Trends in cancer screening volumes at an urban health center during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10551-10551
Author(s):  
Mahir Khan ◽  
Margaret Wright ◽  
Karriem Watson ◽  
Shikha Jain
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Breast Screening ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Pap Test ◽  
Cancer Site ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
White Patients

10551 Background: The Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted cancer screening for reasons including healthcare resource preservation, infection control efforts, and patient factors. There is limited literature quantifying this interruption of care, particularly in vulnerable and racial/ethnic minorities. Methods: We compared the volume of cancer screening at the University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System before and during the COVID-19 pandemic using data obtained from the electronic medical record. Modalities included mammogram, ultrasound, and MRI for breast; Pap test for cervical; colonoscopy, CT colonography, and flexible sigmoidoscopy for colorectal; low-dose CT for lung; and prostate-specific antigen test for prostate. Of note, screening and diagnostic tests could not be distinguished for colorectal cancer. We examined percent changes in cancer screening counts for each month from February 2020-August 2020, using January 2020 as a reference. Results were stratified by gender, race, and ethnicity. Results: Screening volume declined rapidly after January 2020, with the nadir for each cancer site occurring in April 2020: breast ( n = 0, -100%), cervical ( n = 169, -84%), colorectal ( n = 35, -89%), lung ( n = 0, -100%), and prostate ( n = 108, -72%). Values recovered by August 2020 for most cancer sites except cervical cancer, which remained decreased (-23%). There were no differences in screening trends by gender. With respect to race, breast screening volume in Black patients decreased earlier and exhibited slower recovery compared to White patients. White patients had poorer cervical screening recovery than Black patients by August 2020 (-60% vs. -23%). Hispanics had poorer recovery of breast screening compared to non-Hispanics by August 2020 (-23% vs. 6%). Conclusions: We observed widely decreased cancer screening attributable to COVID-19. Breast cancer screening data specifically showed persistent disparities affecting Black and Hispanic patients. Despite the reassuring recovery of multiple screening methods by August 2020, an increase above baseline is needed to compensate for initial declines. Further studies will likely reveal long-term consequences of this unprecedented situation.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Role of Protein Biomarkers in the Detection of High-Grade Disease in Cervical Cancer Screening Programs

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte A. Brown ◽  
Johnannes Bogers ◽  
Shaira Sahebali ◽  
Christophe E. Depuydt ◽  
Frans De Prins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Pap Test ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Protein Biomarkers ◽  
Ki 67 ◽  
Screening Programs

Since the Pap test was introduced in the 1940s, there has been an approximately 70% reduction in the incidence of squamous cell cervical cancers in many developed countries by the application of organized and opportunistic screening programs. The efficacy of the Pap test, however, is hampered by high interobserver variability and high false-negative and false-positive rates. The use of biomarkers has demonstrated the ability to overcome these issues, leading to improved positive predictive value of cervical screening results. In addition, the introduction of HPV primary screening programs will necessitate the use of a follow-up test with high specificity to triage the high number of HPV-positive tests. This paper will focus on protein biomarkers currently available for use in cervical cancer screening, which appear to improve the detection of women at greatest risk for developing cervical cancer, including Ki-67,p16INK4a, BD ProEx C, and Cytoactiv HPV L1.

'Have a Pap smear!' – doctors, their clients, and opportunistic cervical cancer screening

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
L C Chingang ◽  
U Bischof ◽  
G Andall-Brereton ◽  
O Razum
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Pap Smear ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Pap Test ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
High Incidence

In many middle-income countries with a high incidence of cervical cancer, organized screening programmes with the Pap test are being planned. We assessed the knowledge of, and attitudes towards, cervical screening among 63 doctors and 102 randomly selected community members in Trinidad where screening is still opportunistic. Doctors were well informed about cervical cancer, but not all knew the approximate specificity of the Pap test. Many did not routinely discuss the benefits and disadvantages of screening with their clients. Most women had heard of the Pap test, but only 56% knew its purpose; 25% would not participate in screening, stating reasons such as being in menopause or not having symptoms. More information about the aim of screening and the purpose of the Pap test must be communicated. Doctors need to keep their knowledge on screening up-to-date, and offer counselling that helps women to make an informed decision whether or not to participate in screening.

scholarly journals Cross-sectional analyses of participation in cancer screening and use of hormone replacement therapy and medications in meat eaters and vegetarians: the EPIC-Oxford study

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. e018245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tammy Y N Tong ◽  
Paul N Appleby ◽  
Kathryn E Bradbury ◽  
Timothy J Key
Keyword(s):  
Hormone Replacement Therapy ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Breast Screening ◽  
Reference Group ◽  
Hormone Replacement ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Blood Cholesterol ◽  
Meat Eating ◽  
Psa Testing

