Factors influencing participation in preventive interventions for gastric cancer: the results from the GISTAR study. Issue 2 (13th September 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Leja, Mārcis; Cine, Eva; Poļaka, Inese; Daugule, Ilva; Murillo, Raul; Parshutin, Sergei; Ražuka-Ebela, Danute; Rotberga, Laura; Anarkulova, Linda; Kriķe, Petra; Šantare, Daiga; Tzivian, Lilian; Herrero, Rolando; Park, Jin Young
• Is Part Of: European journal of cancer prevention. Volume 31:Issue 2(2022)
• Page Start: 128
• Page End: 136
• Publication Date: 2021-09-13
• Subjects: compliance -- eradication -- gastric cancer -- Helicobacter pylori -- prevention -- screening -- search-and-treat; Cancer -- Prevention -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- etiology -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- prevention & control -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Prevention; Periodicals; 616.994052
• DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000682
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0959-8278

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: Search-and-treat strategy for Helicobacter pylori and surveillance of patients with precancerous lesions are recommended to decrease the burden of gastric cancer in high-risk areas. We aimed to evaluate the acceptance of the target population to these strategies. Methods: We applied a search-and-treat strategy combined with biomarker screening (pepsinogens I and II, gastrin-17) for atrophic gastritis to healthy individuals aged 40–64 years within the GISTAR Pilot study. Different means of invitation were evaluated – direct telephone calls, letters of invitation via the general practitioners. Participants with altered biomarker results were invited to undergo upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. H.pylori positive individuals were offered eradication therapy. Data on the compliance to the treatment and reasons for noncompliance were collected via telephone. Results: Altogether 3453 participants were enrolled. The attendance of women participants was 1.9 times higher although active invitation strategies were mainly targeting men. The yield for the telephone invitations was higher than for mail-delivered invitations (2.1 calls vs. 7.7 letters required to recruit one study subject). Out of 661 individuals reached with the invitation to undergo upper endoscopy, 520 (78.7%) attended the procedure. Out of 1185 study subjects eligible for eradication, 810 (68.4%) accepted it. Of those having received the medication, 765(94.4%) completed it. The reasons for nonparticipation were the overall misconception of the importance of screening, busy schedule and others. Conclusions: While only the minority of the target population participated in the gastric cancer prevention strategy, relatively high compliance was seen among the participants. The acceptance rate and the identified reasons for refusing to participate in our study indicate that there is a need to raise gastric cancer awareness and its existent preventive strategies within the general population for their successful implementation in the community.