Pub Date : 2023-12-01Epub Date: 2023-06-08DOI: 10.1177/09691413231178253
Valentina Rangel, Ginna Paola Fernández-Deaza, Juan Sebastián Castillo, Raúl Murillo
Objectives: Cervical cancer elimination requires high-performance screening tests and high treatment rates, and thus high screening program performance is essential; however, Latin America lacks organized screening and quality assurance (QA) guidelines. We aimed to develop a core set of QA indicators suitable to the region.
Methods: We reviewed QA guidelines from countries/regions with highly organized screening programs and selected 49 indicators for screening intensity, test performance, follow-up, screening outcomes and system capacity. A regional expert consensus using the Delphi method in two rounds was implemented to identify basic indicators actionable within the regional context. The panel was integrated by recognized Latin American scientists and public health experts. They voted for the indicators blinded to each other based on feasibility and relevance. The correlation between both attributes was analyzed.
Results: In the first round 33 indicators reached consensus for feasibility but only 9 for relevance, without full coincidence. In the second round 9 indicators met the criteria for both (2 screening intensity, 1 test performance, 2 follow-up, 3 outcomes, 1 system capacity). A significant positive correlation was observed for test performance and outcomes indicators between the two attributes assessed (p < 0.05).
Conclusions: Cervical cancer control requires realistic goals supported by proper programs and QA systems. We identified a set of indicators suitable to improve cervical cancer screening performance in Latin America. The assessment by an expert panel with a joint vision from science and public health practice represents a significant progress towards real and feasible QA guidelines for countries in the region.
{"title":"Is it feasible to enhance quality assurance of cervical cancer screening in Latin America? A regional expert consensus.","authors":"Valentina Rangel, Ginna Paola Fernández-Deaza, Juan Sebastián Castillo, Raúl Murillo","doi":"10.1177/09691413231178253","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413231178253","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Cervical cancer elimination requires high-performance screening tests and high treatment rates, and thus high screening program performance is essential; however, Latin America lacks organized screening and quality assurance (QA) guidelines. We aimed to develop a core set of QA indicators suitable to the region.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed QA guidelines from countries/regions with highly organized screening programs and selected 49 indicators for screening intensity, test performance, follow-up, screening outcomes and system capacity. A regional expert consensus using the Delphi method in two rounds was implemented to identify basic indicators actionable within the regional context. The panel was integrated by recognized Latin American scientists and public health experts. They voted for the indicators blinded to each other based on feasibility and relevance. The correlation between both attributes was analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the first round 33 indicators reached consensus for feasibility but only 9 for relevance, without full coincidence. In the second round 9 indicators met the criteria for both (2 screening intensity, 1 test performance, 2 follow-up, 3 outcomes, 1 system capacity). A significant positive correlation was observed for test performance and outcomes indicators between the two attributes assessed (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cervical cancer control requires realistic goals supported by proper programs and QA systems. We identified a set of indicators suitable to improve cervical cancer screening performance in Latin America. The assessment by an expert panel with a joint vision from science and public health practice represents a significant progress towards real and feasible QA guidelines for countries in the region.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"201-208"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9590464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09691413231158932
Agathe Marchadier, Laura Bezannier, Stéphanie Barré-Pierrel, Antoine Manceau, Audrey A Abadie, Bruno Detournay
Many factors need to be considered when planning and managing a screening programme for the early detection of cervical cancer (CC). A non-systematic international review of the organisation of CC screening using high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV-HR) testing, aimed at identifying the organisational methods of these programmes, was conducted with a view to supporting the future of the French system in the context of the transition to HPV-HR testing. In countries where HPV testing has been implemented or planned, the initial reflection process has provided an opportunity to rethink the previous (cytological) screening organisation. Despite considerable differences between countries, a nationally or regionally centralised organisational model appears to be the preferred option in most countries. This model is based on a national/regional structure tasked with all invitations, reminders, follow-up and coordination, centralised laboratories integrating both biology and pathology laboratories, and a unified information system integrated with routine health management tools used by health practitioners and nurses. Besides quality considerations, grouped purchasing makes it possible to implement a public procurement policy that includes price negotiations with suppliers. Discussions around the introduction of HPV testing have resulted in most countries reviewing or creating information systems and quality assurance processes. While the WHO seems to recommend the systematic use of vaginal self-sampling, very few countries have considered this option. More and more countries are planning to implement vaginal self-sampling, but no clear organisational model has emerged from the countries where it has been implemented to date.
