State of the science and future directions for research on HIV and cancer: Summary of a joint workshop sponsored by IARC and NCI.

An estimated 38 million people live with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) worldwide and are at excess risk for multiple cancer types. Elevated cancer risks in people living with HIV (PLWH) are driven primarily by increased exposure to carcinogens, most notably oncogenic viruses acquired through shared transmission routes, plus acceleration of viral carcinogenesis by HIV-related immunosuppression. In the era of widespread antiretroviral therapy (ART), life expectancy of PLWH has increased, with cancer now a leading cause of co-morbidity and death. Furthermore, the types of cancers occurring among PLWH are shifting over time and vary in their relative burden in different parts of the world. In this context, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) convened a meeting in September 2022 of multinational and multidisciplinary experts to focus on cancer in PLWH. This report summarizes the proceedings, including a review of the state of the science of cancer descriptive epidemiology, etiology, molecular tumor characterization, primary and secondary prevention, treatment disparities and survival in PLWH around the world. A consensus of key research priorities and recommendations in these domains is also presented.

Oral Antiviral Therapy Utilization Among Adults with Recent COVID-19 in the United States.

BACKGROUND: This is the first study, to our knowledge, to assess uptake of oral antiviral treatment (OAV) for COVID-19 in the US and assess whether it is reaching recommended groups. OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated uptake among persons of all ages, with emphasis on utilization among individuals ages 65 + who comprise 75% of all COVID-19 deaths. To maximize public health outreach and benefit, we sought to understand reasons for use and non-use of OAV among individuals 65 + with at least mild COVID-19 symptoms. DESIGN: Data were collected from phase 3.5 of the US Census Household Pulse Survey, during three 2022 time periods: June 1-13, June 29-July 11, and July 27-August 8. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents (n = 12,299) were ages 18 + with active or resolved COVID-19 within the last 4 weeks of their survey participation. MAIN MEASURE(S): Comparisons of demographic variables were made for OAV uptake using the chi-square test of independence. A logistic regression was conducted to identify characteristics of participants independently associated with receipt of an OAV. Comparisons were made with chi-square testing, between those ages 65 + with at least mild symptoms who endorsed one of a number of specific reasons for not using OAV. KEY RESULTS: Utilization was low-17.9% of all respondents, 20.5% of respondents ages 50-64, and 33.9% of respondents 65 years and older received guideline-concordant treatment for their infection. Receipt did not differ by income or sex. The average response across the three phases was 5.4%. Most common reasons for not receiving treatment included having minimal symptoms, not thinking that they needed treatment, and not receiving a recommendation from their healthcare provider. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of increased-risk US residents have accessed early therapy for COVID-19 despite being made available without cost. Responses suggest that efforts to improve patient and provider knowledge could improve utilization to mitigate future COVID-19 hospitalizations.

Nirmatrelvir Plus Ritonavir for Early COVID-19 in a Large U.S. Health System : A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: In the EPIC-HR (Evaluation of Protease Inhibition for Covid-19 in High-Risk Patients) trial, nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir led to an 89% reduction in hospitalization or death among unvaccinated outpatients with early COVID-19. The clinical impact of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir among vaccinated populations is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir reduces risk for hospitalization or death among outpatients with early COVID-19 in the setting of prevalent SARS-CoV-2 immunity and immune-evasive SARS-CoV-2 lineages. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study analyzed to emulate a clinical trial using inverse probability-weighted models to account for anticipated bias in treatment. SETTING: A large health care system providing care for 1.5 million patients in Massachusetts and New Hampshire during the Omicron wave (1 January to 17 July 2022). PATIENTS: 44 551 nonhospitalized adults (90.3% with ≥3 vaccine doses) aged 50 years or older with COVID-19 and no contraindications for nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalization within 14 days or death within 28 days of a COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: During the study period, 12 541 (28.1%) patients were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir, and 32 010 (71.9%) were not. Patients prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir were more likely to be older, have more comorbidities, and be vaccinated. The composite outcome of hospitalization or death occurred in 69 (0.55%) patients who were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and 310 (0.97%) who were not (adjusted risk ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.75]). Recipients of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir had lower risk for hospitalization (adjusted risk ratio, 0.60 [CI, 0.44 to 0.81]) and death (adjusted risk ratio, 0.29 [CI, 0.12 to 0.71]). LIMITATION: Potential residual confounding due to differential access to COVID-19 vaccines, diagnostic tests, and treatment. CONCLUSION: The overall risk for hospitalization or death was already low (1%) after an outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19, but nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir reduced this risk further. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

At-home Testing and Risk Factors for Acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a Major US Metropolitan Area.

