The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on Italian population-based cancer screening activities and test coverage: results from national cross-sectional repeated surveys ===================================================================================================================================================================== * Paolo Giorgi Rossi * Giuliano Carrozzi * Patrizia Falini * Letizia Sampaolo * Giuseppe Gorini * Manuel Zorzi * Paola Armaroli * Carlo Senore * Priscilla Sassoli de Bianchi * Maria Masocco * Marco Zappa * Francesca Battisti * Paola Mantellini ## Abstract **Background** In Italy, population-based screening programs for breast, cervical and colorectal cancers are mandatory, and Regions are in charge of their delivery. From March to May 2020, a severe lockdown was imposed due to the Covid-19 pandemic by the Italian Ministry of Health, with the suspension of screening programs. This paper describes the impact of the pandemic on Italian screening activities and test coverage in 2020. **Methods** The regional number of subjects invited and of screening tests performed in 2020 were compared with those in 2019. Invitation and examination coverage were also calculated. PASSI surveillance system, through telephone interviews, investigated the population screening test coverage, before and during the pandemic, accordingly to educational attainment, perceived economic difficulties and citizenship. **Results** A reduction of subjects invited and tests performed, with differences among periods and geographic macro areas, was observed in 2020 vs. 2019. The reduction in examination coverage was larger than that in invitation coverage for all screening campaigns. From the second half of 2020, the trend for test coverage showed a decrease in all the macro areas for all the screening campaigns. Compared with the pre-pandemic period, there was a greater difference according to level of education in the odds of having had a test last year vs. never having been screened or not being up to date with screening tests. In addition, foreigners had less access to screening than Italians did. **Conclusions** The lockdown and the ongoing Covid-19 emergency caused an important delay in screening activities. This increased the pre-existing individual and geographical inequalities in access. The opportunistic screening did not mitigate the pandemic impact. **Funding** This study was partially supported by Italian Ministry of Health – Ricerca Corrente Annual Program 2023. ## Background The Covid-19 pandemic and the measures taken by most governments to control the spread of the virus had an impact on all health services, but also on people’s behaviors and attitudes toward prevention 1,2. The combination of reduced health service delivery for non-Covid-19 activities and a lower propensity to access health services by the population caused appreciable delays in cancer diagnosis in most countries where the phenomenon has been studied.3,4,5 Screening programs are non-urgent services and thus they were among the first suspended during the first pandemic wave in most European countries.6 On the other hand, active invitation allows to accurately plan the workload, which represented an opportunity for organized screening programs to resume post-lockdown activities in a rational way according to accurate prioritization, aiming to minimize the impact of the pandemic on cancer diagnosis delays.7,8 Thus, the presence of a structured and well-organized screening program has been recognized as an element favoring the resilience of health services to the pandemic disruption.9 In Italy, a national law included organized screening programs for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers among the public health interventions that all the Regions must carry out[ref].10 The target population, the test, and the intervals used are reported in box 1. Before the Covid-19 pandemic, the invitation coverage was almost complete for all screening programs in Central Italy, and for breast cancer in Northern Italy, while for colorectal cancer screening, there were still areas - especially in Southern Italy - where large parts of the target population was not actively invited. There are large differences in participation to all three screening programs among regions, with the Northern regions achieving higher participation rates than the Southern ones. Routine statistics on activity and performance indicators are produced by the National Screening Monitoring Center (ONS), which is a technical network appointed by the Italian Ministry of Health to monitor regional screening campaigns, and they are available at [www.osservatorionazionalescreening.it](http://www.osservatorionazionalescreening.it). Across the country, opportunistic screening - offered by both private and public providers - is common and does not have a specific informative flow for reporting and monitoring. Opportunistic screening accounts on average for one fourth, one third, and one sixth of the screening test coverage in the target population that reaches 75%, 80%, and 48%, for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively.11 In Italy, the first diagnosis of Covid-19 was made on February 20, 2020, and a strict lockdown started on March 8.12 The impact of this first wave in terms of deaths was very strong and concentrated in Northern Italy. A second wave started in October and lasted until the end of the year, involving all the Italian regions. Control measures differed in the three periods: from March to May, the lockdown stopped all non-essential activities; during the summer, almost all restrictions were removed; while during the October to December restrictions, school closures, limits to movement and recommendations to work from home were applied on a regional or even provincial basis according to incidence.13 The aim of this paper is to describe the impact of the pandemic and infection control measures on the activities of Italian screening programs in terms of invitations and screening tests performed during the first year of the pandemic and to investigate how this impacted the population screening test coverage. ## Methods ### Setting and description of the infection control measures adopted in screening programs In Italy, breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings are recommended, and regional health systems are in charge of implementing them according to the recommendations of the European Commission and of the Italian Ministry of Health. The target ages, intervals and test modalities recommended in Italy are reported in box 1.14,15 After the first case diagnosed on February 20, apparently small clusters were identified and restrictions on movement in small areas in Northern Italy were set. On March 9, the first lockdown measures were put in place for the whole country, causing the suspension of screening first level activities and maintaining diagnostic assessment in those who tested positive.16,17 Regardless of national provisions, the suspension was heterogeneous: it was almost complete in most Northern and Central regions where screening invitations and test delivery were immediately suspended; in Lazio, the suspension was established late; while in other regions, according to screening organization, test delivery was maintained for colorectal (Puglia, Umbria) and cervical (Valle D’Aosta) cancer campaigns. Assessment of people who had previously had a positive screening test was never stopped. The strict lockdown, i.e. the “stay at home” period in which only essential activities were allowed, ended at the beginning of May 2020, but the restrictions were gradually removed until the beginning of June 2020, when only physical distancing and wearing face masks remained mandatory. 