{"title":"Overview of organisational methods of primary cervical lesion screening programmes that use human papillomavirus testing.","authors":"Agathe Marchadier, Laura Bezannier, Stéphanie Barré-Pierrel, Antoine Manceau, Audrey A Abadie, Bruno Detournay","doi":"10.1177/09691413231158932","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413231158932","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many factors need to be considered when planning and managing a screening programme for the early detection of cervical cancer (CC). A non-systematic international review of the organisation of CC screening using high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV-HR) testing, aimed at identifying the organisational methods of these programmes, was conducted with a view to supporting the future of the French system in the context of the transition to HPV-HR testing. In countries where HPV testing has been implemented or planned, the initial reflection process has provided an opportunity to rethink the previous (cytological) screening organisation. Despite considerable differences between countries, a nationally or regionally centralised organisational model appears to be the preferred option in most countries. This model is based on a national/regional structure tasked with all invitations, reminders, follow-up and coordination, centralised laboratories integrating both biology and pathology laboratories, and a unified information system integrated with routine health management tools used by health practitioners and nurses. Besides quality considerations, grouped purchasing makes it possible to implement a public procurement policy that includes price negotiations with suppliers. Discussions around the introduction of HPV testing have resulted in most countries reviewing or creating information systems and quality assurance processes. While the WHO seems to recommend the systematic use of vaginal self-sampling, very few countries have considered this option. More and more countries are planning to implement vaginal self-sampling, but no clear organisational model has emerged from the countries where it has been implemented to date.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"113-119"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/35/ad/10.1177_09691413231158932.PMC10399092.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9962695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09691413231162507
Dustin Kee, Keith M Sigel, Juan P Wisnivesky, Minal S Kale
Objective: To achieve the lung cancer screening (LCS) mortality benefit in clinical trials, timely, real-world follow-up of abnormal test results is necessary. Presently, annual LCS rates are lower than in trials, and adherence to follow-up after suspicious findings has not been well studied. This study examined timely adherence to follow-up recommendations after positive low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screenings.
Methods: This retrospective study included individuals from two academic primary care practices in New York City who met United States Preventative Services Task Force LCS eligibility and had a positive LDCT scan between 2013 and 2020. They were recommended for shorter interval follow-up repeat computed tomography (CT), CT biopsy, or positron emission tomography/CT. Adherence was completion of the prescribed imaging by 15 days after the recommended 7-, 30-, and 90-day follow-up and by 30 days after the 180-day recommended follow-up.
Results: Among 106 individuals with a positive LDCT scan, 64 (60%) were adherent to follow-up recommendations. Adherence was 72%, 63%, and 42% for recommended follow-ups of 30, 90, and 180 days, respectively. Being male was a predictor of a lower adherence rate. Among 23 individuals newly diagnosed with lung cancer after a positive LDCT scan, 83% were adherent to follow-up testing and 82% of cancers were Stage 1A or limited stage.
Conclusions: There was variable adherence to the LCS follow-up recommendations despite positive screening CT, suggesting that even in a well-established screening program there may not be an efficient, systematic approach for follow-up. The delays in repeat testing potentially undermine the benefits of early detection.
