RESUMEN
Guidelines for prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing in Australia recommend that men at average risk of prostate cancer who have been informed of the benefits and harms, and who decide to undergo regular testing, should be offered testing every 2 years from 50 to 69 years. This study aimed to estimate the benefits and harms of regular testing in this context. We constructed Policy1-Prostate, a discrete event microsimulation platform of the natural history of prostate cancer and prostate cancer survival, and PSA testing patterns and subsequent management in Australia. The model was calibrated to pre-PSA (before 1985) prostate cancer incidence and mortality and validated against incidence and mortality trends from 1985 to 2011 and international trials. The model predictions were concordant with trials and Australian observed incidence and mortality data from 1985 to 2011. Out of 1000 men who choose to test according to the guidelines, 36 [21-41] men will die from prostate cancer and 126 [119-133] men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer, compared with 50 [47-54] and 94 [90-98] men who do not test, respectively. During the 20 years of active PSA testing, 32.3% [25.6%-38.8%] of all PSA-test detected cancers are overdiagnosed cases that is, 30 [21-42] out of 94 [83-107] PSA-test detected cancers. Australian men choosing to test with PSA every two years from 50 to 69 will reduce their risk of ever dying from prostate cancer and incur a risk of overdiagnosis: for every man who avoids dying from prostate cancer, two will be overdiagnosed with prostate cancer between 50 and 69 years of age. Australian men, with health professionals, can use these results to inform decision-making about PSA testing.
Asunto(s)
Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Australia/epidemiología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Próstata , Tamizaje Masivo/métodosRESUMEN
While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I2 = 0; people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I2 = 0.58; inpatients with COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Prueba de COVID-19 , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A national, lung cancer screening programme is under consideration in Australia, and we assessed cost-effectiveness using updated data and assumptions. METHODS: We estimated the cost-effectiveness of lung screening by applying screening parameters and outcomes from either the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) or the NEderlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (NELSON) to Australian data on lung cancer risk, mortality, health-system costs, and smoking trends using a deterministic, multi-cohort model. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for a lifetime horizon. RESULTS: The ICER for lung screening compared to usual care in the NELSON-based scenario was AU$39,250 (95% CI $18,150-108,300) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY); lower than the NLST-based estimate (ICER = $76,300, 95% CI $41,750-236,500). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, lung screening was cost-effective in 15%/60% of NELSON-like simulations, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,000/$50,000 per QALY, respectively, compared to 0.5%/6.7% for the NLST. ICERs were most sensitive to assumptions regarding the screening-related lung cancer mortality benefit and duration of benefit over time. The cost of screening had a larger impact on ICERs than the cost of treatment, even after quadrupling the 2006-2016 healthcare costs of stage IV lung cancer. DISCUSSION: Lung screening could be cost-effective in Australia, contingent on translating trial-like lung cancer mortality benefits to the clinic.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Australia/epidemiología , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Análisis de Costo-Efectividad , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/economía , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de VidaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare 50-year forecasts of Australian tobacco smoking rates in relation to trends in smoking initiation and cessation and in relation to a national target of ≤5% adult daily prevalence by 2030. METHODS: A compartmental model of Australian population daily smoking, calibrated to the observed smoking status of 229 523 participants aged 20-99 years in 26 surveys (1962-2016) by age, sex and birth year (1910-1996), estimated smoking prevalence to 2066 using Australian Bureau of Statistics 50-year population predictions. Prevalence forecasts were compared across scenarios in which smoking initiation and cessation trends from 2017 were continued, kept constant or reversed. RESULTS: At the end of the observation period in 2016, model-estimated daily smoking prevalence was 13.7% (90% equal-tailed interval (EI) 13.4%-14.0%). When smoking initiation and cessation rates were held constant, daily smoking prevalence reached 5.2% (90% EI 4.9%-5.5%) after 50 years, in 2066. When initiation and cessation rates continued their trajectory downwards and upwards, respectively, daily smoking prevalence reached 5% by 2039 (90% EI 2037-2041). The greatest progress towards the 5% goal came from eliminating initiation among younger cohorts, with the target met by 2037 (90% EI 2036-2038) in the most optimistic scenario. Conversely, if initiation and cessation rates reversed to 2007 levels, estimated prevalence was 9.1% (90% EI 8.8%-9.4%) in 2066. CONCLUSION: A 5% adult daily smoking prevalence target cannot be achieved by the year 2030 based on current trends. Urgent investment in concerted strategies that prevent smoking initiation and facilitate cessation is necessary to achieve 5% prevalence by 2030.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Lynch syndrome-related colorectal cancer (CRC) risk substantially varies by mismatch repair (MMR) gene. We evaluated the health impact and cost-effectiveness of MMR gene-tailored colonoscopic surveillance. METHODS: We first estimated sex- and MMR gene-specific cumulative lifetime risk of first CRC without colonoscopic surveillance using an optimization algorithm. Next, we harnessed these risk estimates in a microsimulation model, "Policy1-Lynch," and compared 126 colonoscopic surveillance strategies against no surveillance. RESULTS: The most cost-effective strategy was 3-yearly surveillance from age 25 to 70 years (pathogenic variants [path_] in MLH1 [path_MLH1], path_MSH2) with delayed surveillance for path_MSH6 (age 30-70 years) and path_PMS2 (age 35-70 years) heterozygotes (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = Australian dollars (A) $8,833/life-year saved). This strategy averted 60 CRC deaths (153 colonoscopies per death averted) over the lifetime of 1000 confirmed patients with Lynch syndrome (vs no surveillance). This also reduced colonoscopies by 5% without substantial change in health outcomes (vs nontailored 3-yearly surveillance from 25-70 years). Generally, starting surveillance at age 25 (vs 20) years was more cost-effective with minimal effect on life-years saved and starting 5 to 10 years later for path_MSH6 and path_PMS2 heterozygotes (vs path_MLH1 and path_MSH2) further improved cost-effectiveness. Surveillance end age (70/75/80 years) had a minor effect. Three-yearly surveillance strategies were more cost-effective (vs 1 or 2-yearly) but prevented 3 fewer CRC deaths. CONCLUSION: MMR gene-specific colonoscopic surveillance would be effective and cost-effective.