Search

Objective: Cancer screening can play an important role in early detection, improving treatment outcomes and reducing morbidity and mortality. Breast and cervical cancers belong to the most common gynaecological cancers group. Countries provide different screening programmes on its eligible population basis centred on different health care policies. This scientific study aims to assess and understand the health inequalities in the member countries of the European Board & College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG) as regards screening programmes of gynaecological cancer, with a special focus on breast and cervical cancers' screening strategies., Study Design: A descriptive questionnaire-based study was conducted, addressed to EBCOG member countries., Results: Ninety-one percent of the countries have an organized national or regional screening programme for cervical cancer. Of these, 45% of countries use both cytology and testing for Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) as screening test, 31% use cytology exclusively and 17% only perform HPV testing. Considerable differences were found regarding the interval of screening test: there are countries performing HPV detection triennially, while others perform only conventional cytology every 5 years. Sixty-nine percent of countries included in this study begin screening for cervical cancer in women aged 25 to 29 years, four of them using HPV detection as the screening test. Six countries begin cervical cancer screening before the age of 25. As regards vaccination against HPV, almost all countries have implemented national HPV vaccination programme, except in Poland and Turkey. The 9-valent HPV vaccine is the most frequently offered (77% of countries) and the majority vaccination programmes include both girls and boys. As regards breast cancer screening, all thirty-two countries have an implemented screening programme. All countries perform mammography as the screening test, 62.5% of them begin in women aged 50 to 54, with a 2-yearly interval in the majority. In five countries, screening programmes are performed biennially, starting between 45 and 49 years old. Seven countries start in women aged 41 to 44., Conclusions: There are discrepancies around gynaecological cancer screenings provision among EBCOG member countries. It is important to establish European recommendations about screening for gynaecological cancers, in order to standardize the access to equitable better health care in gynaecological cancers within Europe., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Primary vaginal malignancies are rare, comprising only 2% of all female genital tract malignancies in adults and 4.5% in children. As part of its mission to improve the quality of care for women with gynecological cancers across Europe, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) jointly with the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOPe) developed evidence-based guidelines in order to improve the management of patients with vaginal cancer within a multidisciplinary setting. ESTRO/ESGO/SIOPe nominated practicing clinicians who are involved in the management of vaginal cancer patients and have demonstrated leadership through their expertise in clinical care and research, their national and international engagement and profile as well as dedication to the topics addressed to serve on the expert panel (13 experts across Europe comprising the international development group). To ensure that the statements were evidence based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. In the case of absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the international development group. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 112 independent international practitionners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives and their comments and input were incorporated and addressed accordingly. These guidelines cover comprehensively the diagnostic pathways as well as the surgical, radiotherapeutical and systemic management and follow-up of adult patients (including those with rare histological subtypes) and pediatric patients (vaginal rhabdomyosarcoma and germ cell tumours) with vaginal tumours., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V., IGCS and ESGO. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Primary vaginal malignancies are rare, comprising only 2% of all female genital tract malignancies in adults and 4.5% in children. As part of its mission to improve the quality of care for women with gynecological cancers across Europe, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) jointly with the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOPe) developed evidence-based guidelines in order to improve the management of patients with vaginal cancer within a multidisciplinary setting.ESTRO/ESGO/SIOPe nominated practicing clinicians who are involved in the management of vaginal cancer patients and have demonstrated leadership through their expertise in clinical care and research, their national and international engagement and profile as well as dedication to the topics addressed to serve on the expert panel (13 experts across Europe comprising the international development group). To ensure that the statements were evidence based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised.In the case of absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the international development group. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 112 independent international practitionners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives and their comments and input were incorporated and addressed accordingly.These guidelines cover comprehensively the diagnostic pathways as well as the surgical, radiotherapeutical and systemic management and follow-up of adult patients (including those with rare histological subtypes) and pediatric patients (vaginal rhabdomyosarcoma and germ cell tumours) with vaginal tumours., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CC has reported advisory boards for GSK and MSD; SL has reported advisory boards for GSK, MSD, Novartis and AstraZeneca;MPS has reported grants and personal fees for workshops from Elekta AB; CF has reported advisory board for Roche, Tesaro, GSK, MDS/AZ, Clovis., (© IGCS and ESGO 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: To overcome obstacles within the Slovenian organised cervical cancer screening programme, a randomised pilot study of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among non-attenders was performed, aiming to assess three different screening approaches. Participants and methods: Non-attenders aged 30–64 years from two Slovenian regions were randomised to two HPV self-sampling groups–the opt-in (I1, n = 14.400) and the opt-out (I2, n = 9.556), with a control group (P, n = 2.600). Self-collected samples were analysed using the Hybrid Capture 2 assay. HPV-positive women were invited to a colposcopy. The overall and type-specific intention-to-screen response rates and histological outcomes with a positive predictive value (PPV) according to the women's age, the screening approach, the level of protection resulting from previous screening history, and the region of residence were assessed. Results: Of the 26.556 women enrolled, 8.972 (33.8%) responded with self-sample for HPV testing and/or traditional cytology within one year of enrolment. Response rates were 37.7%, 34.0% and 18.4% (p < 0.050) for opt-out, opt-in and control groups. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2+ was diagnosed in 3.9/1.000, 3.4/1.000, and 3.1/1.000 women (p > 0.050), respectively. PPV of the HPV self-sampling was 12.0% and 9.6% for CIN2+ and CIN3+. The highest PPV was obtained in non-attenders in screening programme for more than 10-years and concordant results of HPV testing with 40.8% for CIN2+ and 38.8% for CIN3+. Conclusions: The results of our study show that a high response to HPV self-sampling can be achieved also in an opt-in approach, if women are encouraged to choose between self-sampling at home and screening with gynaecologist. In addition, clinically important risk difference for a high-grade cervical lesion exists in the case of a positive result of HPV testing on self-collected samples, depending on the length of the interval since last screening. Stratified management of these women should be strongly considered. Women who were not screened with cytology for at least 10 years should be referred to immediate colposcopy for histology verification instead to delayed re-testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]