Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 91
Filter
1.
Am J Manag Care ; 28(11): 600-604, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2206465

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant disruption, then recovery, of health care services use. Prior research has not examined the relative rates of resumption of high-value and low-value care. We examined the use of 6 common low-value services that received a D grade from the US Preventive Services Task Force compared with clinically comparable high-value services in a large commercially insured population nationwide from before the pandemic to April 1, 2021. We found that, overall, low-value services and high-value services were disrupted similarly. In aggregate, low-value care declined to 56.2% and high-value care to 53.2% in the initial month of the pandemic (April 2020) relative to baseline (number of visits in 2019 normalized by relevant enrolled population), then rebounded to 83.1% of baseline for low-value services and 95.0% of baseline for high-value services by January 2021. Substantial heterogeneity appeared across clinical contexts, such as prostate cancer screening for men 70 years and older rebounding to 111.8% of baseline and asymptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease screening remaining at 38.5% of baseline in January 2021. This suggests that although, on average, resuming lower-value services may have been perceived to be a lesser priority by providers and patients, the pandemic may have had heterogeneous effects on consumer and provider decision-making along the dimension of clinical value. This enhances our understanding of how disruptions affect the relationship between clinical value and usage of different services and suggests the need for more targeted interventions to reduce low-value care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Prostatic Neoplasms , Humans , Male , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods
2.
N Z Med J ; 135(1565): 83-94, 2022 Nov 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2112071

ABSTRACT

AIM: To determine the feasibility and acceptability of a telehealth offer and contactless delivery of human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical screening self-test during the 2021 COVID-19 Level 4 lockdown in Auckland, New Zealand. METHODS: A small proof-of-concept study was undertaken to test telehealth approaches in never-screened, due or overdue Maori and Pacific women enrolled in a local Primary Health Organisation (PHO). Study invitation, active follow-up, nurse-led discussions, result notification and a post-test questionnaire were all delivered through telehealth. RESULTS: A sample of 197 eligible Maori and Pacific women were invited to take part, of which 86 women were successfully contacted. Sixty-six agreed to take part. Overall uptake was 61 samples returned (31.8%) and uptake of all contactable women was 70.9%. Six of the 61 HPV self-tests (9.8%) were positive, all for non 16/18 types, and were referred for cytology. Three had negative cytology results, and three with positive cytology results were referred for colposcopy. CONCLUSION: The offer of HPV self-testing during COVID-19 lockdown was both feasible and highly acceptable for Maori and Pacific women. Importantly, HPV self-testing via telehealth and mail-out, alongside other options, offers a potential pro-equity approach for addressing the impact of deferred screens due to COVID-19 and other longstanding coverage issues.


Subject(s)
Alphapapillomavirus , COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Infections , Telemedicine , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Self-Testing , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander , Feasibility Studies , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , New Zealand/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Papillomaviridae , Colposcopy , Mass Screening , Disease Outbreaks , Vaginal Smears
3.
BMJ Open ; 12(11): e059482, 2022 11 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2108275

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to compare prostate cancer detection rates between patients undergoing serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) vs magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for prostate cancer screening. DESIGN: Phase III open-label randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Single tertiary cancer centre in Toronto, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Men 50 years of age and older with no history of PSA screening for ≥3 years, a negative digital rectal exam and no prior prostate biopsy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were recommended to undergo a prostate biopsy if their PSA was ≥2.6 ng/mL (PSA arm) or if they had a PIRADS score of 4 or 5 (MRI arm). Patients underwent an end-of-study PSA in the MRI arm. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Adenocarcinoma on prostate biopsy. Prostate biopsy rates and the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer were also compared. RESULTS: A total of 525 patients were randomised, with 266 in the PSA arm and 248 in the MRI arm. Due to challenges with accrual and study execution during the COVID-19 pandemic, the study was terminated early. In the PSA arm, 48 patients had an abnormal PSA and 28 (58%) agreed to undergo a prostate biopsy. In the MRI arm, 25 patients had a PIRADS score of 4 or 5 and 24 (96%) agreed to undergo a biopsy. The relative risk for MRI to recommend a prostate biopsy was 0.52 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.82, p=0.005), compared with PSA. The cancer detection rate for patients in the PSA arm was 29% (8 of 28) vs 63% (15 of 24, p=0.019) in the MRI arm, with a higher proportion of clinically significant cancer detected in the MRI arm (73% vs 50%). The relative risk for detecting cancer and clinically significant with MRI compared with PSA was 1.89 (95% CI 0.82 to 4.38, p=0.14) and 2.77 (95% CI 0.89 to 8.59, p=0.07), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate MRI as a stand-alone screening test reduced the rate of prostate biopsy. The number of clinically significant cancers detected was higher in the MRI arm, but this did not reach statistical significance. Due to early termination, the study was underpowered. More patients were willing to follow recommendations for prostate biopsy based on MRI results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02799303.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostate/diagnostic imaging , Prostate/pathology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Pandemics , Magnetic Resonance Imaging
4.
Prev Med ; 164: 107264, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2086854

