Assessment of barriers to cancer screening and interventions implemented to overcome these barriers in 27 Latin American and Caribbean countries.

There is a gap in the understanding of the barriers to cancer screening participation and complying with downstream management in the Community of Latin American and Caribbean states (CELAC). Our study aimed to assess barriers across the cancer screening pathway from the health system perspective, and interventions in place to improve screening in CELAC. A standardized tool was used to collect information on the barriers across the screening pathway through engagement with the health authorities of 27 member states of CELAC. Barriers were organized in a framework adapted from the Tanahashi conceptual model and consisted of the following dimensions: availability of services, access (covering accessibility and affordability), acceptability, user-provider interaction, and effectiveness of services (which includes governance, protocols and guidelines, information system, and quality assurance). The tool also collected information of interventions in place, categorized in user-directed interventions to increase demand, user-directed interventions to increase access, provider-directed interventions, and policy and system-level interventions. All countries prioritized barriers related to the information systems, such as the population register not being accurate or complete (N = 19; 70.4%). All countries implemented some kind of intervention to improve cancer screening, group education being the most reported (N = 23; 85.2%). Training on screening delivery was the most referred provider-directed intervention (N = 19; 70.4%). The study has identified several barriers to the implementation of cancer screening in the region and interventions in place to overcome some of the barriers. Further analysis is required to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions in achieving their objectives.

Managing menopause after cancer.

Globally, 9 million women are diagnosed with cancer each year. Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide, followed by colorectal cancer in high-income countries and cervical cancer in low-income countries. Survival from cancer is improving and more women are experiencing long-term effects of cancer treatment, such as premature ovarian insufficiency or early menopause. Managing menopausal symptoms after cancer can be challenging, and more severe than at natural menopause. Menopausal symptoms can extend beyond hot flushes and night sweats (vasomotor symptoms). Treatment-induced symptoms might include sexual dysfunction and impairment of sleep, mood, and quality of life. In the long term, premature ovarian insufficiency might increase the risk of chronic conditions such as osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease. Diagnosing menopause after cancer can be challenging as menopausal symptoms can overlap with other common symptoms in patients with cancer, such as fatigue and sexual dysfunction. Menopausal hormone therapy is an effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms and seems to be safe for many patients with cancer. When hormone therapy is contraindicated or avoided, emerging evidence supports the efficacy of non-pharmacological and non-hormonal treatments, although most evidence is based on women older than 50 years with breast cancer. Vaginal oestrogen seems safe for most patients with genitourinary symptoms, but there are few non-hormonal options. Many patients have inadequate centralised care for managing menopausal symptoms after cancer treatment, and more information is needed about cost-effective and patient-focused models of care for this growing population.

HPV vaccination in Africa in the COVID-19 era: a cross-sectional survey of healthcare providers' knowledge, training, and recommendation practices.

Introduction: Although the burden of cervical cancer in Africa is highest, HPV vaccination coverage remains alarmingly low in this region. Providers' knowledge and recommendation are key drivers of HPV vaccination uptake. Yet, evidence about providers' knowledge and recommendation practices about the HPV vaccine against a backdrop of emerging vaccine hesitancy fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic is lacking in Africa. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2021-2022 among healthcare providers involved in cervical cancer prevention activities in Africa. They were invited to report prior training, the availability of the HPV vaccine in their practice, whether they recommended the HPV vaccine, and, if not, the reasons for not recommending it. Their knowledge about the HPV vaccine was assessed through self-reporting (perceived knowledge) and with three pre-tested knowledge questions (measured knowledge). Results: Of the 153 providers from 23 African countries who responded to the survey (mean age: 38.5 years, SD: 10.1), 75 (54.0%) were female and 97 (63.4%) were based In countries with national HPV immunization programs. Overall, 57 (43.8%) reported having received prior training on HPV vaccine education/counseling, and 40 (37.4%) indicated that the HPV vaccine was available at the facility where they work. Most respondents (109, 83.2%) reported recommending the HPV vaccine in their practice. Vaccine unavailability (57.1%), lack of effective communication tools and informational material (28.6%), and need for adequate training (28.6%) were the most commonly reported reasons for not recommending the HPV vaccine. While 63 providers (52.9%) reported that their knowledge about HPV vaccination was adequate for their practice, only 9.9% responded correctly to the 3 knowledge questions. Conclusion: To increase HPV vaccination coverage and counter misinformation about this vaccine in Africa, adequate training of providers and culturally appropriate educational materials are needed to improve their knowledge of the HPV vaccine and to facilitate effective communication with their patients and the community.

