A major randomised trial of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms, and initiation of a UK national screening programme-Thompson
Submitting Institution
University of CambridgeUnit of Assessment
Public Health, Health Services and Primary CareSummary Impact Type
HealthResearch Subject Area(s)
Medical and Health Sciences: Clinical Sciences, Public Health and Health Services
Summary of the impact
Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a major cause of death in older men,
in the UK and elsewhere. A large UK trial led by the University of
Cambridge evaluated the long-term benefits of ultrasound screening for AAA
in men aged 65-74 years. This provided the basis for the introduction of a
UK national AAA screening programme in men aged 65; this was announced in
2008, initiated in 2009, and achieved full coverage of England in 2013.
Similar screening has started in Sweden, New Zealand and in parts of
Italy, and is being actively discussed in Denmark, Norway and Finland.
Underpinning research
Key researchers: Since the year 2000, Professor Simon Thompson
(Director, MRC Biostatistics Unit (2000-2011), Cambridge, and Professor of
Biostatistics, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of
Cambridge (2002-present) has been the lead statistician and co-principal
investigator of the Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study randomised trial,
described below, and became the trial's principal investigator in 2005.
Under his supervision, Dr Lois Kim (early career researcher 2001-07)
undertook analyses of the accumulating data from the trial for its main
publications, developed a detailed health economic model so that long-term
cost-effectiveness could be estimated, and contributed to a variety of
related projects. Thompson was the lead applicant on grants (funded by
MRC) to extend the follow-up of the trial's participants from the initial
4 years to 13 years of follow-up. For the other studies mentioned below,
Thompson was the lead statistician and co-investigator in the national
trials of treatment of AAA (funded by MRC and NIHR HTA), and the principal
investigator of the international RESCAN Collaboration which aimed to
provide a better evidence-base for the choice of small AAA surveillance
intervals (funded by NIHR HTA). In Cambridge, Thompson supervised Lu Gao,
Anthony Brady and Dr Michael Sweeting for these studies.
Research undertaken: Uncertainty over the potential benefits of
screening for AAA in the 1990s led to the initiation of the UK Multicentre
Aneurysm Screening Study (MASS, started in 1997 with follow-up until
2013). This randomised trial recruited a population-based sample of 68,770
men aged 65-74, randomised to either invitation to ultrasound screening
(with surveillance follow-up for small AAAs detected, and surgical
intervention for large AAAs) or no invitation to screening. The University
of Cambridge led the trial's protocol development, its randomisation, data
management and patient recall systems, and supervision of statistical
analyses. MASS remains the largest trial that has been conducted to date,
and together with crucial long-term follow-up data has provided the
majority of the worldwide randomised evidence on the benefit of AAA
screening. Of the men invited, 80% attended screening, and 5% of these had
a latent AAA detected. The early results at 4 years of follow-up showed
that invitation to AAA screening led to a halving of AAA-related mortality
(relative risk reduction 42% amongst those invited, 53% amongst those
attending), as well as a halving of non-fatal AAA ruptures [research ref
1, Cambridge authors Day, Kim, Thompson, Walker]. This impressive
reduction resulting from invitation to once-only screening was maintained
in the longer term, despite some increase in the rate of AAA ruptures
during the later years in those originally screened as normal [research
ref 2, Cambridge authors Thompson, Gao]. In a linked health economic
assessment, it was shown that offering AAA screening to 65-year old men
was likely to be highly cost-effective in the long-term, with an estimated
cost of £2970 per quality-adjusted year of life gained [research ref 3,
Cambridge authors Kim, Thompson].
Additional research to optimise impact: To underpin policy on
screening and treatment of AAA, Thompson and colleagues conducted large
nationally-based UK randomised trials to compare: (i) surveillance versus
early surgery for small AAAs based on 1090 patients recruited in 1991-95
and followed up until 2005 [research ref 4, Cambridge authors Brady,
Thompson], and (ii) open surgery versus endovascular aneurysm repair
(EVAR) for large AAAs amongst 1252 patients recruited in 1999-2004 and
followed up until 2009 [research ref 5, Cambridge author Thompson]. In the
RESCAN Collaboration, Thompson and colleagues also collated individual
longitudinal data on small AAA growth and rupture for 15,000 patients from
18 studies in different countries, with up to 8 years of follow-up, and
undertook a detailed individual patient data meta-analysis in order to
refine the choice of surveillance intervals [research ref 6, Cambridge
authors Sweeting, Thompson].
References to the research
1. Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study Group (Scott RAP, Ashton HA,
Buxton MJ, Day NE, Kim LG, Marteau TM, Thompson SG, Walker NM). The
multicentre aneurysm screening study (MASS) into the effect of abdominal
aortic aneurysm screening on mortality in men: a randomised controlled
trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 1531-1539. 440 citations.
2. Thompson SG, Ashton HA, Gao L, Scott RAP. Screening men for abdominal
aortic aneurysm: 10 year mortality and cost effectiveness results from the
randomised Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study. British Medical
Journal 2009; 338: b2307. 77 citations.