{"title":"Timely adherence to follow-up after high-risk lung cancer screenings.","authors":"Dustin Kee, Keith M Sigel, Juan P Wisnivesky, Minal S Kale","doi":"10.1177/09691413231162507","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413231162507","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To achieve the lung cancer screening (LCS) mortality benefit in clinical trials, timely, real-world follow-up of abnormal test results is necessary. Presently, annual LCS rates are lower than in trials, and adherence to follow-up after suspicious findings has not been well studied. This study examined timely adherence to follow-up recommendations after positive low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screenings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included individuals from two academic primary care practices in New York City who met United States Preventative Services Task Force LCS eligibility and had a positive LDCT scan between 2013 and 2020. They were recommended for shorter interval follow-up repeat computed tomography (CT), CT biopsy, or positron emission tomography/CT. Adherence was completion of the prescribed imaging by 15 days after the recommended 7-, 30-, and 90-day follow-up and by 30 days after the 180-day recommended follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 106 individuals with a positive LDCT scan, 64 (60%) were adherent to follow-up recommendations. Adherence was 72%, 63%, and 42% for recommended follow-ups of 30, 90, and 180 days, respectively. Being male was a predictor of a lower adherence rate. Among 23 individuals newly diagnosed with lung cancer after a positive LDCT scan, 83% were adherent to follow-up testing and 82% of cancers were Stage 1A or limited stage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was variable adherence to the LCS follow-up recommendations despite positive screening CT, suggesting that even in a well-established screening program there may not be an efficient, systematic approach for follow-up. The delays in repeat testing potentially undermine the benefits of early detection.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"150-155"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10016280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09691413221144382
Zhivko Zhelev, Jaime Peters, Morwenna Rogers, Michael Allen, Goda Kijauskaite, Farah Seedat, Elizabeth Wilkinson, Christopher Hyde
Objectives: To systematically review the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI)-based systems for grading of fundus images in diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening.
Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the ClinicalTrials.gov from 1st January 2000 to 27th August 2021. Accuracy studies published in English were included if they met the pre-specified inclusion criteria. Selection of studies for inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by one author with a second reviewer independently screening and checking 20% of titles. Results were analysed narratively.
Results: Forty-three studies evaluating 15 deep learning (DL) and 4 machine learning (ML) systems were included. Nine systems were evaluated in a single study each. Most studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one QUADAS-2 domain. Sensitivity for referable DR and higher grades was ≥85% while specificity varied and was <80% for all ML systems and in 6/31 studies evaluating DL systems. Studies reported high accuracy for detection of ungradable images, but the latter were analysed and reported inconsistently. Seven studies reported that AI was more sensitive but less specific than human graders.
Conclusions: AI-based systems are more sensitive than human graders and could be safe to use in clinical practice but have variable specificity. However, for many systems evidence is limited, at high risk of bias and may not generalise across settings. Therefore, pre-implementation assessment in the target clinical pathway is essential to obtain reliable and applicable accuracy estimates.
{"title":"Test accuracy of artificial intelligence-based grading of fundus images in diabetic retinopathy screening: A systematic review.","authors":"Zhivko Zhelev, Jaime Peters, Morwenna Rogers, Michael Allen, Goda Kijauskaite, Farah Seedat, Elizabeth Wilkinson, Christopher Hyde","doi":"10.1177/09691413221144382","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413221144382","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To systematically review the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI)-based systems for grading of fundus images in diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the ClinicalTrials.gov from 1st January 2000 to 27th August 2021. Accuracy studies published in English were included if they met the pre-specified inclusion criteria. Selection of studies for inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by one author with a second reviewer independently screening and checking 20% of titles. Results were analysed narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-three studies evaluating 15 deep learning (DL) and 4 machine learning (ML) systems were included. Nine systems were evaluated in a single study each. Most studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one QUADAS-2 domain. Sensitivity for referable DR and higher grades was ≥85% while specificity varied and was <80% for all ML systems and in 6/31 studies evaluating DL systems. Studies reported high accuracy for detection of ungradable images, but the latter were analysed and reported inconsistently. Seven studies reported that AI was more sensitive but less specific than human graders.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AI-based systems are more sensitive than human graders and could be safe to use in clinical practice but have variable specificity. However, for many systems evidence is limited, at high risk of bias and may not generalise across settings. Therefore, pre-implementation assessment in the target clinical pathway is essential to obtain reliable and applicable accuracy estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"97-112"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10399100/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10328122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09691413231174163
Yue He, Tong Xu, Jiaxin Fang, Li Tong, Wenhui Gao, Yuan Zhang, Yanfang Wang, Yan Xu, Shunyao Shi, Siyu Liu, Lina Jin
Objectives: Despite recommendations to increase the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, trends in CRC screening vary with sociodemographic status. We aimed to evaluate trends in CRC screening in the US population and subpopulations.