Would shared decision-making be useful in breast cancer screening programmes? A qualitative study using focus group discussions to gather evidence from French women with different socioeconomic backgrounds.

BACKGROUND: To inform the development of an online tool to be potentially used in shared decision-making about breast cancer screening, French women were questioned about participation in breast cancer screening, the health professional's role, and their perceptions of the proposed tool. METHODS: We organised focus group discussions with 55 French women. Two different strategies were used to recruit women from high and low socioeconomic backgrounds. We applied both inductive and deductive approaches to conduct a thematic analysis of the discussions. We analysed the responses by using the main determinants from different health behaviour models and compared the two groups. RESULTS: Independently of socioeconomic status, the most important determinant for a woman's participation in breast cancer screening was the perceived severity of breast cancer and the perceived benefits of its early detection by screening. Cues to action reported by both groups were invitation letters; recommendations by health professionals, or group/community activities and public events were reported by women from high and low socioeconomic backgrounds, respectively. Among other positive determinants, women from high socioeconomic backgrounds reported making informed decisions and receiving peer support whereas women from low socioeconomic backgrounds reported community empowerment through group/community events. Fear of cancer was reported as a barrier in both groups. Among other barriers, language issues were reported only by women from low socioeconomic backgrounds; women from high socioeconomic backgrounds reported breast cancer screening-related risks other than overdiagnosis and/or overtreatment. Barriers to accessing the online tool to be developed were mainly reported by women from high socioeconomic backgrounds. CONCLUSION: Limitations in implementing shared decision-making for women from low socioeconomic backgrounds were highlighted. An online tool that is suitable for all women, regardless of socioeconomic status, would provide "on-demand" reliable and tailored information about breast cancer screening and improve access to health professionals and social exchanges.

Health Policy for Prostate Cancer Early Detection in the European Union and the Impact of Opportunistic Screening: PRAISE-U Consortium.

With the new policy recommendation in 2022 to explore the possibilities of screening for prostate cancer by the European Commission, the landscape for prostate cancer early detection is evolving. In line with this recommendation, the PRAISE-U project aims to evaluate the early detection and diagnosis of prostate cancer through customised and risk-based screening programmes, with the goal to align protocols across European Union member states. This systematic review is part of the PRAISE-U project, with the goal to review the policy, medical guideline recommendations, and the current level of opportunistic screening presented in the scientific literature on prostate cancer early detection from 2016 to 2023 in European Union member states. An extensive literature search was performed on 1 June 2023 in a large number of databases, including Embase.com, Medline (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection, Google Scholar, and Policy Commons. We identified 318 articles (qualitative, quantitative, and reviews), of which 41 were included in the full-text screening. Seventeen articles were ultimately identified as eligible for inclusion. The included articles revealed significant variations towards PSA-based early detection policies for prostate cancer in nine European countries. Despite official recommendations, opportunistic screening was prevalent across all nine countries regardless of recommendations for or against PSA-based early detection. This systematic review suggests that the current early detection policies are not fit for purpose. High levels of opportunistic screening and overdiagnosis persist, prompting policy recommendations for standardised guidelines, informed decision making, and increased awareness to improve efficiency and effectiveness in early detection.