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales Hereditarias sin Poliposis , Adulto , Anciano , Australia , Colonoscopía , Neoplasias Colorrectales Hereditarias sin Poliposis/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales Hereditarias sin Poliposis/epidemiología , Neoplasias Colorrectales Hereditarias sin Poliposis/genética , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Reparación de la Incompatibilidad de ADN/genética , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Endonucleasa PMS2 de Reparación del Emparejamiento Incorrecto/genética , Homólogo 1 de la Proteína MutL/genética , Proteína 2 Homóloga a MutS/genéticaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The WHO Director-General has issued a call for action to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. To help inform global efforts, we modelled potential human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and cervical screening scenarios in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) to examine the feasibility and timing of elimination at different thresholds, and to estimate the number of cervical cancer cases averted on the path to elimination. METHODS: The WHO Cervical Cancer Elimination Modelling Consortium (CCEMC), which consists of three independent transmission-dynamic models identified by WHO according to predefined criteria, projected reductions in cervical cancer incidence over time in 78 LMICs for three standardised base-case scenarios: girls-only vaccination; girls-only vaccination and once-lifetime screening; and girls-only vaccination and twice-lifetime screening. Girls were vaccinated at age 9 years (with a catch-up to age 14 years), assuming 90% coverage and 100% lifetime protection against HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58. Cervical screening involved HPV testing once or twice per lifetime at ages 35 years and 45 years, with uptake increasing from 45% (2023) to 90% (2045 onwards). The elimination thresholds examined were an average age-standardised cervical cancer incidence of four or fewer cases per 100â000 women-years and ten or fewer cases per 100â000 women-years, and an 85% or greater reduction in incidence. Sensitivity analyses were done, varying vaccination and screening strategies and assumptions. We summarised results using the median (range) of model predictions. FINDINGS: Girls-only HPV vaccination was predicted to reduce the median age-standardised cervical cancer incidence in LMICs from 19·8 (range 19·4-19·8) to 2·1 (2·0-2·6) cases per 100â000 women-years over the next century (89·4% [86·2-90·1] reduction), and to avert 61·0 million (60·5-63·0) cases during this period. Adding twice-lifetime screening reduced the incidence to 0·7 (0·6-1·6) cases per 100â000 women-years (96·7% [91·3-96·7] reduction) and averted an extra 12·1 million (9·5-13·7) cases. Girls-only vaccination was predicted to result in elimination in 60% (58-65) of LMICs based on the threshold of four or fewer cases per 100â000 women-years, in 99% (89-100) of LMICs based on the threshold of ten or fewer cases per 100â000 women-years, and in 87% (37-99) of LMICs based on the 85% or greater reduction threshold. When adding twice-lifetime screening, 100% (71-100) of LMICs reached elimination for all three thresholds. In regions in which all countries can achieve cervical cancer elimination with girls-only vaccination, elimination could occur between 2059 and 2102, depending on the threshold and region. Introducing twice-lifetime screening accelerated elimination by 11-31 years. Long-term vaccine protection was required for elimination. INTERPRETATION: Predictions were consistent across our three models and suggest that high HPV vaccination coverage of girls can lead to cervical cancer elimination in most LMICs by the end of the century. Screening with high uptake will expedite reductions and will be necessary to eliminate cervical cancer in countries with the highest burden. FUNDING: WHO, UNDP, UN Population Fund, UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Program of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Canadian Institute of Health Research, Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé, Compute Canada, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia Centre for Research Excellence in Cervical Cancer Control.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Papillomavirus/prevención & control , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/prevención & control , Adulto , Países en Desarrollo , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Renta , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Modelos Biológicos , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/complicaciones , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/epidemiología , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/virología , VacunaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: WHO is developing a global strategy towards eliminating cervical cancer as a public health problem, which proposes an elimination threshold of four cases per 100â000 women and includes 2030 triple-intervention coverage targets for scale-up of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to 90%, twice-lifetime cervical screening to 70%, and treatment of pre-invasive lesions and invasive cancer to 90%. We assessed the impact of achieving the 90-70-90 triple-intervention targets on cervical cancer mortality and deaths averted over the next century. We also assessed the potential for the elimination initiative to support target 3.4 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-a one-third reduction in premature mortality from non-communicable diseases by 2030. METHODS: The WHO Cervical Cancer Elimination Modelling Consortium (CCEMC) involves three independent, dynamic models of HPV infection, cervical carcinogenesis, screening, and precancer and invasive cancer treatment. Reductions in