ABSTRACT

Worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare services, including cervical cancer management, and an increased burden for this condition is expected. This systematic review synthetizes the available evidence on the impact of the pandemic on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cervical cancer. Searches were performed on PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for relevant studies on these topics with the purpose of comparing service access and care delivery before and during COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the methodological heterogeneity among the studies, findings were narratively discussed. Of the 715 screened titles and abstracts, 33 articles were included, corresponding to 42 reports that covered the outcomes of interest: vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) (6 reports), cancer screening (19), diagnosis (8), and treatment (8). Seven studies observed reductions in HPV vaccination uptake and coverage during COVID-19. Reports on cervical screening and cancer diagnosis activities showed a substantial impact of the pandemic on access to screening services and diagnostic procedures. All but one study that investigated cervical cancer treatment reported changes in the number of women with cervical lesions who received treatments, as well as treatment delay and interruption. With a major impact during the first wave in 2020, COVID-19 and restriction measures resulted in a substantial disruption in cervical cancer prevention and management, with declines in screening and delays in treatment. Taken together, findings from this systematic review calls for urgent policy interventions for recovering cervical cancer prevention and care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Infections , Papillomavirus Vaccines , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/prevention & control , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Care
5.
Curr Oncol ; 29(8): 5644-5654, 2022 08 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2032870

ABSTRACT

Quality medical practice is based on science and evidence. For over a half-century, the efficacy of breast cancer screening has been challenged, particularly for women aged 40-49. As each false claim has been raised, it has been addressed and refuted based on science and evidence. Nevertheless, misinformation continues to be promoted, resulting in confusion for women and their physicians. Early detection has been proven to save lives for women aged 40-74 in randomized controlled trials of mammography screening. Observational studies, failure analyses, and incidence of death studies have provided evidence that there is a major benefit when screening is introduced to the general population. In large part due to screening, there has been an over 40% decline in deaths from breast cancer since 1990. Nevertheless, misinformation about screening continues to be promoted, adding to the confusion. Despite claims to the contrary, a careful reading of the guidelines issued by major groups such as the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and the American College of Physicians shows that they all agree that most lives are saved by screening starting at the age of 40. There is no scientific support for using the age of 50 as a threshold for screening. All women should be provided with the facts and not false information about breast cancer screening so that they can make "informed decisions" for themselves about whether to participate.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Early Detection of Cancer , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Communication , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Female , Humans , Mammography/methods , Mass Screening/methods
6.
Obstet Gynecol ; 140(3): 470-476, 2022 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2032193

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess concordance and acceptability of a modified menstrual pad compared with a clinician-collected high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) sample. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study. Women presenting for either cervical cancer screening or with a history of high-risk HPV positivity were eligible. Three samples were requested from participants: 1) clinician-collected cervical specimens; 2) self-collected vaginal swabs; and 3) a modified menstrual pad, which was taken home for use during the next menstruation. All samples were processed using the Cobas HPV test. Menstrual pad dried blood spots were eluted, then similarly processed. RESULTS: Of 153 women enrolled in the study, 106 provided menstrual pad samples and clinician-collected cervical specimens for high-risk HPV analysis. For samples in which the interval between the clinician-collected specimen and the menstrual pad sample was less than 2 months, the concordance was 94% (95% CI 83-98). For women who tested positive for high-risk HPV who presented for general screening and those with more than cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2, menstrual pad and clinician-collected specimen agreement was 100% (95% CI 32.5-100). Among participants, 22.9% expressed discomfort with the self-collected vaginal swabs and opted out of collection. Overall, 94.0% of participants preferred the menstrual pad over clinician-collected sampling. Twelve patients were found to be positive for HPV on the menstrual pad sample but negative on the clinician-collected specimen. CONCLUSION: Among women who tested positive for HPV, the menstrual pad showed highly concordant results compared with clinician-collected sampling. This collection approach shows promise for integration into cervical cancer prevention programs.