Methods: A total of 1,082,924 participants aged 50 to 75 from five cycles (2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020) of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were involved. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to evaluate linear trends in CRC screening utilization from 2012 to 2018. Rao-Scott chi-square tests were used to assess the differences in CRC screening utilization between 2018 and 2020.
Results: The estimated percentage reporting up-to-date with CRC screening increased significantly (P for trend <0.001), from 62.8% (95% CI, 62.4%-63.2%) in 2012 to 66.7% (95% CI, 66.3%-67.2%) in 2018 and 70.4% (95% CI, 69.8%-71.0%) in 2020, in accordance with 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. Trends followed similar patterns in most subgroups, although with different magnitudes in several subgroups, primarily those underweight showed a stable percentage over time (P for trend = 0.170). In 2020, 72.4% of participants reported they were up to date with CRC screening, including the utilization of stool DNA tests and virtual colonoscopy. Colonoscopy was the most commonly used test in 2020 (64.5%), followed by FOBT (12.6%), stool DNA test (5.8%), sigmoidoscopy (3.8%), and virtual colonoscopy (2.7%).
Conclusions: In this nationally representative survey of the US population from 2012 through 2020, the percentage reporting up to date with CRC screening has increased, but not equally among all subgroups.
{"title":"Trends in colorectal cancer screening in the United States, 2012 to 2020.","authors":"Yue He, Tong Xu, Jiaxin Fang, Li Tong, Wenhui Gao, Yuan Zhang, Yanfang Wang, Yan Xu, Shunyao Shi, Siyu Liu, Lina Jin","doi":"10.1177/09691413231174163","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413231174163","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Despite recommendations to increase the uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, trends in CRC screening vary with sociodemographic status. We aimed to evaluate trends in CRC screening in the US population and subpopulations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 1,082,924 participants aged 50 to 75 from five cycles (2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020) of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were involved. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to evaluate linear trends in CRC screening utilization from 2012 to 2018. Rao-Scott chi-square tests were used to assess the differences in CRC screening utilization between 2018 and 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The estimated percentage reporting up-to-date with CRC screening increased significantly (<i>P</i> for trend <0.001), from 62.8% (95% CI, 62.4%-63.2%) in 2012 to 66.7% (95% CI, 66.3%-67.2%) in 2018 and 70.4% (95% CI, 69.8%-71.0%) in 2020, in accordance with 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. Trends followed similar patterns in most subgroups, although with different magnitudes in several subgroups, primarily those underweight showed a stable percentage over time (<i>P</i> for trend = 0.170). In 2020, 72.4% of participants reported they were up to date with CRC screening, including the utilization of stool DNA tests and virtual colonoscopy. Colonoscopy was the most commonly used test in 2020 (64.5%), followed by FOBT (12.6%), stool DNA test (5.8%), sigmoidoscopy (3.8%), and virtual colonoscopy (2.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this nationally representative survey of the US population from 2012 through 2020, the percentage reporting up to date with CRC screening has increased, but not equally among all subgroups.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"125-133"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9962455","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09691413231153568
Nadine Zielonke, Carlo Senore, Antonio Ponti, Marcell Csanadi, Harry J de Koning, Eveline A M Heijnsdijk, Nicolien T van Ravesteyn
Objectives: Organized breast cancer screening may not achieve its full potential due to organizational and cultural barriers. In Italy, two identified barriers were low attendance in Southern Italy and, in Italy as a whole, underscreening and overscreening in parts of the eligible population. The objective of this study was to identify potential changes to overcome these barriers and to quantify their costs and effects.
