Comparative accuracy of cervical cancer screening strategies in healthy asymptomatic women:a systematic review and network meta-analysis

To compare all available accuracy data on screening strategies for identifying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade ≥ 2 in healthy asymptomatic women, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to October 2020 for paired-design studies of cytology and testing for high-risk genotypes of human papillomavirus (hrHPV). The methods used included a duplicate assessment of eligibility, double extraction of quantitative data, validity assessment, random-effects network meta-analysis of test accuracy, and GRADE rating. Twenty-seven prospective studies (185,269 subjects) were included. The combination of cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or higher grades) and hrHPV testing (excepting genotyping for HPV 16 or 18 [HPV16/18]) with the either-positive criterion (OR rule) was the most sensitive/least specific, whereas the same combination with the both-positive criterion (AND rule) was the most specific/least sensitive. Compared with standalone cytology, non-HPV16/18 hrHPV assays were more sensitive/less specific. Two algorithms proposed for primary cytological testing or primary hrHPV testing were ranked in the middle as more sensitive/less specific than standalone cytology and the AND rule combinations but more specific/less sensitive than standalone hrHPV testing and the OR rule combination. Further research is needed to assess these results in population-relevant outcomes at the program level

The Effect of Nationwide Organized Cancer Screening Programs on Gastric Cancer Mortality:a Synthetic Control Study

Background &amp; Aims: Nationwide organized gastric cancer (GC) screening programs have been running for decades in South Korea and Japan. This study conducted a quasi-experimental analysis to assess the population impact of these programs on GC mortality. Methods: We used the flexible synthetic control method (SCM) to estimate the effect of the screening programs on age-standardized GC mortality and other upper gastrointestinal (UGI) diseases (esophageal cancer and peptic ulcer) among people aged ≥40 years. World Health Organization mortality data and country-level covariates from the World Bank and the Global Burden of Diseases study were used for the analyses. We compared postintervention trends in outcome with the counterfactual trend of the synthetic control and estimated average postintervention rate ratios (RRs) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A series of sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: The preintervention fits were acceptable for the analyses of South Korea and Japan's GC mortality but poor for Japan's other UGI disease mortality. The average postintervention RRs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.71–0.96) for GC mortality and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.57–0.90) for other UGI disease mortality in South Korea. The RR reached 0.59 by the 15th year after the initiation of nationwide screening. For Japan, the average RRs were 0.97 (95% CI, 0.88–1.07) for GC mortality and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.68–1.28) for other UGI disease mortality. Sensitivity analysis reveals the result for Japan may potentially be biased. Conclusions: South Korea's nationwide GC screening has apparent benefits, whereas the Japanese program's effectiveness is uncertain. The experiences of South Korea and Japan could serve as a reference for other countries.</p

The Effect of Nationwide Organized Cancer Screening Programs on Gastric Cancer Mortality:a Synthetic Control Study

Background &amp; Aims: Nationwide organized gastric cancer (GC) screening programs have been running for decades in South Korea and Japan. This study conducted a quasi-experimental analysis to assess the population impact of these programs on GC mortality. Methods: We used the flexible synthetic control method (SCM) to estimate the effect of the screening programs on age-standardized GC mortality and other upper gastrointestinal (UGI) diseases (esophageal cancer and peptic ulcer) among people aged ≥40 years. World Health Organization mortality data and country-level covariates from the World Bank and the Global Burden of Diseases study were used for the analyses. We compared postintervention trends in outcome with the counterfactual trend of the synthetic control and estimated average postintervention rate ratios (RRs) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A series of sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: The preintervention fits were acceptable for the analyses of South Korea and Japan's GC mortality but poor for Japan's other UGI disease mortality. The average postintervention RRs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.71–0.96) for GC mortality and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.57–0.90) for other UGI disease mortality in South Korea. The RR reached 0.59 by the 15th year after the initiation of nationwide screening. For Japan, the average RRs were 0.97 (95% CI, 0.88–1.07) for GC mortality and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.68–1.28) for other UGI disease mortality. Sensitivity analysis reveals the result for Japan may potentially be biased. Conclusions: South Korea's nationwide GC screening has apparent benefits, whereas the Japanese program's effectiveness is uncertain. The experiences of South Korea and Japan could serve as a reference for other countries.</p