Subject(s)
Alphapapillomavirus , Papillomavirus Infections , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Papillomaviridae , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Mass Screening/methods , Specimen Handling/methods , Vaginal Smears/methods , Sensitivity and Specificity
7.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 117(9): 1536-1538, 2022 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2025669

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a structured telephone reminder system on completion rates of screening fecal immunochemical tests. METHODS: Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) return rates were compared among patients who received a telephone reminder after 14 days and those who did not receive a reminder. RESULTS: There was a significantly higher return rate among patients who received a telephone reminder. Automated FIT tracking processes failed to capture a significant percentage of returned FITs compared with manual tracking processes. DISCUSSION: These results support telephone reminders as an effective modality to increase FIT return rates.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Early Detection of Cancer , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/prevention & control , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Occult Blood , Reminder Systems , Telephone
8.
Eur J Cancer ; 175: 54-59, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2007672

ABSTRACT

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in Europe. Europe's Beating Cancer Plan calls for a comprehensive approach to the disease in general but not specifically to lung cancer. Such a comprehensive approach, integrating efforts to strengthen anti-tobacco policies, early detection and underlying models of care, is sorely needed for lung cancer - particularly considering disruptions to care during the COVID-19 pandemic. In a recently published think piece, a multidisciplinary group of experts proposed four key policy priority areas. First, to reduce stigma and improve awareness of potential symptoms, there is a need to foster a better understanding of lung cancer - among the public and healthcare professionals. Second, opportunities for early detection should be enhanced, and the implementation of targeted screening through low-dose computed tomography should be encouraged as a complement to smoking cessation services. This complementarity should be recognised and built into joint policy proposals, with development and better integration of screening and smoking cessation programmes on the ground. Third, the socioeconomic inequalities underpinning disparities in outcomes in people with lung cancer must be addressed, with targeted approaches to overcome barriers to access Finally, the overall quality of lung cancer care must be improved, making multidisciplinary care available to all and ensuring survivorship is given due attention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lung Neoplasms , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , Pandemics , Policy
9.
Respirology ; 27(10): 818-833, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1997207

ABSTRACT

In recent years, pulmonary imaging has seen enormous progress, with the introduction, validation and implementation of new hardware and software. There is a general trend from mere visual evaluation of radiological images to quantification of abnormalities and biomarkers, and assessment of 'non visual' markers that contribute to establishing diagnosis or prognosis. Important catalysts to these developments in thoracic imaging include new indications (like computed tomography [CT] lung cancer screening) and the COVID-19 pandemic. This review focuses on developments in CT, radiomics, artificial intelligence (AI) and x-ray velocimetry for imaging of the lungs. Recent developments in CT include the potential for ultra-low-dose CT imaging for lung nodules, and the advent of a new generation of CT systems based on photon-counting detector technology. Radiomics has demonstrated potential towards predictive and prognostic tasks particularly in lung cancer, previously not achievable by visual inspection by radiologists, exploiting high dimensional patterns (mostly texture related) on medical imaging data. Deep learning technology has revolutionized the field of AI and as a result, performance of AI algorithms is approaching human performance for an increasing number of specific tasks. X-ray velocimetry integrates x-ray (fluoroscopic) imaging with unique image processing to produce quantitative four dimensional measurement of lung tissue motion, and accurate calculations of lung ventilation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lung Neoplasms , Artificial Intelligence , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Pandemics , Rheology , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , X-Rays
10.
Br J Cancer ; 127(8): 1525-1533, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1991565