12 Most screening programs started again in May/June, but rules to reduce the risk of infection required avoiding crowding in waiting rooms and physical distancing in the clinics, thus the number of exams per hour was reduced by 30 to 50% in all programs. These restrictions lasted for the entire study period. During the summer, Covid-19 incidence remained relatively low throughout the country, but in October it increased rapidly and new restrictions were introduced. 13 Regions or provinces were classified as white, yellow, orange, and red according to a set of indicators measuring the quality of data reporting, the testing capacity, the incidence trend (the Rt), the adequacy of contact tracing, and the pressure on the health system.18 Each color code corresponded to a set of mandatory restrictions that the regional government should implement and eventually integrate with local measures. Among these measures, none were directed to reduce non-urgent health services and, in several regions, cancer screening had been included among the services which had to be maintained. Nevertheless, in many areas, the pressure on hospitals became so strong that it became necessary to reduce non-urgent activities in order to re-direct health professionals to Covid-19-related activities. Furthermore, in orange and red zones there were restrictions on moving from one municipality to another (even if these did not apply for medical checks/reasons) and restrictions on public transport, thus making it more difficult for invited people to attend screening appointments. Box 1. Italian Ministry of Health recommendations for cancer screening programs. View this table: [Table1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/T1) ### Data sources The National Screening Monitoring Center (ONS) monitors regional screening performances and trends, and a summary report is regularly published ([https://www.osservatorionazionalescreening.it/content/rapporto-ons-2020](https://www.osservatorionazionalescreening.it/content/rapporto-ons-2020)). In October 2020, the ONS promoted an additional survey to monitor the impact of the pandemic on screening programs.19,20 An ad hoc quantitative questionnaire was sent by the ONS to all regional cancer screening coordinators in order to collect - within breast, cervical and colorectal screening programs - an absolute number of subjects invited and an absolute number of screening tests performed for the periods of January-May 2020, June-September 2020, October-December 2020, and January-May 2021 compared to those of the same periods over 2019. Data were referred to the core target population, i.e., the age group that is mandatory for all regions (see box 1). Twenty-one regions out of 21 participated in the survey. It must be noted that: the results of two out of five programs in Calabria are missing; the data from Basilicata refer to the whole period of the study, thus sub-periods are excluded from analyses; the colorectal cancer screening data from Umbria refer to the 50-74-year-old target population rather than 50-69. PASSI survey is one of the two National Health Interviews (NHIS) active in Italy.11,21 Through a continuous sampling of the resident population, it conducts telephone interviews collecting information about health behaviors, use of health services and participation in preventive interventions.22,23 It also collects data on socioeconomic characteristics of the people interviewed: educational attainment (4 categories: elementary school; middle school; high school; higher education), perceived economic difficulties (3 categories: many economic difficulties; some economic difficulties; no economic difficulties) and citizenship (2 categories: Italians with foreign nationals from high-income countries; foreign nationals from middle or low-income countries - according to the World Bank classification (UNDP, 2007)). Participation in the survey is free and voluntary, individuals can refuse to be interviewed or can interrupt the interview at any time. The interviewers are specifically trained to safely and correctly process personal data. Individuals selected for the interview are informed by letter about the objectives of the investigation, its methods and the arrangements taken to ensure the confidentiality of the collected information. After receiving the letter, they are contacted by phone; during the phone interview the interviewer presents the information again and asks for the interviewee’s consent to conduct the interview. In the present study, the analyzed data were collected by PASSI between 2017 and 2021, from interviews of more than 106,000 people, a representative sample of the Italian population aged 25–69, except for the Lombardy region that suspended the surveillance in 2016. ### Outcomes definition Based on the ONS survey, we report the number of the invitations sent during the investigation period and the number of the screening examinations performed in the study period. Invitation (percentage of citizens who were sent an invitation to a screening during the analyzed period, compared to the target population, excluding undelivered invitations and non-eligible subjects) and examination (percentage of citizens who performed the test compared to the target population excluding those with specific exclusion criteria) coverage relatively to 2017-2019 is also reported. We also computed the “standard months” of delay, i.e., the number of months that would be required to catch up the cumulated backlog if the program screened women at the same pace it did over the pre-COVID era. This parameter is obtained by multiplying the reduction in the number of tests performed during the study period as compared to the same period in 2019 (% reduction), by the duration (number of months) of the study period. Based on the date of the last test before the PASSI interview and the reported provider of the last test (free or paid out of pocket, proxy of organized and spontaneous screening, respectively), we computed the test coverage for each screening program: for breast cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 50 to 