Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
Reprod Health ; 18(1): 228, 2021 Nov 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1515447

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a blended educational program to promote performing the PST among Iranian women. DESIGN: In a randomized control trial four main variables; knowledge, attitude, self-efficacy, and practice about PST was evaluated using a man-made questionnaire for PST. SETTING: Women aged 18-49 living in Andimeshk (Khuzestan, Iran), covered by 16 health centers, participated in study from November 2019 till April 2019. METHOD: The educational intervention conducted to increasing women's performing the PST. The experimental group received an intervention, whereas the control group received usual care. Participants were tested at four-time points: pre-test (baseline), post-test 1 (immediately after the program's completion) post-test 2 (4 weeks after the program's completion) and post-test 3 (12 weeks after the program completion). RESULTS: A total of 84 women with average aged 32.27 (42 in the experimental group, 42 in the control group) were recruited from 16 health centers in Andimeshk, southern Iran. Significant group differences were found at different times in knowledge, attitude, self-efficacy, and practice about PST. CONCLUSION: A blended method was effective in sustaining the effects of the educational program in the experimental group. The development of appropriate teaching method on restricted situation such as COVID-19 pandemic to promote participation is suggested.


Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women. The Pap-test is considered the most economical and efficient method for screening cervical cancer and is a simple method without any side effects. Given that awareness with proper methods regarding the initial symptoms, timely diagnosis and treatment are vital for controlling cancer.In this study, we assessed the effect of a blended educational program to promote performing Pap-test among 84 Iranian women. Therefore, a study to assess four main variables; knowledge, attitude, self-efficacy, and practice about PST was designed. We asked women aged 18­49 living in Andimeshk (Khuzestan, Iran) covered by 16 health centers. The educational program to increase women's performance in the PST using online technology regarding participants' convenience, accessibility, and availability of educational content. Women were divided into two groups. One group received an educational program, the second group remained in control and did not receive any education. All women were asked for their knowledge, attitude, self-efficacy and practice of PST three times immediately, 4 and 12 weeks after one-month training.Our assessment showed significant group differences at different times in knowledge, attitude, self-efficacy, and practice about PST.In conclusion, effective online education in sustaining the effects of the educational program in the experimental group happened. Moreover, we experienced an appropriate teaching method for restricted situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic to promote educational participation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Iran , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology
3.
Cancer Prev Res (Phila) ; 14(10): 919-926, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1450634

ABSTRACT

The World Health Organization global call to eliminate cervical cancer encourages countries to consider introducing or improving cervical cancer screening programs. Brazil's Unified Health System (SUS) is among the world's largest public health systems offering free cytology testing, follow-up colposcopy, and treatment. Yet, health care networks across the country have unequal infrastructure, human resources, equipment, and supplies resulting in uneven program performance and large disparities in cervical cancer incidence and mortality. An effective screening program needs multiple strategies feasible for each community's reality, facilitating coverage and follow-up adherence. Prioritizing those at highest risk with tests that better stratify risk will limit inefficiencies, improving program impact across different resource settings. Highly sensitive human papillomavirus (HPV)-DNA testing performs better than cytology and, with self-collection closer to homes and workplaces, improves access, even in remote regions. Molecular triage strategies like HPV genotyping can identify from the same self-collected sample, those at highest risk requiring follow-up. If proven acceptable, affordable, cost-effective, and efficient in the Brazilian context, these strategies would increase coverage while removing the need for speculum exams for routine screening and reducing follow-up visits. SUS could implement a nationwide organized program that accommodates heterogenous settings across Brazil, informing a variety of screening programs worldwide.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Cytodiagnosis/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Brazil/epidemiology , DNA, Viral/analysis , DNA, Viral/genetics , Female , Humans , Papillomavirus Infections/genetics , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
4.
Prev Med ; 151: 106596, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1294325