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) faces endoscopy capacity challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic and plans to lower the screening starting age. This may necessitate modifying the interscreening interval or threshold. METHODS: We analysed data from the English Faecal Immunochemical Testing (FIT) pilot, comprising 27,238 individuals aged 59-75, screened for colorectal cancer (CRC) using FIT. We estimated screening sensitivity to CRC, adenomas, advanced adenomas (AA) and mean sojourn time of each pathology by faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) thresholds, then predicted the detection of these abnormalities by interscreening interval and f-Hb threshold. RESULTS: Current 2-yearly screening with a f-Hb threshold of 120 µg/g was estimated to generate 16,092 colonoscopies, prevent 186 CRCs, detect 1142 CRCs, 7086 adenomas and 4259 AAs per 100,000 screened over 15 years. A higher threshold at 180 µg/g would reduce required colonoscopies to 11,500, prevent 131 CRCs, detect 1077 CRCs, 4961 adenomas and 3184 AAs. A longer interscreening interval of 3 years would reduce required colonoscopies to 10,283, prevent 126 and detect 909 CRCs, 4796 adenomas and 2986 AAs. CONCLUSION: Increasing the f-Hb threshold was estimated to be more efficient than increasing the interscreening interval regarding overall colonoscopies per screen-benefited cancer. Increasing the interval was more efficient regarding colonoscopies per cancer prevented.


Subject(s)
Adenoma , COVID-19 , Colorectal Neoplasms , Adenoma/diagnosis , Adenoma/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , England , Hemoglobins/analysis , Humans , Pandemics , Pilot Projects
11.
Cancer Causes Control ; 33(10): 1313-1323, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1982204

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: We calculated rates of breast and prostate cancer screening and diagnostic procedures performed during the COVID-19 pandemic through December 2021 compared to the same months in 2019 in a large healthcare provider group in central Massachusetts. METHODS: We included active patients of the provider group between January 2019 and December 2021 aged 30-85 years. Monthly rates of screening mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis, breast MRI, total prostate specific antigen (PSA), and breast or prostate biopsy per 1,000 people were compared by year overall, by age, and race/ethnicity. Completed procedures were identified by relevant codes in electronic health record data. RESULTS: Rates of screening mammography, tomosynthesis, and PSA testing reached the lowest levels in April-May 2020. Breast cancer screening rates decreased 43% in March and 99% in April and May 2020, compared to 2019. Breast cancer screening rates increased gradually beginning in June 2020 through 2021, although more slowly in Black and Hispanic women and in women aged 75-85. PSA testing rates decreased 34% in March, 78% in April, and 53% in May 2020, but rebounded to pre-pandemic levels by June 2020; trends were similar across groups defined by age and race/ethnicity. CONCLUSION: The observed decline in two common screening procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic reflects the impact of the pandemic on cancer early detection and signals potential downstream effects on the prognosis of delayed cancer diagnoses. The slower rate of return for breast cancer screening procedures in certain subgroups should be investigated to ensure all women return for routine screenings.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Prostatic Neoplasms , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Male , Mammography/methods , Mass Screening/methods , Pandemics , Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology
12.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev ; 31(8): 1521-1531, 2022 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1973969

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer screening is a complex process involving multiple steps and levels of influence (e.g., patient, provider, facility, health care system, community, or neighborhood). We describe the design, methods, and research agenda of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) consortium. PROSPR II Research Centers (PRC), and the Coordinating Center aim to identify opportunities to improve screening processes and reduce disparities through investigation of factors affecting cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening in U.S. community health care settings. METHODS: We collected multilevel, longitudinal cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening process data from clinical and administrative sources on >9 million racially and ethnically diverse individuals across 10 heterogeneous health care systems with cohorts beginning January 1, 2010. To facilitate comparisons across organ types and highlight data breadth, we calculated frequencies of multilevel characteristics and volumes of screening and diagnostic tests/procedures and abnormalities. RESULTS: Variations in patient, provider, and facility characteristics reflected the PROSPR II health care systems and differing target populations. PRCs identified incident diagnoses of invasive cancers, in situ cancers, and precancers (invasive: 372 cervical, 24,131 colorectal, 11,205 lung; in situ: 911 colorectal, 32 lung; precancers: 13,838 cervical, 554,499 colorectal). CONCLUSIONS: PROSPR II's research agenda aims to advance: (i) conceptualization and measurement of the cancer screening process, its multilevel factors, and quality; (ii) knowledge of cancer disparities; and (iii) evaluation of the COVID-19 pandemic's initial impacts on cancer screening. We invite researchers to collaborate with PROSPR II investigators. IMPACT: PROSPR II is a valuable data resource for cancer screening researchers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Colorectal Neoplasms , Lung Neoplasms , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Pandemics
13.
Intern Emerg Med ; 17(8): 2229-2235, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1971816