69 and those who reported having had a mammogram in the last two years as up-to-date with screening; for cervical cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 25 to 64 and those having had a Pap test in the last three years or an HPV-DNA test in the last five years as up-to-date with screening; for colorectal cancer, we considered as being eligible males and females aged 50 to 69 and those reporting a faecal occult blood test (FOBT) in the last two years or a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy in the last five years as up-to-date with screening. We also only considered the tests performed in the last year as an outcome for each screening test. ### Statistical analysis For the ONS surveys, only descriptive analyses are presented. In PASSI, each Local Health Authority extracts a proportionate stratified sampling for the sex and age categories (18–34,35–49, 50–69 years) of the resident population. Therefore, data analysis at a national and macro-area level requires the application of appropriate weights accounting for age and geographic stratification to be representative of the whole population. Trends of coverage are computed for each quarter of the study period, including interviews from January 2008 up to December 2020 for cervical and breast cancer and from January 2010 to December 2020 for colorectal cancer screening because the relevant items in the questionnaire were changed in 2010. Using the tests performed in the last year as a dependent variable, we present Poisson regression models reporting the odds of having had a test in the last year vs. the odds of not having the test in the last year. Prevalence rate ratios with relative 95% confidence interval (95%CI) for age, gender, educational attainment, nationality and economic difficulties are obtained. Models are performed on interviews conducted in 2020 and for those conducted in the 2017-2019 period. The statistical package Stata 16 software (StataCorp LP) was used to analyze the data. ### Ethics and data sharing In the PASSI surveillance system, personal data are processed in compliance with the GDPR 2016. PASSI was approved by the Ethics Committee of the National Institute of Public Health on January 23, 2007. Interviews are transferred anonymously to a national archive via a secure internet connection. Personal Identifiers on paper or computers are subsequently locally destroyed. Although the anonymized dataset is not yet available, the National Institute of Health is working to make it available on request ([http://www.epicentro.iss.it/passi/PresPolicy.asp](http://www.epicentro.iss.it/passi/PresPolicy.asp)). ## Results ### Impact on screening programs In 2020, the screening invitations decreased, for cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening in Northern and Southern Italy, compared with those of the 2017-2019 period. It is worth noting that Central Italy registered the best performances: cervical cancer screening programs were indeed able to maintain the invitation coverage close to 100% and breast and colorectal cancer screening resulted just below the cut off of 90% (Figure 1). ![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F1) Figure 1. Invitation coverage for cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening in Italy, by year and geographical macro area. The coverage is computed as the number of the invitations sent during the year divided by the expected target population to be invited in one year. For breast and colorectal cancer, the target population is expected to be invited in two years, for cervical cancer the target population is expected to be invited every three years if last test was a Pap test and every five years if the last test was an HPV test. The reduction in invitations was large and consistent in all macro areas and all screening programs for the first (January to May 2020) and second (June to September 2020) period. In the third one (October to December 2020) differences emerged: in Central Italy, programs tried to catch up the backlog of invitations, while in Northern Italy the programs mostly continued with the pre-pandemic pace. In Southern Italy the reduction in activity remained up to the first quarter of 2021, except for colorectal cancer screening (Figure 2). ![Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F2.medium.gif) [Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F2) Figure 2. Percent changes in the number of invitations sent by screening programs in 2020-21 compared to 2019, by period and geographic macro area. Compared to 2017-2019, in 2020 the reduction in examination coverage was larger than the reduction in invitation coverage for all screenings and in all macro areas (Figure 3). In Central and Northern Italy, it was particularly strong in the first period and then decreased gradually (Figure 4), reaching pre-pandemic levels for breast and colorectal cancer screening in the first quarter of 2021, but not for cervix cancer screening in Northern Italy. In Southern Italy, the reduction in tests performed lasted until the end of 2020 and it is still strong for cervical and breast cancer screening in the first quarter of 2021 (Figure 4). ![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F3.medium.gif) [Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F3) Figure 3. Test coverage for cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening in Italy, by year and geographical macro area. The coverage is computed as the number of the tests sent during the year divided by the expected target population to be tested in one year. For breast and colorectal cancer, the target population is expected to be screened in two years, for cervical cancer the target population is expected to be screened every three years if last test was a Pap test and every five years if the last test was an HPV test. ![Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F4.medium.gif) [Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F4) Figure 4. Changes in the number of screening tests performed by screening programs in 2020-21 compared to 2019, by period and geographic macro area. The delay accumulated until May 2021 in screening the target population differs by macro area, and it is larger for Southern Italy and smaller for Central Italy for the three programs. Despite the fact that the efforts in restarting invitations were dissimilar, the difference in delay between breast and cervical cancer was only of 1.2 months. Ranges between regions within macro areas are important. In fact, in Northern and Central Italy one or more regions cumulated a negligible delay of less than 45 days, while some regions cumulated about one year of delay in all programs (Table 1). View this table: [Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/T2) Table 1. Cumulative reduction of tests performed in Italian screening programs and average cumulated delay in testing, with ranges between regions, b geographic macro area. January 2020 to May 2021 ### Impact on overall screening test coverage The trend for test coverage as reported by PASSI showed a clear decrease in all the macro areas for the mammographic and colorectal screenings starting from the second half of 2020 (Figure 5). Also, for coverage with Pap tests or HPV tests the decrease is appreciable, but the magnitude is smaller. It is also appreciable that in 2020 we had an inversion in a long-term trend, with a decrease of opportunistic screening in favor of organized screening for cervical cancer (Figure 6). ![Figure 5.