age-standardised rates of cervical cancer mortality in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) were estimated for three core scenarios: girls-only vaccination at age 9 years with catch-up for girls aged 10-14 years; girls-only vaccination plus once-lifetime screening and cancer treatment scale-up; and girls-only vaccination plus twice-lifetime screening and cancer treatment scale-up. Vaccination was assumed to provide 100% lifetime protection against infections with HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58, and to scale up to 90% coverage in 2020. Cervical screening involved HPV testing at age 35 years, or at ages 35 years and 45 years, with scale-up to 45% coverage by 2023, 70% by 2030, and 90% by 2045, and we assumed that 50% of women with invasive cervical cancer would receive appropriate surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy by 2023, which would increase to 90% by 2030. We summarised results using the median (range) of model predictions. FINDINGS: In 2020, the estimated cervical cancer mortality rate across all 78 LMICs was 13·2 (range 12·9-14·1) per 100â000 women. Compared to the status quo, by 2030, vaccination alone would have minimal impact on cervical cancer mortality, leading to a 0·1% (0·1-0·5) reduction, but additionally scaling up twice-lifetime screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 34·2% (23·3-37·8), averting 300â000 (300â000-400â000) deaths by 2030 (with similar results for once-lifetime screening). By 2070, scaling up vaccination alone would reduce mortality by 61·7% (61·4-66·1), averting 4·8 million (4·1-4·8) deaths. By 2070, additionally scaling up screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 88·9% (84·0-89·3), averting 13·3 million (13·1-13·6) deaths (with once-lifetime screening), or by 92·3% (88·4-93·0), averting 14·6 million (14·1-14·6) deaths (with twice-lifetime screening). By 2120, vaccination alone would reduce mortality by 89·5% (86·6-89·9), averting 45·8 million (44·7-46·4) deaths. By 2120, additionally scaling up screening and cancer treatment would reduce mortality by 97·9% (95·0-98·0), averting 60·8 million (60·2-61·2) deaths (with once-lifetime screening), or by 98·6% (96·5-98·6), averting 62·6 million (62·1-62·8) deaths (with twice-lifetime screening). With the WHO triple-intervention strategy, over the next 10 years, about half (48% [45-55]) of deaths averted would be in sub-Saharan Africa and almost a third (32% [29-34]) would be in South Asia; over the next 100 years, almost 90% of deaths averted would be in these regions. For premature deaths (age 30-69 years), the WHO triple-intervention strategy would result in rate reductions of 33·9% (24·4-37·9) by 2030, 96·2% (94·3-96·8) by 2070, and 98·6% (96·9-98·8) by 2120. INTERPRETATION: These findings emphasise the importance of acting immediately on three fronts to scale up vaccination, screening, and treatment for pre-invasive and invasive cervical cancer. In the next 10 years, a one-third reduction in the rate of premature mortality from cervical cancer in LMICs is possible, contributing to the realisation of the 2030 UN SDGs. Over the next century, successful implementation of the WHO elimination strategy would reduce cervical cancer mortality by almost 99% and save more than 62 million women's lives. FUNDING: WHO, UNDP, UN Population Fund, UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Program of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Germany Federal Ministry of Health, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Centre for Research Excellence in Cervical Cancer Control, Canadian Institute of Health Research, Compute Canada, and Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/mortalidad , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Niño , Preescolar , Países en Desarrollo , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Renta , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Biológicos , Mortalidad/tendencias , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/complicaciones , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/prevención & control , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/prevención & control , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/virología , Vacunación/métodos , Organización Mundial de la Salud , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the health impact and cost-effectiveness of systematic testing for Lynch syndrome (LS) in people with incident colorectal cancer (CRC) in Australia. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: We investigated the impact of LS testing strategies in a micro-simulation model (Policy1-Lynch), explicitly modelling the cost of testing all patients diagnosed with incident CRC during 2017, with detailed modelling of outcomes for patients identified as LS carriers (probands) and their at-risk relatives throughout their lifetimes. For people with confirmed LS, we modelled ongoing colonoscopic surveillance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness of six universal tumour testing strategies (testing for DNA mismatch repair deficiencies) and of universal germline gene panel testing of patients with incident CRC; impact on cost-effectiveness of restricting testing by age at CRC diagnosis (all ages, under 50/60/70 years) and of colonoscopic surveillance interval (one, two years). RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness ratio of universal tumour testing strategies (annual colonoscopic surveillance, no testing age limit) compared with no testing ranged from $28 915 to $31 904/life-year saved (LYS) (indicative willingness-to-pay threshold: $30 000-$50 000/LYS). These strategies could avert 184-189 CRC deaths with an additional 30 597-31 084 colonoscopies over the lifetimes of 1000 patients with incident CRC with LS and 1420 confirmed LS carrier relatives (164-166 additional colonoscopies/death averted). The most cost-effective strategy was immunohistochemistry and BRAF V600E testing (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER], $28 915/LYS). Universal germline gene panel testing was not cost-effective compared with universal tumour testing strategies (ICER, $2.4 million/LYS). Immunohistochemistry and BRAF V600E testing was cost-effective at all age limits when paired with 2-yearly colonoscopic surveillance (ICER, $11 525-$32 153/LYS), and required 4778-15 860 additional colonoscopies to avert 46-181 CRC deaths (88-103 additional colonoscopies/death averted). CONCLUSIONS: Universal tumour testing strategies for guiding germline genetic testing of people with incident CRC for LS in Australia are likely to be cost-effective compared with no testing. Universal germline gene panel testing would not currently be cost-effective.
