Understanding the high-risk human papillomavirus prevalence and associated factors in the European country with a high incidence of cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) is a known cause of cervical cancer (CC). Latvia has a high incidence of CC compared with the average incidence in the European Union. This study aims to fill the data gap on the HR-HPV burden in Latvia, providing information on its prevalence and associated factors. METHODS: The cross-sectional study was conducted from February 2021 to April 2022. Participants 25-70 years old visiting a general practitioner (general population) or those referred to a colposcopy clinic with changes in their cervical cytology (colposcopy population) collected vaginal self-sample and completed a paper-based questionnaire. Samples were analyzed with Cobas 6800 System (Roche) for HPV16, HPV18 and other HR-HPV (HPV31/33/35/39/45/51/52/56/58/59/66/68). Descriptive statistics for categorical variables were performed. The Chi-square test was used to determine for the statistical significance of differences in the proportions of the dependent variable between subgroups of the independent variable. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression were used to identify factors associated with positive HR-HPV status. Results were considered statistically significant at P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1274 participants provided a valid sample. The prevalence of any HR-HPV infection was 66.8% in the colposcopy group and 11.0% in the general population. Factors associated with positive HR-HPV status were marital status single/divorced/widowed (vs. married/cohabiting) [adjusted OR (aOR) 2.6; P = 0.003], higher number of lifetime sex partners [aOR 5.1 (P < 0.001) and 4.0 (P = 0.001)] for six or more and three to five partners in the general population; in the colposcopy group, the statistical significance remained only for Latvian ethnicity (vs. other) (aOR 1.8; P = 0.008) and current smoking (vs. never) (aOR 1.9; P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: We documented a comparison to European Union HR-HPV infection burden in Latvia. Any HR-HPV positivity was significantly associated with sexual and other health behavior.

Age-specific and genotype-specific carcinogenic human papillomavirus prevalence in a country with a high cervical cancer burden: results of a cross-sectional study in Estonia.

OBJECTIVES: To describe age-specific and type-specific carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence prior to large-scale effect of HPV vaccines in Estonia and to analyse the risk factors associated with carcinogenic HPV. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using self-administered questionnaire and self-collected vaginal swabs for detection of HPV infection. SETTING: Estonian Biobank database. PARTICIPANTS: Stratified random sample of women aged 30-33, 57-60 and 67-70 years living in one of the three largest counties in Estonia. Of 3065 women approached, 1347 (43.9%) returned questionnaires and specimens for HPV DNA detection. OUTCOME MEASURES: HPV prevalence and fully adjusted ORs with 95% CIs for risk factors. RESULTS: HPV prevalence was highest among women aged 30-33 years (18.7%; 95% CI 15.8 to 21.9) followed by those aged 67-70 years (16.7%; 95% CI 12.4 to 22.0) and 57-60 years (10.2%; 95% CI 7.8 to 13.3). HPV16 and HPV56 were the most common among women aged 30-33 years (both 4.0%; 95% CI 2.7 to 5.9), and HPV68 was the most common among women aged 57-60 years (2.8%; 95% CI 1.5 to 4.7) and 67-70 years (6.4%; 95% CI 3.6 to 10.4). Vaccination with nonavalent vaccine would have halved the carcinogenic HPV prevalence among women aged 30-33 years. The odds of infection with carcinogenic HPV were higher among women with six or more sexual partners among younger (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.54 to 5.81) and older (OR 3.80; 95% CI 1.25 to 11.55) women and lower (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.72) among younger married women. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated U-shaped age-specific genotype profile of carcinogenic HPV prevalence, indicating that public health providers should focus on developing exit strategies for the cervical cancer screening programme in Estonia with a possible extension of HPV testing beyond the current screening age of 65 years. Generalisability of the findings of this study may be affected by the low response rate.

An overview of cervical cancer epidemiology and prevention in the Baltic States.

AIMS: To inform future Baltic States-specific policy analyses, we aimed to provide an overview of cervical cancer epidemiology and existing prevention efforts in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. METHODS: A structured desk review: we compiled and summarized data on current prevention strategies, population demography and epidemiology (high risk human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence and cervical cancer incidence and mortality over time) for each Baltic State by reviewing published literature and official guidelines, performing registry-based analyses using secondary data and having discussions with experts in each country. RESULTS: We observed important similarities in the three Baltic States: high burden of the disease (high incidence and mortality of cervical cancer, changes in TNM (Classification of Malignant Tumors) stage distribution towards later stage at diagnosis), high burden of high-risk HPV in general population and suboptimal implementation of the preventive strategies as low screening and HPV vaccination coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical cancer remains a substantial health problem in the region and the efforts in addressing barriers by implementing a four-step plan for elimination cervical cancer in Europe should be made. This goal is achievable through evidence-based steps in four key areas: vaccination, screening, treatment, and public awareness.