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F5.medium.gif) [Figure 5.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F5) Figure 5. Trends of the proportion of the screening target population who declared to have had a test in due time, overall and by setting of the last test performed. For breast cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 50 to 69 and those who reported as having had a mammogram in the last two years as up-to-date with screening; for cervical cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 25 to 64 and those having had a Pap test in the last three years or an HPV-DNA test in the last five years as up-to-date with screening; for colorectal cancer, we considered as being eligible males and females aged 50 to 69 and those who reported as having had a FOBT in the last two years or a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy in the last five years as up-to-date with screening. Data from the PASSI interviews. ![Figure 6.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F6.medium.gif) [Figure 6.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F6) Figure 6. Trends of the proportion of the screening target population who declared to have had a test in due time, by geographical macro area. For breast cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 50 to 69 and those who reported as having had a mammogram in the last two years as up- to-date with screening; for cervical cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 25 to 64 and those having had a Pap test in the last three years or an HPV-DNA test in the last five years as up- to-date with screening; for colorectal cancer, we considered as being eligible males and females aged 50 to 69 and those who reported having had a FOBT in the last two years or a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy in the last five years as up-to-date with screening. Data from the PASSI interviews. The decrease in test coverage is steeper in people with a lower level of educational or with many perceived economic difficulties (Figures 7,8). For cervical cancer, the proportion of women aged 25-64 that declared to have a test in the last year decreased dramatically for the screening program and at a lesser extent for opportunistic tests. For breast and colorectal cancer, the reduction was smaller and all attributable to organized screening (Figure 9). ![Figure 7.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F7.medium.gif) [Figure 7.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F7) Figure 7. Trends of the proportion of the screening target population who declared to have had a test in due time, by perceived economic difficulties. For breast cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 50 to 69 and those who reported as having had a mammogram in the last two years as up- to-date with screening; for cervical cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 25 to 64 and those having had a Pap test in the last three years or an HPV-DNA test in the last five years as up- to-date with screening; for colorectal cancer, we considered as being eligible males and females aged 50 to 69 and those who reported as having had a FOBT in the last two years or a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy in the last five years as up-to-date with screening. Data from the PASSI interviews. ![Figure 8.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F8.medium.gif) [Figure 8.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F8) Figure 8. Trends of the proportion of the screening target population who declared to have had a test in due time, by citizenship (Italian plus foreign nationals from high-income countries and foreign nationals from middle or low-income countries, according to the World Bank classification (UNDP, 2007)). For breast cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 50 to 69 and those who reported as having had a mammogram in the last two years as up-to-date with screening; for cervical cancer, we considered as being eligible the female population aged 25 to 64 and those having had a Pap test in the last three years or an HPV-DNA test in the last five years as up-to-date with screening; for colorectal cancer, we considered as being eligible males and females aged 50 to 69 and those who reported as having had a FOBT in the last two years or a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy in the last 5 years as up-to-date with screening. Data from the PASSI interviews. ![Figure 9.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F9.medium.gif) [Figure 9.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/F9) Figure 9. Proportion of the target population who declared having had the screening test in the last year, by year and setting where the test was last performed. Data from the PASSI interviews. In 2020, the odds of having had a test in recent years vs. never having been screened or not being up to date with screening tests, showed larger differences according to level of educational than in the pre-pandemic period, for the three screenings (Table 2). Furthermore, in 2020, for breast cancer screening only foreigners had a lower probability of having had a test than Italians, inverting what was observed in the pre-pandemic period (Table 2). The other differences remained substantially unchanged in the pandemic compared with the pre-pandemic period. View this table: [Table 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/17/2022.08.15.22278787/T3) Table 2. Multivariable Poisson regression models comparing the prevalence of having had a test in the last year by age, sex, familial status, socioeconomic characteristics and citizenship in the pandemic and pre-pandemic period for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening in Italy. ## Discussion The interruption of screening programs during lockdown over March - May 2020, as well as the reduction in their activity in the following months caused, on average, a delay of at least six months for cervical cancer, five months for breast cervical, and six months for colorectal cancer screening. There are large differences in the cumulated delay between macro areas and, within macro areas, between regions (Table 1) and local health authorities. 