Methods: To assess the impact of potential measures to improve breast cancer screening in Italy, we performed an evaluation of costs and effects for increasing adherence for Southern Italy and harmonizing screening intervals (biennial screening) for the whole of Italy, using an online tool (EU-TOPIA evaluation tool) based on the MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis (MISCAN) model.
Results: Increasing adherence in Southern Italy through investing in mobile screening units has an acceptable cost-effectiveness ratio of €9531 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Harmonizing the screening interval by investing in measures to reduce opportunistic screening and simultaneously investing in mobile screening units to reduce underscreening is predicted to gain 1% fewer life-years, while saving 19% of total screening costs compared to the current situation.
Conclusions: Increasing adherence in Southern Italy and harmonizing the screening interval could result in substantial improvements at acceptable costs, or in the same benefits at lower costs. This example illustrates a systematic approach that can be easily applied to other European countries, as the online tools can be used by stakeholders to quantify effects and costs of a broad range of specific barriers, and ways to overcome them.
{"title":"Overcoming barriers: Modelling the effect of potential future changes of organized breast cancer screening in Italy.","authors":"Nadine Zielonke, Carlo Senore, Antonio Ponti, Marcell Csanadi, Harry J de Koning, Eveline A M Heijnsdijk, Nicolien T van Ravesteyn","doi":"10.1177/09691413231153568","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413231153568","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Organized breast cancer screening may not achieve its full potential due to organizational and cultural barriers. In Italy, two identified barriers were low attendance in Southern Italy and, in Italy as a whole, underscreening and overscreening in parts of the eligible population. The objective of this study was to identify potential changes to overcome these barriers and to quantify their costs and effects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To assess the impact of potential measures to improve breast cancer screening in Italy, we performed an evaluation of costs and effects for increasing adherence for Southern Italy and harmonizing screening intervals (biennial screening) for the whole of Italy, using an online tool (EU-TOPIA evaluation tool) based on the MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis (MISCAN) model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Increasing adherence in Southern Italy through investing in mobile screening units has an acceptable cost-effectiveness ratio of €9531 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Harmonizing the screening interval by investing in measures to reduce opportunistic screening and simultaneously investing in mobile screening units to reduce underscreening is predicted to gain 1% fewer life-years, while saving 19% of total screening costs compared to the current situation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Increasing adherence in Southern Italy and harmonizing the screening interval could result in substantial improvements at acceptable costs, or in the same benefits at lower costs. This example illustrates a systematic approach that can be easily applied to other European countries, as the online tools can be used by stakeholders to quantify effects and costs of a broad range of specific barriers, and ways to overcome them.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"134-141"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10399099/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10333960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09691413231160109
Geralyn M Lambert-Messerlian, Jonathan P Bestwick, Nicholas J Wald
Objectives: Unconjugated estriol (uE3) is used as a marker for fetal aneuploidy in maternal serum screening tests. The goal of this study was to examine the validity of a new immunoassay for uE3 that uses a monoclonal antibody (m-uE3) rather than the more commonly used polyclonal antibody (p-uE3).
Setting: Assays were performed in the Special Chemistry laboratory at Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island.
Methods: Residual fresh (n = 100) and frozen (n = 533) second trimester serum samples from routine clinical care were tested using p-uE3 and/or m-uE3 assays. Assay results were compared between methods using Bland-Altman plots. A median equation was developed for m-uE3 results. Down syndrome risks were compared between the two assays in a case-control sample set (21 cases each matched with five controls for the completed week of gestation, duration of freezer storage and race).
Results: Log-transformed serum uE3 levels were highly correlated between the assays (r = 0.93, p < 0.001), with the m-uE3 assay levels yielding, on average, 23% higher (standard deviation of differences in log uE3 concentrations = 0.07) results. Assay and gestation-based median equations were calculated and used to convert m-uE3 concentrations to multiples of the median (MoM). The m-uE3 MoM values fit a log Gaussian distribution well with a log standard deviation of 0.11. Down syndrome risk results were not significantly different between assays.