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has a major impact on a wide range of health outcomes. Disruptions of elective health services related to cervical screening, management of abnormal screening test results, and treatment of precancers, may lead to increases in cervical cancer incidence and exacerbate existing health disparities. Modeling studies suggest that a short delay of cervical screening in subjects with previously negative HPV results has minor effects on cancer outcomes, while delay of management and treatment can lead to larger increases in cervical cancer. Several approaches can mitigate the effects of disruption of cervical screening and management. HPV-based screening has higher accuracy compared to cytology, and a negative HPV result provides longer reassurance against cervical cancer; further, HPV testing can be conducted from self-collected specimens. Self-collection expands the reach of screening to underserved populations who currently do not participate in screening. Self-collection and can also provide alternative screening approaches during the pandemic because testing can be supported by telehealth and specimens collected in the home, substantially reducing patient-provider contact and risk of COVID-19 exposure, and also expanding the reach of catch-up services to address backlogs of screening tests that accumulated during the pandemic. Risk-based management allows prioritizing management of patients at highest risk of cervical cancer while extending screening intervals for those at lowest risk. The pandemic provides important lessons for how to make cervical screening more resilient to disruptions and how to reduce cervical cancer disparities that may be exacerbated due to disruptions of health services.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Infections , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Mass Screening , Pandemics , Papillomaviridae , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology
6.
JAMA Oncol ; 7(6): 885-894, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274648

ABSTRACT

Importance: In 2018, only half of US women obtained all evidence-based cancer screenings. This proportion may have declined during the COVID-19 pandemic because of social distancing, high-risk factors, and fear. Objective: To evaluate optimal screening strategies in women who obtain some, but not all, US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-recommended cancer screenings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This modeling study was conducted from January 31, 2017, to July 20, 2020, and used 4 validated mathematical models from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network using data from 20 million simulated women born in 1965 in the US. Interventions: Forty-five screening strategies were modeled that combined breast, cervical, colorectal, and/or lung cancer (LC) screenings; restricted to 1, 2, 3 or 4 screenings per year; or all eligible screenings once every 5 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Modeled life-years gained from restricted cancer screenings as a fraction of those attainable from full compliance with USPSTF recommendations (maximum benefits). Results were stratified by LC screening eligibility (LC-eligible/ineligible). We repeated the analysis with 2018 adherence rates, evaluating the increase in adherence required for restricted screenings to have the same population benefit as USPSTF recommendations. Results: This modeling study of 20 million simulated US women found that it was possible to reduce screening intensity to 1 carefully chosen test per year in women who were ineligible for LC screening and 2 tests per year in eligible women while maintaining 94% or more of the maximum benefits. Highly ranked strategies screened for various cancers, but less often than recommended by the USPSTF. For example, among LC-ineligible women who obtained just 1 screening per year, the optimal strategy frequently delayed breast and cervical cancer screenings by 1 year and skipped 3 mammograms entirely. Among LC-eligible women, LC screening was essential; strategies omitting it provided 25% or less of the maximum benefits. The top-ranked strategy restricted to 2 screenings per year was annual LC screening and alternating fecal immunochemical test with mammography (skipping mammograms when due for cervical cancer screening, 97% of maximum benefits). If adherence in a population of LC-eligible women obtaining 2 screenings per year were to increase by 1% to 2% (depending on the screening test), this model suggests that it would achieve the same benefit as USPSTF recommendations at 2018 adherence rates. Conclusions and Relevance: This modeling study of 45 cancer screening strategies suggests that women who are noncompliant with cancer screening guidelines may be able to reduce USPSTF-recommended screening intensity with minimal reduction in overall benefits.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Early Detection of Cancer , Models, Theoretical , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/virology , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/virology , Female , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/virology , Mammography , Patient Compliance , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
7.
JAMA Oncol ; 7(6): 885-894, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1206734

