© Hong Kong Academy of Medicine. CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
    EDITORIAL
    Implications of evidence-based understanding of
      benefits and risks for cancer prevention strategy
    Harry HX Wang, PhD1,2; JJ Wang, MD, MPH3,4
    1 School of Public Health, Sun Yat-Sen
      University, PR China
    2 General Practice and Primary Care,
      Institute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom
    3 School of Public Health, Guangzhou
      Medical University, PR China
    4 Guangdong-provincial Primary
      Healthcare Association (GDPHA), PR China
    Corresponding author: Dr Harry HX Wang (haoxiangwang@163.com)
    As the second leading cause of death worldwide,
      cancer has posed enormous burden to patients, their families, and the
      society as a whole. The shift from cancer treatment to prevention, with an
      emphasis on coordinated multisectoral actions, has become a global trend.
    
    The Hong Kong Cancer Strategy 20191 recently released by the Hong Kong SAR Government is
      the first holistic plan to upscale cancer prevention and control in Hong
      Kong. Target outcomes of the seven aspects in the Strategy are expected to
      be achieved by 2025. The key strategies set for cancer prevention include
      reducing risk factors, providing population-based cancer screening based
      on evidence, seeking early detection and diagnosis, and strengthening
      primary healthcare services in Hong Kong. Globally, the UK has long been
      featured by its expanding role of primary care in cancer prevention.2 Meanwhile, primary care is also being promoted
      increasingly in mainland China,3
      where a community-based longitudinal study is in progress. Patients’
      adherence to healthy lifestyles is being followed up within the context of
      family doctor team–led activities to prevent long-term conditions that
      share common risk factors with cancer.
    To date, a substantial body of research evidence in
      primary prevention of cancer has confirmed that modifiable lifestyles such
      as tobacco consumption, alcohol use, poor diet, physical inactivity, and
      overweight and obesity are associated with cancers, such as colorectal,
      lung, breast, prostate, and liver cancer, that are prevalent locally and
      internationally. Infections, exposure to environmental and occupational
      carcinogens, and exposure to radiation are also important in cancer
      development. Public health education and health policies that encourage
      healthy (or discourage unhealthy) behavioural practices can greatly
      benefit the prevention of cancer. Evidence from the UK suggested that
      approximately 4 in 10 cancer cases could be prevented through behavioural
      changes alone.4 5 6 Furthermore,
      a widespread adoption of vaccination administration approach, such as
      universal vaccination against hepatitis B virus that has been part of the
      Hong Kong Childhood Immunisation Programme for 30 years, has shown to be
      safe and most cost-effective in reducing the incidence of liver cancer.
      Most recently, eligible female primary school students of suitable ages
      will be provided with human papillomavirus vaccination, starting from the
      2019/20 school year, as evidence supports this vaccination strategy as
      effective in reducing the incidence of cervical cancer.
    Of equal importance is the secondary prevention of
      cancer that aims to detect cancer at an early stage when treatment is more
      effective. Cancer screening and early detection is inevitably a
      multi-determined field with complexity illustrated by the overriding
      concern on whether screening does more good than harm to individuals and
      to society. Recommendations and controversies on the benefits and
      downsides of prevention and screening strategy have been brought to the
      public’s attention with regard to cervical cancer,7 colorectal cancer,8
      and breast cancer.9 10 11 12 At present, the cervical screening programme and the
      colorectal cancer screening programme are the two territory-wide
      strategies regularised in Hong Kong based on current evidence.1 It is recommended that Hong Kong individuals aged 50 to
      75 years with average risk for colorectal cancer should consult their
      physicians to consider either one of the three screening modalities
      (faecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy) at different
      screening intervals. This is consistent with UK policy, where asymptomatic
      individuals who are at average risk and aged ≥50 years are provided with
      flexible sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood test.2 On certain types of cancers such as breast cancer, most
      criticisms of the screening are related to unfavourable
      cost-effectiveness, false-positive (or false-negative) results,
      overdiagnosis, overtreatment, complications arising from subsequent
      invasive procedures, and psychological distress.9
      Therefore, population-based mammography screening still requires more
      robust evidence to ascertain the screening appropriateness for asymptotic
      women at average risk. For prostate cancer, recent evidence of its
      incidence and mortality highlights the potential influence of cancer
      screening and diagnostic ascertainment on geographic variations.13 A local study conducted among Chinese patients with
      prostate cancer14 reported that
      patients who presented with cancer-related symptoms had more metastatic
      disease and poorer prognosis than asymptomatic individuals who were
      diagnosed by an opportunistic case-finding preventive approach. This
      implied the importance of screening methodology in secondary prevention of
      cancer.
    In this issue of the Hong Kong Medical Journal,
      Cheng et al15 examined incidence
      and types of complications and associated predictive factors for
      transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy in diagnosing suspected
      prostate cancer. In their retrospective cohort study, the authors
      demonstrated a satisfactorily low level of overall post-biopsy
      complications that required subsequent visits to emergency departments or
      hospital admissions. Their findings support the use of TRUS biopsy as a
      safe procedure for diagnosing suspected prostate cancer. Although these
      findings from Hong Kong may not be readily generalisable to Western
      populations, they are compatible with guidelines released by the British
      Association of Urological Surgeons and the British Association of
      Urological Nurses that support the use of TRUS biopsy in early detection
      given its widespread availability, affordability, and easy-to-learn
      procedure.16 The UK National
      Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends that physicians should
      explain the risks and benefits to patients with adequate time for informed
      consideration.17 As suggested by
      Cheng et al,15 more evidence
      generated from a multicentre study in the wider Asian population would be
      valuable to offer a comprehensive picture of the magnitude of the
      complications.
    A methodological highlight of Cheng et al’s study15 is the investigation performed
      on the basis of a territory-wide centralised electronic patient record
      system in Hong Kong. In the UK, electronic clinical decision support has
      been in use for adult cancer. Primary care clinical computers are
      integrated with diagnostic software, which can automatically search the
      records for relevant entries with an absolute cancer risk estimated.2 As advocated in The Hong Kong Cancer Strategy 2019, the
      application of big data analytics should be given a priority to examine
      clinical information for better management of cancer patients.
    Improvements in cancer detection and patient
      outcome, with reduced mortality, are the prime goal of cancer prevention.
      Emphasis on the individuals’ continuous engagement in their care should be
      placed across the cancer continuum with enhanced capacity and expertise
      support. Primary prevention remains the single most effective and
      efficient strategy in both clinical and community settings for many
      decades. Secondary prevention, despite holding the potential for reduced
      morbidity and mortality through concentrated efforts in screening and
      early detection, requires more cutting-edge science and high-quality data
      to ascertain the appropriateness at each risk stratum. The government
      should be proactive in developing structured cancer screening programmes,
      based on up-to-date and robust evidence confirming that the benefits
      outweigh risks and harms, and ensure adequate coverage for the target
      population. Cancer screening interventions that remain controversial
      should be subject to individualised consideration and undergo rigorous
      risk-benefit assessments before being recommended for implementation on a
      wider scale. Meanwhile, emphasis should be made on individual preferences
      and shared decision making with sufficient discussions that detail the
      benefits, uncertainties, and possible complications to patients, their
      families and carers.
    The future of cancer prevention is challenging but
      promising. We look forward to a growing body of scientific work that can
      further advance the understanding of benefits and risks arising from
      emerging strategies and novel technologies in cancer prevention. Knowledge
      accumulated and transferred from evidence-based studies will ultimately
      help achieve the vision and mission of The Hong Kong Cancer Strategy 2019.
    Author contributions
    All authors contributed to the concept or design;
      acquisition of data; analysis or interpretation of data; drafting of the
      article; and critical revision for important intellectual content. All
      authors had full access to the data, contributed to the study, approved
      the final version for publication, and take responsibility for its
      accuracy and integrity.
    Conflicts of interest
    The authors have declared no conflict of interest.
    References
    1. Hong Kong SAR Government. Hong Kong
      Cancer Strategy 2019 Summary Report. July 2019. Available from:
      https://www.fhb.gov.hk/download/press_and_publications/otherinfo/190700_hkcs/e_hkcs_summary.pdf.
      Accessed 14 Sep 2019. 
    2. Rubin G, Berendsen A, Crawford SM, et
      al. The expanding role of primary care in cancer control. Lancet Oncol
      2015;16:1231-72. Crossref
    3. Wang HH, Wang JJ, Wong SY, Wong MC,
      Mercer SW, Griffiths SM. The development of urban community health centres
      for strengthening primary care in China: a systematic literature review.
      Br Med Bull 2015;116:139-53. Crossref
    4. Parkin DM, Boyd L, Walker LC. 16. The
      fraction of cancer attributable to lifestyle and environmental factors in
      the UK in 2010. Br J Cancer 2011;105 Suppl 2:S77-81. Crossref
    5. Brown KF, Rumgay H, Dunlop C, et al. The
      fraction of cancer attributable to modifiable risk factors in England,
      Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and the United Kingdom in 2015. Br J
      Cancer 2018;118:1130-41. Crossref
    6. Cancer Research UK–Ludwig Cancer
      Research Nutrition and Cancer Prevention Collaborative Group. Current
      opportunities to catalyze research in nutrition and cancer prevention—an
      interdisciplinary perspective. BMC Med 2019;17:148. Crossref
    7. Ting YH, Tse HY, Lam WC, Chan KS, Leung
      TY. The pattern of cervical smear abnormalities in marginalised women in
      Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J 2017;23:28-34. Crossref
    8. Lam TH, Wong KH, Chan KK, et al.
      Recommendations on prevention and screening for colorectal cancer in Hong
      Kong. Hong Kong Med J 2018;24:521-6. Crossref
    9. Lam TH, Wong KH, Chan KK, et al.
      Recommendations on prevention and screening for breast cancer in Hong
      Kong. Hong Kong Med J 2018;24:298-306. Crossref
    10. Sitt JC, Lui CY, Sinn LH, Fong JC.
      Understanding breast cancer screening—past, present, and future. Hong Kong
      Med J 2018;24:166-74. Crossref
    11. Clift AK. Breast screening controversy
      and the ‘mammography wars’—two sides to every story. Hong Kong Med J
      2018;24:320-1. Crossref
    12. Lam TH. Population-based mammography
      screening programme should be rigorously evaluated. Hong Kong Med J
      2018;24:428. Crossref
    13. Wong MC, Goggins WB, Wang HH, et al.
      Global incidence and mortality for prostate cancer: analysis of temporal
      patterns and trends in 36 countries. Eur Urol 2016;70:862-74. Crossref
    14. Chan SY, Ng CF, Lee KW, et al.
      Differences in cancer characteristics of Chinese patients with prostate
      cancer who present with different symptoms. Hong Kong Med J 2017;23:6-12.
      Crossref
    15. Cheng KC, Lam WC, Chan HC, et al.
      Emergency attendances and hospitalisations for complications after
      transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: a 5-year retrospective
      multicentre study. Hong Kong Med J 2019;25:349-55. Crossref
    16. Greene D, Ali A, Kinsella N, Turner B.
      Transrectal ultrasound and prostatic biopsy: guidelines &
      recommendations for training. The British Association of Urological
      Surgeons/British Association of Urological Nurses; April 2015. Available
      from:
      https://www.baus.org.uk/professionals/baus_business/publications/76/transrectal_ultrasound_prostatic_biopsy.Accessed
      14 Sep 2019.
    17. NICE Guidance—Prostate cancer:
      diagnosis and management: NICE (2019) Prostate cancer: diagnosis and
      management. BJU Int 2019;124:9-26. Crossref

