TY - JOUR
T1 - Cervical screening during the COVID-19 pandemic
T2 - optimising recovery strategies
AU - Castanon, Alejandra
AU - Rebolj, Matejka
AU - Burger, Emily Annika
AU - de Kok, Inge M C M
AU - Smith, Megan A
AU - Hanley, Sharon J B
AU - Carozzi, Francesca Maria
AU - Peacock, Stuart
AU - O'Mahony, James F
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was done on behalf of the Screening Working Group of the COVID-19 and Cancer Global Modelling Consortium (CCGMC) and we acknowledge all members of the CCGMC Steering Committee, Secretariat, and Working Group 2. This work was supported by Ireland's Health Research Board (grant number EIA-2017?054 to JFOM), the National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia; grant APP1159491 to MAS), Cancer Research UK (grant number C8162/A27047 to MR and AC), Cancer Institute NSW (ECF181561 to MAS), National Institutes of Health (USA; U01CA199334 to EAB), Norwegian Cancer Society (#198073 to EAB), and the National Cancer Centre (Japan; 31-A-20 to SJBH). These funders had no role in directing or the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit for publication.
Funding Information:
This work was done on behalf of the Screening Working Group of the COVID-19 and Cancer Global Modelling Consortium (CCGMC) and we acknowledge all members of the CCGMC Steering Committee, Secretariat, and Working Group 2. This work was supported by Ireland's Health Research Board ( grant number EIA-2017–054 to JFOM), the National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia; grant APP1159491 to MAS), Cancer Research UK (grant number C8162/A27047 to MR and AC), Cancer Institute NSW (ECF181561 to MAS), National Institutes of Health (USA; U01CA199334 to EAB), Norwegian Cancer Society (#198073 to EAB), and the National Cancer Centre (Japan; 31-A-20 to SJBH). These funders had no role in directing or the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit for publication.
Funding Information:
MR reports funding from Hologic and grants from Public Health England, outside of the submitted work. MAS reports grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Cancer Institute New South Wales. SJBH reports grants from National Cancer Centre Japan. SP reports being a member of the Board of Directors for the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/7
Y1 - 2021/7
N2 - Disruptions to cancer screening services have been experienced in most settings as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideally, programmes would resolve backlogs by temporarily expanding capacity; however, in practice, this is often not possible. We aim to inform the deliberations of decision makers in high-income settings regarding their cervical cancer screening policy response. We caution against performance measures that rely solely on restoring testing volumes to pre-pandemic levels because they will be less effective at mitigating excess cancer diagnoses than will targeted measures. These measures might exacerbate pre-existing inequalities in accessing cervical screening by disregarding the risk profile of the individuals attending. Modelling of cervical screening outcomes before and during the pandemic supports risk-based strategies as the most effective way for screening services to recover. The degree to which screening is organised will determine the feasibility of deploying some risk-based strategies, but implementation of age-based risk stratification should be universally feasible.
AB - Disruptions to cancer screening services have been experienced in most settings as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideally, programmes would resolve backlogs by temporarily expanding capacity; however, in practice, this is often not possible. We aim to inform the deliberations of decision makers in high-income settings regarding their cervical cancer screening policy response. We caution against performance measures that rely solely on restoring testing volumes to pre-pandemic levels because they will be less effective at mitigating excess cancer diagnoses than will targeted measures. These measures might exacerbate pre-existing inequalities in accessing cervical screening by disregarding the risk profile of the individuals attending. Modelling of cervical screening outcomes before and during the pandemic supports risk-based strategies as the most effective way for screening services to recover. The degree to which screening is organised will determine the feasibility of deploying some risk-based strategies, but implementation of age-based risk stratification should be universally feasible.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85108554277&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00078-5
DO - 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00078-5
M3 - Review article
C2 - 33939965
SN - 2468-2667
VL - 6
SP - e522-e527
JO - The Lancet Public Health
JF - The Lancet Public Health
IS - 7
ER -
