Defining sensitivity and specificity for quality control of organized cancer screening using Prefectural Cancer Registry data in Japan.

Objective To decrease cancer mortality by implementing cancer screening programs, rigorous quality control measures that utilize standardized indicators are imperative. In Japan, although each municipality performing cancer screening programs implements quality control for their programs using the checklist authorized by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, compliance with all the items listed is not possible because calculating sensitivity and specificity using cancer registry data is difficult under these circumstances. This report elucidates the methodology for calculating indicators, including sensitivity and specificity, by delineating the parameters of false-negative cases within population-based cancer screening programs in Japan. Furthermore, the inherent challenges associated with ensuring the quality control of cancer screening procedures are expounded upon in this report.Method Data from the Prefectural Cancer Registry of Japan and cancer screening records compiled by municipalities were used to differentiate true-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative cases based on the combination of screening test outcomes and subsequent cancer incidence.Results A false-negative case was defined as an examinee who received a cancer diagnosis within one year after undergoing the screening test, notwithstanding the negative judgment of the cancer screening decision. The duration for judgment of true-positive, true-negative, and false-negative cases was also extended to one year. Cancer identification after cancer screening was ascertained using data from the Prefectural Cancer Registry, ensuring uniform categorization of the four cases. Subsequently, sensitivity and specificity values were calculated for municipalities conducting cancer screening programs.Conclusion Sensitivity and specificity are indispensable metrics for the inherent quality control of cancer screening because these parameters directly assess the efficacy of screening tests. The anticipated increase in the number of municipalities engaged in comprehensive quality control of cancer screening in Japan is poised to enhance the efficiency of cancer control policies. This augmentation will be accomplished through the meticulous utilization of the sensitivity and specificity values elucidated in the present report. The forthcoming challenges involve the proliferation of medical institutes reporting their adherence to the checklist stipulated by the National Cancer Center of Japan and the widespread dissemination of fundamental knowledge pertaining to cancer screening.