9,35 The largest delays are observed in those areas where screening programs had historical problems in extending invitations to the whole target population and participation was already low before the pandemic - particularly in Southern Italy but also in some areas of Northern Italy - where cervical cancer screening was recently implemented and coverage relied largely on opportunistic screening. 21,24,25 Northern Italy was also the most affected area by the pandemic. It is worth noting that the decrease in screening tests performed by screening programs was larger than the decrease in invitations. Even if the surveys conducted by the National Screening Monitoring Center were not designed to measure participation, this difference in the decrease indirectly shows that participation decreased during the study period. Stopping screening programs and their slow restart caused an appreciable decrease in test coverage in the target population of breast and colorectal cancer. This decrease is smaller, as expected, for cervical cancer screening because the longer screening intervals reduce the impact of the period of absent or reduced activity; nevertheless, a change in the direction of the trend is also appreciable for cervical cancer screening. While for colorectal screening the contribution of opportunistic screening was negligible before and during the pandemic, for breast and cervical cancer opportunistic screening did not increase the proportion of population test coverage and only a small peak of women reporting having paid for a test was appreciable in the strict lockdown period of March-May 2020. The decrease in test coverage provided by organized screening programs caused an increase in inequalities. In fact, people with a lower level of educational and immigrants paid the largest lack of access to secondary prevention during the pandemic. Other studies reported an early disruption of screening activities following the lockdown, with invitations and first level tests being stopped, and a reduction in participation when invitation restarted.26,27,28,29,30 The reported data show large differences across countries in the screening programs’ ability to resume their activity and in catching up with the cumulated backlog. Italy has a federal health system in which implementation of screening programs is delegated to the regional government and practically managed by the local health authorities. This organizational model together with historical differences in the robustness of screening programs and the population’s trust in the public health system resulted in an extreme variability in the delay cumulated in more than one year of Covid-19 emergency. 25 In fact, some areas showed the ability to recover all the backlog, while the vast majority were still cumulating further delay in the first months of 2021. These differences increased the already existing geographical inequalities across the country. As a consequence, individual inequalities are also going to increase. In fact, the difference by educational level were much stronger in 2020 than in previous years; furthermore, differences disadvantaging immigrants - that were not appreciable in previous years - were observed in the access to screening tests particularly for breast cancer screening in 2020, probably because immigrants rely mostly on organized screening and scarcely on opportunistic screening. Studies from the US also showed increased inequalities consequent to the screening program interruption, with a larger impact in the decrease of screening uptake in rural areas and for beneficiaries of public insurance or those who are not insured at all.31, 32 ### Possible impact Many studies from Italy and other countries reported a delay in diagnoses for many cancer sites.33, 34 In some studies, a shift to more advanced stages and different initial therapeutic approaches have been observed for breast cancer and colorectal cancers. 35,36,37,38,39 Investigating the impact on cancer stage is out of the scope of this study. Nevertheless, computing the expected delay cumulated up to now can give an estimate of the impact on mortality and, for cervical and colorectal cancer, on incidence. In fact, several mathematical models have been adapted precisely for to this scope. For breast and colorectal cancer, in England, a model assuming a 12-month suspension of screening and early diagnosis pathways and reallocating all diagnoses to symptomatic diagnosis estimated an excess of about 300 breast cancer deaths (8-10% increase) and 1500 colorectal cancer deaths (15-17%) in the next five years40. The expected health impact of the disruption may be larger for clinical than for screening services. The results of simulation models focused on the analysis of the impact of screening programs disruption are suggesting that we can expect a relative increase in breast and colorectal cancer specific mortality ranging between 1% and 3% over the next 10 to 30 years, depending on the duration of the disruption and on the catch-up strategies adopted. More than half of the excess deaths are expected to occur during the first 5 to 10 years following disruption and the health impact might be larger for older people and disadvantaged population subgroups. For cervical cancer, it has been estimated that a delay of six months national screening program would lead to about 600 more cancers in England that would occur in the next screening round, in the absence of catch-up strategies. 7, 41 We can expect a similar impact of screening disruption in Italy, where we observed a wide variability in the length of disruption, with a 6-month average delay in the invitations.42,43,44 ## Conclusions The lockdown and the ongoing Covid-19 emergency caused an important delay in screening activities. This increased the pre-existing individual and geographical inequalities in access. The opportunistic screening did not mitigate the pandemic impact. ## Data Availability The study reports the results of mandatory monitoring activities, that are statutary duties of the National Screening Monitoring System (ONS). Although the anonymized dataset is not yet available, ONS is working to make it available as open data on its website. In the PASSI surveillance system, personal data are processed in compliance with the GDPR 2016. Although the anonymized dataset is not yet available, the National Institute of Public Health is working to make it available on request (http://www.epicentro.iss.it/passi/PresPolicy.asp) and the excel sheets with the numbers used to plot the graphs and charts of the manuscript are available and enclosed as supplementary files. ## Funding This study was partially supported by Italian Ministry of Health – Ricerca Corrente Annual Program 2023. ## Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to all the regional and local coordinators and interviewers of PASSI surveillance and to the regional screening coordinators, who contributed to the data collection. A special thanks goes to the PASSI group for their competence and commitment. * Received August 15, 2022. * Revision received August 15, 2022. * Accepted August 17, 2022. * © 2022, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ## References 1. Kumari S, Mahla RS, Mangone L, Giorgi Rossi P, Grilli R, Pinto C, Ferrara G, De Vincentiis L, Crivelli F, Feyles E, Orvieto E, Venturino E, Saragoni L, Barbareschi M. Lockdown Measures Negatively Impacted Cancer Care. Am J Clin Pathol. 