Asunto(s)
Colonoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias Colorrectales Hereditarias sin Poliposis/diagnóstico , Análisis Costo-Beneficio/estadística & datos numéricos , Pruebas Genéticas/economía , Anciano , Australia/epidemiología , Colonoscopía/economía , Neoplasias Colorrectales Hereditarias sin Poliposis/economía , Neoplasias Colorrectales Hereditarias sin Poliposis/mortalidad , Femenino , Humanos , Inmunohistoquímica/economía , Masculino , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cervical screening and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination have been implemented in most high-income countries; however, coverage is low in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In 2018, the Director-General of WHO announced a call to action for the elimination of cervical cancer as a public health problem. WHO has called for global action to scale-up vaccination, screening, and treatment of precancer, early detection and prompt treatment of early invasive cancers, and palliative care. An elimination threshold in terms of cervical cancer incidence has not yet been defined, but an absolute rate of cervical cancer incidence could be chosen for such a threshold. In this study, we aimed to quantify the potential cumulative effect of scaled up global vaccination and screening coverage on the number of cervical cancer cases averted over the 50 years from 2020 to 2069, and to predict outcomes beyond 2070 to identify the earliest years by which cervical cancer rates could drop below two absolute levels that could be considered as possible elimination thresholds-the rare cancer threshold (six new cases per 100â000 women per year, which has been observed in only a few countries), and a lower threshold of four new cases per 100â000 women per year. METHODS: In this statistical trends analysis and modelling study, we did a statistical analysis of existing trends in cervical cancer worldwide using high-quality cancer registry data included in the Cancer Incidence in Five Continents series published by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. We then used a comprehensive and extensively validated simulation platform, Policy1-Cervix, to do a dynamic multicohort modelled analysis of the impact of potential scale-up scenarios for cervical cancer prevention, in order to predict the future incidence rates and burden of cervical cancer. Data are presented globally, by Human Development Index (HDI) category, and at the individual country level. FINDINGS: In the absence of further intervention, there would be 44·4 million cervical cancer cases diagnosed globally over the period 2020-69, with almost two-thirds of cases occurring in low-HDI or medium-HDI countries. Rapid vaccination scale-up to 80-100% coverage globally by 2020 with a broad-spectrum HPV vaccine could avert 6·7-7·7 million cases in this period, but more than half of these cases will be averted after 2060. Implementation of HPV-based screening twice per lifetime at age 35 years and 45 years in all LMICs with 70% coverage globally will bring forward the effects of prevention and avert a total of 12·5-13·4 million cases in the next 50 years. Rapid scale-up of combined high-coverage screening and vaccination from 2020 onwards would result in average annual cervical cancer incidence declining to less than six new cases per 100â000 individuals by 2045-49 for very-high-HDI countries, 2055-59 for high-HDI countries, 2065-69 for medium-HDI countries, and 2085-89 for low-HDI countries, and to less than four cases per 100â000 by 2055-59 for very-high-HDI countries, 2065-69 for high-HDI countries, 2070-79 for medium-HDI countries, and 2090-2100 or beyond for low-HDI countries. However, rates of less than four new cases per 100â000 would not be achieved in all individual low-HDI countries by the end of the century. If delivery of vaccination and screening is more gradually scaled up over the period 2020-50 (eg, 20-45% vaccination coverage and 25-70% once-per-lifetime screening coverage by 2030, increasing to 40-90% vaccination coverage and 90% once-per-lifetime screening coverage by 2050, when considered as average coverage rates across HDI categories), end of the century incidence rates will be reduced by a lesser amount. In this scenario, average cervical cancer incidence rates will decline to 0·8 cases per 100â000 for very-high-HDI countries, 1·3 per 100â000 for high-HDI countries, 4·4 per 100â000 for medium-HDI countries, and 14 per 100â000 for low-HDI countries, by the end of the century. INTERPRETATION: More than 44 million women will be diagnosed with cervical cancer in the next 50 years if primary and secondary prevention programmes are not implemented in LMICs. If high coverage vaccination can be implemented quickly, a substantial effect on the burden of disease will be seen after three to four decades, but nearer-term impact will require delivery of cervical screening to older cohorts who will not benefit from HPV vaccination. Widespread coverage of both HPV vaccination and cervical screening from 2020 onwards has the potential to avert up to 12·5-13·4 million cervical cancer cases by 2069, and could achieve average cervical cancer incidence of around four per 100â000 women per year or less, for all country HDI categories, by the end of the century. A draft global strategy to accelerate cervical cancer elimination, with goals and targets for the period 2020-30, will be considered at the World Health Assembly in 2020. The findings presented here have helped inform initial discussions of elimination targets, and ongoing comparative modelling with other groups is supporting the development of the final goals and targets for cervical cancer elimination. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Australia, part-funded via the NHMRC Centre of Excellence for Cervical Cancer Control (C4; APP1135172).