Conclusions: The m-uE3 assay, with results expressed in MoMs, is suitable for screening and as a monoclonal-based assay offers the advantage of a predictable and indefinite supply of antibody to perform the assay.
{"title":"Validation of a monoclonal unconjugated estriol antibody for use in prenatal maternal serum screening.","authors":"Geralyn M Lambert-Messerlian, Jonathan P Bestwick, Nicholas J Wald","doi":"10.1177/09691413231160109","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413231160109","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Unconjugated estriol (uE3) is used as a marker for fetal aneuploidy in maternal serum screening tests. The goal of this study was to examine the validity of a new immunoassay for uE3 that uses a monoclonal antibody (m-uE3) rather than the more commonly used polyclonal antibody (p-uE3).</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Assays were performed in the Special Chemistry laboratory at Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Residual fresh (<i>n</i> = 100) and frozen (<i>n</i> = 533) second trimester serum samples from routine clinical care were tested using p-uE3 and/or m-uE3 assays. Assay results were compared between methods using Bland-Altman plots. A median equation was developed for m-uE3 results. Down syndrome risks were compared between the two assays in a case-control sample set (21 cases each matched with five controls for the completed week of gestation, duration of freezer storage and race).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Log-transformed serum uE3 levels were highly correlated between the assays (<i>r</i> = 0.93, <i>p</i> < 0.001), with the m-uE3 assay levels yielding, on average, 23% higher (standard deviation of differences in log uE3 concentrations = 0.07) results. Assay and gestation-based median equations were calculated and used to convert m-uE3 concentrations to multiples of the median (MoM). The m-uE3 MoM values fit a log Gaussian distribution well with a log standard deviation of 0.11. Down syndrome risk results were not significantly different between assays.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The m-uE3 assay, with results expressed in MoMs, is suitable for screening and as a monoclonal-based assay offers the advantage of a predictable and indefinite supply of antibody to perform the assay.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"120-124"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10016279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09691413231165237
Carmen B Visioli, Paolo Giorgi Rossi, Paola Armaroli, Anna Iossa, Raffaella Rizzolo, Luigina A Bonelli, Ezio Venturino, Francesca M Carozzi, Simonetta Bisanzi, Laura De Marco, Livia Giordano, Elisa Camussi, Annarosa Del Mistro, Marco Zappa
Objective: To evaluate the association between human papillomavirus vaccination status and participation in cervical cancer screening (at age 25) by the first cohorts of girls who were offered vaccination at the age of 15 to 16 years in Italy.
Methods: Women born in 1993, 1994 and 1995 were invited to participate in cervical cancer screening between 2018 and 2020. We report participation in screening by vaccination status in three large areas, Florence province, Piedmont region and Savona province, where the Consensus Project was carried out. The relative risk of participation among vaccinated (≥2 doses) and unvaccinated women was estimated. Odds ratios (OR) of participation by vaccination status were estimated by logistic regression, adjusted by birthplace and birth cohort.
Results: Overall, 34,993 women were invited for screening: 13,006 (37.2%) participated and 10,062 of these agreed to participate in the Consensus intervention study. Among the invited women and screening participants, vaccinated women were 51.0% and 60.6%, respectively. Comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated women, the adjusted OR of screening participation was 1.80 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.72-1.89), 2.17 (95% CI: 1.94-2.42), 1.59 (95% CI: 1.50-1.68) and 1.15 (95% CI: 0.86-1.54) for overall, Florence, Piedmont and Savona, respectively. About 33% of the invited women were unvaccinated and did not participate in screening: 25.8%, 59.5% and 64.2% of women born in Italy, in high migration pressure countries and in advanced development countries, respectively.
Conclusions: Screening participation was higher among vaccinated than unvaccinated women. Active policies are needed to reduce inequalities, targeting the unscreened and unvaccinated population, particularly non-native women, to accelerate cervical cancer elimination in Italy.