Impact of age at vaccination and cervical HPV infection status on binding and neutralizing antibody titers at 10 years after receiving single or higher doses of quadrivalent HPV vaccine.

Long-term follow-up of a cohort of unmarried girls who received one, two, or three doses of quadrivalent HPV vaccine, between 10 and 18 years of age, in an Indian multi-centric study allowed us to compare antibody responses between the younger and older age cohorts at 10-years post-vaccination, and study the impact of initiation of sexual activity and cervical HPV infections on antibody levels. Among the younger (10-14 years) recipients of a single dose, 97.7% and 98.2% had detectable binding antibody titers against HPV 16 and HPV 18 respectively at ten years post-vaccination. The proportions among those receiving a single dose at age 15-18 years were 92.3% and 94.2% against HPV 16 and HPV 18 respectively. Mean HPV 16 binding antibody titers were 2.1 folds (95%CI 1.4 to 3.3) higher in those vaccinated at ages 10-14 years, and 1.9 folds (95%CI 1.2 to 3.0) higher in those vaccinated at 15-18 years compared to mean titers seen in the unvaccinated women. Compared to previous timepoints of 36 or 48 months, binding antibodies against HPV 16 and neutralizing antibodies against both HPV 16 and HPV 18 were significantly higher at 10 years. This rise was more pronounced in participants vaccinated at 15-18 years. No association of marital status or cervical HPV infections was observed with the rise in titer. Durability of antibody response in single dose recipients correlated well with the high efficacy of a single dose against persistent HPV 16/18 infections irrespective of age at vaccination, as we reported earlier.

Benefits and harms of cervical screening, triage and treatment strategies in women living with HIV.

To support a strategy to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the World Health Organisation (WHO) reviewed its guidelines for screening and treatment of cervical pre-cancerous lesions in 2021. Women living with HIV have 6-times the risk of cervical cancer compared to women in the general population, and we harnessed a model platform ('Policy1-Cervix-HIV') to evaluate the benefits and harms of a range of screening strategies for women living with HIV in Tanzania, a country with endemic HIV. Assuming 70% coverage, we found that 3-yearly primary HPV screening without triage would reduce age-standardised cervical cancer mortality rates by 72%, with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 38.7, to prevent a cervical cancer death. Triaging HPV positive women before treatment resulted in minimal loss of effectiveness and had more favorable NNTs (19.7-33.0). Screening using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) or cytology was less effective than primary HPV and, in the case of VIA, generated a far higher NNT of 107.5. These findings support the WHO 2021 recommendation that women living with HIV are screened with primary HPV testing in a screen-triage-and-treat approach starting at 25 years, with regular screening every 3-5 years.

Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of cervical screening, triage and treatment strategies for women in the general population.

In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched a strategy to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. To support the strategy, the WHO published updated cervical screening guidelines in 2021. To inform this update, we used an established modeling platform, Policy1-Cervix, to evaluate the impact of seven primary screening scenarios across 78 low- and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) for the general population of women. Assuming 70% coverage, we found that primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening approaches were the most effective and cost-effective, reducing cervical cancer age-standardized mortality rates by 63-67% when offered every 5 years. Strategies involving triaging women before treatment (with 16/18 genotyping, cytology, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) or colposcopy) had close-to-similar effectiveness to HPV screening without triage and fewer pre-cancer treatments. Screening with VIA or cytology every 3 years was less effective and less cost-effective than HPV screening every 5 years. Furthermore, VIA generated more than double the number of pre-cancer treatments compared to HPV. In conclusion, primary HPV screening is the most effective, cost-effective and efficient cervical screening option in LMICs. These findings have directly informed WHO's updated cervical screening guidelines for the general population of women, which recommend primary HPV screening in a screen-and-treat or screen-triage-and-treat approach, starting from age 30 years with screening every 5 years or 10 years.

Navigating through the Controversies and Emerging Paradigms in Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Bridging the Gap from Classic RCTs to Modern Population-Based Pilot Programs.

Over the last three decades, the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and the US-based Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening have steered the conversation around the early detection of prostate cancer. These two randomized trials assessed the effect of screening on prostate cancer disease-specific mortality. Elevated PSA levels were followed by a systematic sextant prostate biopsy. Standard repeat testing intervals were applied. After controversies from 2009 to 2016 due to contradicting results of the two trials, the results aligned in 2016 and showed that early PSA detection reduces prostate cancer-specific mortality. However, overdiagnosis rates of up to 50% were reported, and this sparked an intense debate on harms and benefits for almost 20 years. The balance between harms and benefits is highly debated and has initiated further research to investigate new ways of early detection. In the meantime, the knowledge and tools for the diagnostic algorithm improved. This is a continuously ongoing effort which focuses on individual risk-based screening algorithms that preserve the benefits of the purely PSA-based screening algorithms, while reducing the side effects. An important push towards investigating new techniques for early detection came from the European Commission on the 20th of September 2022. The European Commission published its updated recommendation to investigate prostate, lung, and gastric cancer early detection programs. This opened a new window of opportunity to move away from the trial setting to population-based early detection settings. With this review, we aim to review 30 years of historical evidence of prostate cancer screening, which led to the initiation of the 'The Prostate Cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union' (PRAISE-U) project, which aims to encourage the early detection and diagnosis of PCa through customized and risk-based screening programs.