Background: Unbiased assessment of the risks associated with acquisition of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is critical to informing mitigation efforts during pandemics. The objective of our study was to understand the risk factors for acquiring coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a large prospective cohort of adult residents in a large US metropolitan area. Methods: We designed a fully remote longitudinal cohort study involving monthly at-home SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and serology self-testing and monthly surveys. Results: Between October 2020 and January 2021, we enrolled 10 289 adults reflective of the Boston metropolitan area census data. At study entry, 567 (5.5%) participants had evidence of current or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. This increased to 13.4% by June 15, 2021. Compared with Whites, Black non-Hispanic participants had a 2.2-fold greater risk of acquiring COVID-19 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.19; 95% CI, 1.91-2.50; P < .001), and Hispanics had a 1.5-fold greater risk (HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.32-1.71; P < .016). Individuals aged 18-29, those who worked outside the home, and those living with other adults and children were at an increased risk. Individuals in the second and third lowest disadvantaged neighborhood communities were associated with an increased risk of acquiring COVID-19. Individuals with medical risk factors for severe disease were at a decreased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status are the biggest determinants of acquisition of infection. This disparity is significantly underestimated if based on PCR data alone, as noted by the discrepancy in serology vs PCR detection for non-White participants, and points to persistent disparity in access to testing. Medical conditions and advanced age, which increase the risk for severity of SARS-CoV-2 disease, were associated with a lower risk of COVID-19 acquisition, suggesting the importance of behavior modifications. These findings highlight the need for mitigation programs that overcome challenges of structural racism in current and future pandemics.

Bebtelovimab for High-Risk Outpatients With Early COVID-19 in a Large US Health System.

There are limited data for the clinical efficacy of bebtelovimab in preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019. Among outpatients unable to take nirmatrelvir-ritonavir at a large health system, 10 of 377 (2.7%) patients who received bebtelovimab and 17 of 377 (4.5%) matched untreated patients were hospitalized or died. The 43% observed risk reduction with bebtelovimab was not statistically significant (P = 0.14).

Nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir for early COVID-19 and hospitalization in a large US health system.

Background: In the EPIC-HR trial, nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir led to an 88% reduction in hospitalization or death among unvaccinated outpatients with early COVID-19. Clinical impact of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir among vaccinated populations is uncertain. Objective: To assess whether nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir reduces risk of hospitalization among outpatients with early COVID-19 in the setting of prevalent SARS-CoV-2 immunity and immune evasive SARS-CoV-2 lineages. Design: Population-based cohort study analyzed to emulate a clinical trial utilizing two-stage, inverse-probability weighted models to account for anticipated bias in testing and treatment. Setting: A large healthcare system providing care for 1.5 million patients in Massachusetts and New Hampshire during Omicron wave (January 1 to May 15, 2022) with staged access and capacity to prescribe nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir. Patients: 30,322 non-hospitalized adults (87.2% vaccinated) aged 50 and older with COVID-19 and without contraindications to nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir. Measurement: Primary outcome was hospitalization within 14 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Results: During the study period, 6036 (19.9%) patients were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and 24,286 (80.1%) patients were not. Patients prescribed nirmatrelvir were more likely to be older, have more comorbidities, and be unvaccinated. Hospitalization occurred in 40 (0.66%) and 232 (0.96%) patients prescribed and not prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir, respectively. The adjusted risk ratio was 0.55 (95% confidence interval 0.38 to 0.80, p = 0.002). Observed risk reduction was greater among unvaccinated patients and obese patients. Limitations: Potential for residual confounding due to differential access and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, diagnostics, and treatment. Conclusions: The overall risk of hospitalization was already low (<1%) following an outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19, but this risk was 45% lower among patients prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir. Funding: National Institutes of Health (P30 AI060354 and R01 CA236546).

Feasibility and lessons learned on remote trial implementation from TestBoston, a fully remote, longitudinal, large-scale COVID-19 surveillance study.