Asunto(s)
Papillomaviridae/efectos de los fármacos , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/prevención & control , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/prevención & control , Adolescente , Adulto , Cuello del Útero/patología , Cuello del Útero/virología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Papillomaviridae/patogenicidad , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/virología , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus/inmunología , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/epidemiología , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/inmunología , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/virología , Vacunación , Organización Mundial de la Salud , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
This study demonstrates that the clinical sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility of the novel cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test on the cobas 6800 system for high-risk HPV types fulfills the criteria for use in population-based cervical screening. The criteria were formulated by an international consortium, using the cobas 4800 HPV test as a validated reference assay. The cobas HPV test detected over 98% of histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) lesions in women age 30 years or older, with a specificity of 98.9% compared with the reference cobas 4800 test. Both the intra- and interlaboratory agreement for the cobas HPV test were 98%. The clinical performance of the cobas HPV test is comparable to those of longitudinally validated HPV assays and fulfills the criteria for its use in primary cervical screening.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular/métodos , Papillomaviridae/clasificación , Papillomaviridae/aislamiento & purificación , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Displasia del Cuello del Útero/diagnóstico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Persona de Mediana Edad , Papillomaviridae/genética , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/virología , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
The Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) will fully roll-out 2-yearly screening using the immunochemical Faecal Occult Blood Testing (iFOBT) in people aged 50 to 74 years by 2020. In this study, we aimed to estimate the comparative health benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of screening with iFOBT, versus other potential alternative or adjunctive technologies. A comprehensive validated microsimulation model, Policy1-Bowel, was used to simulate a total of 13 screening approaches involving use of iFOBT, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography (CTC), faecal DNA (fDNA) and plasma DNA (pDNA), in people aged 50 to 74 years. All strategies were evaluated in three scenarios: (i) perfect adherence, (ii) high (but imperfect) adherence, and (iii) low adherence. When assuming perfect adherence, the most effective strategies involved using iFOBT (annually, or biennially with/without adjunct sigmoidoscopy either at 50, or at 54, 64 and 74 years for individuals with negative iFOBT), or colonoscopy (10-yearly, or once-off at 50 years combined with biennial iFOBT). Colorectal cancer incidence (mortality) reductions for these strategies were 51-67(74-80)% in comparison with no screening; 2-yearly iFOBT screening (i.e. the NBCSP) would be associated with reductions of 51(74)%. Only 2-yearly iFOBT screening was found to be cost-effective in all scenarios in context of an indicative willingness-to-pay threshold of A$50,000/life-year saved (LYS); this strategy was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of A$2,984/LYS-A$5,981/LYS (depending on adherence). The fully rolled-out NBCSP is highly cost-effective, and is also one of the most effective approaches for bowel cancer screening in Australia.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/economía , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Anciano , Australia , Colonografía Tomográfica Computarizada/efectos adversos , Colonografía Tomográfica Computarizada/economía , Colonoscopía/efectos adversos , Colonoscopía/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , ADN/sangre , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/efectos adversos , Heces/química , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Teóricos , Sangre Oculta , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Sigmoidoscopía/efectos adversos , Sigmoidoscopía/economíaRESUMEN
Lung cancer screening with computerised tomography holds promise, but optimising the balance of benefits and harms via selection of a high risk population is critical. PLCOm2012 is a logistic regression model based on U.S. data, incorporating sociodemographic and health factors, which predicts 6-year lung cancer risk among ever-smokers, and thus may better predict those who might benefit from screening than criteria based solely on age and smoking history. We aimed to validate the performance of PLCOm2012 in predicting lung cancer outcomes in a cohort of Australian smokers. Predicted risk of lung cancer was calculated using PLCOm2012 applied to baseline data from 95,882 ever-smokers aged ≥45 years in the 45 and Up Study (2006-2009). Predictions were compared to lung cancer outcomes captured to June 2014 via linkage to population-wide health databases; a total of 1,035 subsequent lung cancer diagnoses were identified. PLCOm2012 had good discrimination (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic-curve; AUC 0.80, 95%CI 0.78-0.81) and excellent calibration (mean and 90th percentiles of absolute risk difference between observed and predicted outcomes: 0.006 and 0.016, respectively). Sensitivity (69.4%, 95%CI, 65.6-73.0%) of the PLCOm2012 criteria in the 55-74 year age group for predicting lung cancers was greater than that using criteria based on ≥30 pack-years smoking and ≤15 years quit (57.3%, 53.3-61.3%; p < 0.0001), but specificity was lower (72.0%, 71.7-72.4% versus 75.2%, 74.8-75.6%, respectively; p < 0.0001). Targeting high risk people for lung cancer screening using PLCOm2012 might improve the balance of benefits versus harms, and cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Fumar/efectos adversos , Anciano , Australia/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Selección de Paciente , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
