Chlamydia control activities in Europe: cross-sectional survey

Background: Chlamydia is the most commonly reported bacterial sexually transmitted infection in Europe. The objective of the Screening for Chlamydia in Europe (SCREen) project was to describe current and planned chlamydia control activities in Europe. Methods: The authors sent a questionnaire asking about different aspects of chlamydia epidemiology and control to public health and clinical experts in each country in 2007. The principles of sexually transmitted infection control were used to develop a typology comprising five categories of chlamydia control activities. Each country was assigned to a category, based on responses to the questionnaire. Results: Experts in 29 of 33 (88%) invited countries responded. Thirteen of 29 countries (45%) had no current chlamydia control activities. Six countries in this group stated that there were plans to introduce chlamydia screening programmes. There were five countries (17%) with case management guidelines only. Three countries (10%) also recommended case finding amongst partners of diagnosed chlamydia cases or people with another sexually transmitted infection. Six countries (21%) further specified groups of asymptomatic people eligible for opportunistic chlamydia testing. Two countries (7%) reported a chlamydia screening programme. There was no consistent association between the per capita gross domestic product of a country and the intensity of chlamydia control activities (P = 0.816). Conclusion: A newly developed classification system allowed the breadth of ongoing national chlamydia control activities to be described and categorized. Chlamydia control strategies should ensure that clinical guidelines to optimize chlamydia diagnosis and case management have been implemented before considering the appropriateness of screening programme

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

Are trends in HIV, gonorrhoea, and syphilis worsening in western Europe?

Trend data show that the numbers of new diagnoses of sexually acquired HIV infections increased by 20% in western Europe between 1995 and 2000. Gonorrhoea reports have increased in France, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The Netherlands, France, Ireland, and the United Kingdom reported outbreaks of syphilis in men having sex with men, including men already infected with HIV. These preliminary data for several European countries imply that people may increasingly take sexual risks. HIV remains Europe's most important sexually transmitted infection, yet complacency over HIV prevention may have set in among individuals, populations, and some governments in western Europe

How to Best Define Target Populations of Medicines in View of Their Coverage by the National Health Insurance Scheme?

The target population of a medicine may include different populations that may partially overlap including the population that has been evaluated in the clinical trials, the population for which the medicine provides an actual benefit (SMR), that for which the drug provides an improvement of the actual benefit (ASMR), etc. The definition of the target population in both qualitative and quantitative terms has key public health and economic implications. Recommendations are made to shed light on the definitions, to clarify the requests of the public decision makers and to improve the methods and the sources allowing the quantification of target populations

Exploring Uncertainty in Economic Evaluations of Drugs and Medical Devices: Lessons from the First Review of Manufacturers’ Submissions to the French National Authority for Health

International audienceObjectivesThe objective of this paper was to evaluate how uncertainty has been accounted for in the cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) submitted by manufacturers to the French National Authority for Health (HAS) and to identify recurring concerns in these submissions.MethodsWe used a cross-sectional design to evaluate manufacturers’ submissions from the beginning of the evaluation process in October 2013 to the end of May 2015 (n = 28). The sources of uncertainty attached to these CEAs were categorized and assessed. Relevant data were extracted independently by two assessors.ResultsAdherence to the HAS reference case was generally considered to be acceptable. Methodological uncertainty and parameter uncertainty were the sources of uncertainty that were most frequently explored by manufacturers. The quality of reporting of deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis varied substantially across submissions, with a frequent lack of justification of the plausible range of parameter point estimates in 12 submissions (43 %). Structural uncertainty was explored much less frequently. Concerns related to omission of either important clinical events or relevant health states or extrapolation of the effects of the technology beyond the time horizon of the clinical trials were identified in 16 submissions (57 %).ConclusionsThis study presented a characterization of the treatment of uncertainty for the first 28 manufacturers’ submissions to the HAS. This work identified important concerns regarding the exploration of sources of uncertainty. The findings may help manufacturers to improve the quality of their submissions and may provide useful insights for extending guidelines on uncertainty analysis in CEAs submitted to the HAS

Définition des populations cibles des médicaments : comment anticiper au mieux la définition des populations cibles en vue du remboursement ?

La population cible d’un médicament en vue du remboursement peut inclure différentes populations qui peuvent se recouvrir partiellement : la population qui a étéétudiée dans les essais cliniques, celle de l’autorisation de mise sur le marché (AMM), celle du service médical rendu (SMR), celle de l’amélioration du service médical rendu (ASMR), etc. Sa définition qualitative et quantitative implique des enjeux importants en termes de santé publique et économique. Des recommandations ont été faites afin de clarifier les définitions, d’éclaircir les souhaits des décideurs publics et d’améliorer les méthodes et les sources permettant une quantification des populations cibles

HIV testing in Europe: Mapping policies

Objectives: In the absence of treatment and in the context of discrimination, HIV testing was embedded within exceptional procedures. With increasing treatment effectiveness, early HIV diagnosis became important, calling for the normalization of testing. National HIV testing policies were mapped to explore the characteristics and variations across European countries. Methods: Key informants within the health authorities of all EU/EEA countries were questioned on HIV testing policies, which were assessed within a conceptual framework and the level of exceptionalism and normalization was scored based on defined attributes. Results: Twenty-four out of 31 countries participated in the survey. Policies tended to support confidential voluntary testing, informed consent, and counselling. In the majority of countries, specific groups were targeted for provider-initiated testing. Taking together all attributes of HIV testing, 14 countries obtained a high score for exceptionalism, while only 3 achieved a high score on normalization. Italy, Lithuania and Romania had primarily exceptional procedures; Norway leant more towards normalization; Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Denmark scored high in both. Conclusions: In most EU/EEA countries, policies are integrating HIV testing in health care settings, through voluntary and targeted testing strategies. Current HIV testing policies exhibited a high level of exceptionalism with varying degrees of normalization. Further research should compare HIV testing policies with practices

HIV testing practices as reported by HIV-infected patients in four European countries

HIV testing constitutes an important strategy to control the HIV epidemic, which therefore merits an observation of HIV testing practices to help improve testing effectiveness. In 2008, a cross-sectional survey among recently diagnosed (≤ 3 years) HIV-infected patients was conducted in Belgium, Estonia, Finland and Portugal. Participants were questioned about reasons for HIV testing, testing place and testing conditions. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Out of 1460 eligible participants, 629 (43%) were included. Forty-one per cent were diagnosed late and 55% had never undergone a previous HIV test with perceived low risk being the primary reason for not having been tested earlier. Heterogeneity in HIV testing practices was observed across countries. Overall, tests were most frequently conducted in primary care (38%) and specialised clinics (21%), primarily on the initiative of the health care provider (65%). Sixty-one per cent were tested with informed consent, 31% received pretest counselling, 78% received post-test counselling, 71% were involved in partner notification and 92% were in care three months after diagnosis. The results showed that HIV testing is done in a variety of settings suggesting that multiple pathways to HIV testing are provided. HIV testing practice is being normalised, with less focus on pretest counselling, yet with emphasis on post-test follow-up. Major barriers to testing are centred on the denial of risk. Efforts are needed to concurrently promote public awareness about HIV risk and benefits of HIV testing and train clinicians to be more proactive in offering HIV testing