ObjectivesTo examine differences in health-related behaviours such as screening or testing for cancer, use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and use of other medications in different diet groups.DesignWe studied 31 260 participants across four diet groups (18 155 meat eaters, 5012 fish eaters, 7179 vegetarians, 914 vegans) in the UK EPIC-Oxford cohort. Information was collected in 5-year (around 2000–2003) or 10-year (around 2007) follow-up questionnaires regarding participation in breast screening, cervical screening, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, use of HRT and use of medications for the past 4 weeks. Using Poisson regression, we estimated the prevalence ratios (PR) for each behaviour across people of different diet groups, using meat eaters as the reference group.ResultsCompared with meat eaters, vegetarian (PR: 0.94, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98) and vegan (PR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.95) women reported lower participation in breast screening, and vegetarian men were less likely to report PSA testing (PR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.96). No differences were observed among women for cervical screening. In women, all non-meat-eating groups reported lower use of HRT compared with meat eaters (P heterogeneity <0.0001). Lower reported use of any medication was observed for participants in all non-meat-eating groups with no (P<0.0001) or one (P=0.0002) self-reported illness. No heterogeneity was observed across the diet groups for the reported use of specific medication for high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, asthma, diabetes and thyroid disease.ConclusionsDifferences in self-reported breast screening, PSA testing, HRT use and overall medication use were observed across the diet groups. Whether such differences contribute to differential long-term disease risks requires further study.

Health Behaviors of Cancer Survivors: Examining Opportunities for Cancer Control Intervention

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (34) ◽  
pp. 8884-8893 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith M. Bellizzi ◽  
Julia H. Rowland ◽  
Diana D. Jeffery ◽  
Timothy McNeel
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Alcohol Consumption ◽  
Alcohol Use ◽  
Health Behaviors ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Cancer Site ◽  
Time Since Diagnosis

PurposeA population-based investigation was conducted to examine the prevalence of health behaviors (smoking, alcohol use, physical activity, and cancer screening) of cancer survivors by age, time since diagnosis, and cancer site. Understanding health behaviors of survivors is imperative, as many survivors are living longer and are at risk for cancer recurrence, second cancers, and complications from treatment.MethodsUsing the National Health Interview Survey, this study examined the prevalence of smoking and alcohol use as well as whether cancer survivors (n = 7,384) are meeting current recommendations for physical activity and cancer screening compared with noncancer controls (n = 121,347).ResultsCancer survivors are similar to controls with respect to smoking status and alcohol consumption after adjusting for group differences. However, younger survivors (18 to 40 years) are at greater risk for continued smoking than controls. Survivors are 9% more likely to meet physical activity recommendations compared with controls. χ2tests indicate no significant differences in smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity by time since diagnosis, but differences by cancer site exist. Female cancer survivors are 34% and 36% more likely to meet mammogram and Papanicolaou smear screening recommendations, respectively, compared with controls. Similar screening patterns were found for prostate-specific antigen screening in men.ConclusionThis study provides benchmark approximations of the prevalence of risky health behaviors of survivors by time since diagnosis and cancer site. As part of the collective effort to reduce late effects of cancer treatment, oncologists may be in the best position to offer initial guidance for promoting healthy lifestyle behaviors among cancer survivors.

scholarly journals The Clinical Role of HPV Testing in Primary and Secondary Cervical Cancer Screening

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Hoste ◽  
K. Vossaert ◽  
W. A. J. Poppe
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Clinical Role ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Hpv Test

Traditional population-based cervical screening programs, based on cytology, have successfully reduced the burden of cervical cancer. Nevertheless limitations remain and new screening methods are emerging. Despite vaccination against the 2 most oncogenic types (HPV 16/18), cervical cancer screening will have to continue as an essential public health strategy. As the acquisition of an HR-HPV infection is critical in the progression to (pre-)cancerous cervical lesions, recent research has focused on HR-HPV detection. The sensitivity of HPV testing in primary and secondary prevention outweighs that of cytology, at the cost of slightly lower specificity. Although most of the HR-HPV infections are cleared after conization, new evidence from numerous studies encourages the implementation of HR-HPV testing and genotyping to improve posttreatment surveillance. An HR-HPV test 6 months after conization is a promising useful clinical marker to detect persistence and prevent progression. This review highlights the clinical role of HPV testing in primary and secondary cervical cancer screening.

scholarly journals Colorectal Cancer Disparities: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solomiya Syvyk ◽  
Chris Wirtalla ◽  
Rachel Rapaport Kelz ◽  
Sanford Roberts ◽  
Caitlin Finn
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Vulnerable Populations ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
English Language ◽  
Cancer Disparities ◽  
Cancer Site ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
The Impact ◽  
White Patients

