Özmen V, Anderson BO. The challenge of breast cancer in low and middle in come countries implementing the breast health global initiative guidelines. US Oncology. 2008;4(1):76-79.
  • Akova İ, Hasdemir Ö, Türkoğu H. [Evaluation of screening for breast cancer in women of age 40-69 in a province]. Bozok Med J. 2019;9(1):89-92.
  • Kayhan A, Gürdal SÖ, Özaydın N, Öztürk E, Cabıoğlu N, Arıbal E, et al. [First term results of long term community based Bahçeşehir breast cancer screening project]. The Journal of Breast Health. 2012;8(4):180-184.
  • Ergünay K, Mısırlıoğlu M, Fırat P, Tuncer ZS, Tuncer S, Ustaçelebi Ş. [Investigation of human papilloma virus DNA in cytologically detected cervix samples and typing the virüs]. Mikrobiyol Bul. 2007;41:219-226.
  • Altun E, Usta A, Bülbül ÇB, Turan G. [Evaluation of correlation between smear and colposcopic biopsy results of HPV-DNA subtypes]. Van Med J. 2018;(25):472-76.
  • Bell MC, Schmidt-Grimminger D, Patrick S, Ryschon T, Linz L, Chauhan SC. There is a high prevalence of human papillomavirus infection in American Indian women of the Northern Plains. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107(2):236-241.
  • Deshou H, Changhua W, Qinyan L, Wei L, Wen F. Clinical utility of Liqui-PREP™ cytology system for primary cervical cancer screening in a large urban hospital setting in China. J Cytol. 2009;26:20-5.
  • Korkmaz F, Gencer M. [Outpatient screening pap smear results]. Anatol J Clin Investig. 2014;8(1):17-20.

National Cancer Screening Program Results; A City Example

Year 2021, Volume: 3 Issue: 2, 69 - 73, 01.07.2021
https://doi.org/10.38175/phnx.922780

Abstract

Objective: In our study, it was aimed to evaluate the results of the national cancer screening program carried out in our country in our province.
Material and Method: The information of individuals who were screened for cancer between 01.09.2018-01.09.2019 by Cancer Early Diagnosis Screening and Training Centers (CEDSTC) in our city was retrospectively scanned from cancer records. Fecal occult blood test results for colorectal cancer screening, mammography results for breast cancer, HPV DNA and Pap-Smear test results for cervical cancer were evaluated.
Results: It was determined that 17.1% of the target population was reached for colorectal cancer screening. It was determined that 777 test results were positive and 35713 test results were negative. It was determined that 12.8% of the target population was reached within the scope of breast cancer screening program. As a result of mammography, the rate of those with BIRADS 0 was 9.7%, the ratio of those with BIRADS 1-2 was 87.5%, and the rate of those with BIRADS 4-5 was 0.9%. Within the scope of cervical cancer screening program, it was determined that 33.5% of the target population was reached. As a result of the test, it was determined that the rate of positive ones was 4.0% and the rate of negative ones was 95.6%.
Conclusion: It is estimated that country averages have been reached in terms of inclusiveness in the screenings conducted in our city. However, the efforts of family physicians, other relevant specialists and general practitioners are needed with KETEMs in order to reach 70% of the population required for an effective screening.

References

  • Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of ıncidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394-424.
  • Keskinkılıç B, Gültekin M, Karaca AS, Öztürk C, Boztaş G, Karaca M, et al. [Turkey Cancer Control Program]. Ankara: T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu; 2016. p. 18-49.
  • Kokanalı D, Üstün YE. [Reproductive health in older women]. The Journal of Gynecology-Obstetrics and Neonatology. 2019;16(2):97-100.
  • American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2012. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2012.
  • American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2006. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2006.
  • Kitchener HC, Castle PE, Cox JT. 7th: Achievements and limitations of cervical cytology screening. Vaccine. 2006;24(3):63-70.
  • Atalay BI, Emiral GÖ, Işıklı B, Alataş İÖ, Metintaş S, Önsüz MF. [Comparing the validity of occult blood tests in two different stools]. Turkish World Implementation and Research Center Public Health Journal. 2018;3(2):15-21.
  • Balleyguier C, Ayadi S, Van NK, Vanel D, Dromain C, Sigal R. BIRADS™ classification in mammography. European journal of radiology. 2007;61(2):192-194.
  • Güner H, editör. [Cancer screening]. Jinekolojik Onkoloji. 4. Baskı. Ankara: Rota Tıp Yayıncılık; 2010.
  • Lieberman DA. Screening for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1179-87.
  • Özmen V, Anderson BO. The challenge of breast cancer in low and middle in come countries implementing the breast health global initiative guidelines. US Oncology. 2008;4(1):76-79.
  • Akova İ, Hasdemir Ö, Türkoğu H. [Evaluation of screening for breast cancer in women of age 40-69 in a province]. Bozok Med J. 2019;9(1):89-92.
  • Kayhan A, Gürdal SÖ, Özaydın N, Öztürk E, Cabıoğlu N, Arıbal E, et al. [First term results of long term community based Bahçeşehir breast cancer screening project]. The Journal of Breast Health. 2012;8(4):180-184.
  • Ergünay K, Mısırlıoğlu M, Fırat P, Tuncer ZS, Tuncer S, Ustaçelebi Ş. [Investigation of human papilloma virus DNA in cytologically detected cervix samples and typing the virüs]. Mikrobiyol Bul. 2007;41:219-226.
  • Altun E, Usta A, Bülbül ÇB, Turan G. [Evaluation of correlation between smear and colposcopic biopsy results of HPV-DNA subtypes]. Van Med J. 2018;(25):472-76.
  • Bell MC, Schmidt-Grimminger D, Patrick S, Ryschon T, Linz L, Chauhan SC. There is a high prevalence of human papillomavirus infection in American Indian women of the Northern Plains. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107(2):236-241.
  • Deshou H, Changhua W, Qinyan L, Wei L, Wen F. Clinical utility of Liqui-PREP™ cytology system for primary cervical cancer screening in a large urban hospital setting in China. J Cytol. 2009;26:20-5.
  • Korkmaz F, Gencer M. [Outpatient screening pap smear results]. Anatol J Clin Investig. 2014;8(1):17-20.
There are 18 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Clinical Sciences
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

İsmail Hakkı Tunçez 0000-0003-4753-8089

Nergis Aksoy 0000-0002-0408-5190

Mehmet Koç 0000-0003-1504-2900

Publication Date July 1, 2021
Submission Date April 21, 2021
Acceptance Date May 11, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021 Volume: 3 Issue: 2

Cite

Vancouver Tunçez İH, Aksoy N, Koç M. Ulusal Kanser Tarama Programı Sonuçları; Bir İl Örneği. Phnx Med J. 2021;3(2):69-73.

Creative Commons License
Phoenix Medical Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


600x200

Phoenix Medical Journal has signed the Budapest Open Access Declaration.