ABSTRACT

Importance: In 2018, only half of US women obtained all evidence-based cancer screenings. This proportion may have declined during the COVID-19 pandemic because of social distancing, high-risk factors, and fear. Objective: To evaluate optimal screening strategies in women who obtain some, but not all, US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-recommended cancer screenings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This modeling study was conducted from January 31, 2017, to July 20, 2020, and used 4 validated mathematical models from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network using data from 20 million simulated women born in 1965 in the US. Interventions: Forty-five screening strategies were modeled that combined breast, cervical, colorectal, and/or lung cancer (LC) screenings; restricted to 1, 2, 3 or 4 screenings per year; or all eligible screenings once every 5 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Modeled life-years gained from restricted cancer screenings as a fraction of those attainable from full compliance with USPSTF recommendations (maximum benefits). Results were stratified by LC screening eligibility (LC-eligible/ineligible). We repeated the analysis with 2018 adherence rates, evaluating the increase in adherence required for restricted screenings to have the same population benefit as USPSTF recommendations. Results: This modeling study of 20 million simulated US women found that it was possible to reduce screening intensity to 1 carefully chosen test per year in women who were ineligible for LC screening and 2 tests per year in eligible women while maintaining 94% or more of the maximum benefits. Highly ranked strategies screened for various cancers, but less often than recommended by the USPSTF. For example, among LC-ineligible women who obtained just 1 screening per year, the optimal strategy frequently delayed breast and cervical cancer screenings by 1 year and skipped 3 mammograms entirely. Among LC-eligible women, LC screening was essential; strategies omitting it provided 25% or less of the maximum benefits. The top-ranked strategy restricted to 2 screenings per year was annual LC screening and alternating fecal immunochemical test with mammography (skipping mammograms when due for cervical cancer screening, 97% of maximum benefits). If adherence in a population of LC-eligible women obtaining 2 screenings per year were to increase by 1% to 2% (depending on the screening test), this model suggests that it would achieve the same benefit as USPSTF recommendations at 2018 adherence rates. Conclusions and Relevance: This modeling study of 45 cancer screening strategies suggests that women who are noncompliant with cancer screening guidelines may be able to reduce USPSTF-recommended screening intensity with minimal reduction in overall benefits.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Early Detection of Cancer , Models, Theoretical , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/virology , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/virology , Female , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/virology , Mammography , Patient Compliance , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
8.
Vaccine ; 39(20): 2731-2735, 2021 05 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1193499

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly affected utilization of preventative health care, including vaccines. We aimed to assess HPV vaccination rates during the pandemic, and conduct a simulation model-based analysis to estimate the impact of current coverage and future pandemic recovery scenarios on disease outcomes. The model population included females and males of all ages in the US. The model compares pre-COVID vaccine uptake to 3 reduced coverage scenarios with varying recovery speed. Vaccine coverage was obtained from Truven Marketscan™. Substantially reduced coverage between March-August 2020 was observed compared to 2018-2019. The model predicted that 130,853 to 213,926 additional cases of genital warts; 22,503 to 48,157 cases of CIN1; 48,682 to 110,192 cases of CIN2/3; and 2,882 to 6,487 cases of cervical cancer will occur over the next 100 years, compared to status quo. Providers should plan efforts to recover HPV vaccination and minimize potential long-term consequences.


Subject(s)
Alphapapillomavirus , COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Infections , Papillomavirus Vaccines , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Humans , Male , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Vaccination , Vaccination Coverage
9.
Ethiop J Health Sci ; 31(1): 189-200, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1175686

ABSTRACT

Background: Cervical cancer remains the most common cancer of women worldwide. Its burden is more serious in developing countries. It is also the second common cancer deaths of women in Ethiopia followed by breast cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the pooled prevalence and associated factors of precancerous cervical lesions among women in Ethiopia. Methods: We systematically searched published and unpublished articles reported from 2010 to 2019 using a comprehensive search of electronic databases including PubMed and Google scholar for grey literature from August 1 to September 1, 2019. The methodological qualities of included studies were evaluated using Joanna Briggs Institute meta-analysis of Statistics Assessment. The pooled prevalence estimate was calculated using MedCalc software-version 19.0.7, and the pooled odd ratios for predictors was calculated using RevMan software version 5.3. Results: The pooled prevalence of precancerous cervical lesions among women in Ethiopia was 13.4% (95% CI:10.63% 16.37%). Statistically significant heterogeneity between studies was detected (I2=83.1%, P < 0.001). Among all measured associated factors: numbers of women life time sexual partners > 1, OR=2.5 (95% CI:3.70,4.76), being HIV positive women, OR=2.4 (95% CI:1.33,4.61) and women having history of STI, OR=2.0 (95% CI:1.02,3.87) had statistically significant association with precancerous cervical lesions among women in Ethiopia. Conclusion: The pooled prevalence of precancerous cervical lesions among women in Ethiopia was high as compared to the 5-year worldwide cervical cancer prevalence. Women having more than one life time sexual partners, being HIV positive women and women having history of STI had a statistically significant association with precancerous cervical lesions.