Primary HPV screening enables earlier diagnosis of cervical lesions compared to cytology, however, its effect on the risk of treatment and adverse obstetric outcomes has not been extensively investigated. We estimated the cumulative lifetime risk (CLR) of cervical cancer and excisional treatment, and change in adverse obstetric outcomes in HPV unvaccinated women and cohorts offered vaccination (>70% coverage in 12-13 years) for the Australian cervical screening program. Two-yearly cytology screening (ages 18-69 years) was compared to 5-yearly primary HPV screening with partial genotyping for HPV16/18 (ages 25-74 years). A dynamic model of HPV transmission, vaccination, cervical screening and treatment for precancerous lesions was coupled with an individual-based simulation of obstetric complications. For cytology screening, the CLR of cervical cancer diagnosis, death and treatment was estimated to be 0.649%, 0.198% and 13.4% without vaccination and 0.182%, 0.056% and 6.8%, in vaccinated women, respectively. For HPV screening, relative reductions of 33% and 22% in cancer risk for unvaccinated and vaccinated women are predicted, respectively, compared to cytology. Without the implementation of vaccination, a 4% increase in treatment risk for HPV versus cytology screening would have been expected, implying a possible increase in pre-term delivery (PTD) and low birth weight (LBW) events of 19 to 35 and 14 to 37, respectively, per 100,000 unvaccinated women. However, in vaccinated women, treatment risk will decrease by 13%, potentially leading to 4 to 41 fewer PTD events and from 2 more to 52 fewer LBW events per 100,000 vaccinated women. In unvaccinated women in cohorts offered vaccination as 12-13 year olds, no change to lifetime treatment risk is expected with HPV screening. In unvaccinated women in cohorts offered vaccination as 12-13 year olds, no change to lifetime treatment risk is expected with HPV screening. HPV screening starting at age 25 in populations with high vaccination coverage, is therefore expected to both improve the benefits (further decrease risk of cervical cancer) and reduce the harms (reduce treatments and possible obstetric complications) associated with cervical cancer screening.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Papillomaviridae/aislamiento & purificación , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Australia , Citodiagnóstico , ADN Viral/análisis , Femenino , Técnicas de Genotipaje , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Papillomaviridae/genética , Embarazo , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/virología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening increases detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplastic lesions and invasive cancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ [CIN2+]) compared to cytology, but no evaluation has been conducted in a population previously offered HPV vaccination. We aimed to assess colposcopy referral and CIN2+ detection rates for HPV-screened versus cytology-screened women in Australia's HPV-vaccinated population (by 2014, resident women ≤33 years had been age-eligible for HPV vaccination, with 3-dose uptake across age cohorts being about 50%-77%). METHODS AND FINDINGS: Compass is an open-label randomised trial of 5-yearly HPV screening versus 2.5-yearly liquid-based cytology (LBC) screening. In the first phase, consenting women aged 25-64 years presenting for routine screening at 47 primary practices in Victoria, Australia, provided a cervical sample and were randomised at a central laboratory at a 1:2:2 allocation to (i) image-read LBC screening with HPV triage of low-grade cytology ('LBC screening'), (ii) HPV screening with those HPV16/18 positive referred to colposcopy and with LBC triage for other oncogenic (OHR) types ('HPV+LBC triage'), or (iii) HPV screening with those HPV16/18 positive referred to colposcopy and with dual-stained cytology triage for OHR types ('HPV+DS triage'). A total of 5,006 eligible women were recruited from 29 October 2013 to 7 November 2014 (recruitment rate 58%); of these, 22% were in the group age-eligible for vaccination. Data on 4,995 participants were analysed after 11 withdrawals; 998 were assigned to, and 995 analysed (99.7%) in, the LBC-screened group; 1,996 assigned to and 1,992 analysed (99.8%) in the HPV+LBC triage group; and 2,012 assigned to and 2,008 analysed (99.8%) in the HPV+DS triage group. No serious trial-related adverse events were reported. The main outcomes were colposcopy referral and detected CIN2+ rates at baseline screening, assessed on an intention-to-treat basis after follow-up of the subgroup of triage-negative women in each arm referred to 12 months of surveillance, and after a further 6 months of follow-up for histological outcomes (dataset closed 31 August 2016). Analysis was adjusted for whether women had been age-eligible for HPV vaccination or not. For the LBC-screened group, the overall referral and detected CIN2+ rates were 27/995 (2.7% [95% CI 1.8%-3.9%]) and 1/995 (0.1% [95% CI 0.0%-0.6%]), respectively; for HPV+LBC triage, these were 75/1,992 (3.8% [95% CI 3.0%-4.7%]) and 20/1,992 (1.0% [95% CI 0.6%-1.5%]); and for HPV+DS triage, these were 79/2,008 (3.9% [95% CI 3.1%-4.9%]) and 24/2,008 (1.2% [95% CI 0.8%-1.6%]) (p = 0.09 for difference in referral rate in LBC versus all HPV-screened women; p = 0.003 for difference in CIN2+ detection rate in LBC versus all HPV-screened women, with p = 0.62 between HPV screening groups). Limitations include that the study population involved a relatively low risk group in a previously well-screened and treated population, that individual women's vaccination status was unknown, and that long-term follow-up data on disease detection in screen-negative women are not yet available. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, primary HPV screening was associated with significantly increased detection of high-grade precancerous cervical lesions compared to cytology, in a population where high vaccine uptake was reported in women aged 33 years or younger who were offered vaccination. It had been predicted that increased disease detection might be associated with a transient increase in colposcopy referral rates in the first round of HPV screening, possibly dampened by HPV vaccine effect; in this study, although the point estimates for referral rates in women in each HPV-screened group were 41%-44% higher than in cytology-screened women, the difference in referral rate between cytology- and HPV-screened women was not significant. These findings provide initial support for the implementation of primary HPV screening in vaccinated populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613001207707.