Immunogenicity and safety of a new quadrivalent HPV vaccine in girls and boys aged 9-14 years versus an established quadrivalent HPV vaccine in women aged 15-26 years in India: a randomised, active-controlled, multicentre, phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: To meet global cervical cancer elimination efforts, a wider range of affordable and accessible vaccines against human papillomavirus (HPV) are needed. We aimed to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of a quadrivalent HPV vaccine (targeting HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18), developed and manufactured by the Serum Institute of India (SIIPL). Here we report outcomes in the 9-14 years cohort. METHODS: This randomised, active-controlled, phase 2/3 trial was conducted at 12 tertiary care hospitals across India. Healthy participants aged 9-14 years or 15-26 years with no history of HPV vaccination were eligible for enrolment. Female participants were randomly assigned (1:1) with an interactive web response system, by use of a central computer-generated schedule and block randomisation (block sizes of 2, 4, 6, and 8), to receive the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine (Cervavac; SIIPL, Pune, India) or the comparator quadrivalent HPV vaccine (Gardasil; Merck Sharp & Dohme, Harleem, the Netherlands). Participants, investigators, laboratory technicians, and sponsors were masked to treatment allocation of female participants. Male participants were given the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine in an open-label manner. Study vaccines were administered intramuscularly with a two-dose schedule (at day 0 and 6 months) in the cohort aged 9-14 years, and with a three-dose schedule (at day 0, month 2, and month 6) in the cohort aged 15-26-years. Immunogenicity was assessed 30 days after the last dose by use of multiplexed ELISA. The primary outcome was the non-inferiority of immune response in terms of the geometric mean titre (GMT) of antibodies against HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18 generated by the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine in girls and boys (aged 9-14 years) compared with the GMT generated by the comparator quadrivalent HPV vaccine in women aged 15-26 years at month 7 in the modified per-protocol population (ie, all participants who received all doses of study vaccines per assigned treatment group and had both day 0 and 1-month immunogenicity measurements after the last dose following protocol-defined window periods with no major protocol deviations). Non-inferiority was established if the lower bound of the 98·75% CI of the GMT ratio was 0·67 or higher. The co-primary outcome of occurrence of solicited adverse events (within 7 days of each dose) and unsolicited adverse events (up to 30 days after the last dose) was assessed in all participants who were enrolled and received at least one dose of study vaccine. The trial is registered with the Clinical Trials Registry - India (CTRI/2018/06/014601), and long-term follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 20, 2018, and Feb 9, 2021, 2341 individuals were screened, of whom 2307 eligible individuals were enrolled and vaccinated: 1107 (738 girls and 369 boys) in the cohort aged 9-14 years and 1200 (819 women and 381 men) in the cohort aged 15-26 years. No race or ethnicity data were collected. 350 girls and 349 boys in the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine group and 338 women in the comparator vaccine group were included in the modified per-protocol population for the primary endpoint analysis. The median follow-up for the analyses was 221 days (IQR 215-231) for girls and 222 days (217-230) for boys in the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine group, 223 days (216-232) for girls in the comparator vaccine group, and 222 days (216-230) for women in the comparator vaccine group. GMT ratios were non-inferior in girls and boys receiving the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine compared with women receiving the comparator vaccine: GMT ratios for girls were 1·97 (98·75% CI 1·67-2·32) for HPV type 6, 1·63 (1·38-1·91) for HPV type 11, 1·90 (1·60-2·25) for HPV type 16, and 2·16 (1·79-2·61) for HPV type 18. For boys the GMT ratios were 1·86 (1·57-2·21) for HPV type 6, 1·46 (1·23-1·73) for HPV type 11, 1·62 (1·36-1·94) for HPV type 16, and 1·80 (1·48-2·18) for HPV type 18. The safety population comprised all 1107 participants (369 girls and 369 boys in the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine group, and 369 girls in the comparator group). Solicited adverse events occurred in 176 (48%) of 369 girls and 124 (34%) of 369 boys in the SIIPL vaccine group and 179 (49%) of 369 girls in the comparator vaccine group. No grade 3-4 solicited adverse events occurred within 7 days of each dose. Unsolicited adverse events occurred in 143 (39%) girls and 147 (40%) boys in the SIIPL vaccine group, and 143 (39%) girls in the comparator vaccine group. The most common grade 3 unsolicited adverse event was dengue fever, in one (<1%) girl in the SIIPL vaccine group and three (1%) girls in the comparator group. There were no grade 4 or 5 adverse events. Serious adverse events occurred in three (1%) girls and three (1%) boys in the SIIPL vaccine group, and five (1%) girls in the comparator vaccine group. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: We observed a non-inferior immune response with the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine in girls and boys aged 9-14 years and an acceptable safety profile compared with the comparator vaccine. These findings support extrapolation of efficacy from the comparator vaccine to the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine in the younger population. The availability of the SIIPL quadrivalent HPV vaccine could help meet the global demand for HPV vaccines, and boost coverage for both girls and boys globally. FUNDING: Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council, Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Government of India, and Serum Institute of India.

Cancer screening in China: a steep road from evidence to implementation.

Cancer screening has the potential to decrease mortality from several common cancer types. The first cancer screening programme in China was initiated in 1958 and the Cancer High Incidence Fields established in the 1970s have provided an extensive source of information for national cancer screening programmes. From 2012 onwards, four ongoing national cancer screening programmes have targeted eight cancer types: cervical, breast, colorectal, lung, oesophageal, stomach, liver, and nasopharyngeal cancers. By synthesising evidence from pilot screening programmes and population-based studies for various screening tests, China has developed a series of cancer screening guidelines. Nevertheless, challenges remain for the implementation of a fully successful population-based programme. The aim of this Review is to highlight the key milestones and the current status of cancer screening in China, describe what has been achieved to date, and identify the barriers in transitioning from evidence to implementation. We also make a set of implementation recommendations on the basis of the Chinese experience, which might be useful in the establishment of cancer screening programmes in other countries.