Subject(s)
Precancerous Conditions , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Ethiopia/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Precancerous Conditions/epidemiology , Precancerous Conditions/etiology , Prevalence , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/etiology
10.
J Med Screen ; 28(2): 213-216, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1140458

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the secondary impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic disruptions to cervical cancer screening in the United States, stratified by step in the screening process and primary test modality, on cervical cancer burden. METHODS: We conducted a comparative model-based analysis using three independent NCI Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network cervical models to quantify the impact of eight alternative COVID-19-related screening disruption scenarios compared to a scenario of no disruptions. Scenarios varied by the duration of the disruption (6 or 24 months), steps in the screening process being disrupted (primary screening, surveillance, colposcopy, excisional treatment), and primary screening modality (cytology alone or cytology plus human papillomavirus "cotesting"). RESULTS: The models consistently showed that COVID-19-related disruptions yield small net increases in cervical cancer cases by 2027, which are greater for women previously screened with cytology compared with cotesting. When disruptions affected all four steps in the screening process under cytology-based screening, there were an additional 5-7 and 38-45 cases per one million screened for 6- and 24-month disruptions, respectively. In contrast, under cotesting, there were additional 4-5 and 35-45 cases per one million screened for 6- and 24-month disruptions, respectively. The majority (58-79%) of the projected increases in cases under cotesting were due to disruptions to surveillance, colposcopies, or excisional treatment, rather than to primary screening. CONCLUSIONS: Women in need of surveillance, colposcopies, or excisional treatment, or whose last primary screen did not involve human papillomavirus testing, may comprise priority groups for reintroductions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Early Detection of Cancer , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adult , Colposcopy , Cytological Techniques , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Models, Statistical , Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , United States , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology
11.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev ; 30(3): 432-434, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133380

ABSTRACT

Cervical cancer screening has undergone a transformation in recent decades. Historically, programs were based on cervical cytology (i.e., "Pap smear"), which had to be repeated often because of its limited sensitivity and reproducibility. In more recent years, the discovery of human papillomavirus (HPV) as the necessary cause of virtually all cervical cancers has led to the introduction of HPV testing into clinical practice, first as a triage test for minor cytologic abnormalities, then in conjunction with cervical cytology (cotesting), and most recently, as a standalone screening test. Multiple randomized trials have shown that HPV-based screening has higher sensitivity compared with cytology, providing great reassurance against cervical precancer and cancer for women testing HPV-negative for many years. Analyses have also been conducted in support of the recent U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines that show that primary HPV screening achieves the greatest balance of benefits and harms compared with other strategies. An added benefit of primary HPV testing is the ability to conduct it from self-collected samples, which is critical for extending coverage among hard-to-reach individuals and could provide a safe and effective alternative to in-person screening visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.See related article by Liang et al., p. 474.


Subject(s)
Alphapapillomavirus , COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Infections , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Mass Screening , Pandemics , Papanicolaou Test , Papillomaviridae , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2 , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Vaginal Smears
13.
Br J Cancer ; 124(8): 1361-1365, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1072147

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cervical cancer screening services. Assuming increases to screening capacity are unrealistic, we propose two recovery strategies: one extends the screening interval by 6 months for all and the other extends the interval by 36/60 months, but only for women who have already missed being screened. METHODS: Using routine statistics from England we estimate the number of women affected by delays to screening. We used published research to estimate the proportion of screening age women with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and progression rates to cancer. Under two recovery scenarios, we estimate the impact of COVID-19 on cervical cancer over one screening cycle (3 years at ages 25-49 and 5 years at ages 50-64 years). The duration of disruption in both scenarios is 6 months. In the first scenario, 10.7 million women have their screening interval extended by 6 months. In the second, 1.5 million women (those due to be screened during the disruption) miss one screening cycle, but most women have no delay. RESULTS: Both scenarios result in similar numbers of excess cervical cancers: 630 vs. 632 (both 4.3 per 100,000 women in the population). However, the scenario in which some women miss one screening cycle creates inequalities-they would have much higher rates of excess cancer: 41.5 per 100,000 delayed for screened women compared to those with a 6-month delay (5.9 per 100,000). CONCLUSION: To ensure equity for those affected by COVID-19 related screening delays additional screening capacity will need to be paired with prioritising the screening of overdue women.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Colposcopy/methods , England/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Papillomaviridae/pathogenicity , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/complications , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaginal Smears/methods
14.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6 Suppl 2): 344-352, 2020.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068157