{"title":"The Consensus Project: Participation in cervical cancer screening by the first cohorts of girls offered HPV vaccination at age 15-16 years in Italy.","authors":"Carmen B Visioli, Paolo Giorgi Rossi, Paola Armaroli, Anna Iossa, Raffaella Rizzolo, Luigina A Bonelli, Ezio Venturino, Francesca M Carozzi, Simonetta Bisanzi, Laura De Marco, Livia Giordano, Elisa Camussi, Annarosa Del Mistro, Marco Zappa","doi":"10.1177/09691413231165237","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413231165237","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the association between human papillomavirus vaccination status and participation in cervical cancer screening (at age 25) by the first cohorts of girls who were offered vaccination at the age of 15 to 16 years in Italy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Women born in 1993, 1994 and 1995 were invited to participate in cervical cancer screening between 2018 and 2020. We report participation in screening by vaccination status in three large areas, Florence province, Piedmont region and Savona province, where the Consensus Project was carried out. The relative risk of participation among vaccinated (≥2 doses) and unvaccinated women was estimated. Odds ratios (OR) of participation by vaccination status were estimated by logistic regression, adjusted by birthplace and birth cohort.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 34,993 women were invited for screening: 13,006 (37.2%) participated and 10,062 of these agreed to participate in the Consensus intervention study. Among the invited women and screening participants, vaccinated women were 51.0% and 60.6%, respectively. Comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated women, the adjusted OR of screening participation was 1.80 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.72-1.89), 2.17 (95% CI: 1.94-2.42), 1.59 (95% CI: 1.50-1.68) and 1.15 (95% CI: 0.86-1.54) for overall, Florence, Piedmont and Savona, respectively. About 33% of the invited women were unvaccinated and did not participate in screening: 25.8%, 59.5% and 64.2% of women born in Italy, in high migration pressure countries and in advanced development countries, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Screening participation was higher among vaccinated than unvaccinated women. Active policies are needed to reduce inequalities, targeting the unscreened and unvaccinated population, particularly non-native women, to accelerate cervical cancer elimination in Italy.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"142-149"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9962409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09691413231175724
Zechen Liu, Mingyang Song
As cancer is overtaking cardiovascular disease as the leading cause of death among diabetics, improved cancer prevention efforts are needed for individuals with diabetes. In this research letter, we used data from the US National Health Interview Survey to examine the use of screening for two major diabetes-related cancers, colorectal cancer, and breast cancer, in individuals with and without diabetes. We found that individuals with diabetes had slightly higher use of colorectal cancer screening and similar use of breast cancer screening compared to those without diabetes in the US. Besides, despite the increasing use of colorectal cancer and breast cancer screening over the past 10 years, screening uptake remains suboptimal. We believe that these findings provide important data to inform policymaking and cancer prevention efforts.
{"title":"Prevalence of colorectal cancer and breast cancer screening according to history of diabetes in 2010-2019.","authors":"Zechen Liu, Mingyang Song","doi":"10.1177/09691413231175724","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413231175724","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As cancer is overtaking cardiovascular disease as the leading cause of death among diabetics, improved cancer prevention efforts are needed for individuals with diabetes. In this research letter, we used data from the US National Health Interview Survey to examine the use of screening for two major diabetes-related cancers, colorectal cancer, and breast cancer, in individuals with and without diabetes. We found that individuals with diabetes had slightly higher use of colorectal cancer screening and similar use of breast cancer screening compared to those without diabetes in the US. Besides, despite the increasing use of colorectal cancer and breast cancer screening over the past 10 years, screening uptake remains suboptimal. We believe that these findings provide important data to inform policymaking and cancer prevention efforts.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 3","pages":"156-158"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10318159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01Epub Date: 2022-10-11DOI: 10.1177/09691413221127583
Sue M Hudson, Kathie Binysh, Stephen W Duffy
Objective: The Covid-19 pandemic created a backlog of women awaiting an invitation for breast screening in the UK. To recover in a timely fashion, the National Health Service programme opted to issue open invitations (OI) to women rather than the standard pre-booked timed appointments (TA). Historically, OIs have been shown to result in lower uptake. The aim of this study was to make use of a natural experiment to compare uptake in groups sent an OI with those sent a TA during a period when both invitation methods were in use.