Longitudinal clinical studies traditionally require in-person study visits which are well documented to pose barriers to participation and contribute challenges to enrolling representative samples. Remote trial models may reduce barriers to research engagement, improve retention, and reach a more representative cohort. As remote trials become more common following the COVID-19 pandemic, a critical evaluation of this approach is imperative to optimize this paradigm shift in research. The TestBoston study was launched to understand prevalence and risk factors for COVID-19 infection in the greater Boston area through a fully remote home-testing model. Participants (adults, within 45 miles of Boston, MA) were recruited remotely from patient registries at Brigham and Women's Hospital and the general public. Participants were provided with monthly and "on-demand" at-home SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and antibody testing using nasal swab and dried blood spot self-collection kits and electronic surveys to assess symptoms and risk factors for COVID-19 via an online dashboard. Between October 2020 and January 2021, we enrolled 10,289 participants reflective of Massachusetts census data. Mean age was 47 years (range 18-93), 5855 (56.9%) were assigned female sex at birth, 7181(69.8%) reported being White non-Hispanic, 952 (9.3%) Hispanic/Latinx, 925 (9.0%) Black, 889 (8.6%) Asian, and 342 (3.3%) other and/or more than one race. Lower initial enrollment among Black and Hispanic/Latinx individuals required an adaptive approach to recruitment, leveraging connections to the medical system, coupled with community partnerships to ensure a representative cohort. Longitudinal retention was higher among participants who were White non-Hispanic, older, working remotely, and with lower socioeconomic vulnerability. Implementation highlighted key differences in remote trial models as participants independently navigate study milestones, requiring a dedicated participant support team and robust technology platforms, to reduce barriers to enrollment, promote retention, and ensure scientific rigor and data quality. Remote clinical trial models offer tremendous potential to engage representative cohorts, scale biomedical research, and promote accessibility by reducing barriers common in traditional trial design. Barriers and burdens within remote trials may be experienced disproportionately across demographic groups. To maximize engagement and retention, researchers should prioritize intensive participant support, investment in technologic infrastructure and an adaptive approach to maximize engagement and retention.

Improving identification of symptomatic cancer at primary care clinics: A predictive modeling analysis in Botswana.

In resource-limited settings, augmenting primary care provider (PCP)-based referrals with data-derived algorithms could direct scarce resources towards those patients most likely to have a cancer diagnosis and benefit from early treatment. Using data from Botswana, we compared accuracy of predictions of probable cancer using different approaches for identifying symptomatic cancer at primary clinics. We followed cancer suspects until they entered specialized care for cancer treatment (following pathologically confirmed diagnosis), exited from the study following noncancer diagnosis, or died. Routine symptom and demographic data included baseline cancer probability assessed by the primary care provider (low, intermediate, high), age, sex, performance status, baseline cancer probability by study physician, predominant symptom (lump, bleeding, pain or other) and HIV status. Logistic regression with 10-fold cross-validation was used to evaluate classification by different sets of predictors: (1) PCPs, (2) Algorithm-only, (3) External specialist physician review and (4) Primary clinician augmented by algorithm. Classification accuracy was assessed using c-statistics, sensitivity and specificity. Six hundred and twenty-three adult cancer suspects with complete data were retained, of whom 166 (27%) were diagnosed with cancer. Models using PCP augmented by algorithm (c-statistic: 77.2%, 95% CI: 73.4%, 81.0%) and external study physician assessment (77.6%, 95% CI: 73.6%, 81.7%) performed better than algorithm-only (74.9%, 95% CI: 71.0%, 78.9%) and PCP initial assessment (62.8%, 95% CI: 57.9%, 67.7%) in correctly classifying suspected cancer patients. Sensitivity and specificity statistics from models combining PCP classifications and routine data were comparable to physicians, suggesting that incorporating data-driven algorithms into referral systems could improve efficiency.

At-home Testing and Risk Factors for Acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a Major US Metropolitan Area.