Health and economic effects of introducing single-dose or two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination in India.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a major public health problem in India, where access to prevention programmes is low. The WHO-Strategic Advisory Group of Experts recently updated their recommendation for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to include a single-dose option in addition to the two-dose option, which could make HPV vaccination programmes easier to implement and more affordable. METHODS: We combined projections from a type-specific HPV transmission model and a cancer progression model to assess the health and economic effects of HPV vaccination at national and state level in India. The models used national and state-specific Indian demographic, epidemiological and cost data, and single-dose vaccine efficacy and immunogenicity data from the International Agency for Research on Cancer India vaccine trial with 10-year follow-up. We compared single-dose and two-dose HPV vaccination for a range of plausible scenarios regarding single-dose vaccine protection, coverage and catch-up. We used a healthcare sector payer perspective with a time horizon of 100 years. RESULTS: Under the base-case scenario of lifelong protection of single-dose vaccination in 10-year-old girls with 90% coverage, the discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of nationwide vaccination relative to no vaccination was US$406 (₹INR30 000) per DALY (disability-adjusted life-years) averted. This lay below an opportunity-cost-based threshold of 30% Indian gross domestic product per capita in each Indian state (state-specific ICER range: US$67-US$593 per DALY averted). The ICER of two-dose vaccination versus no vaccination vaccination was US$1404 (₹INR104 000). The ICER of two-dose vaccination versus single-dose vaccination, assuming lower initial efficacy and waning of single-dose vaccination, was at least US$2282 (₹INR169 000) per DALY averted. CONCLUSIONS: Nationwide introduction of single-dose HPV vaccination at age 10 in India is highly likely to be cost-effective whereas extending the number of doses from one to two would have a less favourable profile.

A Study of the Impact and Restitutive Efforts of Cervical Cancer Screening during the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Regionsl Cancer Centre in Eastern India.

AIM: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of switching to a self-sampling based screening as compared to ongoing provider-collection based screening using HPV DNA test and assess the compliance of HPV positive women for further treatment during the COVID 19 pandemic. METHOD: The study participants were women aged 30-60 years from rural and semi-urban communities around Kolkata, who underwent screening followed by HPV testing by Hybrid Capture II test. In the pre pandemic era, the women who attended the health centres where trained health workers that collected cervical samples. Following lockdown, the health workers distributed the self-sampling device to the women during home visits and counselled them to collect their samples by themselves. Thereafter the self collected screened positive women were brought to the hospital for further treatment instead of community clinics. RESULTS: From April 2018 to March 2020, 12,718 women underwent screening using either HPV DNA test or visual inspection with acetic acid. HPV samples were either provider collected (62.7%) or self-collected (37.2%). The HPV positivity and CIN2+ detection rate were 5.4% and 2%. From April 2020 to February 2022, 10,792 women underwent screening using self-sampling only. The HPV positivity rate and CIN2+ detection rate were found to be 5.1% and 1.9 % . CONCLUSION: Cervical cancer screening by HPV self-sampling advocates participation of more women especially in rural areas, while accelerating progress towards elimination of cervical cancer.

Efficacy and safety of therapeutic HPV vaccines to treat CIN 2/CIN 3 lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase II/III clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to assess the efficacy and safety of therapeutic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines to treat cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or 3 (CIN 2/3). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus and CENTRAL Cochrane were searched up to 31 January 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Phase II/III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and single-arm studies reporting the efficacy of therapeutic vaccines to achieve regression of CIN 2/3 lesions were included. Studies evaluating only safety and side effects of the vaccine were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and evaluated study quality. A random-effect model was used to pool the proportions of regression and/or HPV clearance. RESULTS: 12 trials met the inclusion criteria. Out of 734 women (all studies considered) receiving therapeutic HPV vaccine for CIN 2/3, 414 regressed to normal/CIN 1 with an overall proportion of regression of 0.54 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.69) for vaccinated group; 166 women (from five RCTs) receiving placebo only achieving a pooled normal/CIN 1 regression of 0.27 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.34). When including only the five two-arm studies, the regression proportion for the 410 vaccine group participants was higher than that of the 166 control group participants (relative risk (RR) 1.52; 95% CI 1.14 to 2.04). The pooled proportion of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) clearance was 0.42 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.52) in the vaccine group (six studies with a total of 357 participants) and 0.17 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.26) in the control group (three RCTs with a total of 104 participants). Based on these three RCTs, the hrHPV clearance was significantly higher in the vaccinated group (250 participants) compared with the control group (RR 2.03; 95% CI 1.30 to 3.16). Similar results were found regarding HPV 16/18 clearance. No significant unsolicited adverse events have been consistently reported. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of the therapeutic vaccines in the treatment of CIN 2/3 was modest. Implementation issues such as feasibility, acceptability, adoption and cost-effectiveness need to be further studied. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022307418.