Asunto(s)
Cuello del Útero/patología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Papillomavirus Humano 16/aislamiento & purificación , Papillomavirus Humano 18/aislamiento & purificación , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Displasia del Cuello del Útero/diagnóstico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Adulto , Células Escamosas Atípicas del Cuello del Útero/patología , Células Escamosas Atípicas del Cuello del Útero/virología , Biopsia/métodos , Colposcopía , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus , Proyectos Piloto , Lesiones Intraepiteliales Escamosas de Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Lesiones Intraepiteliales Escamosas de Cuello Uterino/patología , Lesiones Intraepiteliales Escamosas de Cuello Uterino/virología , Triaje , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/patología , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/virología , Vacunación , Displasia del Cuello del Útero/patología , Displasia del Cuello del Útero/virologíaRESUMEN
Background: Long-term projections of premature mortality (defined as deaths age <75 years) help to inform decisions about public health priorities. This study aimed to project premature mortality rates in Australia to 2044, and to estimate numbers of deaths and potential years of life lost (PYLL) due to premature mortality overall and for 59 causes. Methods: We examined the past trends in premature mortality rates using Australian mortality data by sex, 5-year age group and 5-year calendar period up to 2019. Cigarette smoking exposure data (1945-2019) were included to project lung cancer mortality. Age-period-cohort or generalised linear models were developed and validated for each cause to project premature mortality rates to 2044. Findings: Over the 25-year period from 1990-1994 to 2015-2019, there was a 44.4% decrease in the overall age-standardised premature mortality rate. This decline is expected to continue, from 162.4 deaths/100,000 population in 2015-2019 to 141.7/100,000 in 2040-2044 (12.7% decrease). Despite declining rates, total numbers of premature deaths are projected to increase by 22.8%, rising from 272,815 deaths in 2015-2019 to 334,894 deaths in 2040-2044. This is expected to result in 1.58 million premature deaths over the 25-year period 2020-2044, accounting for 24.5 million PYLL. Of the high-level cause categories, cancer is projected to remain the most common cause of premature death in Australia by 2044, followed by cardiovascular disease, external causes (including injury, poisoning, and suicide), and respiratory diseases. Interpretation: Despite continuously declining overall premature mortality rates, the total number of premature deaths in Australia is projected to remain substantial, and cancer will continue to be the leading cause. These projections can inform the targeting of public health efforts and can serve as benchmarks against which to measure the impact of future interventions. They emphasise the ongoing importance of accelerating the prevention, early detection, and treatment of key health conditions. Funding: No funding was provided for this study.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Genetic and genomic testing can provide valuable information on individuals' risk of chronic diseases, presenting an opportunity for risk-tailored disease screening to improve early detection and health outcomes. The acceptability, uptake and effectiveness of such programmes is dependent on public preferences for the programme features. This study aims to conduct a systematic review of discrete choice experiments assessing preferences for genetic/genomic risk-tailored chronic disease screening. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, EconLit and Cochrane Library were searched in October 2023 for discrete choice experiment studies assessing preferences for genetic or genomic risk-tailored chronic disease screening. Eligible studies were double screened, extracted and synthesised through descriptive statistics and content analysis of themes. Bias was assessed using an existing quality checklist. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included. Most studies focused on cancer screening (n = 10) and explored preferences for testing of rare, high-risk variants (n = 10), largely within a targeted population (e.g. subgroups with family history of disease). Two studies explored preferences for the use of polygenic risk scores (PRS) at a population level. Twenty-six programme attributes were identified, with most significantly impacting preferences. Survival, test accuracy and screening impact were most frequently reported as most important. Depending on the clinical context and programme attributes and levels, estimated uptake of hypothetical programmes varied from no participation to almost full participation (97%). CONCLUSION: The uptake of potential programmes would strongly depend on specific programme features and the disease context. In particular, careful communication of potential survival benefits and likely genetic/genomic test accuracy might encourage uptake of genetic and genomic risk-tailored disease screening programmes. As the majority of the literature focused on high-risk variants and cancer screening, further research is required to understand preferences specific to PRS testing at a population level and targeted genomic testing for different disease contexts.