IMPORTANCE: Unbiased assessment of risks associated with acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 is critical to informing mitigation efforts during pandemics. OBJECTIVE: Understand risk factors for acquiring COVID-19 in a large, prospective cohort of adult residents recruited to be representative of a large US metropolitan area. DESIGN: Fully remote longitudinal cohort study launched in October 2020 and ongoing; Study data reported through June 15, 2021. SETTING: Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston MA. PARTICIPANTS: Adults within 45 miles of Boston, MA. INTERVENTION: Monthly at-home SARS-CoV-2 viral and antibody testing. MAIN OUTCOMES: Between October 2020 and January 2021, we enrolled 10,289 adults reflective of Massachusetts census data. At study entry, 567 (5.5%) participants had evidence of current or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. This increased to 13.4% by June 15, 2021. Compared to whites, Black non-Hispanic participants had a 2.2 fold greater risk of acquiring COVID-19 (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.91-2.50; p=<0.001) and Hispanics had a 1.5 fold greater risk (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.32-1.71; p=<0.016). Individuals aged 18-29, those who worked outside the home, and those living with other adults and children were at an increased risk. Individuals in the second and third lowest disadvantaged neighborhood communities, as measured by the area deprivation index as a marker for socioeconomic status by census block group, were associated with an increased risk in developing COVID-19. Individuals with medical risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease were at a decreased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status are not only risk factors for severity of disease but are also the biggest determinants of acquisition of infection. Importantly, this disparity is significantly underestimated if based on PCR data alone as noted by the discrepancy in serology vs. PCR detection for non-white participants, and points to persistent disparity in access to testing. Meanwhile, medical conditions and advanced age that increase the risk for severity of SARS-CoV-2 disease were associated with a lower risk of acquisition of COVID-19 suggesting the importance of behavior modifications. These findings highlight the need for mitigation programs that overcome challenges of structural racism in current and future pandemics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: N/A. QUESTION: What population and occupational groups in the United States are at increased risk for acquiring COVID-19? FINDINGS: In this remote, longitudinal cohort study involving monthly PCR and serology self-testing of 10,289 adult residents of the Boston metropolitan area, 9257 (90.0%) of TestBoston participants acquired evidence of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 through vaccination, infection, or both as of June 15, 2021. Residents identifying as Black, Hispanic/Latinx had an increased risk of acquisition of COVID-19. Healthcare workers were not at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. Individuals with medical risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease were at a decreased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. MEANING: These results demonstrate that race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status are not only risk factors for severity of disease but also are the biggest determinants of acquisition of infection. These findings highlight the need to address the consequences of structural racism during the development of mitigation programs for current and future pandemics.

HIV and Hodgkin Lymphoma Survival: A Prospective Study in Botswana.

PURPOSE: People living with HIV (PLWH) experience increased risk of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) despite effective initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART). In high-income countries, outcomes following HIV HL have been reported to be non-differential, or inferior for PLWH. We sought to assess the effect of HIV on HL survival in Botswana, an African country with a generalized HIV epidemic and high ART coverage, to describe a context more reflective of global HIV populations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Thabatse Cancer Cohort, consenting participants initiating treatment for HL at one of four cancer centers in Botswana were enrolled from 2010 to 2020. Patients were followed quarterly for up to 5 years. The impact of HIV on survival following treatment initiation was assessed using an inverse probability-weighted Cox marginal structural model adjusted for age, performance status, and disease stage. RESULTS: Seventy-eight new HL cases were enrolled, 47 (60%) were PLWH and 31 (40%) were HIV-uninfected. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The majority (61%) of patients presented with regional disease (stage I or II) with no statistically significant difference by HIV status (P = .38). Nearly all (87%) PLWH participants were on ART before their HL diagnosis (median ART duration 42 months), and median CD4 count was 413 cells/µL (interquartile range 253-691). Survival, in unadjusted analyses, was lower among patients without HIV compared with PLWH (log rank P = .021). In adjusted analysis, HIV infection was not significantly associated with survival in inverse probability-weighted Cox model (hazard ratio 0.43; 95% CI, 0.16 to 1.16; P = .094). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of patients treated for HL in Botswana, survival in PLWH (87% on long-standing ART) was at least as good as in individuals without HIV.

Age-specific burden of cervical cancer associated with HIV: A global analysis with a focus on sub-Saharan Africa.

