European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis: overview and introduction to the full supplement publication.

Population-based screening for early detection and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) and precursor lesions, using evidence-based methods, can be effective in populations with a significant burden of the disease provided the services are of high quality. Multidisciplinary, evidence-based guidelines for quality assurance in CRC screening and diagnosis have been developed by experts in a project co-financed by the European Union. The 450-page guidelines were published in book format by the European Commission in 2010.  They include 10 chapters and over 250 recommendations, individually graded according to the strength of the recommendation and the supporting evidence. Adoption of the recommendations can improve and maintain the quality and effectiveness of an entire screening process, including identification and invitation of the target population, diagnosis and management of the disease and appropriate surveillance in people with detected lesions. To make the principles, recommendations and standards in the guidelines known to a wider professional and scientific community and to facilitate their use in the scientific literature, the original content is presented in journal format in an open-access Supplement of Endoscopy. The editors have prepared the present overview to inform readers of the comprehensive scope and content of the guidelines.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among persons living in homeless shelters in France.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is frequent and can constitute a barrier to the dissemination of vaccines once they are available. Unequal access to vaccines may also contribute to socioeconomic inequalities with regard to COVID-19. We studied vaccine hesitancy among persons living in homeless shelters in France between May and June 2020 (n = 235). Overall, 40.9% of study participants reported vaccine hesitancy, which is comparable to general population trends in France. In multivariate regression models, factors associated with vaccine hesitancy are: being a woman (OR = 2.55; 95% CI 1.40-4.74), living with a partner (OR = 2.48, 95% CI 1.17-5.41), no legal residence in France (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.27-0.92), and health literacy (OR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.21, 0.68). Our results suggest that trends in vaccine hesitancy and associated factors are similar among homeless persons as in the general population. Dissemination of information on vaccine risks and benefits needs to be adapted to persons who experience severe disadvantage.

False-positive results in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review and survey of service screening programmes.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening result in European mammographic screening programmes, and examine the rates and procedures of further assessment. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to identify studies of the cumulative risk of a false-positive result in European screening programmes (390,000 women). We then examined aggregate data, cross-sectional information about further assessment procedures among women with positive results in 20 mammographic screening programmes from 17 countries (1.7 million initial screens, 5.9 million subsequent screens), collected by the European Network for Information on Cancer project (EUNICE). RESULTS: The estimated cumulative risk of a false-positive screening result in women aged 50-69 undergoing 10 biennial screening tests varied from 8% to 21% in the three studies examined (pooled estimate 19.7%). The cumulative risk of an invasive procedure with benign outcome ranged from 1.8% to 6.3% (pooled estimate 2.9%). The risk of undergoing surgical intervention with benign outcome was 0.9% (one study only). From the EUNICE project, the proportions of all screening examinations in the programmes resulting in needle biopsy were 2.2% and 1.1% for initial and subsequent screens, respectively, though the rates differed between countries; the corresponding rates of surgical interventions among women without breast cancer were 0.19% and 0.07%. CONCLUSION: The specific investigative procedures following a recall should be considered when examining the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening result. Most women with a positive screening test undergo a non-invasive assessment procedure. Only a small proportion of recalled women undergo needle biopsy, and even fewer undergo surgical intervention.