Evidence Hub

Impact of an Epstein-Barr Virus Serology-Based Screening Program on Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Mortality: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

Wen-Jie Chen, Xia Yu, Yu-Qiang Lu, Ruth M. Pfeiffer, W. Ling, Shanghang Xie, Zhi-Cong Wu, Xue-Qi Li et al.

Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2024

27 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE Screening for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) has shown an improvement in early detection and survival rates of NPC in endemic regions. It is critical to evaluate whether NPC screening can reduce NPC-specific mortality in the population. METHODS Sixteen towns in Sihui and Zhongshan cities, China, were selected; eight were randomly allocated to the screening group and eight to the control group. Residents age 30-69 years with no history of NPC were included from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2015. Residents in the screening towns were invited to undergo serum Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) viral capsid antigen/nuclear antigen 1-immunoglobulin A antibody tests; others received no intervention. The population was followed until December 31, 2019. Nonparametric tests and Poisson regression models were used to estimate the screening effect on NPC mortality, accounting for the cluster-randomized design. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT00941538). RESULTS A total of 174,943 residents in the screening group and 186,263 residents in the control group were included. NPC incidence and overall mortality were similar between the two groups. A total of 52,498 (30.0% of 174,943) residents participated in the serum EBV antibody test. The overall compliance rate for endoscopic examination and/or biopsies among baseline and ever-classified high-risk participants was 65.9% (1,110 of 1,685) and 67.6% (1,703 of 2,518), respectively. A significant 30% reduction…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free