HIV substantially worsens human papillomavirus (HPV) carcinogenicity and contributes to an important population excess of cervical cancer, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). We estimated HIV- and age-stratified cervical cancer burden at a country, regional and global level in 2020. Proportions of cervical cancer (a) diagnosed in women living with HIV (WLHIV), and (b) attributable to HIV, were calculated using age-specific estimates of HIV prevalence (UNAIDS) and relative risk. These proportions were validated against empirical data and applied to age-specific cervical cancer incidence (GLOBOCAN 2020). HIV was most important in SSA, where 24.9% of cervical cancers were diagnosed in WLHIV, and 20.4% were attributable to HIV (vs 1.3% and 1.1%, respectively, in the rest of the world). In all world regions, contribution of HIV to cervical cancer was far higher in younger women (as seen also in empirical series). For example, in Southern Africa, where more than half of cervical cancers were diagnosed in WLHIV, the HIV-attributable fraction decreased from 86% in women ≤34 years to only 12% in women ≥55 years. The absolute burden of HIV-attributable cervical cancer (approximately 28 000 cases globally) also shifted toward younger women: in Southern Africa, 63% of 5341 HIV-attributable cervical cancer occurred in women <45 years old, compared to only 17% of 6901 non-HIV-attributable cervical cancer. Improved quantification of cervical cancer burden by age and HIV status can inform cervical cancer prevention efforts in SSA, including prediction of the impact of WLHIV-targeted vs general population approaches to cervical screening, and impact of HIV prevention.

Accuracy of Pathologic Diagnosis in Patients With Lymphoma and Survival: A Prospective Analysis From Botswana.

PURPOSE: With intense HIV epidemics, southern African countries have a high burden of classic Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). However, suboptimal access to pathology resources limits subtype classification. We sought to assess the diagnostic accuracy of specimens classified as lymphoma and to determine association between discordant pathologic diagnosis and overall survival. METHODS: Seventy patients with CHL or NHL and treated at three Botswana hospitals from 2010 to 2016 were analyzed. Local pathologic assessment relied primarily on morphology. All cases underwent secondary US hematopathology review, which is considered gold standard. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 58 months. The overall reclassification rate was 20 of 70 cases (29%). All 20 CHL cases were correctly classified in Botswana, and mixed cellularity was the most common subtype, diagnosed in 11 (55%) cases. Of 47 confirmed NHL cases, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma was the final US diagnosis in 28 cases (60%), another aggressive B-cell NHL in nine (19%), an indolent B-cell NHL in six (13%), and T-cell NHL in four (9%). Common types of diagnostic discordance included NHL subtype reclassification (11 of 20, 55%) and CHL reclassified as NHL (7 of 20, 35%). Concordant versus discordant diagnosis after secondary review was associated with improved 5-year overall survival (60.1% v 26.3%, P = .0066). Discordant diagnosis was independently associated with increased risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio 2.733; 95% CI, 1.102 to 6.775; P = .0300) even after stratifying results by CHL versus NHL. CONCLUSION: In this single prospective cohort, discordant pathologic diagnosis was associated with a nearly three-fold increased risk of death. Limited access to relatively basic diagnostic techniques impairs treatment decisions and leads to poor patient outcomes in low-resource countries.

A Novel Approach to Equitable Distribution of Scarce Therapeutics: Institutional Experience Implementing a Reserve System for Allocation of COVID-19 Monoclonal Antibodies.

BACKGROUND: In fall 2020, the Food and Drug Administration issued emergency use authorization for monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies for outpatients with COVID-19. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts issued guidance outlining the use of a reserve system with a lottery for allocation of mAbs in the event of scarcity that would prioritize socially vulnerable patients for 20% of the infusion slots. The Mass General Brigham health system subsequently implemented such a reserve system. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can a reserve system be deployed successfully in a large health system in a way that promotes equitable access to mAb therapy among socially vulnerable patients with COVID-19? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the operation of the reserve system for allocation of mAb therapies to identify how referrals moved through the allocation process and what proportion of patients who were offered and received mAb therapies were socially vulnerable. RESULTS: Notwithstanding multiple operational challenges, the reserve system for allocation of mAb therapy worked as intended to enhance the number of socially vulnerable patients who were offered and received mAb therapy. A significantly higher proportion of patients offered mAb therapy were socially vulnerable (27.0%) than would have been the case if the infusion appointments had been allocated using a pure lottery system without a vulnerable reserve (19.8%), and a significantly higher proportion of patient who received infusions were socially vulnerable (25.3%) than would have been the case if the infusion appointments had been allocated using a pure lottery system (17.6%) INTERPRETATION: Our health system experience demonstrates that a reserve system with a lottery for tiebreaking is a viable way to distribute scarce therapeutics when enhancing access for certain groups is desirable.