Molecular triaging options for women testing HPV positive with self-collected samples.

We review developments in molecular triaging options for women who test positive for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) on self-collected samples in the context of cervical cancer elimination. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends hrHPV screening as the primary test for cervical screening due to its high sensitivity compared to other screening tests. However, when hrHPV testing is used alone for treatment decisions, a proportion of women of childbearing age receive unnecessary treatments. This provides the incentive to optimize screening regimes to minimize the risk of overtreatment in women of reproductive age. Molecular biomarkers can potentially enhance the accuracy and efficiency of screening and triage. HrHPV testing is currently the only screening test that allows triage with molecular methods using the same sample. Additionally, offering self-collected hrHPV tests to women has been reported to increase screening coverage. This creates an opportunity to focus health resources on linking screen-positive women to diagnosis and treatment. Adding an additional test to the screening algorithm (a triage test) may improve the test's positive predictive value (PPV) and offer a better balance of benefits and risks for women. Conventional triage methods like cytology and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) cannot be performed on self-collected samples and require additional clinic visits and subjective interpretations. Molecular triaging using methods like partial and extended genotyping, methylation tests, detection of E6/E7 proteins, and hrHPV viral load in the same sample as the hrHPV test may improve the prediction of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and invasive cancer, offering more precise, efficient, and cost-effective screening regimes. More research is needed to determine if self-collected samples are effective and cost-efficient for diverse populations and in comparison to other triage methods. The implementation of molecular triaging could improve screening accuracy and reduce the need for multiple clinical visits. These important factors play a crucial role in achieving the global goal of eliminating cervical cancer as a public health problem.

Training health care providers to administer VIA as a screening test for cervical cancer: a systematic review of essential training components.

BACKGROUND: Training health care providers to administer visual inspection after application of acetic acid (VIA) is paramount in improving cervical cancer screening services for women in low- and middle-income countries. The objective of this systematic review was to create a framework of essential VIA training components and provide illustrating examples of how VIA training programs can be carried out in different clinical settings. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (from 2006 to 2021) was undertaken. Our inclusion criteria comprised articles reporting on implemented cervical cancer screening programs using VIA in a screen-and-treat approach. Trained health care providers with any level of health education were included, and the outcome of interest was the reporting of training components. Data were extracted by two reviewers, and a narrative synthesis of the training programs was performed. We developed a framework of seven essential training components and applied it to assess how training courses were conducted in different settings. RESULTS: 13 primary studies were eligible for inclusion, including 2,722 trained health care providers and 342,889 screened women. Most training courses lasted 5-7 days and included theoretical education, practical skill development, and competence assessment. It was unclear how visual aids and training in client counselling and quality assessment were integrated in the training courses. After the training course, nearly all the VIA training programs made provisions for on-job training at the providers' own clinical settings through supervision, feedback, and refresher training. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing international training recommendations for cervical cancer screening in real-world settings and provides valuable examples of training program implementation across various clinical settings. The diverse reporting practices of quality indicators in different studies hinder the establishment of direct links between these data and training program effectiveness. To enhance future reporting, authors should emphasize specific training components, delivery methods, and contextual factors. Standardized reporting of quality indicators for effective evaluation of VIA training programs is recommended, fostering comparability, facilitating research, and enhancing reporting quality in this field.

