Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses.
Adult
COVID-19
/ complications
Colposcopy
/ methods
Early Detection of Cancer
England
/ epidemiology
Female
Humans
Middle Aged
Pandemics
Papillomaviridae
/ pathogenicity
Papillomavirus Infections
/ complications
Pregnancy
SARS-CoV-2
/ genetics
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
/ complications
Vaginal Smears
/ methods
Journal
British journal of cancer
ISSN: 1532-1827
Titre abrégé: Br J Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370635
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2021
04 2021
Historique:
received:
02
12
2020
accepted:
13
01
2021
pubmed:
10
2
2021
medline:
23
4
2021
entrez:
9
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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). 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.
Sections du résumé
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33558708
doi: 10.1038/s41416-021-01275-3
pii: 10.1038/s41416-021-01275-3
pmc: PMC8039040
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1361-1365Subventions
Organisme : Cancer Research UK (CRUK)
ID : C8162/A16892
Organisme : Cancer Research UK (CRUK)
ID : C8162/A25356
Références
Screening & Immunisations Team, NHS Digital. Cervical Screening Programme, England—2018–2019. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/cervical-screening-annual/england---2018-19 (2019).
Public Health England (PHE). Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine coverage in England, 2008/09 to 2013/14. A Review of the Full Six years of the Three-Dose Schedule: Immunisation, Hepatitis and Blood Safety Department. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/human-papillomavirus-hpv-immunisation-programme-review-2008-to-2014 (2015).
Merrifield, N. NHSE to start issuing cervical screening invitations again from this month. PULSE Magazine. http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/clinical/clinical-specialties/cancer/nhse-to-start-issuing-cervical-screening-invitations-again-from-this-month/20040892.article (2020).
Pearce, C. NHS England is reviewing suspension of national screening programmes. PULSE Magazine. http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/clinical/clinical-specialties/cancer/nhs-england-is-reviewing-suspension-of-national-screening-programmes/20040657.article (2020).
Khanna, D., Khargekar, N. C. & Khanna, A. K. Implementation of early detection services for cancer in India during COVID-19 pandemic. Cancer Control 27, 1073274820960471 (2020).
doi: 10.1177/1073274820960471
Cancino, R., Su, Z., Mesa, R., Tomlinson, G. & Wang, J. The impact of COVID-19 on cancer-screening: challenges and opportunities. JMIR Cancer 6, e21697 (2020).
doi: 10.2196/21697
NHS Digital. Cervical Screening Programme, England—2018-19 (2019). Retrieved 25 Jan 2021, from https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/cervical-screening-annual/england---2018-19 .
Office for National Statistics. Population estimates for the UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland: mid-2019. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/mid2019estimates (2020).
Rebolj, M., Rimmer, J., Denton, K., Tidy, J., Mathews, C., Ellis, K. et al. Primary cervical screening with high risk human papillomavirus testing: observational study. BMJ 364, l240 (2019).
doi: 10.1136/bmj.l240
Health Protection Agency Immunisation Section. Annual HPV vaccine coverage in England in 2010/11: Department of Health. https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130104163933/http://immunisation.dh.gov.uk/annual-hpv-vaccine-coverage-in-england-in-201011-report/ (2012).
Palmer, T., Wallace, L., Pollock, K. G., Cuschieri, K., Robertson, C., Kavanagh, K. et al. Prevalence of cervical disease at age 20 after immunisation with bivalent HPV vaccine at age 12-13 in Scotland: retrospective population study. BMJ 365, l1161 (2019).
doi: 10.1136/bmj.l1161
Landy, R., Windridge, P., Gillman, M. S. & Sasieni, P. D. What cervical screening is appropriate for women who have been vaccinated against high risk HPV? A simulation study. Int. J. Cancer 142, 709–718 (2017).
doi: 10.1002/ijc.31094
Naber, S. K., Matthijsse, S. M., Rozemeijer, K., Penning, C., de Kok, I. M. & van Ballegooijen, M. Cervical cancer screening in partly HPV vaccinated cohorts—a cost-effectiveness analysis. PLoS ONE 11, e0145548 (2016).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145548
Andrae, B., Kemetli, L., Sparen, P., Silfverdal, L., Strander, B., Ryd, W. et al. Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 100, 622–629 (2008).
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djn099
Sasieni, P., Adams, J. & Cuzick, J. Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from the UK audit of screening histories. Br. J. Cancer 89, 88–93 (2003).
doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6600974
Lonnberg, S., Anttila, A., Luostarinen, T. & Nieminen, P. Age-specific effectiveness of the Finnish cervical cancer screening programme. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 21, 1354–1361 (2012).
doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-0162
Dillner, J., Rebolj, M., Birembaut, P., Petry, K. U., Szarewski, A., Munk, C. et al. Long term predictive values of cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: joint European Cohort Study. BMJ 337, a1754 (2008).
doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1754
Sasieni, P. Equality and equity in medical screening: what is fair? Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 4, 578–580 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30185-2