Cancer Screening, Incidental Detection, and Overdiagnosis

Abstract Background In the past, patients were only diagnosed with cancer because they had symptoms. Now, because of screening and incidental detection, some patients are diagnosed with cancer when they are asymptomatic. While this shift is typically viewed as desirable, it has produced an unfortunate side-effect: it is now possible to be diagnosed with a cancer not destined to cause symptoms or death—a phenomenon labeled as overdiagnosis. Content We begin with a brief introduction to the heterogeneity of cancer progression: at one extreme, some cancers are already systemic by the time they are detectable; at the other, some grow extremely slowly or even regress. The ensuing sections describe the evidence that the pursuit of earlier detection has led to overdiagnosis. Although rarely confirmed in an individual, overdiagnosis is readily identifiable in a long-term follow-up of a randomized trial of screening. Furthermore, 2 population signatures for overdiagnosis exist: (a) rising incidence coupled with stable mortality and (b) rising early-stage incidence coupled with stable late-stage incidence. Finally, we review the misleading feedback produced by overdiagnosis—such as rising 5-year survival rates and more cancer survivors. This feedback is erroneously interpreted as reinforcing the value of early detection, encourages more screening/incidental detection and, ironically, promotes more overdiagnosis. Summary Overdiagnosis is an unintended consequence of the desire to detect cancer early. Given the evolving understanding that tumor biology and host response are more relevant to prognosis than early vs late diagnosis, it is time to challenge the assertion that early diagnosis is always the best approach to curing cancer.