3. Kim LG, Thompson SG, Briggs AH, Buxton MJ, Campbell HE. How
cost-effective is screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms? Journal of
Medical Screening 2007; 14: 46-52. 18 citations
4. UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants (Powell JT, Brady AR, Brown LC,
Fowkes FGR, Greenhalgh RM, Ruckley CV, Thompson SG). Long-term outcomes of
immediate repair compared with surveillance for small abdominal aortic
aneurysms. New England Journal of Medicine 2002; 346:
1445-1452. 249 citations
5. UK EVAR Trial Investigators (Greenhalgh RM, Brown LC, Powell JT,
Thompson SG, Epstein D). Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal
aortic aneurysm. New England Journal of Medicine 2010; 362;
1863-1871. 253 citations
6. RESCAN Collaborators (Bown MJ, Sweeting MJ, Brown LC, Powell JT,
Thompson SG). Surveillance intervals for small abdominal aortic aneurysms:
a meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association 2013;
309: 806-813.
Details of the impact
The initial clinical and cost-effectiveness results from the MASS trial
were presented to the UK National Screening Committee (NSC) in 2003-04 who
consequently recommended, in 2005, the introduction of a national AAA
screening programme for men aged 65 [impact ref 1]. Work was then
undertaken to raise the profile of AAA screening as a matter for public
debate, and in particular to increase awareness amongst policy makers and
politicians. Also during 2006-07 Thompson and Kim refined the estimates of
the long-term cost-effectiveness of an AAA screening programme in the UK,
made the NSC aware of this work, and worked with health economic modellers
at the Department of Health to answer questions about the health service
impacts of such a programme. In January 2008, the prime minister Gordon
Brown announced the introduction of a national AAA screening programme, in
line with the NSC's original recommendation [impact ref 2].
As a result, the NHS AAA Screening Programme (NAAASP) was initiated in
2009, in four geographical centres in England [impact ref 3]. On the basis
of the research findings, Thompson and colleagues provided advice on
issues including: training and quality control monitoring of
ultrasonographers; deployment of surgical services necessary to
accommodate the anticipated increased numbers of elective AAA repairs
undertaken; and content of the core data needed to audit and control the
programme as it rolled out. An issue crucial to the success of NAAASP in
terms of delivering the anticipated reduction in AAA-related mortality was
that the mortality from elective AAA operations was kept as low possible,
as had been achieved in the MASS trial. For this purpose, and after much
debate, it was decided that AAA surgery should be concentrated into larger
centres where surgical experience would be greater, excellence could be
more easily achieved, and monitoring could be more effective [impact ref
4].
NAAASP currently (August 2013) covers the whole of England [impact ref
3], with identical programmes being initiated in the devolved
jurisdictions of Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland [impact refs 5,6].
It is anticipated that full UK-wide coverage will be achieved in 2015. The
uptake of the screening invitation in NAAASP has been 75%, only slightly
lower than the 80% achieved in the MASS trial, and the elective surgical
mortality rate for large AAAs has been kept low (<2%) [3]. Surveillance
for small AAAs follows the protocol and intervals developed for the
Cambridge-led MASS trial, but may be slightly relaxed in the future in
response to the publication [research ref 6] from the RESCAN Collaboration
on the effects and cost-effectiveness of alternative surveillance
intervals.
AAA screening leads to improved patient outcomes through the monitoring
of those at risk with a small AAA, and by offering elective surgery to
those with a large AAA. Based on the MASS trial and the three other
smaller randomised trials of AAA screening that are available
internationally, it is anticipated that mortality from AAA should be
reduced by about a half in men aged over 65 through the introduction of
NAAASP. Given current mortality rates, this corresponds to 1300 deaths
prevented per year in the UK [impact ref 3].
At international meetings in London (2012) and Budapest (2013),
representatives from 12 different countries worldwide compared their
prospects for initiating AAA screening programmes. Outside the UK,
screening programmes have started in Sweden [impact ref 7], New Zealand
and parts of Italy, while initiation is being actively discussed in
Denmark, Norway and Finland [impact refs 8,9]; in the USA, ultrasound AAA
screening is now recommended for all men aged over 65 who have ever smoked
[impact ref 10]. These changes in international policy have been driven by
the results from the MASS trial, as well as the early experience of NAAASP
in the UK.
Sources to corroborate the impact
- UK National Screening Committee statement on AAA screening: AAA policy
review summary, November 2005: http://www.screening.nhs.uk/aaa
[accessed 2 Sept 2013] The screening committee's guidance (see "Related
documents AAA policy review summary" on this website cites the work
described above as the `major MRC sponsored trial of screening')
- BBC News website: Men to get aneurysm screening, 5 January 2008:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7172094.stm
[accessed 14 Aug 2013]
- NHS Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Programme (NAAASP) main
website:
http://www.aaa.screening.nhs.uk,
and most recent progress report for 2011-12 (Summary and Data): http://aaa.screening.nhs.uk/annualreport
[accessed 14 Aug 2013]
- Statement on NHS AAA Screening Programme's quality criteria for
elective surgery, June 2010.
http://aaa.screening.nhs.uk/publications
[accessed 14 Aug 2013]
- Wales Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Programme:
http://www.aaascreening.wales.nhs.uk/home
[accessed 14 Aug 2013]
- Scottish Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Programme:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/Services/Screening/Abdominal-Aortic-Aneurysm
[accessed 14 Aug 2013]
- Screening for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Sweden, September 2008:
http://www.sbu.se/en/Published/Alert/Screening-for-Abdominal-Aortic-Aneurysm
[accessed 14 Aug 2013]
- International progress on AAA screening: http://aaa.screening.nhs.uk/international-research
[accessed 14 Aug 2013]
- Stather PW, Dattani N, Bown MJ, Earnshaw JJ, Lees TA. International
variations in AAA screening. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2013; 45:
231-234.
- US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for abdominal aortic
aneurysm:
recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2005; 142:
198-202.