RESUMEN
COVID-19 disrupted cancer control worldwide, impacting preventative screening, diagnoses, and treatment services. This modelling study estimates the impact of disruptions on colorectal cancer cases and deaths in Canada and Australia, informed by data on screening, diagnosis, and treatment procedures. Modelling was used to estimate short- and long-term effects on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, including ongoing impact of patient backlogs. A hypothetical mitigation strategy was simulated, with diagnostic and treatment capacities increased by 5% from 2022 to address backlogs. Colorectal cancer screening dropped by 40% in Canada and 6.3% in Australia in 2020. Significant decreases to diagnostic and treatment procedures were also observed in Australia and Canada, which were estimated to lead to additional patient wait times. These changes would lead to an estimated increase of 255 colorectal cancer cases and 1,820 colorectal cancer deaths in Canada and 234 cases and 1,186 deaths in Australia over 2020-2030; a 1.9% and 2.4% increase in mortality, respectively, vs a scenario with no screening disruption or diagnostic/treatment delays. Diagnostic and treatment capacity mitigation would avert 789 and 350 deaths in Canada and Australia, respectively. COVID-related disruptions had a significant impact on colorectal cancer screening, diagnostic, and treatment procedures in Canada and Australia. Modelling demonstrates that downstream effects on disease burden could be substantial. However, backlogs can be managed and deaths averted with even small increases to diagnostic and treatment capacity. Careful management of resources can improve patient outcomes after any temporary disruption, and these results can inform targeted approaches early detection of cancers.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Humanos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/terapia , Australia/epidemiología , Canadá/epidemiología , Prueba de COVID-19RESUMEN
During the COVID-19 pandemic, countries adopted mitigation strategies to reduce disruptions to cancer services. We reviewed their implementation across health system functions and their impact on cancer diagnosis and care during the pandemic. A systematic search was performed using terms related to cancer and COVID-19. Included studies reported on individuals with cancer or cancer care services, focusing on strategies/programs aimed to reduce delays and disruptions. Extracted data were grouped into four functions (governance, financing, service delivery, and resource generation) and sub-functions of the health system performance assessment framework. We included 30 studies from 16 countries involving 192,233 patients with cancer. Multiple mitigation approaches were implemented, predominantly affecting sub-functions of service delivery to control COVID-19 infection via the suspension of non-urgent cancer care, modified treatment guidelines, and increased telemedicine use in routine cancer care delivery. Resource generation was mainly ensured through adequate workforce supply. However, less emphasis on monitoring or assessing the effectiveness and financing of these strategies was observed. Seventeen studies suggested improved service uptake after mitigation implementation, yet the resulting impact on cancer diagnosis and care has not been established. This review emphasizes the importance of developing effective mitigation strategies across all health system (sub)functions to minimize cancer care service disruptions during crises. Deficiencies were observed in health service delivery (to ensure equity), governance (to monitor and evaluate the implementation of mitigation strategies), and financing. In the wake of future emergencies, implementation research studies that include pre-prepared protocols will be essential to assess mitigation impact across cancer care services.
RESUMEN
Australia's cervical screening program transitioned from cytology to HPV-testing with genotyping for HPV16/18 in Dec'2017. We investigated whether program data could be used to monitor HPV vaccination program impact (commenced in 2007) on HPV16/18 prevalence and compared estimates with pre-vaccination benchmark prevalence. Pre-vaccination samples (2005-2008) (n = 1933; WHINURS), from 25 to 64-year-old women had been previously analysed with Linear Array (LA). Post-vaccination samples (2013-2014) (n = 2989; Compass pilot), from 25 to 64-year-old women, were analysed by cobas 4800 (cobas), and by LA for historical comparability. Age standardised pre-vaccination HPV16/18 prevalence was 4.85% (95%CI:3.81-5.89) by LA; post-vaccination estimates were 1.67% (95%CI:1.21-2.13%) by LA, 1.49% (95%CI:1.05-1.93%) by cobas, and 1.63% (95%CI:1.17-2.08%) for cobas and LA testing of non-16/18 cobas positives (cobas/LA). Age-standardised pre-vaccination oncogenic HPV prevalence was 15.70% (95%CI:13.79-17.60%) by LA; post-vaccination estimates were 9.06% (95%CI:8.02-10.09%) by LA, 8.47% (95%CI:7.47-9.47%) by cobas and cobas/LA. Standardised rate ratios between post-vs. pre-vaccination rates were significantly different for HPV16/18, non-16/18 HPV and oncogenic HPV: 0.34 (95%CI:0.23-0.50), 0.68 (95%CI:0.55-0.84) and 0.58 (95%CI:0.48-0.69), respectively. Additional strategies (LA for all cobas positives; combined cobas and LA results on all samples) had similar results. If a single method is applied consistently, it will provide important data on relative changes in HPV prevalence following vaccination.