ArticlePreventive medicine reports2021
The EU-TOPIA evaluation tool: An online modelling-based tool for informing breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening decisions in Europe.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Why Organised Cancer Screening Works: Lessons from Slovenia and the Next Phase of Evidence-Based Implementation.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2026Article
- Risk-based guidance for choosing fecal immunochemical test or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: a modeling study.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Modeling and the Use of Surrogate Endpoints: Is This a Valid Approach?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Population-level impact of the BMJ Rapid Recommendation for colorectal cancer screening: a microsimulation analysis.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Efficient organized colorectal cancer screening in Shenzhen: a microsimulation modelling study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Overcoming barriers: Modelling the effect of potential future changes of organized breast cancer screening in Italy.Journal of medical screening · 2023Article
- Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening in Shanghai, China: A modelling study.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAiming to support European countries in improving their breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes, the EU-TOPIA consortium has developed an online user-friendly tool (the EU-TOPIA evaluation tool; https://miscan.eu-topia.org) based on the Microsimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN) model.
methodsWe designed an online platform that allows stakeholders to use their country-specific data (demographic, epidemiological, and cancer screening information) to quantify future harms and benefits of different cancer screening scenarios in their country. Current cancer screening programmes and impacts of potential changes in screening protocols (such as extending target ages or increasing screening attendance) can be simulated. Results are scaled to the country-specific population. To illustrate the tool, we used the tool to simulate two different CRC screening scenarios in the Netherlands: biennial fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in ages 55-75 and colonoscopy every ten years in ages 55-75. Data from the Dutch screening programme was used to inform both scenarios.
resultsA total of 482,700 CRC cases and 178,000 CRC deaths were estimated in the Netherlands with FIT screening (for individuals aged 40-100 years, 2018-2050), with 47.3 million FITs performed (1.92 million positives of which 1.64 million adhered to diagnostic colonoscopy). With colonoscopy screening, CRC incidence and mortality were, respectively, up to 17% and 14% lower than in the current FIT screening programme, requiring, however, a colonoscopy demand that was 7-fold higher.
conclusionsOur study presents an essential online tool for stakeholders and medical societies to quantify estimates of benefits and harms of early cancer detection in Europe.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.