The IARC perspective on cervical cancer screening

In May 2018, the World Health Organization (WHO) called for a global initiative to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. To achieve this goal, global scale-up of effective vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV) as well as screening for and treatment of cervical cancer are required. Cervical cancer screening was evaluated in 2005 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Handbooks program,1 and a reevaluation was deemed to be timely given the major advances in the field since then. The new handbook provides updated evaluations of the effectiveness of screening methods, which were used as a basis for the update of the WHO Guideline for Screening and Treatment of Cervical Pre-cancer Lesions for Cervical Cancer Prevention.2 We convened an IARC Working Group of 27 scientists from 20 countries to assess the evidence on the current approaches to and technologies used in cervical cancer screening with the use of the newly updated Handbooks Preamble3 (Fig. 1) and Table 1).Fil: Bouvard, Véronique. International Agency For Research On Cancer; FranciaFil: Wentzensen, Nicolas. National Cancer Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Mackie, Anne. Public Health England; Reino UnidoFil: Berkhof, Johannes. University of Amsterdam; Países BajosFil: Brotherton, Julia. VCS Foundation; Australia. University of Melbourne; AustraliaFil: Giorgi Rossi, Paolo. Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale Di Reggio Emilia; ItaliaFil: Kupets, Rachel. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Smith, Robert. American Cancer Society; Estados UnidosFil: Arrossi, Silvina. Centro de Estudios de Estado y Sociedad; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Bendahhou, Karima. Casablanca Cancer Registry; MarruecosFil: Canfell, Karen. The University Of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Chirenje, Z. Mike. University Of Zimbabwe; ZimbabueFil: Chung, Michael H.. University of Emory; Estados UnidosFil: del Pino, Marta. Hospital Clinico de Barcelona; EspañaFil: de Sanjosé, Silvia. Program for Appropriate Technology in Health; Estados UnidosFil: Elfström, Miriam. Karolinska Huddinge Hospital. Karolinska Institutet; SueciaFil: Franco, Eduardo L.. McGill University; CanadáFil: Hamashima, Chisato. Teikyo University; JapónFil: Hamers, Françoise F.. French National Public Health Agency; FranciaFil: Herrington, C. Simon. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Murillo, Raúl. Hospital Universitario San Ignacio; ColombiaFil: Sangrajrang, Suleeporn. National Cancer Institute; TailandiaFil: Sankaranarayanan, Rengaswamy. Research Triangle Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Saraiya, Mona. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Estados UnidosFil: Schiffman, Mark. National Cancer Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Zhao, Fanghui. Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College; ChinaFil: Arbyn, Marc. Sciensano; BélgicaFil: Prendiville, Walter. International Agency For Research On Cancer; FranciaFil: Indave Ruiz, Blanca I.. International Agency For Research On Cancer; FranciaFil: Mosquera Metcalfe, Isabel. International Agency For Research On Cancer; FranciaFil: Lauby Secretan, Béatrice. International Agency For Research On Cancer; Franci

Association between age factors and strategies for promoting participation in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings

Abstract Background Despite the long history of cancer screening in Japan, the participation rates in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings have not increased. Strategies for improving the participation rates have been proposed, but differences in their effects among different age groups remain unclear. Methods The Japanese government conducted a national survey in all municipalities in Japan in 2010 to investigate whether the implementation of promotion strategies increased participation in cancer screening. We investigated the association between age factors and strategies for promoting participation in cancer screening based on this national survey. Multiple regression analysis with generalized linear model was performed using the participation rates in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings as dependent variables, and the following strategies for promoting participation as independent variables: 1) personal invitation letters, 2) household invitation letters, 3) home visits by community nurses, 4) screenings in medical offices, and 5) free cancer screening programs. Results One thousand six hundred thirty nine municipalities for gastric cancer screening and 1666 municipalities for colorectal cancer screening were selected for the analysis. In gastric and colorectal cancer screenings, the participation rates of individuals aged 60–69 years was higher than those of other age groups. Personal and household invitation letters were effective promotion strategies for all age groups, which encouraged even older people to participate in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings. Screening in medical offices and free screenings were not effective in all age groups. Home visits were effective, but their adoption was limited to small municipalities. Conclusions To clarify whether promotion strategies can increase the participation rate in cancer screening among different age groups, 5 strategies were assessed on the basis of a national survey. Although personal and household invitation letters were effective strategies for promoting participation in cancer screening for all age groups, these strategies equally encouraged older people to participate in gastric and colorectal cancer screenings. If resource for sending invitation letters are limited, priority should be given to individuals who are in their 50s and 60s for gastric and colorectal cancer screening