. 2020 Jul 16;147(12):3305–3312. doi: 10.1002/ijc.33178

TABLE 1.

Criteria for screening for various cancers (based on Wilson and Jungner's classic screening criteria)

	Cervix	Vulva	Vagina	Ovary	Breast		Oral (mouth) ^a	Anal ^a	Colorectal ^a	Melanoma		Lung ^a	Prostate	Thyroid ^a
					Men	Women				Men	Women
Incidence ^b	++ ^c	++	+	++	+	+++	++	+	+++	+++	++	+++	+++ ^c	++
Survival ^b	++	++	+++	+++	++	+	+++	++	++	+	+	+++	+	+
Natural history of condition adequately understood	++	++	+	+	+/−	++	++	++	++	++	++	+	++	+/−
Recognizable latent or early symptomatic stage exists	++	++	++	+	+/−	++	++	++	++	+	+	++	++	+/−
Suitable test or examination available ^d	++	++	++	+/−	++	++	++	++	++	++	++	++	++	++
Test acceptable to population ^d	++	++	++	++	+	++	++	++	++	++	++	++	++	++
Accepted treatment for disease exists	Yes (conditional on availability of secondary and tertiary care facilities)
Facilities for diagnosis and treatment available ^e
Agreed policy on whom to treat as patients	++	++	++	+	+	++	++	++	++	++	++	++	+	+
Potential harms of undergoing screening ^f	Yes
Cost‐effectiveness ^g	++	+/−	+/−	+/−	+/−	++	+/−	+	++	++	++	+	+/−	+/−
Case‐finding a continuing process	Yes (conditional on risk group or antecedents)

^{^a}

Estimates for men and women were collapsed because of comparability in incidence and survival statistics.

^{^b}

Incidence and survival data were used to reflect Wilson and Jungner's first criterion (ie, whether the disease at hand is an important health problem). For incidence: +: <10, ++: >10, <100, +++: >100 per 100 000. For survival: +: >75%, ++: <75%, >50%, +++: <50%.

^{^c}

Incidence directly affected by screening (downwards for cervix and upwards for prostate).

^{^d}

Includes only tests that have been in widespread use and/or have clinical application in specific circumstances. Diagnostic work‐up procedures not considered.

^{^e}

Includes management decisions and diagnostic work‐up.

^{^f}

Considers psychological harms and potential morbidity and risks during the entire screening process, including diagnostic work‐up and treatment.

^{^g}

Cancers for which organized, guideline‐driven screening programs currently exist were considered highly cost‐effective (ie, ++). Cancers for which screening guidelines exist for high‐risk subgroups only, or in opportunistic settings were considered moderately cost‐effective (ie, +). Uncertainty regarding the cost‐effectiveness of screening was considered equivocally cost‐effective (ie, +/−).