ABSTRACT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Many communities remain under the 80% CRC screening goal. We aimed to identify factors associated with non-adherence to CRC screening and to describe the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic in CRC screening patterns. A retrospective review of patients aged 50-75 years seen at the Griffin Faculty Physicians primary care offices between January 2019 and December 2020 was performed. Logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with CRC screening non-adherence. Of 12,189 patients, 66.2% had an updated CRC screen. On univariable logistic regression, factors associated with CRC screening non-adherence included age ≤ 55 years [odds ratio (OR) 2.267, p < 0.001], White/Caucasian race (OR 0.858, p = 0.030), Medicaid insurance (OR 2.097, p < 0.001), morbid obesity (OR 1.436, p < 0.001), current cigarette smoking (OR 1.849, p < 0.001), and elevated HbA1c (OR 1.178, p = 0.004). Age, Medicaid insurance, morbid obesity, current smoking, and HbA1c ≥ 6.5% remained significant in the final multivariable model. Compared to 2019, there was an 18.2% decrease in the total number of CRC screening tests in 2020. The proportion of colonoscopy procedures was lower in 2020 compared to the proportion of colonoscopy procedures conducted in 2019 (65.9% vs 81.7%, p < 0.001), with a concurrent increase in stool-based tests. CRC screening rates in our population are comparable to national statistics but below the 80% goal. COVID-19 affected CRC screening. Our results underscore the need to identify patient groups most vulnerable to missing CRC screening and highlight the importance of stool-based testing to bridge screening gaps.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Colorectal Neoplasms , Obesity, Morbid , United States , Humans , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Connecticut/epidemiology , Glycated Hemoglobin A , Pandemics , Occult Blood , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Mass Screening/methods
14.
Ginekol Pol ; 92(2): 165-173, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1964413

ABSTRACT

The Polish Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathophysiology (PTKiPSM) together with the Polish Society of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (PTGiP) issued a final summary of interim guidelines for secondary cervical cancer prevention during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic based on the analysis of the latest directional publications and the authors' own experiences. The aim of the summary is to facilitate the implementation of the most effective possible screening of cervical precancerous lesions and cervical cancer due to temporary significant limitation of screening as a consequence of the ongoing epidemiological threat. These final guidelines are taking into account the 2020 call of the World Health Organization (WHO) for global epidemiological elimination of cervical cancer. The guidelines supplement the interim guidelines of PTKiPSM and PTGiP announced in March 2020 on the possible deferral of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in patients with abnormal screening tests results in secondary prevention of cervical cancer in current pandemic.


Subject(s)
Colposcopy , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Mass Screening/methods , Secondary Prevention , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Algorithms , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pandemics , Poland , Precancerous Conditions/diagnosis , Precancerous Conditions/prevention & control , Precancerous Conditions/surgery , SARS-CoV-2 , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/surgery
15.
Health Expect ; 25(4): 1776-1788, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1961583

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many countries are introducing low-dose computed tomography screening programmes for people at high risk of lung cancer. Effective communication strategies that convey risks and benefits, including unfamiliar concepts and outcome probabilities based on population risk, are critical to achieving informed choice and mitigating inequalities in uptake. METHODS: This study investigated the acceptability of an aspect of NHS England's communication strategy in the form of a leaflet that was used to invite and inform eligible adults about the Targeted Lung Health Check (TLHC) programme. Acceptability was assessed in terms of how individuals engaged with, comprehended and responded to the leaflet. Semi-structured, 'think aloud' interviews were conducted remotely with 40 UK screening-naïve current and former smokers (aged 55-73). The verbatim transcripts were analysed thematically using a coding framework based on the Dual Process Theory of cognition. RESULTS: The leaflet helped participants understand the principles and procedures of screening and fostered cautiously favourable intentions. Three themes captured the main results of the data analysis: (1) Response-participants experienced anxiety about screening results and further investigations, but the involvement of specialist healthcare professionals was reassuring; (2) Engagement-participants were rapidly drawn to information about lung cancer prevalence, and benefits of screening, but deliberated slowly about early diagnosis, risks of screening and less familiar symptoms of lung cancer; (3) Comprehension-participants understood the main principles of the TLHC programme, but some were confused by its rationale and eligibility criteria. Radiation risks, abnormal screening results and numerical probabilities of screening outcomes were hard to understand. CONCLUSION: The TLHC information leaflet appeared to be acceptable to the target population. There is scope to improve aspects of comprehension and engagement in ways that would support informed choice as a distributed process in lung cancer screening. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The insight and perspectives of patient representatives directly informed and improved the design and conduct of this study.


Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer , Health Communication , Health Literacy , Lung Neoplasms , National Health Programs , Pamphlets , Adult , Comprehension , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , England , Health Communication/methods , Humans , Lung , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Mass Screening , National Health Programs/standards , State Medicine
16.
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 34(7): 739-743, 2022 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1922401

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Procedural delays due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may exacerbate disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) preventive care. We aimed to measure racial and socioeconomic disparities in the prioritization of CRC screening or adenoma surveillance during the COVID reopening period. METHODS: We identified CRC screening or surveillance colonoscopies performed during two time periods: (1) 9 June 2019-30 September 2019 (pre-COVID) and (2) 9 June 2020-30 September 2020 (COVID reopening). We recorded the procedure indication, patient age, sex, race/ethnicity, primary language, insurance status and zip code. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors independently associated with undergoing colonoscopy in the COVID reopening era. RESULTS: We identified 1473 colonoscopies for CRC screening or adenoma surveillance; 890 occurred in the pre-COVID period and 583 occurred in the COVID reopening period. In total 342 (38.4%) pre-COVID patients underwent adenoma surveillance and 548 (61.6%) underwent CRC screening; in the COVID reopening cohort, 257 (44.1%) underwent adenoma surveillance and 326 (55.9%) underwent CRC screening (P = 0.031). This increased proportion of surveillance procedures in the reopening cohort was statistically significant on multivariable analysis [odds ratio (OR), 1.26; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.001-1.58]. Black patients comprised 17.4% of the pre-COVID cohort, which declined to 15.3% (P = 0.613). There was a trend toward an inverse association between reopening phase colonoscopy and Medicaid insurance compared with commercial insurance (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.49-1.04). No significant associations were found between reopening phase colonoscopy and the remaining variables. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID reopening period, colonoscopies for CRC fell by over one-third with significantly more surveillance than screening procedures. Nonwhite patients and non-English speakers comprised a shrinking proportion in the COVID reopening period.


Subject(s)
Adenoma , COVID-19 , Colorectal Neoplasms , Adenoma/diagnosis , Adenoma/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Colonoscopy/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/prevention & control , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Social Determinants of Health , United States/epidemiology
17.
Cancer Epidemiol ; 80: 102212, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1914199

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has increased barriers to accessing preventive healthcare. This study identifies populations disproportionately underrepresented in screening and surveillance colonoscopies during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In this single-center cohort study, colonoscopy procedures were reviewed during 6-month intervals before the pandemic (July 1, 2019 - December 31, 2019) and during the pandemic (July 1, 2020 - December 31, 2020 and January 1, 2021 - June 30, 2021). 7095 patients were categorized based on procedure indication, demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index and Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). Statistics performed using VassarStats. RESULTS: 2387 (2019) colonoscopies pre-pandemic and 2585 (2020) and 2123 (2021) during the pandemic were identified. There was a decrease in colonoscopies performed during months when COVID-19 cases peaked. The total number of average CRC risk patients presenting for first colonoscopy declined during the pandemic: 232 (10 %) pre-pandemic to 190 (7 %) in 2020, 145 (7 %) in 2021 (p < 0.001). Fewer of these patients presented from highly vulnerable communities, SVI > 0.8, during the pandemic, 39 in 2019 vs 16 in 2020 and 22 in 2021. Of all screening and surveillance patients, fewer presented from communities with SVI > 0.8 during the pandemic, 106 in 2019 versus 67 in 2020 and 77 in 2021. CONCLUSION: It is important to address the decline in CRC preventive care during this pandemic among average CRC risk first-time screeners and vulnerable community patients. An emphasis on addressing social determinants of health and establishing patients in gastroenterology clinics is imperative to promote future health in these populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Colorectal Neoplasms , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/prevention & control , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies
18.
PLoS One ; 17(6): e0270223, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1910673

