Background: Cancer burden is higher and cancer screening participation is lower among individuals living in more socioeconomically deprived areas of England, contributing to worse health outcomes and shorter life expectancy. Owing to higher multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test sensitivity for poor-prognosis cancers and greater cancer burden in groups experiencing greater deprivation, MCED screening programmes may have greater relative benefits in these groups. We modelled potential differential benefits of MCED screening between deprivation groups in England at different levels of screening participation.
Methods: We applied the interception multi-cancer screening model to cancer incidence and survival data made available by the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service in England to estimate reductions in late-stage diagnoses and cancer mortality from an MCED screening programme by deprivation group across 24 cancer types. We assessed the impact of varying the proportion of people who participated in annual screening in each deprivation group on these estimates.
Results: The modelled benefits of an MCED screening programme were substantial: reductions in late-stage diagnoses were 160 and 274 per 100 000 persons in the least and most deprived groups, respectively. Reductions in cancer mortality were 60 and 99 per 100 000 persons in the least and most deprived groups, respectively. Benefits were greatest in the most deprived group at every participation level and were attenuated with lower screening participation.
Conclusions: For the greatest possible population benefit and to decrease health inequalities, an MCED implementation strategy should focus on enhancing equitable, informed participation, enabling equal participation across all socioeconomic deprivation groups.
Trial registration number: NCT05611632.
Keywords: EPIDEMIOLOGY; HEALTHCARE DISPARITIES; NEOPLASMS; PUBLIC HEALTH; SCREENING.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.