ABSTRACT
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.
Funding This study was supported by funding from the National Cancer Institute (U01CA199334). The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute. Megan A Smith receives salary support from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia (APP1159491) and Cancer Institute NSW (ECF181561). Matejka Rebolj is funded by Cancer Research UK (reference: C8162/A27047). James O’Mahony is funded by Ireland’s Health Research Board (EIA2017054). Karen Canfell receives salary support from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia (APP1194679). Emily A. Burger receives salary support from the Norwegian Cancer Society.
Competing Interest Statement
Karen Canfell is the co-PI of an investigator-initiated trial of CC screening, Compass, run by the VCS Foundation, which is a government-funded not-for-profit charity. Neither KC nor her institution have received funding from industry for this or any other research project. All other authors declare no conflicts.
Clinical Trial
NA
Funding Statement
Emily A Burger receives salary support from the Norwegian Cancer Society (#198073), and Megan A Smith receives salary support from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia (APP1159491) and Cancer Institute NSW (ECF181561). Matajka Rebolj: Public Health England provided funding for evaluation of various PHE projects; member of various PHE advisory groups for cervical screening; attended meetings with various HPV assay manufacturers; fee for lecture in the last four years from Hologic, paid to employer.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
No patient-level data were used in this study.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Not Applicable
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Footnotes
i.dekok{at}erasmusmc.nl
Jfomahon{at}tcd.ie
matejka.rebolj{at}kcl.ac.uk
e.e.l.jansen{at}erasmusmc.nl
James.Killen{at}nswcc.org.au
d.debondt{at}erasmusmc.nl
sjbh1810{at}med.hokudai.ac.jp
alejandra.castanon{at}kcl.ac.uk
mregan{at}hsph.harvard.edu
jkim{at}hsph.harvard.edu
karen.canfell{at}nswcc.org.au
megan.smith{at}nswcc.org.au
Data Availability
Supporting Information contained in the Supplementary Material of Burger et al. (20) provides details on microsimulation model inputs, calibration to epidemiologic data, and calibration approach in line with good modeling practice. Access to the raw results data will be made available upon reasonable request.