2021 Mar 15;155(4):615–616. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/aqaa243. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ajcp/aqaa243&link_type=DOI) 2. Moynihan R, Sanders S, Michaleff ZA, Scott AM, Clark J, To EJ, Jones M, Kitchener E, Fox M, Johansson M, Lang E, Duggan A, Scott I, Albarqouni L. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on utilisation of healthcare services: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2021 Mar 16;11(3): e045343. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045343. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoiYm1qb3BlbiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMjoiMTEvMy9lMDQ1MzQzIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjIvMDgvMTcvMjAyMi4wOC4xNS4yMjI3ODc4Ny5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 3. Ferrara G, De Vincentiis L, Ambrosini-Spaltro A, Barbareschi M, Bertolini V, Contato E, Crivelli F, Feyles E, Mariani MP, Morelli L, Orvieto E, Pacella E, Venturino E, Saragoni L. Cancer Diagnostic Delay in Northern and Central Italy During the 2020 Lockdown Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic. Am J Clin Pathol. 2021 Jan 4;155(1):64–68. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/aqaa177. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ajcp/aqaa177&link_type=DOI) 4. Dinmohamed AG, Cellamare M, Visser O, de Munck L, Elferink MAG, Westenend PJ, Wesseling J, Broeders MJM, Kuipers EJ, Merkx MAW, Nagtegaal ID, Siesling S. The impact of the temporary suspension of national cancer screening programmes due to the COVID-19 epidemic on the diagnosis of breast and colorectal cancer in the Netherlands. J Hematol Oncol. 2020 Nov 4;13(1):147. doi:10.1186/s13045-020-00984-1. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s13045-020-00984-1&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 5. Nyante SJ, Benefield TS, Kuzmiak CM, Earnhardt K, Pritchard M, Henderson LM. Population-level impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on breast cancer screening and diagnostic procedures. Cancer. 2021 Jun 15;127(12):2111–2121. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33460. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/cncr.33460&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 6. Breast Screening Working Group (WG2) of the Covid-19 and Cancer Global Modelling Consortium, Figueroa JD, Gray E et al. The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on breast cancer early detection and screening Preventive Medicine 151 (2021) 106585 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106585](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106585). 7. Castanon A, Rebolj M, Pesola F, Sasieni P. Recovery strategies following COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening and their impact on excess diagnoses. Br J Cancer. 2021 Apr;124(8):1361–1365. doi: 10.1038/s41416-021-01275-3. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41416-021-01275-3&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 8. Campbell C, Sommerfield T, Clark GRC, Porteous L, Milne AM, Millar R, Syme T,Thomson CS. COVID-19 and cancer screening in Scotland: A national and coordinated approach to minimising harm. Prev Med. 2021 Oct;151:106606. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106606. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106606&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 9. Mangone L, Mancuso P, Braghiroli MB, Bisceglia I, Campari C, Caroli S, Marino M, Caldarella A, Giorgi Rossi P, Pinto C. Prompt Resumption of Screening Programme Reduced the Impact of COVID-19 on New Breast Cancer Diagnoses in Northern Italy. Cancers (Basel). 2022 Jun 20;14(12):3029. doi: 10.3390/cancers14123029. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3390/cancers14123029&link_type=DOI) 10. Decreto del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri, 12 gennaio 2017. Definizione e aggiornamento dei livelli essenziali di assistenza, di cui all’articolo 1, comma 7, del decreto legislativo 30 dicembre 1992, n. 502. Supplemento Ordinario alla Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 65, 18 marzo 2017. 11. Carrozzi G, Sampaolo L, Bolognesi L, Sardonini L, Bertozzi N, Giorgi Rossi P, Zappa M, Baldissera S, Campostrini S, Ferrante G, Masocco M, Minardi V, D’Argenzio A, Moghadam PF, Quarchioni E, Ramigni M, Trinito MO, Salmaso S; Regional and local PASSI coordinators. Cancer screening uptake: association with individual characteristics, geographic distribution, and time trends in Italy. Epidemiol Prev. 2015 May-Jun;39(3 Suppl 1):9–18. 12. Marziano V, Guzzetta G, Rondinone BM, Boccuni F, Riccardo F, Bella A, Poletti P, Trentini F, Pezzotti P, Brusaferro S, Rezza G, Iavicoli S, Ajelli M, Merler S. Retrospective analysis of the Italian exit strategy from COVID-19 lockdown. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Jan 26;118(4):e2019617118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2019617118. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxNzoiMTE4LzQvZTIwMTk2MTcxMTgiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMi8wOC8xNy8yMDIyLjA4LjE1LjIyMjc4Nzg3LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 13. Manica M, Guzzetta G, Riccardo F, Valenti A, Poletti P, Marziano V, Trentini F, Andrianou X, Mateo-Urdiales A, Del Manso M, Fabiani M, Vescio MF, Spuri M, Petrone D, Bella A, Iavicoli S, Ajelli M, Brusaferro S, Pezzotti P, Merler S. Impact of tiered restrictions on human activities and the epidemiology of the second wave of COVID-19 in Italy. Nat Commun. 2021 Jul 27;12(1):4570. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-24832-z. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41467-021-24832-z&link_type=DOI) 14. Ministero della Salute e Osservatorio Nazionale Screening. Raccomandazioni per la pianificazione e l’esecuzione degli screening di popolazione per la prevenzione del cancro della mammella, del cancro della cervice uterina e del cancro del colon retto. 2006, Available at [https://www.osservatorionazionalescreening.it/sites/default/files/allegati/screening\_vers\_completa.pdf](https://www.osservatorionazionalescreening.it/sites/default/files/allegati/screening_vers_completa.pdf) [last access 28/06/2022]. 15. Ronco G, Confortini M, Maccallini V, Naldoni C, Segnan N, Sideri M, Zappa M, Zorzi M, Calvia M, Giorgi Rossi P. Health Technology assessment Report. Uso della citologia in fase liquida nello screening dei precursori del cancro del collo uterino [Health technology assessment report. Use of liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer precursors screening]. Epidemiol Prev. 2012 Sep-Oct;36(5 Suppl 2):e1–e33. