American Cancer Society; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Swiss Re; Swiss Cancer Research foundation; Swiss Cancer League; Institut National du Cancer; La Ligue Contre le Cancer; Rossy Family Foundation; US National Cancer Institute; and the Susan G Komen Foundation.

No abstract

Background: Cell entry of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) depends on binding of the viral spike (S) proteins to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 and on S protein priming by TMPRSS2. Inhibition of TMPRSS2 may work to block or decrease the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Intriguingly, TMPRSS2 is an androgen-regulated gene that is up-regulated in prostate cancer where it supports tumor progression and is involved in a frequent genetic translocation with the ERG gene. First-or second-generation androgen-deprivation therapies (ADTs) decrease the levels of TMPRSS2. Here we put forward the hypothesis that ADTs may protect patients affected by prostate cancer from SARS-CoV-2 infections. Materials and methods: We extracted data regarding 9280 patients (4532 males) with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from 68 hospitals in Veneto, one of the Italian regions that was most affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The parameters used for each COVID-19-positive patient were sex, hospitalization, admission to intensive care unit, death, tumor diagnosis, prostate cancer diagnosis, and ADT. Results: There were evaluable 9280 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients in Veneto on 1 April 2020. Overall, males developed more severe complications, were more frequently hospitalized, and had a worse clinical outcome than females. Considering only the Veneto male population (2.4 million men), 0.2% and 0.3% of non-cancer and cancer patients, respectively, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Comparing the total number of SARS-CoV-2-positive cases, prostate cancer patients receiving ADT had a significantly lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with patients who did not receive ADT (OR 4.05; 95% CI 1.55e10.59). A greater difference was found comparing prostate cancer patients receiving ADT with patients with any other type of cancer (OR 4.86; 95% CI 1.88e12.56). Conclusion: Our data suggest that cancer patients have an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections compared with noncancer patients. However, prostate cancer patients receiving ADT appear to be partially protected from SARS-CoV-2 infections.

For women aged 35-60 years, HPV testing with a cutoff of 2 pg/mL achieves a substantial gain in sensitivity over cytology with only a small reduction in PPV. Among women aged 25-34 years, the large relative sensitivity of HPV testing compared with conventional cytology and the difference between relative sensitivity during phases 1 and 2 suggests that there is frequent regression of CIN2+ that are detected by direct referral of younger HPV-positive women to colposcopy. Thus, triage test or repeat testing is needed if HPV is to be used for primary testing in this context.

Background: Although testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) has higher sensitivity and lower specifi city than cytology alone for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), studies comparing conventional and liquid-based cytology have had confl icting results. Methods: In the fi rst phase of a two-phase multicenter randomized controlled trial, women aged 35 -60 years in the conventional arm ( n = 16 658) were screened using conventional cytology, and women in the experimental arm ( n = 16 706) had liquidbased cytology and were tested for high-risk HPV types using the Hybrid Capture 2 assay. Women in the conventional arm were referred to colposcopy with atypical cells of undetermined signifi cance (

No abstract

FIT-based screening programmes were associated with a significant reduction in CRC mortality. This effect took place much earlier than reported by gFOBT-based trials and observational studies.

Objective To compare the accuracy of conventional cytology with liquid based cytology for primary screening of cervical cancer. Design Randomised controlled trial. Setting Nine screening programmes in Italy. Participants Women aged 25-60 attending for a new screening round: 22 466 were assigned to the conventional arm and 22 708 were assigned to the experimental arm. Interventions Conventional cytology compared with liquid based cytology and testing for human papillomavirus. Main outcome measure Relative sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more at blindly reviewed histology, with atypical cells of undetermined significance or more severe cytology considered a positive result. Results In an intention to screen analysis liquid based cytology showed no significant increase in sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more (relative sensitivity 1.17, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.56) whereas the positive predictive value was reduced (relative positive predictive value v conventional cytology 0.58, 0.44 to 0.77). Liquid based cytology detected more lesions of grade 1 or more (relative sensitivity 1.68, 1.40 to 2.02), with a larger increase among women aged 25-34 (P for heterogeneity 0.0006), but did not detect more lesions of grade 3 or more (relative sensitivity 0.84, 0.56 to 1.25). Results were similar when only low grade intraepithelial lesions or more severe cytology were considered a positive result. No evidence was found of heterogeneity between centres or of improvement with increasing time from start of the study. The relative frequency of women with at least one unsatisfactory result was lower with liquid based cytology (0.62, 0.56 to 0.69).Conclusion Liquid based cytology showed no statistically significant difference in sensitivity to conventional cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or more. More positive results were found, however, leading to a lower positive predictive value. A large reduction in unsatisfactory smears was evident. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN81678807. INTRODUCTIONLiquid based cytology is used widely for primary screening of cervical cancer but high quality studies on its accuracy are limited. Indeed almost all published studies are based either on the comparison of non-randomly assigned populations or on double testing the same women. With the double testing design, cells used for diagnosis could be removed with the conventional sample, which is taken first, leading to an underestimation of the accuracy of liquid based cytology. In addition only some of the published studies, in a primary screening setting, considered histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia as the end point and only a few verified the diagnosis by colpohistology in the large majority of women with abnormal cytology results. A recent review identified one small randomised trial only and concluded that large randomised trials were needed.