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: to describe the course of Italian organized cancer screening programmes during the COVID-19 emergency; to provide estimates of the diagnosis of malignant or pre-malignant lesions that will face a diagnostic delay due to the slowing down of screening activities. DESIGN: quantitative survey of aggregated data for each Region and overall for Italy relating to screening tests carried out in the period January-May 2020 compared to those of the same period of 2019; estimate of diagnostic delays starting from the calculation of the average detection rate of the last 3 years available (specific by Region). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Italian mass screening programmes. Data on the tests carried out in the target population of the breast (women 50-69 years old), cervix (women 25-64 years old), and colorectal (women and men 50-69 years old) cancer screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: the cumulative delay (in absolute numbers and as a percentage) in the period January-May 2020 compared to the same period of 2019, by Region; the difference of screening tests (in absolute number and in percentage) performed in May 2020 compared to May 2019; the estimate of the fewer lesions diagnosed in 2020 compared with 2019 with relative 95% confidence intervals (95%CI); the 'standard months' of delay (proportion of fewer tests carried out from January to May 2020 for the corresponding number of months). RESULTS: 20 Regions out of 21 participated. In the period January-May 2020, the fewer screening tests performed in comparison with the same period of 2019 were: 472,389 (equal to 53.8%) with an average delay of standard months of 2.7 for mammography screening; 585,287 (equal to 54.9%) with an average delay of standard months of 2.7 for colorectal screening; 371,273 (equal to 55.3%) with an average delay of 2.8 standard months for cervical screening. The estimated number of undiagnosed lesions is 2,201 (95%CI 2,173-2,220) breast cancers; 645 (95%CI 632-661) colorectal carcinomas; 3,890 (95%CI 3,855-3,924) advanced colorectal adenomas and 1,497 (95%CI 1,413-1,586) CIN2 or more serious lesions. CONCLUSIONS: mass screenings need to be restarted as quickly as possible. In order to make up for the delay that is accumulating, it is necessary to provide for wider delivery times, greater resources, and new organizational approaches. It will also be essential to develop communication strategies suitable for promoting participation during this emergency.


Subject(s)
Appointments and Schedules , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Delayed Diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer , Pandemics , Quarantine , SARS-CoV-2 , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Delayed Diagnosis/statistics & numerical data , Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Care Surveys , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Mammography/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Procedures and Techniques Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology
17.
ESMO Open ; 5(Suppl 3)2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-688771

ABSTRACT

The rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and its related disease (COVID-19) has required an immediate and coordinate healthcare response to face the worldwide emergency and define strategies to maintain the continuum of care for the non-COVID-19 diseases while protecting patients and healthcare providers. The dimension of the COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented risk especially for the more vulnerable populations. To manage patients with cancer adequately, maintaining the highest quality of care, a definition of value-based priorities is necessary to define which interventions can be safely postponed without affecting patients' outcome. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) has endorsed a tiered approach across three different levels of priority (high, medium, low) incorporating information on the value-based prioritisation and clinical cogency of the interventions that can be applied for different disease sites. Patients with gynaecological cancer are at particular risk of COVID-19 complications because of their age and prevalence of comorbidities. The definition of priority level should be based on tumour stage and histology, cancer-related symptoms or complications, aim (curative vs palliative) and magnitude of benefit of the oncological intervention, patients' general condition and preferences. The decision-making process always needs to consider the disease-specific national and international guidelines and the local healthcare system and social resources, and a changing situation in relation to COVID-19 infection. These recommendations aim to provide guidance for the definition of deferrable and undeferrable interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic for ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancers within the context of the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Genital Neoplasms, Female/therapy , Medical Oncology/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Betacoronavirus/physiology , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Delivery of Health Care/trends , Endometrial Neoplasms/diagnosis , Endometrial Neoplasms/epidemiology , Endometrial Neoplasms/therapy , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Genital Neoplasms, Female/diagnosis , Genital Neoplasms, Female/epidemiology , Humans , Medical Oncology/organization & administration , Ovarian Neoplasms/diagnosis , Ovarian Neoplasms/epidemiology , Ovarian Neoplasms/therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Societies, Medical , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...