Cervical Cancer in the Baltic States: Can Intelligent and Personalized Cancer Screening Change the Situation?

The three Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania) are among the European Union countries with the highest incidence and mortality rates for cervical cancer. In order to tackle this public health challenge, there is an urgent need to implement more advanced and effective methods in cervical cancer prevention in Baltic countries. Nationwide cervical cancer screening programs in the Baltic States commenced in 2004-2009. While the organized screening programs in these countries differ in some relevant details (target age groups, screening interval), the underlying principles and problems, barriers are universal. However, the outcomes of present screening programs are unsatisfactory. In addition, universal screening programs are extremely costly. There is a potential need for more intelligent and personalized cervical cancer screening program. In 2019 the project "Towards elimination of cervical cancer: intelligent and personalized solutions for cancer screening" (2020-2023) was developed with the main objective - to develop improved and personalized cancer screening methods within a sustainable health care system. It is expected, that more sophisticated cervical cancer screening model will be implemented in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, and will have a positive impact to epidemiology of cervical cancer and public health in general.

SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in Lithuania: Results of National Population Survey.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND: Betacoronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has spread in early 2020 worldwide just in several months. The official statistics are consistently collected, but this is mainly based on symptomatic reports. This study was aimed to estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Lithuanian population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study was conducted during August-September 2020 in 6 municipalities of Lithuania. The sample comprised 3087 adult participants from the general population (mean age 53.7 years, 64% female). SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were assessed using AMP IgM/IgG Rapid Test, other data were based on self-report. Seroprevalence was assessed as a crude estimate and as adjusted by sensitivity-specificity of the test. RESULTS: The crude seroprevalence in the total sample was 1.9%, the adjusted - 1.4%, ranging from 0.8% to 2.4% across municipalities. Among seroprevalent cases, 67.2% had IgG, 29.3% had IgM, and 3.5% had both IgG and IgM. An increased risk for seropositive test was observed among people who reported having had close contacts with SARS-CoV-2 positives (OR=5.49, p<0.001). At the borderline significance were female gender (OR=1.75, p=0.082) and non-smoking status (OR=2.95, p=0.072). Among the seropositive participants, 69.0% reported having had no COVID-19 symptoms since 1 March 2020, while 31.0% reported having had at least one of the symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Lithuanian sample in August-September 2020 was 1.4%, ranging from 0.8% to 2.4% across municipalities. Given the overall official data, by the end of study (11 September 2020) the total COVID-19 rate in Lithuania was 117.5 per 100,000 population or 0.12%. This suggests more than 10 times higher prevalence of virus across the population than the official estimates.

Is Capacity Building Training Effective for Changing Attitudes toward Health Inequalities? Experience from a Norway Grants Project in Lithuania.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In 2014⁻2017, the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences and partners implemented the project, 'Development of the Model for the Strengthening of the Capacities to Identify and Reduce Health Inequalities', which was financed by The Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2009⁻2014 Public Health Initiatives Program. One of objectives of this project was to increase the awareness about public health and related specialist knowledge and skills in the field of health inequalities. This paper evaluates the effectiveness of capacity-training sessions on capacity building regarding increasing the awareness and knowledge that is needed for addressing health inequalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants attending capacity-building seminars were asked to complete the same questionnaires before and after these training sessions. A total of 145 questionnaires were received (response rate 71.8%). The evaluation of changes in the pre-survey and post-survey responses in relation to a nonparametric analysis of two related samples was performed using the Wilcoxon test. RESULTS: Respondents were asked to identify the general importance of health inequalities to the national public health agenda. The pre-training median of the survey was nine (minimum four; maximum 10), and post-training was 10 [minimum five; maximum 10] (p < 0.001). Unemployed, low-paid, and low-educated people were identified as the most vulnerable groups of society in terms of health inequalities. A more effective tobacco and alcohol control was identified as the most important inequality measure needed. An absolute majority of participants emphasized the need for intersectoral collaboration for the effective reduction of health inequalities. CONCLUSION: The findings from our study suggest that capacity-building sessions can be effective measures for increasing awareness of health inequalities. It is expected that the outcomes of these training opportunities will act as facilitators for further engagement and ongoing approaches to addressing health inequalities.