Assessment of organization of cervical and breast cancer screening programmes in the Latin American and the Caribbean states: The CanScreen5 framework.

BACKGROUND: In the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), breast cancer and cervical cancer are the first and third causes of cancer death among females. The objectives are to assess the characteristics of the cervical and breast cancer screening programmes in CELAC, their level of organization, and the association of screening organization and coverage of essential health services. METHODS: Representatives of the Ministries of Health of 33 countries were invited to the CanScreen5 project. Twenty-seven countries participated in a "Train The Trainers" programme on cancer screening, and 26 submitted data using standardized questionnaires. Data were discussed and validated. The level of organization of the screening programmes was examined adapting the list of essential elements of organized screening programmes identified in a recently published IARC study. RESULTS: Twenty-one countries reported a screening programme for cervical cancer and 15 for breast cancer. For cervical cancer, 14 countries dedicated budget for screening (66.7%), and women had to pay in 3 countries for screening (14.3%), 9 for diagnosis (42.9%) and 8 for treatment (38.1%). Only 4 countries had a system to invite women individually (19.0%). For breast cancer, 8 countries dedicated budget for screening (53.3%), and women had to pay for screening in 3 countries (20.0%), diagnosis in 7 (46.7%) and treatment in 6 (40.0%). One country (6.7%) invited women individually. There was variability in the level of organization of both cancer screening programmes. The level of organization of cervical cancer screening and coverage of essential health services were correlated. CONCLUSION: Large gaps were identified in the organization of cervical and breast cancer screening services. CELAC governments need pragmatic public health policies and strengthened health systems. They should guarantee sustainable funding, and universal access to cancer diagnosis and treatment. Moreover, countries should enhance their health information system and ensure adequate monitoring and evaluation.

Towards elimination of cervical cancer - human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and cervical cancer screening in Asian National Cancer Centers Alliance (ANCCA) member countries.

About 95% of cervical cancers worldwide are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). Cervical cancer is preventable and curable if it is detected and treated early. We reviewed the latest national cervical cancer indicators, and barriers to HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening in 21 Asian National Cancer Centers Alliance (ANCCA) member countries. Half (n = 11, 52%) of the countries have introduced HPV vaccination for girls as part of their national vaccination programme, three countries reported coverage of over 90%. Most ANCCA member countries have cervical cancer screening programmes, only five countries reported screening uptake of over 50%. The barriers to HPV vaccination coverage and cervical cancer screening participation have been identified. Ensuring health service accessibility and affordability for women, addressing sociocultural barriers, and strengthening the healthcare system and continuum of care are essential to increase HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening coverage.

Agreement between Self- and Physician­Sampling for Detection of High­Risk Human Papillomavirus Infections in Women Attending Cervical Screening at National Cancer Institute, Thailand.

BACKGROUND: We determined testing of self-sampling vagina swabs for Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) can be used to screen for cervical disease in outpatient clinics. METHODS: In this study, women attending cervical cancer screening clinic and gynecology clinic of the National Cancer Institute were invited to take a vaginal self-sampling and physician-collected cervical sampling. RESULTS: Of 268 participants, 20 (7.5%) were HPV-positive on the physician-collected samples. Among these screen-positive women, only two (0.7%) had HPV 18 and/or 45 and none had HPV 16 infections. For the self-collected samples, 4 participants had invalid HPV test results. Of the remaining 264 women with valid test results on self-collected samples, 29 (11.0 %) were HPV-positive, of whom, two (0.8%) were infected with HPV 16 and one (0.4%) with HPV 18 and/or 45 infections. The agreement between self-sampling and physician-sampling HPV test results (when two HPV results categories were considered) was 92. 8% with a moderate Kappa value of 0.57. CONCLUSION: Overall, self-sampling seems to be a reliable alternative to health-provider collection. However, instructions on proper procedures for sample collection to the women are important step before general roll out.