Impact of Community-Based Clinical Breast Examinations in Botswana.

PURPOSE: We evaluated a clinical breast examination (CBE) screening program to determine the prevalence of breast abnormalities, number examined per cancer diagnosis, and clinical resources required for these diagnoses in a middle-income African setting. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a CBE screening program (2015-2018) by Journey of Hope Botswana, a Botswana-based nongovernmental organization (NGO). Symptomatic and asymptomatic women were invited to attend. Screening events were held in communities throughout rural and periurban Botswana, with CBEs performed by volunteer nurses. Individuals who screened positive were referred to a private tertiary facility and were followed by the NGO. Data were obtained from NGO records. RESULTS: Of 6,120 screened women (50 men excluded), 452 (7.4%) presented with a symptom and 357 (5.83%) were referred for further evaluation; 257 ultrasounds, 100 fine-needle aspirations (FNAs), 58 mammograms, and 31 biopsies were performed. In total, 6,031 were exonerated from cancer, 78 were lost to follow-up (67 for ≤ 50 years and 11 for > 50 years), and 11 were diagnosed with cancer (five for 41-50 years and six for > 50 years, 10 presented with symptoms). Overall breast cancer prevalence was calculated to be 18/10,000 (95% CI, 8 to 29/10,000). The number of women examined per breast cancer diagnosis was 237 (95% CI, 126 to 1910) for women of age 41-50 years and 196 (95% CI, 109 to 977) for women of age > 50 years. Median time to diagnosis for all women was 17.5 [1 to 32.5] days. CBE-detected tumors were not different than tumors presenting through standard care. CONCLUSION: In a previously unscreened population, yield from community-based CBE screening was high, particularly among symptomatic women, and required modest diagnostic resources. This strategy has potential to reduce breast cancer mortality.

Disparities in SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination-to-Infection Risk During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Massachusetts.

This cohort study examines the alignment of vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 risk in Massachusetts by creating and applying a vaccination-to-infection risk ratio.

Modest reduction in adverse birth outcomes following the COVID-19 lockdown.

BACKGROUND: Widespread lockdowns imposed during the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis may impact birth outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the association between the COVID-19 lockdown and the risk of adverse birth outcomes in Botswana. STUDY DESIGN: In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis, Botswana enforced a lockdown that restricted movement within the country. We used data from an ongoing nationwide birth outcomes surveillance study to evaluate adverse outcomes (stillbirth, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age fetuses, and neonatal death) and severe adverse outcomes (stillbirth, very preterm birth, very-small-for-gestational-age fetuses, and neonatal death) recorded prelockdown (January 1, 2020-April 2, 2020), during lockdown (April 3, 2020-May 7, 2020), and postlockdown (May 8, 2020-July 20, 2020). Using difference-in-differences analyses, we compared the net change in each outcome from the prelockdown to lockdown periods in 2020 relative to the same 2 periods in 2017-2019 with the net change in each outcome from the prelockdown to postlockdown periods in 2020 relative to the same 2 periods in 2017-2019. RESULTS: In this study, 68,448 women delivered a singleton infant in 2017-2020 between January 1 and July 20 and were included in our analysis (mean [interquartile range] age of mothers, 26 [22-32] years). Across the included calendar years and periods, the risk of any adverse outcome ranged from 27.92% to 31.70%, and the risk of any severe adverse outcome ranged from 8.40% to 11.38%. The lockdown period was associated with a 0.81 percentage point reduction (95% confidence interval, -2.95% to 1.30%) in the risk of any adverse outcome (3% relative reduction) and a 0.02 percentage point reduction (95% confidence interval, -0.79% to 0.75%) in the risk of any severe adverse outcome (0% relative reduction). The postlockdown period was associated with a 1.72 percentage point reduction (95% confidence, -3.42% to 0.02%) in the risk of any adverse outcome (5% relative reduction) and a 1.62 percentage point reduction (95% confidence interval, -2.69% to -0.55%) in the risk of any severe adverse outcome (14% relative reduction). Reductions in adverse outcomes were largest among women with human immunodeficiency virus and among women delivering at urban delivery sites, driven primarily by reductions in preterm birth and small-for-gestational-age fetuses. CONCLUSION: Adverse birth outcomes decreased from the prelockdown to postlockdown periods in 2020, relative to the change during the same periods in 2017-2019. Our findings may provide insights into associations between mobility and birth outcomes in Botswana and other low- and middle-income countries.