Methods: Women invited for routine screening at one of the six London breast screening services from September 2020 to March 2021 were included and grouped according to the type of invitation they had received (TA or OI). The outcome was attendance within 6 months of opening the screening episode. Data were analysed by logistic regression.
Results: During the period of the study, 78,192 (32.5%) women received a TA and 162,680 (67.5%) received an OI. In the TA group, 47,391 (60.6%) attended within six months of offered appointment and in the OI group 86,430 (53.1%) attended. This difference was significant (p < 0.001). The odds ratio (95% CI) for the attended outcome was 1.44 (1.33-1.55) adjusted for differences in deprivation and for invitation category (first invitation or subsequent invitation).
Conclusions: This study supports the view that TA delivers a higher uptake than OI. It suggests that during this period over 12,000 women in London, who would have been expected to attend if given the standard TA, did not attend their appointment having received an OI.
目的:Covid-19 大流行导致英国积压了大量等待乳腺筛查邀请函的妇女。为了及时恢复,国民健康服务计划选择向妇女发出公开邀请(OI),而不是标准的预先预约定时预约(TA)。从历史上看,公开邀请的接受率较低。本研究的目的是利用自然实验,比较在两种邀请方式同时使用期间,发送 OI 和发送 TA 的群体的接受率:纳入了 2020 年 9 月至 2021 年 3 月期间受邀在伦敦六家乳腺筛查服务机构之一接受常规筛查的妇女,并根据她们收到的邀请类型(TA 或 OI)进行分组。结果为筛查开始后 6 个月内的就诊情况。数据采用逻辑回归法进行分析:在研究期间,78 192 名妇女(32.5%)收到了 TA 的邀请,162 680 名妇女(67.5%)收到了 OI 的邀请。在接受辅助检查组中,有 47391 名妇女(60.6%)在预约后的六个月内接受了检查,而在接受其他检查组中,有 86430 名妇女(53.1%)在预约后的六个月内接受了检查。这一差异非常明显(P这项研究支持了 "TA "比 "OI "提供更多的就诊率这一观点。它表明,在此期间,伦敦有 12,000 多名妇女在接受了 OI 后没有赴约,而如果提供标准 TA,她们本应赴约。
{"title":"Did the use of open invitations in place of timed appointment invitations reduce the uptake of breast screening in the London region during the COVID-19 recovery?","authors":"Sue M Hudson, Kathie Binysh, Stephen W Duffy","doi":"10.1177/09691413221127583","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09691413221127583","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Covid-19 pandemic created a backlog of women awaiting an invitation for breast screening in the UK. To recover in a timely fashion, the National Health Service programme opted to issue open invitations (OI) to women rather than the standard pre-booked timed appointments (TA). Historically, OIs have been shown to result in lower uptake. The aim of this study was to make use of a natural experiment to compare uptake in groups sent an OI with those sent a TA during a period when both invitation methods were in use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Women invited for routine screening at one of the six London breast screening services from September 2020 to March 2021 were included and grouped according to the type of invitation they had received (TA or OI). The outcome was attendance within 6 months of opening the screening episode. Data were analysed by logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the period of the study, 78,192 (32.5%) women received a TA and 162,680 (67.5%) received an OI. In the TA group, 47,391 (60.6%) attended within six months of offered appointment and in the OI group 86,430 (53.1%) attended. This difference was significant (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The odds ratio (95% CI) for the attended outcome was 1.44 (1.33-1.55) adjusted for differences in deprivation and for invitation category (first invitation or subsequent invitation).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study supports the view that TA delivers a higher uptake than OI. It suggests that during this period over 12,000 women in London, who would have been expected to attend if given the standard TA, did not attend their appointment having received an OI.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":"30 2","pages":"87-91"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9554567/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9650176","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}