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic forced colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs to downscale their colonoscopy capacity. In this study, we assessed strategies to deal with temporary restricted colonoscopy capacity in a FIT-based CRC screening program while aiming to retain the maximum possible preventive effect of the screening program. DESIGN: We simulated the Dutch national CRC screening program inviting individuals between ages 55 and 75 for biennial FIT using the MISCAN-Colon model including the 3-month disruption in the first half of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. For the second half of 2020 and 2021, we simulated three different strategies for the total target population: 1) increasing the FIT cut-off, 2) skipping one screening for specific screening ages, and 3) extending the screening interval. We estimated the impact on required colonoscopy capacity in 2020-2021 and life years (LYs) lost in the long-term. RESULTS: Increasing the FIT cut-off, skipping screening ages and extending the screening interval resulted in a maximum reduction of 25,100 (-17.0%), 16,100(-10.9%) and 19,000 (-12.9%) colonoscopies, respectively. Modelling an increased FIT cut-off, the number of LYs lost ranged between 1,400 and 4,400. Skipping just a single screening age resulted in approximately 2,700 LYs lost and this was doubled in case of skipping two screening ages. Extending the screening interval up to 34 months had the smallest impact on LYs lost (up to 1,100 LYs lost). CONCLUSION: This modelling study shows that to anticipate on restricted colonoscopy capacity, temporarily extending the screening interval retains the maximum possible preventive effect of the CRC screening program.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Colorectal Neoplasms , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child, Preschool , Colonoscopy , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Middle Aged , Occult Blood , Pandemics
19.
Ann Ist Super Sanita ; 58(1): 16-24, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1897026

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In Italy, regional governments are in charge of implementing cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening programmes. The 2020 Coronavirus pandemic led to a national lockdown and the temporary suspension of several non-urgent healthcare activities, including cancer screening. This paper aims to describe the results of a national survey carried out by the National Centre for Screening Monitoring (ONS) on cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening activities in 2020. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A national survey was conducted by ONS in 2020 to assess: the number of screening invitations by Region; the volumes of screening tests and the attitude to attend the screening programme compared to 2019; the number of delayed diagnoses of malignant or pre-malignant lesions caused by the slowing down of screening programmes, based on the average Region-specific screening detection rate for cervical, breast and colorectal cancers. RESULTS: Screening tests for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer decreased by 37.6%, 45.5% and 43.4% in 2020 compared with 2019. In 2020 the estimated numbers of undiagnosed lesions are: 3,324 breast cancers, 1,299 colorectal cancers, 7,474 colorectal advanced adenomas and 2,782 CIN2 or more severe cervical lesions. Participation in cancer screening programmes decreased by 15%, 15% and 20%, for cervical, breast and CRC screening, respectively. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: An urgent call to action is needed to prevent further delays and to limit the impact of the pandemic on cancer diagnosis and prevention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Delayed Diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control
20.
Int J Mol Sci ; 23(2)2022 Jan 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1884201

ABSTRACT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is still a leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Less than half of cases are diagnosed when the cancer is locally advanced. CRC is a heterogenous disease associated with a number of genetic or somatic mutations. Diagnostic markers are used for risk stratification and early detection, which might prolong overall survival. Nowadays, the widespread use of semi-invasive endoscopic methods and feacal blood tests characterised by suboptimal accuracy of diagnostic results has led to the detection of cases at later stages. New molecular noninvasive tests based on the detection of CRC alterations seem to be more sensitive and specific then the current methods. Therefore, research aiming at identifying molecular markers, such as DNA, RNA and proteins, would improve survival rates and contribute to the development of personalized medicine. The identification of "ideal" diagnostic biomarkers, having high sensitivity and specificity, being safe, cheap and easy to measure, remains a challenge. The purpose of this review is to discuss recent advances in novel diagnostic biomarkers for tumor tissue, blood and stool samples in CRC patients.


Subject(s)
Biomarkers, Tumor , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/etiology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Clinical Decision-Making , Colorectal Neoplasms/metabolism , Disease Management , Disease Susceptibility , Feces/chemistry , Humans , Liquid Biopsy/methods , Precision Medicine/methods , Volatile Organic Compounds
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL