The European Collaborative on Personalized Early Detection and Prevention of Breast Cancer (ENVISION) brings together several international research consortia working on different aspects of the personalized early detection and prevention of breast cancer. In a consensus conference held in 2019, the members of this network identified research areas requiring development to enable evidence-based personalized interventions that might improve the benefits and reduce the harms of existing breast cancer screening and prevention programmes. The priority areas identified were: 1) breast cancer subtype-specific risk assessment tools applicable to women of all ancestries; 2) intermediate surrogate markers of response to preventive measures; 3) novel non-surgical preventive measures to reduce the incidence of breast cancer of poor prognosis; and 4) hybrid effectiveness–implementation research combined with modelling studies to evaluate the long-term population outcomes of risk-based early detection strategies. The implementation of such programmes would require health-care systems to be open to learning and adapting, the engagement of a diverse range of stakeholders and tailoring to societal norms and values, while also addressing the ethical and legal issues. In this Consensus Statement, we discuss the current state of breast cancer risk prediction, risk-stratified prevention and early detection strategies, and their implementation. Throughout, we highlight priorities for advancing each of these areas.

a on behalf of the EU-TOPIA consortium 1

Background: Populations differ with respect to their cancer risk and screening preferences, which may influence the performance of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. This review aims to systematically compare the mortality effect of CRC screening across European regions. Methods: Six databases including Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PubMed publisher, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies published before March 2018. Bibliographic searches were conducted to select studies assessing the effect of various screening tests (guaiac fecal occult blood test [gFOBT]; flexible sigmoidoscopy [FS]; fecal immunochemical test [FIT] and colonoscopy) on CRC mortality in Europe (PROSPERO protocol: CRD42016042433). Abstract reviewing, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. Results: A total of 18 studies were included; of which, 11 were related to gFOBT, 4 to FS, 2 to FIT and 1 to colonoscopy; 8 were randomised clinical trials, and 10, observational studies, and an approximately equal number of studies represented Northern, Western and Southern European regions. Among individuals invited to screening, CRC mortality reductions varied from 8% to 16% for gFOBT and from 21% to 30% for FS. When studies with a high risk of bias were considered, ranges were more extensive. The estimated effectiveness of gFOBT and FS screening appeared similar across different European regions.

Background: The aim of this study was to quantify the impact of organised mammography screening on breast cancer mortality across European regions. Therefore, a systematic review was performed including different types of studies from all European regions and stringently used clearly defined quality appraisal to summarise the best evidence. Methods: Six databases were searched including Embase, Medline and Web of Science from inception to March 2018. To identify all eligible studies which assessed the effect of organised screening on breast cancer mortality, two reviewers independently applied predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Original studies in English with a minimum follow-up of five years that were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies were included. The Cochrane risk of bias instrument and the NewcastleeOttawa Scale were used to assess the risk of bias. Results: Of the 5015 references initially retrieved, 60 were included in the final analysis. Those comprised 36 cohort studies, 17 caseecontrol studies and 7 RCTs. None were from Eastern Europe. The quality of the included studies varied: Nineteen of these studies were of very good or good quality. Of those, the reduction in breast cancer mortality in attenders versus non-

BackgroundThe aim of our study was to describe cancer burden and time trends of all cancers combined, the most frequent as well as the rare cancers in Slovenia.Patients and methodsThe principal data source was the population-based Cancer Registry of Republic of Slovenia. The cancer burden is presented by incidence and prevalence for the period 1950–2013 and by mortality for years 1985–2013. The time trends were characterized in terms of an average annual percent change estimated by the log-linear joinpoint regression. The Dyba-Hakulinen method was used for estimation of incidence in 2016 and the projections of cancer incidence for the year 2025 were calculated applying the Globocan projection software.ResultsIn recent years, near 14,000 Slovenes were diagnosed with cancer per year and just over 6,000 died; more than 94,000 people who were ever diagnosed with cancer are currently living among us. The total burden of cancer is dominated by five most common cancer sites: skin (non-melanoma), colon and rectum, lung, breast and prostate, together representing almost 60% of all new cancer cases. On average the incidence of common cancers in Slovenia is increasing for 3.0% per year in last decade, but the incidence of rare cancers is stable.ConclusionsBecause cancer occurs more among the elderly, and additionally more numerous post-war generation is entering this age group, it is expected that the burden of this disease will be growing further, even if the level of risk factors remains the same as today.

The persisting burden of cervical cancer in underserved populations and low-resource regions worldwide, worsened by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, requires proactive strategies and expanded screening options to maintain and improve screening coverage and its effects on incidence and mortality from cervical cancer. Self-sampling as a screening strategy has unique advantages from both a public health and individual patient perspective. Some of the barriers to screening can be mitigated by self-sampling, and resources can be better allocated to patients at the highest risk of developing cervical cancer. This review summarizes the implementation options for self-sampling and associated challenges, evidence in support of self-sampling, the available devices, and opportunities for expansion beyond human papillomavirus testing.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic threatens the impact of cervical cancer screening and global cervical cancer elimination goals. As cervical cancer screening programmes were adjusting to the new situation, we evaluated the intensity, quality, and outcomes of cervical cancer screening in Slovenia in the first seven months of the pandemic. Methods Historical observational study on data from a population-based cervical cancer screening registry. Number of cervical cytopathology (screening and follow-up), histopathology (diagnostic procedures, invasive procedures and number of newly diagnosed CIN2+ cases) and HPV test results from the entire Slovenian women population between January 1st and September 30th 2020 were compared to a three-year average of the years 2017–19. Findings A two-month screening lock-down between March 12th and May 8th 2020 resulted in an epidemic deficit of screening (-92%), follow-up (-70%), and HPV triage tests (-68%), as well as invasive diagnostic (-47%) and treatment (-15%) of cervical lesions. Time to diagnosis and treatment did not increase; times to laboratory results fluctuated but stayed within standards. Slovenia has entered the second epidemic intending to add as little as possible to the pandemic deficit of screening smears (-23%) and yearly CIN2+ cases (-10%). Women aged 30–39 were most affected, with the highest pandemic deficit of screening smears (-26%) and yearly CIN2+ cases (-19%). Interpretation The pandemic has deeply affected all levels of our lives. New vulnerable groups and inequalities have emerged that require recognition and action. To prevent long-term increases in the cervical cancer burden due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial that organised screening is maintained and monitored in settings where it can be safely and comprehensively provided. Funding None.

BackgroundTo 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 methodsNon-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.ResultsOf 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+.ConclusionsThe 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.