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23139174&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 16. Decreto del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri del 9 marzo 2020. Ulteriori disposizioni attuative del decreto-legge 23 febbraio 2020, n. 6, recante misure urgenti in materia di contenimento e gestione dell’emergenza epidemiologica da COVID-19, applicabili sull’intero territorio nazionale. G.U. Serie Generale n.62 del 09/03/2020. 17. Ministero della Salute. Nota 8076 del 30/03/2020 recante “Chiarimenti Rif. Linee di indirizzo per la rimodulazione dell’attività programmata differibile in corso di emergenza da COVID-19”. 18. Riccardo F, Guzzetta G, Urdiales AM, Del Manso M, Andrianou XD, Bella A, Pezzotti P, Carbone S, De Vito T, Maraglino F, Demicheli V, Dario C, Coscioni E, Rezza G, Urbani A, Merler S, Brusaferro S; Italian COVID-19 monitoring group. COVID-19 response: effectiveness of weekly rapid risk assessments, Italy. Bull World Health Organ. 2022 Feb 1;100(2):161–167. doi: 10.2471/BLT.21.286317. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2471/BLT.21.286317&link_type=DOI) 19. Mantellini P, Battisti F, Armaroli P, Giubilato P, Ventura L, Zorzi M, Battagello J, Sassoli de Bianchi P, Senore C, Zappa M. Ritardi maturati dai programmi di screening oncologici ai tempi del COVID-19 in Italia, velocità della ripartenza e stima dei possibili ritardi diagnostici [Oncological organized screening programmes in the COVID-19 era: an Italian survey on accrued delays, reboot velocity, and diagnostic delay estimates]. Epidemiol Prev. 2020 Sep-Dec;44(5-6 Suppl 2):344–352. Italian. doi: 10.19191/EP20.5-6.S2.136. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.19191/EP20.5-6.S2.136&link_type=DOI) 20. Battisti F, Falini P, Gorini G, Sassoli de Bianchi P, Armaroli P, Giubilato P, Giorgi Rossi P, Zorzi M, Battagello J, Senore C, Zappa M, Mantellini P. Cancer screening programmes in Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic: an update of a nationwide survey on activity volumes and delayed diagnoses. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 2022 Jan-Mar;58(1):16–24. doi: 10.4415/ANN\_22\_01_03. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access\_num=10.4415/ANN_22_01_03&link_type=DOI) 21. Petrelli A, Giorgi Rossi P, Francovich L, Giordani B, Di Napoli A, Zappa M, Mirisola C, Gargiulo L. Geographical and socioeconomic differences in uptake of Pap test and mammography in Italy: results from the National Health Interview Survey. BMJ Open. 2018 Sep 19;8(9):e021653. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021653. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoiYm1qb3BlbiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiOC85L2UwMjE2NTMiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMi8wOC8xNy8yMDIyLjA4LjE1LjIyMjc4Nzg3LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 22. Baldissera S, Campostrini S, Binkin N, Minardi V, Minelli G, Ferrante G, Salmaso S; PASSI Coordinating Group. Features and initial assessment of the Italian Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (PASSI), 2007-2008. Prev Chronic Dis. 2011 Jan;8(1):A24. Epub 2010 Dec 15. PMID: 21159236; PMCID: PMC3044035. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21159236&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 23. Baldissera S, Ferrante G, Quarchioni E, Minardi V, Possenti V, Carrozzi G, Masocco M, Salmaso S; PASSI Coordinating Group. Field substitution of nonresponders can maintain sample size and structure without altering survey estimates-the experience of the Italian behavioral risk factors surveillance system (PASSI). Ann Epidemiol. 2014 Apr;24(4):241–5. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2013.12.003. Epub 2013 Dec 28. PMID: 24461932. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.annepidem.2013.12.003&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24461932&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 24. Giorgi Rossi P, Petrelli A, Rossi A, Francovich L, Zappa M, Gargiulo L. L’inappropriatezza nell’uso dei test di screening oncologici femminili in Italia: determinanti di sovra e sottoutilizzo [The inappropriateness in the use of female cancer screening tests in Italy: over- and under-utilization determinants]. Epidemiol Prev. 2019 Jan-Feb;43(1):35–47. Italian. doi: 10.19191/EP19.1.P35.019. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.19191/EP19.1.P35.019&link_type=DOI) 25. Giorgi Rossi P, Carrozzi G, Federici A, Mancuso P, Sampaolo L, Zappa M. Invitation coverage and participation in Italian cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening programmes. J Med Screen. 2018 Mar;25(1):17–23. doi: 10.1177/0969141317704476. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/0969141317704476&link_type=DOI) 26. Eijkelboom AH, de Munck L, Lobbes MBI, van Gils CH, Wesseling J, Westenend PJ, Guerrero Paez C, Pijnappel RM, Verkooijen HM, Broeders MJM, Siesling S; NABON COVID-19 Consortium and the COVID and Cancer-NL Consortium. Impact of the suspension and restart of the Dutch breast cancer screening program on breast cancer incidence and stage during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prev Med. 2021 Oct;151:106602. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106602. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106602&link_type=DOI) 27. Peacock HM, Tambuyzer T, Verdoodt F, Calay F, Poirel HA, De Schutter H, Francart J, Van Damme N, Van Eycken L. Decline and incomplete recovery in cancer diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium: a year-long, population-level analysis. ESMO Open. 2021 Aug;6(4):100197. doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100197. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100197&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 28. Ho EL, Kim MJ, Wilkinson LS, Given-Wilson R, Zuckerman SP. The Global Reading Room: Recovery of Breast Cancer Screening Services After the COVID-19 Pandemic First Wave. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2022 Jan 26. doi: 10.2214/AJR.22.27416. Epub ahead of print. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2214/AJR.22.27416&link_type=DOI) 29. Eijkelboom AH, de Munck L, Vrancken Peeters MTFD, Broeders MJM, Strobbe LJA, Bos Memm, Schmidt MK, Guerrero Paez C, Smidt ML, Bessems M, Verloop J, Linn S, Lobbes MBI, Honkoop AH, van den Bongard DHJG, Westenend PJ, Wesseling J, Menke-van der Houven van Oordt CW, Tjan-Heijnen Vcg, Siesling S; NABON COVID-19 Consortium and the COVID and Cancer-NL Consortium. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosis, stage, and initial treatment of breast cancer in the Netherlands: a population-based study. J Hematol Oncol. 2021 Apr 17;14(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s13045-021-01073-7. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s13045-021-01073-7&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 30. Bosch G, Posso M, Louro J, Roman M, Porta M, Castells X, Macià F. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer screening indicators in a Spanish population-based program: a cohort study. Elife. 2022 Jun 10;11:e77434. doi: 10.7554/eLife.77434. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7554/eLife.77434&link_type=DOI) 31. Monsivais P, Amiri S, Robison J, Pflugeisen C, Kordas G, Amram O. Racial and socioeconomic inequities in breast cancer screening before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: analysis of two cohorts of women 50 years +. Breast Cancer. 2022 Jul;29(4):740–746. doi: 10.1007/s12282-022-01352-2. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s12282-022-01352-2&link_type=DOI) 32. Amram O, Amiri S, Robison J, Pflugeisen CM, Monsivais P. COVID-19 and inequities in colorectal and cervical cancer screening and diagnosis in Washington State. Cancer Med. 2022 Mar 18:10.1002/cam4.4655. doi:10.1002/cam4.4655. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/cam4.4655&link_type=DOI) 33. Vanni G, Pellicciaro M, Materazzo M, Palombi L, Buonomo OC. Breast Cancer Diagnosis in Coronavirus-Era: Alert From Italy. Front Oncol. 2020 May 22;10:938. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00938. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3389/fonc.2020.00938&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32574281&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 34. Gathani T, Clayton G, MacInnes E, Horgan K. The COVID-19 pandemic and impact on breast cancer diagnoses: what happened in England in the first half of 2020. Br J Cancer. 2021 Feb;124(4):710–712. doi: 10.1038/s41416-020-01182-z. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41416-020-01182-z&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 35. Toss A, Isca C, Venturelli M, Nasso C, Ficarra G, Bellelli V, Armocida C, Barbieri E, Cortesi L, Moscetti L, Piacentini F, Omarini C, Andreotti A, Gambini A, Battista R, Dominici M, Tazzioli G. Two-month stop in mammographic screening significantly impacts on breast cancer stage at diagnosis and upfront treatment in the COVID era. ESMO Open. 2021 Apr;6(2):100055. doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100055. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100055&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 36. Vanni G, Pellicciaro M, Materazzo M, Pedini D, Portarena I, Buonomo C, Perretta T, Rizza S, Pistolese CA, Buonomo OC. Advanced Stages and Increased Need for Adjuvant Treatments in Breast Cancer Patients: The Effect of the One-year COVID-19 Pandemic. Anticancer Res. 2021 May;41(5):2689–2696. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.15050. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTA6ImFudGljYW5yZXMiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6OToiNDEvNS8yNjg5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjIvMDgvMTcvMjAyMi4wOC4xNS4yMjI3ODc4Ny5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 37. Vives N, Binefa G, Vidal C, Milà N, Muñoz R, Guardiola V, Rial O, Garcia M. Short-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a population-based screening program for colorectal cancer in Catalonia (Spain). Prev Med. 2022 Feb; 155:106929. doi: 10.1016 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016&link_type=DOI) 38. Blay JY, Boucher S, Le Vu B, Cropet C, Chabaud S, Perol D, Barranger E, Campone M, Conroy T, Coutant C, De Crevoisier R, Debreuve-Theresette A, Delord JP, Fumoleau P, Gentil J, Gomez F, Guerin O, Jaffré A, Lartigau E, Lemoine C, Mahe MA, Mahon FX, Mathieu-Daude H, Merrouche Y, Penault-Llorca F, Pivot X, Soria JC, Thomas G, Vera P, Vermeulin T, Viens P, Ychou M, Beaupere S. Delayed care for patients with newly diagnosed cancer due to COVID-19 and estimated impact on cancer mortality in France. ESMO Open. 2021 Jun;6(3):100134. doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100134. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100134&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33984676&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 39. Longcroft-Wheaton G, Tolfree N, Gangi A, Beable R, Bhandari P. Data from a large Western centre exploring the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on endoscopy services and cancer diagnosis. Frontline Gastroenterol. 2020 Jul 30;12(3):193–199. doi: 10.1136/flgastro-2020-101543. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6ODoiZmxnYXN0cm8iO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6ODoiMTIvMy8xOTMiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMi8wOC8xNy8yMDIyLjA4LjE1LjIyMjc4Nzg3LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 40. Maringe C, Spicer J, Morris M, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer deaths due to delays in diagnosis in England, UK: a national, population-based, modelling study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(8):1023–34. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30388-0 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30388-0&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 41. Castanon A, Rebolj M, Pesola F, Pearmain P, Stubbs R. COVID-19 disruption to cervical cancer screening in England. J Med Screen. 2022 Apr 4:9691413221090892. doi: 10.1177/09691413221090892. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/09691413221090892&link_type=DOI) 42. Kregting LM, Kaljouw S, de Jonge L, Jansen EEL, Peterse EFP, Heijnsdijk EAM, van Ravesteyn NT, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, de Kok IMCM. Effects of cancer screening restart strategies after COVID-19 disruption. Br J Cancer. 2021 Apr;124(9):1516–1523. doi: 10.1038/s41416-021-01261-9. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41416-021-01261-9&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33723386&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F08%2F17%2F2022.08.15.22278787.atom) 43. de Jonge L, Worthington J, van Wifferen F, Iragorri N, Peterse EFP, Lew JB, Greuter MJE, Smith HA, Feletto E, Yong JHE, Canfell K, Coupé VMH, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I; COVID-19 and Cancer Global Modelling Consortium working group 2. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands: a comparative modelling study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Apr;6(4):304–314. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00003-0. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00003-0&link_type=DOI) 44. Duffy SW, Seedat F, Kearins O, Press M, Walton J, Myles J, Vulkan D, Sharma N, Mackie A. The projected impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on breast cancer deaths in England due to the cessation of population screening: a national estimation. Br J Cancer. 2022 May;126(9):1355–1361. doi: 10.1038/s41416-022-01714-9. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41416-022-01714-9&link_type=DOI)