Cargando…
Health impacts of COVID-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: A model-based analysis for current and future disruptions
BACKGROUND. We evaluated how temporary disruptions to primary cervical cancer (CC) screening services may differentially impact women due to heterogeneity in their screening history and test modality. METHODS. We used three CC models to project the short- and long-term health impacts assuming an und...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9347288/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35923317 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2022.07.25.22278011 |
_version_ | 1784761831514963968 |
---|---|
author | Burger, Emily A. de Kok, Inge M.C.M. O’Mahony, James F Rebolj, Matejka Jansen, Erik E.L. de Bondt, Daniel D. Killen, James Hanley, Sharon J. Castanon, Alejandra Kim, Jane J. Canfell, Karen Smith, Megan A. Regan, Mary Caroline |
author_facet | Burger, Emily A. de Kok, Inge M.C.M. O’Mahony, James F Rebolj, Matejka Jansen, Erik E.L. de Bondt, Daniel D. Killen, James Hanley, Sharon J. Castanon, Alejandra Kim, Jane J. Canfell, Karen Smith, Megan A. Regan, Mary Caroline |
author_sort | Burger, Emily A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND. We evaluated how temporary disruptions to primary cervical cancer (CC) screening services may differentially impact women due to heterogeneity in their screening history and test modality. METHODS. We used three CC models to project the short- and long-term health impacts assuming an underlying primary screening frequency (i.e., 1, 3, 5, or 10 yearly) under three alternative COVID-19-related screening disruption scenarios (i.e., 1-, 2- or 5-year delay) versus no delay, in the context of both cytology-based and HPV-based screening. RESULTS. Models projected a relative increase in symptomatically-detected cancer cases during a 1-year delay period that was 38% higher (Policy1-Cervix), 80% higher (Harvard) and 170% higher (MISCAN-Cervix) for under-screened women whose last cytology screen was 5 years prior to the disruption period compared with guidelines-compliant women (i.e., last screen three years prior to disruption). Over a woman’s lifetime, temporary COVID-19-related delays had less impact on lifetime risk of developing CC than screening frequency and test modality; however, CC risks increased disproportionately the longer time had elapsed since a woman’s last screen at the time of the disruption. Excess risks for a given delay period were generally lower for HPV-based screeners than for cytology-based screeners CONCLUSIONS. Our independent models predicted that the main drivers of CC risk were screening frequency and screening modality, and the overall impact of disruptions from the pandemic on CC outcomes may be small. However, screening disruptions disproportionately affect under-screened women, underpinning the importance of reaching such women as a critical area of focus, regardless of temporary disruptions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9347288 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93472882022-08-04 Health impacts of COVID-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: A model-based analysis for current and future disruptions Burger, Emily A. de Kok, Inge M.C.M. O’Mahony, James F Rebolj, Matejka Jansen, Erik E.L. de Bondt, Daniel D. Killen, James Hanley, Sharon J. Castanon, Alejandra Kim, Jane J. Canfell, Karen Smith, Megan A. Regan, Mary Caroline medRxiv Article BACKGROUND. We evaluated how temporary disruptions to primary cervical cancer (CC) screening services may differentially impact women due to heterogeneity in their screening history and test modality. METHODS. We used three CC models to project the short- and long-term health impacts assuming an underlying primary screening frequency (i.e., 1, 3, 5, or 10 yearly) under three alternative COVID-19-related screening disruption scenarios (i.e., 1-, 2- or 5-year delay) versus no delay, in the context of both cytology-based and HPV-based screening. RESULTS. Models projected a relative increase in symptomatically-detected cancer cases during a 1-year delay period that was 38% higher (Policy1-Cervix), 80% higher (Harvard) and 170% higher (MISCAN-Cervix) for under-screened women whose last cytology screen was 5 years prior to the disruption period compared with guidelines-compliant women (i.e., last screen three years prior to disruption). Over a woman’s lifetime, temporary COVID-19-related delays had less impact on lifetime risk of developing CC than screening frequency and test modality; however, CC risks increased disproportionately the longer time had elapsed since a woman’s last screen at the time of the disruption. Excess risks for a given delay period were generally lower for HPV-based screeners than for cytology-based screeners CONCLUSIONS. Our independent models predicted that the main drivers of CC risk were screening frequency and screening modality, and the overall impact of disruptions from the pandemic on CC outcomes may be small. However, screening disruptions disproportionately affect under-screened women, underpinning the importance of reaching such women as a critical area of focus, regardless of temporary disruptions. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2022-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9347288/ /pubmed/35923317 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2022.07.25.22278011 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. |
spellingShingle | Article Burger, Emily A. de Kok, Inge M.C.M. O’Mahony, James F Rebolj, Matejka Jansen, Erik E.L. de Bondt, Daniel D. Killen, James Hanley, Sharon J. Castanon, Alejandra Kim, Jane J. Canfell, Karen Smith, Megan A. Regan, Mary Caroline Health impacts of COVID-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: A model-based analysis for current and future disruptions |
title | Health impacts of COVID-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: A model-based analysis for current and future disruptions |
title_full | Health impacts of COVID-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: A model-based analysis for current and future disruptions |
title_fullStr | Health impacts of COVID-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: A model-based analysis for current and future disruptions |
title_full_unstemmed | Health impacts of COVID-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: A model-based analysis for current and future disruptions |
title_short | Health impacts of COVID-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: A model-based analysis for current and future disruptions |
title_sort | health impacts of covid-19 disruptions to primary cervical screening by time since last screen: a model-based analysis for current and future disruptions |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9347288/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35923317 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2022.07.25.22278011 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT burgeremilya healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT dekokingemcm healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT omahonyjamesf healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT reboljmatejka healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT jansenerikel healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT debondtdanield healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT killenjames healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT hanleysharonj healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT castanonalejandra healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT kimjanej healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT canfellkaren healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT smithmegana healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions AT reganmarycaroline healthimpactsofcovid19disruptionstoprimarycervicalscreeningbytimesincelastscreenamodelbasedanalysisforcurrentandfuturedisruptions |