Cargando…
Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses
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 wo...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8039040/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33558708 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01275-3 |
_version_ | 1783677508082728960 |
---|---|
author | Castanon, Alejandra Rebolj, Matejka Pesola, Francesca Sasieni, Peter |
author_facet | Castanon, Alejandra Rebolj, Matejka Pesola, Francesca Sasieni, Peter |
author_sort | Castanon, Alejandra |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8039040 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80390402021-04-27 Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses Castanon, Alejandra Rebolj, Matejka Pesola, Francesca Sasieni, Peter Br J Cancer Article 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. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-02-09 2021-04-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8039040/ /pubmed/33558708 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01275-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Castanon, Alejandra Rebolj, Matejka Pesola, Francesca Sasieni, Peter Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses |
title | Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses |
title_full | Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses |
title_fullStr | Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses |
title_full_unstemmed | Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses |
title_short | Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses |
title_sort | recovery strategies following covid-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8039040/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33558708 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01275-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT castanonalejandra recoverystrategiesfollowingcovid19disruptiontocervicalcancerscreeningandtheirimpactonexcessdiagnoses AT reboljmatejka recoverystrategiesfollowingcovid19disruptiontocervicalcancerscreeningandtheirimpactonexcessdiagnoses AT pesolafrancesca recoverystrategiesfollowingcovid19disruptiontocervicalcancerscreeningandtheirimpactonexcessdiagnoses AT sasienipeter recoverystrategiesfollowingcovid19disruptiontocervicalcancerscreeningandtheirimpactonexcessdiagnoses |