SARS-CoV-2 Testing Disparities in Massachusetts.

OBJECTIVE: Early deficiencies in testing capacity contributed to poor control of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In the context of marked improvement in SARS-CoV-2 testing infrastructure, we sought to examine the alignment of testing with epidemic intensity to mitigate subsequent waves of COVID-19 in Massachusetts. METHODS: We compiled publicly available weekly SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing data for period (May 27 to October 14, 2020) following the initial COVID-19 wave. We defined testing intensity as weekly SARS-CoV-2 tests performed per 100,000 population and used weekly test positivity (percent of tests positive) as a measure of epidemic intensity. We considered optimal alignment of testing resources to be matching community ranks of testing and positivity. In communities with a lower rank of testing than positivity in a given week, the testing gap was calculated as the additional tests required to achieve matching ranks. Multivariable Poisson modeling was utilized to assess for trends and association with community characteristics. RESULTS: During the observation period, 4,262,000 tests were reported in Massachusetts and the misalignment of testing with epidemic intensity increased. The weekly testing gap increased 9.0% per week (adjusted rate ratio [aRR]: 1.090, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-1.10). Increasing levels of community socioeconomic vulnerability (aRR: 1.35 per quartile increase, 95% CI: 1.23-1.50) and the highest quartile of minority and language vulnerability (aRR: 1.46, 95% CI 0.96-1.49) were associated with increased testing gaps, but the latter association was not statistically significant. Presence of large university student population (>10% of population) was associated with a marked decrease in testing gap (aRR 0.21, 95% CI: 0.12-0.38). CONCLUSION: These analyses indicate that despite objectives to promote equity and enhance epidemic control in vulnerable communities, testing resources across Massachusetts have been disproportionally allocated to more affluent communities. Worsening structural inequities in access to SARS-CoV-2 testing increase the risk for another intense wave of COVID-19 in Massachusetts, particularly among vulnerable communities.

Lifetime Prevalence of Cervical Cancer Screening in 55 Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Importance: The World Health Organization is developing a global strategy to eliminate cervical cancer, with goals for screening prevalence among women aged 30 through 49 years. However, evidence on prevalence levels of cervical cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is sparse. Objective: To determine lifetime cervical cancer screening prevalence in LMICs and its variation across and within world regions and countries. Design, Setting, and Participants: Analysis of cross-sectional nationally representative household surveys carried out in 55 LMICs from 2005 through 2018. The median response rate across surveys was 93.8% (range, 64.0%-99.3%). The population-based sample consisted of 1 136 289 women aged 15 years or older, of whom 6885 (0.6%) had missing information for the survey question on cervical cancer screening. Exposures: World region, country; countries' economic, social, and health system characteristics; and individuals' sociodemographic characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-report of having ever had a screening test for cervical cancer. Results: Of the 1 129 404 women included in the analysis, 542 475 were aged 30 through 49 years. A country-level median of 43.6% (interquartile range [IQR], 13.9%-77.3%; range, 0.3%-97.4%) of women aged 30 through 49 years self-reported to have ever been screened, with countries in Latin America and the Caribbean having the highest prevalence (country-level median, 84.6%; IQR, 65.7%-91.1%; range, 11.7%-97.4%) and those in sub-Saharan Africa the lowest prevalence (country-level median, 16.9%; IQR, 3.7%-31.0%; range, 0.9%-50.8%). There was large variation in the self-reported lifetime prevalence of cervical cancer screening among countries within regions and among countries with similar levels of per capita gross domestic product and total health expenditure. Within countries, women who lived in rural areas, had low educational attainment, or had low household wealth were generally least likely to self-report ever having been screened. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of data collected in 55 low- and middle-income countries from 2005 through 2018, there was wide variation between countries in the self-reported lifetime prevalence of cervical cancer screening. However, the median prevalence was only 44%, supporting the need to increase the rate of screening.