IMPORTANCE Colorectal Cancer (CRC) disparities continue to mostly impact vulnerable populations. Across the CRC continuum, most focus has been attributed to interventions in prevention, detection, and diagnosis. Varying surgical outcomes has emerged as an important contributing factor to CRC disparities. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the distribution of publications across the CRC care continuum, examine interventional studies related to CRC Surgery, and synthesize findings in studies evaluating CRC disparities in Surgery. DATA SOURCES We searched PubMed for prospective or retrospective studies reporting data on colorectal cancer disparities. STUDY SELECTION Studies were selected if: (1) articles used US-sourced data (2) articles were published in the English language (3) Subjects included humans only or data. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Odds ratios for receipt of surgery for black vs. white patients were pooled from studies that performed multivariate analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed per procedure type. RESULTS No publications regarding interventions associated with improvements in colorectal cancer surgery were found. Of the 1600 articles identified, an analysis was conducted from 18 publications. It included 89,214 black patients and 646,990 white patients. Black patients were significantly less likely to receive surgical treatment for CRC than white patients. This was confirmed in the sensitivity analysis by cancer site (colon vs rectum). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Based on the results, the majority of studies on CRC disparities have focused on access to prevention, diagnosis and screening. Considering the impact of varying surgical outcomes on vulnerable populations, it should be considered to shift research focus from process-oriented interventions to outcomes.

Trends in screening for prostate cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1542-1542
Author(s):  
F. Eisinger ◽  
J. Morere ◽  
X. Pivot ◽  
J. Blay ◽  
Y. Coscas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Screening ◽  
Representative Sample ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
The Future ◽  
Systematic Recommendation

1542 Background: Screening for prostate cancer is still in debate. In France, there is no financial barrier for individuals to be screened with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, and there is no recommendation for mass screening. Methods: Two nationwide observational studies were carried out in France. The first one, EDIFICE 1, was conducted in 2005 among a representative sample of 1504 subjects aged between 40 and 75 years and a representative sample of 600 general practitioners (GPs). The second one, EDIFICE 2, was conducted in 2008 with the same methodology. Results: General population: In 2005, 36% of the interviewed male population aged between 50 and 75 years declared having undergone a screening test, compared to 49% in 2008 (OR = 1.63 CI95% 1.25; 2.12). Prostate cancer screening increased in all age groups, however, the most significant increase can be observed in the population aged between 50 and 54 years: 18% in 2005 versus 35% in 2008 (OR = 2.43 CI95% 1.31; 4.52). This trend for increasing testing will probably be confirmed in the future since 57% of males never screened plan to undergo a test, and only 16% of those who did screening plan to stop. The expected participation in the future will be close to 70%. Physicians: In 2005, 58% of GPs systematically recommended prostate cancer screening for their male consultants ages 50 to 74, in 2008 the figure is 65% (OR = 1.32 CI95%1.04; 1.66). For prostate cancer screening, a GP's gender has no significant impact. Systematic recommendation for both breast and colorectal cancer screening has an impact on recommending prostate cancer screening as well; OR = 2.9 (CI95% 2.0–4.4) and OR = 2.0 (CI95% 1.3–3.2) respectively. The GP's age is not associated with a higher rate of systematic recommendation. Conclusions: We have observed in France a significant growth in prostate cancer screening: more persons screened, more often, at a younger age. Despite the lack of consistent evidence, persons and GPs exposed to mass communication and campaign for breast and colorectal cancer screening might infer that screening is valuable for other conditions. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Racial and Ethnic Variation in PSA Testing and Prostate Cancer Incidence Following the 2012 USPSTF Recommendation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin H Kensler ◽  
Claire H Pernar ◽  
Brandon A Mahal ◽  
Paul L Nguyen ◽  
Quoc-Dien Trinh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Disease Incidence ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Prostate Cancer Incidence ◽  
Psa Testing

Abstract Background The 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against routine prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing led to a decrease in prostate cancer screening, but the heterogeneity of its impact by race and ethnicity remains unclear. Methods The proportion of 40- to 74-year-old men who self-reported receiving a routine PSA test in the past year was estimated in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2012-2018). Odds ratios (ORs) of undergoing screening by race and ethnicity were estimated, adjusting for healthcare–related factors. Prostate cancer incidence rates and rate ratios (IRRs) by race and ethnicity were estimated using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data (2004-2017). Results PSA testing frequencies were 32.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 31.7% to 32.8%) among non-Hispanic White (NHW), 30.3% (95% CI = 28.3% to 32.3%) among non-Hispanic Black (NHB), 21.8% (95% CI = 19.9% to 23.7%) among Hispanic, and 17.7% (95% CI = 14.1% to 21.3%) among Asian and Pacific Islander men in 2012. The absolute screening frequency declined by 9.5% from 2012 to 2018, with a larger decline among NHB (11.6%) than NHW men (9.3%). The relative annual decrease was greater among NHB (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.88) than NHW men (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.89 to 0.90; Pheterogeneity = .005), driven by a larger decline among NHB men ages 40-54 years. The NHB to NHW IRR for total prostate cancer increased from 1.73 (95% CI = 1.69 to 1.76) in 2011 to 1.87 (95% CI = 1.83 to 1.92) in 2012 and has remained elevated, driven by differences in localized tumor incidence. Metastatic disease incidence is rising across all racial and ethnic groups. Conclusions The frequency of prostate cancer screening varies by race and ethnicity, and there was a modestly steeper decline in PSA testing among younger NHB men relative to NHW men since 2012. The NHB to NHW IRR for localized prostate cancer modestly increased following 2012.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document